Raging Bull (1980) (mini-review++)

raging_bull.jpg

(If you’re curious, my review process. It’s also pasted at the end of this post. I don’t believe in Rotten Tomatoes. I just believe in me.)

(***all-purpose SPOILER ALERT*** there may be some in this review)

The mini-review:

Raging Bull

acting 10

directing 9

effects 9

editing 8

writing 9

SW SCORE: 45

4.5 out of 5 šŸ™

++

It’s hard to quantify how much of a genius Martin Scorsese is. Yes, I’m kissing ass. I’d say “sue me” but it would be a waste of your time since I’m broke. I go back and forth between Raging Bull. Taxi Driver, and Goodfellas as to which “masterpiece” is Scorsese’s masterpiece. Raging Bull is simply a tragedy about a real man (Jake LaMotta) with so much raw power who succumbs to ignoble forces within and without him. He is an artist forced to draw instruction manual diagrams. We all have our moments when the universe removes our delusions of grandeur. De Niro is all of us, in our darkest moments. It is an astounding piece of art.

.

.

.

Review process: (this is always evolving, I’m sad to say. I’m more of a watcher who makes mostly unhelpful observations about things I have absorbed. I am not unlike a pop culture blob.)

Two scores are assigned: (I don’t believe in Rotten Tomatoes. I just believe in me)

(1) Shark Wrighter (SW) Score: Based on a sum of 5 sub-scores (acting, directing, writing/story, effects: cinematography &/or animation &/or effects, editing) with 1 being terrible and 10 being terrific.

(2) Octopuses (0-5 šŸ™, with 5 being fantastic and 0 being feces)

(3) Octopuses are my unquantifiable feelingā€¦not that SW score is scientificā€¦but this one is even less so

(4) ++ This optional section includes any incredibly *brilliant observations that don’t fit into simple quantitative slices like the scores and octopuses *(they are likely NOT brilliant).Ā 

Leave a Reply