Thirty years ago, the best Hollywood blockbusters looked a lot
like The Untouchables: lush, stylish, operatic,
and daring as hell.
Or, as critic Vincent Canby wrote in The New York Times regarding
De Palma's 1987 gangster film: "... it's a smashing work. It's
vulgar, violent, funny and sometimes breathtakingly beautiful. After this ''Untouchables,''
all other movies dealing with Prohibition Chicago, Al Capone and the lawmen who
brought him to justice (for income tax evasion) must look a bit anemic."
Boosted by a coruscating, pulse-pounding score from composer Ennio Morricone,
De Palma's The Untouchables is actually much
more than a period piece or a typical gangster genre film. Instead, it's the
passion-laden story of a burg at war with itself and its ideals...and the
valiant heroes who brought peace to that city at the cost of great personal
sacrifice.
Now the setting here isn't classic in any sense.
It isn't ancient Sparta (like 300), or The Trojan
War (as in Troy).
But make no mistake, De Palma brings to The Untouchables the
same archetypal flourishes we might reasonably expect in any cinematic
depiction of those legends. He transforms real historical figures into
larger-than-life scoundrels, saints, and angels. As dramatized by De
Palma, The Untouchables is nothing less than
the Timeless Heroic Poem of Avenger Eliot Ness.
Let's
Do Some Good...
Written by award-winning playwright David Mamet, De Palma's The
Untouchables is a blend of the popular old TV series
(1959-1963) of the same name, and the popular 1957 autobiography of Eliot Ness
penned by Ness with Oscar Fraley.
The film depicts Chicago of the Prohibition Era as -- importantly -- a "city
at war."
The unofficial but acknowledged ruler of Chicago is criminal Al
Capone (Robert De Niro), a self-satisfied gangster who has "bought"
the loyalty of city cops, district judges, and even the cynical press.
Capone is treated as a celebrity and a king, and has the run of the city. He is
a crook and a monster to be certain, but because Capone has so much money, the
tyrant is respected and feared. Nobody crosses him.
In light of this situation, we might even dare to view De Palma's film as a
veiled critique of capitalism, with power going to the highest bidder. And as
the film begins, Capone is tightening his grip on the small businesses of
Chicago, using fear, intimidation and murder to making certain that he gets a
"cut" of everything.
Into this war zone of escalating violence arrives a straight-arrow
crusader, the impossibly moral Treasury Agent named Eliot Ness (Kevin Costner).
After his first "sting" fails to nab Capone, family man Ness realizes
he must work around the corrupt system, and therefore recruits a group of
outsiders he can trust to the death. These men include his new mentor, an Irish
cop on the beat, Jimmy Malone (Sean Connery), police academy graduate and
sharp-shooter Giuseppe Petri (Andy Garcia), and nerdy accountant Oscar Wallace
(Charles Martin Smith).
Importantly, not one of these men (especially Ness) declares any fealty to the
government's (wrongheaded) policy of Prohibition. On the contrary, what this
foursome defends to the death is the very principle that makes America great: the
rule of law.
This is the meat of Ness's inner crisis: can
the rule of law be re-established by violating the law?
Over several tumultuous weeks, Ness puts a dent in Capone's illegal liquor
operation in Chicago, but spurs Capone's murderous wrath. The gangster
dispatches enforcer Frank Nitti (Billy Drago) to see to it that the four
Untouchables are, in fact...quite touchable. Wallace is murdered in an elevator
along with a trial witness against Capone. Malone is set up in his own apartment
and viciously gunned down.
With his team in tatters, Ness recognizes that his last chance to stop Capone
involves indicting the gangster for tax evasion. To accomplish this, however,
Ness needs to intercept Capone's accountant at a train station...
Never Stop Fighting Till The Fight is Done.
On the surface, the brutal struggle in The Untouchables appears
to be one regarding law enforcement, but the movie's tone and visuals make it
plain that this is not entirely the case.
On the contrary: this is total war, a fact De Palma makes plain
via cross-cutting. Early in the film, he cross-cuts between Capone decrying
violence as "not good business" and then a scene involving a
little girl murdered in what, essentially, is a terrorist bombing of a local
Chicago saloon.
While noting that "there is violence in Chicago" (but
not by him, of course), Capone thus wipes out a business that refuses to kowtow
to his demands for protection money. The bombing is a crime, but a crime elevated
to guerrilla war tactics (like those seen in the Vietnam War; another De Palma
obsession).
Another scene, involving Ness's first bust, sees the hero riding astride a
vehicle that appears to be a kind of 1930's armored attack truck. It's the
visual equivalent of putting a soldier atop a tank at the beginning of battle;
a visual recognition that this is, for all intents and purposes, combat.
In constructing a mythic poem, it's crucial that the stakes are high, and
that's what De Palma accomplishes in setting the key backgrounds of Chicago
in The Untouchables. He makes plain that this
isn't simple a matter of putting a criminal away, but of winning a war against
a powerful, and heartless opponent. The soul of the city is on the line because
Capone has his hooks in everyone. Ness's war is thus virtually an Aristotlean
thing: "we make war that we may live in peace."
The spiritual nature of
this dramatic war is made evident in one particularly important debate about
battle tactics. With the ceiling of a grand cathedral serving as backdrop
behind them, Malone and Ness discuss the pathway to victory. "They
pull a knife, you pull a gun," suggests Malone. "He
sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. That's
the Chicago way, and that's how you get Capone!" Again, the tenor of
this talk is more akin to war than to crime-fighting.
In addition, Malone notes that "The Lord hates a coward," a
sentiment that sounds more appropriate to a conversation in a foxhole (where
there are no atheists...) than in a campaign to bring a mere thug to justice.
What the audience comes to understand is that Malone is a spiritual man, but
one who believes that anything worth fighting for, is worth fighting dirty for.
This is a point of view Ness learns much about in the course of the film.
In defining the central struggle of The Untouchables as
a real, dirty war, De Palma even recruits the old-fashioned war movie cliche
about a man discovering himself in the crucible of combat. During the
Western-style scene set in Montana, the bookish, diminutive accountant, Wallace
-- a man who has never been in battle -- unexpectedly finds
himself, under fire, a paragon of bravery: taking down Capone's men in a daring
frontal assault. By contrast, Ness ends this engagement underneath a car...
What Are You Prepared to Do?
If the battle to unseat Capone from his throne of blood is a war,
not simply a legal matter, then the men who fight him are great,
larger-than-life warriors, and that's part of De Palma's visual vocabulary
in The Untouchables as well.
On several occasions, the director composes shots meant to suggest the screen
iconography of heroism. Above, I mentioned the interlude set in the wide-open
country of Montana. Essentially, this set-piece harks back to the Old West (or
at least our Hollywood memories of the Old West) and De
Palma presents us with scenes of our stalwart heroes astride horses, carrying
rifles and pistols...ready to heroically engage in combat.
The reflexive mental response to these images is to associate the G-Men -- the
Untouchables -- with cowboys, or gunslingers...the heroes who single-handedly
ride in and bring justice to imperiled frontier towns.
Cowboys are part of our shared national mythology, as curator George Slosser,
of The Science Fiction and Fantasy Collection at the University of California
once observed: "They’re the embodiment of the American myth of the
lone, rugged individual who comes into society and cleans it up. We all want to
do it, but we don’t know how to do it. We live our everyday lives that don’t
allow for this kind of simplistic vision. So we cheer for it."
Failing to discern De Palma's mode in The Untouchables,
many film critics complained that a Western-style set-piece in a Chicago crime
movie was distinctly out-of-place -- a glaring faux pas. However,
if we gaze at De Palma's purpose here as one of elevating the heroes of The
Untouchable to mythic, iconic status, it makes perfect sense
that the director should mine the visual language of heroes that American
generations have shared at the movies.
Outside the Old West-style sequence, De Palma on several occasions provides
awe-inspiring group shots of the four crusaders -- shoulder to
shoulder -- engaging in battle. They stride down the streets of Chicago,
elbow-to-elbow, an "untouchable" line of heroism, approaching
the camera...looming larger and larger in frame (and in our psyches).
In another sequence, as The Untouchables successfully take down a branch of
Capone's operation in a warehouse, the music and the camera work practically
swoon in simultaneous orgasm at the achievement. The camera spins dizzily
around the four men, doing a celebratory victory dance or whirl. This is myth
making, pure and simple.
Despite his cutthroat methods, Malone is practically elevated to the role of
saint in The Untouchables; constantly associated
with his belief in Christianity; his attachment to his Rosary beads, and so
forth. Ness becomes the designated carrier of "righteousness" after a
grieving mother (of the girl killed in the bombing) tasks him with the sacred
mission of capturing and incarcerating Capone. Even Ness's wife is treated as a
sort of immaculate Madonna figure; forever tolerant; forever supportive,
forever accepting of the dangers in her husband's line of work.
It probably goes without saying, but these are not the stock characters of your
typical crime-drama, shaded in naturalistic grays, but rather bold, iconic
warriors...remembered for feats of great bravery.
De Palma's camera-work again and again hammers home this point. For example,
Malone is shot a hundred times (by a machine gun at close range!) and still
lives long enough to share a crucial piece of information with the mourning
Ness. The wise, cunning Malone -- in every way -- is the Obi-Wan Kenobi Elder
of The Untouchables, the mentor and man who guides
the hero (Ness) on his mythic, Joseph Campbell-style journey.
Oppositely, De Palma's technique is also to depict the villain, Al Capone, in a
deeply unflattering light.
After Capone murders one of his treacherous henchmen with a baseball bat, De
Palma stages a terrific shot: a horrified withdrawal or retraction from the
bloody action; an overhead shot that seems to literally recoil in
horror as spilled, scarlet blood contaminates Capone's white table linens.
The cross-cutting, mentioned earlier, also serves to create a cause-and-effect
feeling in regards to Capone. He states that he is not behind the violence;
then we see the brutal violence conducted in his name for ourselves. The
sequencing of these scenes makes the viewer aware that Capone is a liar; not to
be trusted.
Finally, an effective villain must be powerful and menacing, and so in all of
Capone's scenes, De Palma positions the gangster amidst almost unbelievable
opulence. In the famous baseball bludgeoning scene, Capone dons a tuxedo to
gain the appearance of respectability. Later, we see the crook sitting in an
expensive seat at the opera house, crying his eyes out during a moving
performance (a nod to Coppola's gangster films...). Capone's hotel suite is
luxuriant to the point of decadence and beyond.
Capone controls the city, and lives amidst absolute wealth, with absolute
unchallenged power. This is the mountain that Ness must climb on his journey.
He must defeat a man who controls all the channels of power; who possesses vast
wealth; and who will use violence; who is deceitful and capricious in his
bloody whims. We easily understand all this from De Palma's cross-cutting,
production design, and choice of compositions. The script itself (and De Niro's
interpretation of the character), seem to suggest some sub-textual resonance of
Mussolini, only this is capitalism's Il Duce: a man who has gamed the system
through money and intimidation.
The Odessa Steps Re-Framed: Homage, Intertextuality and
Commentary
The most impressive scene in De Palma's The Untouchables is
one that isn't even in the screenplay.
Originally, Ness and Petri were supposed to nab Capone's accountant on a train,
and there was to be a rather elaborate car/train chase.
When this did not prove feasible from an economic standpoint, De Palma altered
the scene to involve the accountant arriving at a train station, and Ness and
Petri standing by to intercept him there.
During the attempted capture, there is a shoot-out with Capone's men, and two
innocent by-standers are caught in the crossfire: a mother and her baby in a
carriage. At one intense point, the carriage topples over the station's vast
stone staircase in slow-motion. All around, bullets fly...and the
carriage shakes and bumps as it careens to the bottom.
Again, this sequence is likely the demarcation point where some people will
"get" and appreciate De Palma, and others will simply insist that he
is a particularly gifted "thief." For in concept and execution, the
staircase scene of The Untouchables is an
intricate homage to Sergei Eisenstein's 1925 propaganda classic, The
Battleship Potemkin.
In that film, the famous "Odessa Steps" sequence dramatized a
massacre conducted by the Tsarist Regime, set atop a wide staircase. Civilians
were brutally murdered in this bloody sequence, as Cossacks killed men, women
and children. Famously, a baby carriage was depicted rolling down the
staircase.
In original context, the Odessa Steps sequence was meant to demonize the
Imperial Regime, to expose the fact that there was no depth to which it would
not sink to hold onto to power in Russia. The scene is so famous in cinema
history that some people have apparently believed that there was a massacre on
the Odessa Steps even though the incident was a fictional one concocted for the
film.
Those who accuse De Palma of lifting the Odessa Steps sequence from The
Battleship Potemkin should take one extra step -- beyond that
of accusation -- and ask themselves why? What purpose does
it serve to feature a similar sequence here, in this movie?
On one hand, we can certainly point to the deliberate homage and
inter-textuality we see throughout De Palma's canon. But furthermore, there's a
reflexive quality to this reference in The Untouchables.
To wit: the battle for capitalist control of Chicago is occurring, roughly, in
the same time period that The Battleship Potemkin was
made and distributed (circa 1925 - 1930). In other words, by cutting and
shooting a sequence just like the Odessa Steps, De Palma is actually reflecting
something that the characters of the time might have themselves conceivably
understood or known about.
Much more importantly, however, De Palma has created a thematic relative
of Potemkin; a kind of
"pop" form of propaganda; a heroic myth elevating the G-Men in
stature and deriding a corrupt system and the criminals -- like Capone -- who
exploited it (the capitalist equivalent of the Tsarists).
De Palma's point -- captured beautifully in the slow-motion shoot-out -- is
that Capone's Regime (like that of the Cossacks...) boasts no moral compunction
about the murder of the innocent. It will hold onto control any way it
can, as we have seen in the corner saloon bombing and now with the
imperiled baby carriage. Ness's task is much more difficult: he must eliminate
the entrenched, powerful bad guys (the hench-men of Capone) and defend
the innocent simultaneously.
Remember how that grieving mother told Ness to get Capone? Well, here Ness
lands in an even more urgent variation of that scene: finally in the position
to prevent the death of an innocent at the same time that he takes down the
guilty.
So, of course, De Palma pays tribute to Eisenstein's shock cutting in the
famous staircase battle, but he has done two other important things as well.
First, he has raised audience "ire" over Capone's actions in the
self-same manner as Eisenstein did in regards to the Tsarists;"
exposing" a corrupt regime in the process.
And secondly, he has re-purposed the "lifted" sequence so as to make
a point about the nature of the all-out battle Ness is fighting.
Amazingly, De Palma crafts an action sequence in the very film
language appropriate to the era of his film, the 1920s-1930s. In his
review, critic Hal Hinson called the staircase shoot-out scene De Palma's
"greatest stunt," only-half impressed, but I suggest that given the
context, given the reflexive nature, given the re-purposing of a classic
sequence for a like thematic purpose, it is much more than a stunt. This is De
Palma conceiving and deploying brilliant visuals to chart for audiences the
epic nature of the Capone/Ness conflict.
Why does The Untouchables succeed as a grand
entertainment and as a work of art? The answer involves our history as a
nation.
Just over two centuries old, America is still a young country at heart. Because
our ancestors arrived from a variety of other countries, the U.S.A. lacks the
coherent, long-standing mythology of Greece or Rome, of England or France. In
many ways, the short history of America has involved the fashioning of a fresh,
new mythology that can serve as the sturdy vehicle to carry our ideals into an
unknown future . The Old West -- the era of righteous gunslingers --
is one critical part of that new-fangled mythology.
As I wrote in The Encyclopedia of Superheroes on Film and
Television, I believe that superheroes have, to a large degree,
replaced the cowboy in this regard.
But nonetheless, in The Untouchables, Brian De
Palma takes Ness's G-Men -- who fought for the rule of law in Chicago, -- and
elevates them to the same epic stature Americans typically reserve for cowboys,
war heroes, or supermen. We don't have an American Robin Hood; or American
Three Musketeers. But the heroic, saintly and courageous Untouchables - at
least in De Palma's cinematic interpretation -- more than suffice for
the film's running time.
A visual exercise in myth-building, The Untouchables is
De Palma's mainstream masterpiece; a supreme and rousing entertainment that
dispenses with the predictable "grittiness" of the gangster drama and
audaciously serves us up a symbolic fable in its place.
John, I appreciate your adroit review of one of my favorite movies. I agree: some critics took issue with the very aspects of "The Untouchables" that made audiences LOVE it. The Western sequences were necessary not only to DePalma's cinematic language, but to the audience's final commitment to the characters.
ReplyDeleteYou see, I think up until that part of the movie, the viewer is still somewhat skeptical of the "good guys" because DePalma has laid the groundwork for us to question their commitment to one another and to their enterprise on some level. Ness initially seems committed to do the job of bringing Capone down because it's a job he's required to do, not because he's fully invested in it. Malone is the ruthlessly committed one who must convince Ness--and thus the audience--but Ness doesn't fully trust his (or anyone's) motivations and we aren't sure of Malone, either--he's just an Irish cop with his own axe to grind at first. The dweebish accountant is one of those necessary bureaucrats whose motivations happen to coincide temporarily with need, so to the audience he represents a dangerous weak link. The Montana interlude enables us to witness them all acting in ways that commit them to one another and for the good of the "side" they're on. Malone takes action that he recognizes he can't expect of Ness and the audience appreciates him doing this. Ness finally proves willing to be bold and confrontational, so the audience recognizes his investiture in his position--we're now sure he will do what's required even if he doesn't like it. And Mr. Accountant emerges from his nebbishy trappings and proves courageous. In Western terms, this is how a loosely affiliated bunch of guys "become men" together, and just as with a Western, the audience from this point forward has no doubt or qualm that they will do what is necessary and right.
I must draw attention to the sequences with Capone at the opera, where DePalma, using the minimalistic spareness of cinema, shows us the ruthless criminal sociopath who is capable of heedlessly weeping in public--a man unable to be emotionally involved with or moved by the humanity in the world around him who is uncontrollably moved by the monumentally-scaled depiction of humanity provided by the musical-theatrical constructs of Verdian opera. Capone is DePalma's operatic figure.
In fact, the Western itself is America's New-World translation of the Old World art form of opera. DePalma uses the devices of both here to present "The Untouchables" as an operatic film.