Read Negative User Reviews for The Departed

0

XelanakAug 22, 2017

This is not a film Scorsese will be or should be remembered for - though fans of Goodfellas may relish the profligate bloodshed,It was really boring and i didnt like it at all.

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

2

Weld1Jul 1, 2016

I really wanted to like this movie considering the cast and Scorcese, however, I found it jumped all over and was hard to follow. The plot was ok and the acting was mediocre at best as there was a lot of over-acting for dramatic effect whichI really wanted to like this movie considering the cast and Scorcese, however, I found it jumped all over and was hard to follow. The plot was ok and the acting was mediocre at best as there was a lot of over-acting for dramatic effect which diminished the realism and believability. It felt like I wasn't watching fictional characters with any depth, instead just actors acting with bad fake Bahstun accents. I think this would have been a much better movie with some quality new or unknown actors instead of the typical multi-Millionaires, of course, that isn't how the movie business works - it's all about the money and the A-listers get more cattle to the box office. Finally, the cover of Pink Floyd's classic Comfortably Numb was absolutely terrible, I actually cringed when I heard this beautiful song being completely butchered. The band, singer, and anyone involved with this decision should be lined up against a wall and pelted with rotten cantaloupe until they sob, apologize, and promise to never do this again.… Expand

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

3

1966ZodiacOct 6, 2010

This movie is pretty much an overrated remake of Infernal Affairs. When I first saw this movie I thought it would be AMAZING since it had won the oscar fo best picture and all. I was very disappointed and all I remember was mostly peopleThis movie is pretty much an overrated remake of Infernal Affairs. When I first saw this movie I thought it would be AMAZING since it had won the oscar fo best picture and all. I was very disappointed and all I remember was mostly people saying the F word over and over again. Some parts of the movie tries to have crude humor but it fails miserably. Now I saw this movie before I saw the original infernal affairs I saw infernal affairs about a year after an thought the original was much much MUCH better. This movie lacks proper character development and we feel no emotion for the characters. The only thing better about this remake is the mob boss played by Jack Nicholson. This movie is WAY overrated and I really don't recomend watching it. I however can recomend watching the original movie. The orginal movie "Inferna Affairs" has what this movies missing(a heart).… Expand

5 of 13 users found this helpful58

All this user's reviews

1

Trev29Mar 31, 2012

Uninteresting. It is very overrated. It is too bad that Marty won for this film when he clearly had better work that was overlooked. The accents seem so forced and the storyline is just another gangster film.

4 of 11 users found this helpful47

All this user's reviews

3

ZackB.Jul 14, 2008

I really wish someone would explain to me how this is a good movie. Is the acting great? You bet. Direction? Sure. But, how about this... There is absolutely no way in my mind that the events portrayed in the movie could ever be considered I really wish someone would explain to me how this is a good movie. Is the acting great? You bet. Direction? Sure. But, how about this... There is absolutely no way in my mind that the events portrayed in the movie could ever be considered believable. Leonardo DiCaprios character wouldn't have survived any longer than the amount of time it took Jack Nicholson to find him after hearing that there was a rat in the group. Secondly, if there is a leak in a department, they would bring in from outside the group to investigate, not just tell the guy in charge to do it. I dislike this movie only for the reason that I find it amazingly unbelievable and ludicrous.… Expand

3 of 14 users found this helpful

0

linten234Jan 2, 2021

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This is one of the worst, most overrated movies I've ever seen. Critics pretended it was good so that Scorsese could win his best picture that he never won before for the times he really did deserve it like Goodfellas and Casino. This movie was ridiculously unrealistic. Jack Nicholson was horrible in his role. Why would the mob boss be personally involved in all the day to day business? Unrealistic. Why would he personally meet with his police dept. mole in the adult movie theatre and then whip out a s*x toy and do a weird joke thing? That was one of the worst scenes I've ever seen. He was annoying and not all likeable or interesting. He constantly wore that stupid hat and ugly glasses and when he didn't, he had his overly long hair which flared on the sides like they were little wings. Stupid and frustrating to look at. Also, there was the constant offensive language and profanity. Why the need for all the racial and anti-LGBT language? Another horrible scene: when Alec Baldwin's character tells the other guy, "You one of those guys who works out? Go f*ck yourself". Yes, that's how bad the dialogue was. The script was unbearably bad. Also, the main female character of a psychiatrist? Why would she sleep with her client who acts like a total lunatic and is extremely insulting to her? Is this Scorsese's fantasy of women? You can treat them like crap and then they break their professional ethics to sleep with you? Horrible. I just watched Casino the night before and was on a Scorsese kick. Wow, what a comparison. Casino is about 100 times better than this one. I can't believe I thought this was a good movie when it first came out. What was I thinking? I guess if you are desperate enough to believe the hype, you can like just about anything. I guess that explains all the positive reviews here. Sad. Deeply painful movie to watch and not at all worth the 2.5 hours of my life I'll never get back. Don't waste your time watching unless you enjoy watching movies just to see how terrible they can get.… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

3

TerenceH.May 23, 2008

While the original Hong Kong version was plausible due to their cultural standards, Scorsese's version was way below imaginable standards. While the HK verison had some plot devices, there was a lot implausible gaps and forced concepts While the original Hong Kong version was plausible due to their cultural standards, Scorsese's version was way below imaginable standards. While the HK verison had some plot devices, there was a lot implausible gaps and forced concepts that didn't work out in the American version. Like a boss sitting in the front of a car so the mole can communicate in the back. A gang boss will never sit in the front of a car! Using cell-phones to bring down a gang is just lame and un-inspiring! Colin Sullivan, who claimed to not be able to use the password on his computer all of a sudden uses it to delete Costigans profile on his very own computer seconds later. The list goes on and gets very tiresome to mention. Didn't anyone review these forced issues and plotholes before making the film? That's right, they just tried to copy IA, forgetting about the lost in translation consequences. Its a shame that America never bothered to release the IA trilogy instead in theaters. The original stories encompassed balanced story-telling, better suspense and emotional content, slick cat-and mouse chase, psychological dept, and well-developed and intriguing characters. We also get to see how being in the police and triads truly bring grief in their lives. The Departed was done sloppy in comparison only saved by typical Scorsese violence and swearing. The characters in Departed were lame and boring. Billy Costigan (Leo Dicpario) is the only character probably that got his role right. Matt Damon, a good actor, had a very dull and typical bad guy character in comparison to Andy Lau's tormented role in IA. Martin Sheen was a poor father figure and a watse of time. and of course, there are other lame, pointless filler characters that aren't worth mentioning. Sadly, Scorsese will get praises from the audience no matter how he makes his films. Had Scorsese's name not been on the director's list, this film would had got a worser rating. All in all, it was IA that was more realistic. People say Departed is, but tell yourself this, not one person swears that much, nor do you see bloodshed like that in reality. 4 guys getting bullets in their heads one after another? There was a reason why IA had the bullet in the head scenerio but Scorsese and Monahan just really never knew what it meant, did they?… Expand

2 of 11 users found this helpful

1

TerryJacobsDec 20, 2007

Overrated. Unfortunately, overexcessive swearing and violence makes this film too unrealistic. Scorsese is starting to lack polish in his films.

2 of 12 users found this helpful

2

JaneDJul 3, 2008

For once ,I agree with the negative reviews here. I simply didn't like the film and Scorsese's way beyond fictional views. I don't see how anyone could give this film a 8 or above.

1 of 7 users found this helpful

0

JCA.Oct 2, 2007

Not necessary. Martin, William, leonardo, Matt, Mark, and Jack put together a performance that goes way over the top and totally unexpected. But 90 minutes in the movie, you can expect the violent killings at the end due to a non-stop Not necessary. Martin, William, leonardo, Matt, Mark, and Jack put together a performance that goes way over the top and totally unexpected. But 90 minutes in the movie, you can expect the violent killings at the end due to a non-stop functional randomly made-up look into crazy lives that is impossibly accurate.… Expand

1 of 7 users found this helpful

2

KevinDJun 7, 2009

Why is Mark Wahlberg affecting a Bostonian accent in this movie: he's FROM Boston! And, as usual, Scorcese can't direct a believable female character at all. Ever. This-- ALL this said-- it is certainly a better movie than his Why is Mark Wahlberg affecting a Bostonian accent in this movie: he's FROM Boston! And, as usual, Scorcese can't direct a believable female character at all. Ever. This-- ALL this said-- it is certainly a better movie than his post-2000 attempts: the tedious GANGS OF NY and the unwatchable THE AVIATOR...faint praise, indeed.… Expand

1 of 8 users found this helpful

0

JoyceC.Oct 2, 2007

Martin Scorsese is obsessed with sinful everything. This movie is written, and every character never does follow the ten commandments, only the devils.

1 of 9 users found this helpful

0

DavidS.Oct 9, 2006

A waste of film on every level. Scorsese is in bad need of a dominatrix.

0 of 11 users found this helpful

3

StevenW.Jan 3, 2007

I've noticed that most of the positive comments of this movie tend to come from people who are essentially Scorcese worshippers - people who will praise anything the 'great director' comes up with. While this film might have I've noticed that most of the positive comments of this movie tend to come from people who are essentially Scorcese worshippers - people who will praise anything the 'great director' comes up with. While this film might have its merits, this movie suffers from terrible characterisation, enough to kill this film. As somebody called JR M posted earlier, "Since much of the movie revolved around a sense of sympathy or at least belief in the tribulations of his character, Decaprio's cardbard portrayal destroyed any emotional engagement in the character". It was hard to care about a guy who spent the whole movie whining. [***SPOILER***] I cheered when Dicaprio's character got shot, and then I asked myself, 'Hey, aren't I supposed to be rooting for this guy?' His character was poorly concieved, poorly written, poorly characterised, and above all poorly (over) acted.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful

3

LindaL.Jan 6, 2007

I don't see how this movie made anyone's "Best of 2006" list -- except that the critics love Scorsese. It's a far-from-groundbreaking "rat in the police dept" story with tons of bloody gun violence and almost no satisfaction I don't see how this movie made anyone's "Best of 2006" list -- except that the critics love Scorsese. It's a far-from-groundbreaking "rat in the police dept" story with tons of bloody gun violence and almost no satisfaction plotwise. Acting is OK, but It's like "Goodfellas" and "Pulp Fiction" minus any style or humor ... and you'll hear the f-word enough to last you the rest of your life.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful

2

TerryJan 7, 2007

Steven is right about this movie getting high ratings due to Scorsese worshippers. This movie is poorly contrived in comparison to the original HK movie. The cast is either poorly used or miscast. In the HK one, the Matt Damon character is Steven is right about this movie getting high ratings due to Scorsese worshippers. This movie is poorly contrived in comparison to the original HK movie. The cast is either poorly used or miscast. In the HK one, the Matt Damon character is more interesting and has a dual personality. Martin Sheen is so dull as Leo's supervisor. This movie also lacks the emotion of the original . How this movie is getting high ratings seem to be pure propaganda to boost Scorsese's failing career. To simply put it, America lacks in the ideas department. If this film gets any oscar at all, there goes any integrity Americans have for foreign films.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful

2

LuisM.Nov 10, 2006

The worst script of this year!!! The last 30 minutes of the movies are a completely nonsense!!

0 of 2 users found this helpful

1

GeorgeROct 11, 2006

I

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

BretTOct 12, 2006

When I saw the preview for the movie I instantly knew that it was a remake of Infernal Affairs. I was excited to see the movie translated, until of course I sat down and watched it. The film was poorly translated. Most of the character When I saw the preview for the movie I instantly knew that it was a remake of Infernal Affairs. I was excited to see the movie translated, until of course I sat down and watched it. The film was poorly translated. Most of the character nuances were lost. Now this wasn't to say that the acting was bad. In fact Nicholson and DiCaprio did a great job, but Matt Damon was pitiful. In the original movie of the characters had a habit of tapping. It was an important part of the movie that was completely removed. Also, the music was very poorly selected and implemented. Nothing like having your ears suddenly blown off in the middle of the movie. Then they turn it down sharply and two seconds later turn it off completely. Makes you wonder how much time they spent on the movie.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful

0

BenK.Jan 15, 2007

Unfortunately, Scorsese won best director. The original director did a much better job and some how Scorsese won best director for telling a weaker story. American cinema is dead at best.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

RobinW.Jan 20, 2007

I had to back up my TIVO when I saw Scorsese get up & start speaking at the podium! I guess I didn't get the word that The Departed was in the running for best director...likely, because it's ridiculous that it be considered & I had to back up my TIVO when I saw Scorsese get up & start speaking at the podium! I guess I didn't get the word that The Departed was in the running for best director...likely, because it's ridiculous that it be considered & placed among the ranks of films actually worthy of the nomination for Best Director! Really...I like Scorses's films, for the most part. But let's face it, even those considered to be among the best at their craft can bomb now & then. The Departed was entertaining at first, but ended up a monumental disappointment & certainly not "award-worthy!" It took too much work to stay involved in the movie. I witnessed so many blatant flaws, it was incredible. A completely convoluted movie - one that should have been a Movie of the Week or on HBO...but a Golden Globe contender? Actually, I think I was okay with the movie until about the last 40 minutes. But, whether I liked the movie or not, it wasn't worthy of a Golden Globe - or any award, for that matter! It did explain to me, however, why Nicolson sat at the front table & the cameras graced us with shots of the various 'smug' looks he had plastered across his face whenever somebody on stage looked down at him & brought him into their 'moment' on stage. He sat back in his chair like he was Omnipotent! It was sickening. I like Nicolson as an actor. I also believe he's a very shrewd business man. But let's get serious. If this movie was so great, why wasn't Nicolson up for best actor? That makes no sense! And, Scorsese seemed awkward on stage - I'm thinkin' he had to feel a tad out of place, suddenly, having to look into the faces of those directors he was up against who actually deserved to be in the best director category this year. The one other thing that made me lose complete respect for what the Golden Globes event represents, was Warren Beatty being honored. Let's see...he won 'best director' for REDS way back when...he's been in more forgettable films than memorable. He hasn't done anything in years, except get himself in the limelight hoping people actually believe he belongs in politics...for which he proved himself to be a big buffoon & that Tom Hanks found a way to make Beatty seem somehow amazing...well. that - alone -deserves some kind of awward! I'll say one thing for Nicolson...despite his 'better than thou' attitude, he has proved himself to be an excellent actor. That doesn't mean everything he's in is worthy of an award. It all makes sense to me now...Scorsese winning for "Best Director," Nicolson behaving as if only a select two or three were worthy of his attention, and Beatty being honored...quite a threesome there.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

AsiaK.Jan 27, 2007

Honestly, Jack Nicholson took over the screen, and not in a good way, Matt Damon's character was too one-sided, and we never really understood what motive the shrink girlfriend had to sleep with Di-Caprio's character... AND it was Honestly, Jack Nicholson took over the screen, and not in a good way, Matt Damon's character was too one-sided, and we never really understood what motive the shrink girlfriend had to sleep with Di-Caprio's character... AND it was too long. The last image was just too obvious and dissapointing... as was the whole flick.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

2

D.G.Jan 27, 2007

This is an over-rated made for t.v dramedy. A perfect "Oscar" type film; both safe and inoffensive. The actors perform their best acting schticks (Jack Nicholson) and do it well - ho hum. It took me a while to realize that it was more comedy This is an over-rated made for t.v dramedy. A perfect "Oscar" type film; both safe and inoffensive. The actors perform their best acting schticks (Jack Nicholson) and do it well - ho hum. It took me a while to realize that it was more comedy than drama. Watch out for the BAD photoshopped photo of the girl on the bike and the rat at the end. Also, more money should have been spent on the sets rather than actor's salaries (Jack Nicholson). At least they might have elevated it beyond the look of a daytime soap. Save your money and wait until it comes out on DVD.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful

1

GiovanniN.Feb 10, 2007

Very bad movie. Full of dramatic errors, completely illogical, sometimes even ridiculous: Why should the shrink fall in love with Damon? Why should she fall in love with di Caprio? Has she a macho-problem? And: What a strange coincidence Very bad movie. Full of dramatic errors, completely illogical, sometimes even ridiculous: Why should the shrink fall in love with Damon? Why should she fall in love with di Caprio? Has she a macho-problem? And: What a strange coincidence that the two guys sleep with the same woman. Why did Costigan risk to see the shrink who worked on floor under the police? Costello knew that Costigan was an ex-statie: Why did he suspect him sooooo late? The police had a second mole in the Costello gang - but Costigan didn't know it? The police could have arrested Costello much more earlier: They had enough proves and more than enough witnesses? Or the scene with die Chinese guys: The head of operations tells his team that they could locate Costello by cell phones - and 30 seconds later all the cell phone signals dissappear. Evidently one member of the team must have been the mole. And what happened to the brown envelope Costigan gave the shrink? Much too long, stupid script, sometimes even unintentionally funny. And a language that is shocking nobody anymore.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

D.A.Feb 20, 2007

Enjoyable until the last 1/2 hour and then you suspend all belief feel cheated for investing time to have it taken away with random happenings. With the second mole you may as well have had John rambo come up in the left and kill the whole Enjoyable until the last 1/2 hour and then you suspend all belief feel cheated for investing time to have it taken away with random happenings. With the second mole you may as well have had John rambo come up in the left and kill the whole gang, in fact I would have prefered that, in fact im off to watch rambo and at least you know that he's gonna kill everything cause it's not meant to be REAL like this which is so UNREALISTIC, oh well bring on Rambo 4.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

1

PeterM.Mar 20, 2007

After viewing this movie, I only wish I hadn't Departed with my money to purchase the tickets! The violence portrayed is so gratuitous and constant that by the time the climax arrivies it degenerates into a bad joke. Another title for After viewing this movie, I only wish I hadn't Departed with my money to purchase the tickets! The violence portrayed is so gratuitous and constant that by the time the climax arrivies it degenerates into a bad joke. Another title for this film could have been, "People being shot in the Head". If Americans regard this ultra vulgar, ultru violent movie as the best of the year, then America has problems. Not worthy of Scorsese and his team.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

0

JMApr 2, 2007

I have lost so much respect for all the people who raved about how good this movie was. It's a shame that THIS is the movie that scorcese wins an oscar for. Weak, convoluded plot that falls apart if you think about it too much. I have lost so much respect for all the people who raved about how good this movie was. It's a shame that THIS is the movie that scorcese wins an oscar for. Weak, convoluded plot that falls apart if you think about it too much. Absolutely no character development whatsoever.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

0

JaredC.May 1, 2007

Scorsese at the top of his game. Yah sure. The acting was well done and the plot was pretty good but overall the movie was unexpecdedly boring. For example: when Alec Baldwin and Mark Wahlberg were in that meeting room confronting the staff, Scorsese at the top of his game. Yah sure. The acting was well done and the plot was pretty good but overall the movie was unexpecdedly boring. For example: when Alec Baldwin and Mark Wahlberg were in that meeting room confronting the staff, they talked so quickly with them saying random things that just made me wonder.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

RichR.May 4, 2007

Leo was great, Jack was asleep, Matt was as boring as ever, Markie Mark was a joke. All this film does is underscore the fact that Good Fellas was one of the greatest films ever made. None of these guys can touch Ray Liotta's genius; Leo was great, Jack was asleep, Matt was as boring as ever, Markie Mark was a joke. All this film does is underscore the fact that Good Fellas was one of the greatest films ever made. None of these guys can touch Ray Liotta's genius; he's America's most under-rated and underappreciated actor by far.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

1

TinaH.Oct 10, 2006

I hated it. I couldn't follow the plot or get involved with the characters. I was just lost a lot of the time. The violence was gratuitous and the script was a mess. I just didn't buy the whole thing. I have seen Scorsese do some I hated it. I couldn't follow the plot or get involved with the characters. I was just lost a lot of the time. The violence was gratuitous and the script was a mess. I just didn't buy the whole thing. I have seen Scorsese do some great films. This was not one of them.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

LadyfingerOct 12, 2006

Violence, blood and gore does not a movie make. There are more holes in the story than Swiss cheese. The acting was superb but there wasn't much to work with as far as the story goes. I could rip it apart but it will be deleted as Violence, blood and gore does not a movie make. There are more holes in the story than Swiss cheese. The acting was superb but there wasn't much to work with as far as the story goes. I could rip it apart but it will be deleted as spoilers. If you like endless bloodshed in which almost everyone comically buys the farm then you will like this. Not my cup of tea as it was totally ridiculous as Jack should have whacked Leonardo as there wasn't any bond between the two.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

2

WalterAdamsonOct 15, 2006

I went to see this fim because I like the work of the leads and the Director, but in my opinion this was a complete waste of time. Lame, actors doing a job for their fees, no tension of any sort, and lots of distracting blood, guts, swearingI went to see this fim because I like the work of the leads and the Director, but in my opinion this was a complete waste of time. Lame, actors doing a job for their fees, no tension of any sort, and lots of distracting blood, guts, swearing and women with their heads in the laps of smelly old men - the main point of which seemed to be to distract from the emptiness of the whole event. I enjoyed the original. Hire it. Don't waste your money on this one.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

2

SanzenOct 15, 2006

Caught The Departed last night and I have to say, its one abject failure of a remake. I was expecting it to be good, and truth be told, I wanted it to be good because it is based on Hongkong

0 of 1 users found this helpful

2

SanZ.Oct 19, 2006

Caught The Departed last night and I have to say, its one abject failure of a remake. I was expecting it to be good, and truth be told, I wanted it to be good because it is based on Hongkong

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

KosChrDec 8, 2006

Only thing good about the film is the music score and the acting. Directing and script are kind of "let's make a movie and put a known director to it". By far not the best movie of the year imo.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

1

S.NgOct 7, 2006

Is everyone else watching a different movie because if there was any common sense and justice, every publication who gave this movie such high marks should be responsible of refunding every ticket sold. Even without watching Infernal Affairs Is everyone else watching a different movie because if there was any common sense and justice, every publication who gave this movie such high marks should be responsible of refunding every ticket sold. Even without watching Infernal Affairs which this was remade from, The Departed is a prolonged bizarre and trite 1 hour and 50 minutes. With wiseguy dialogues that run three words too long of a sentence, it also boasts senseless need of violence on screen. Do American cinema take a few steps backward every few years? The only reason why anyone would give this movie such praise is by just reviewing the credits and not watching it. Where Infernal Affairs was a well-paced film, this was, as one cinema-goer so well put it, "all over the place." Thank you very much for wasting my weekend and also for proving once again, of all the fairness and realism placed in portraying every other race, the Chinese are still made to look like numbskulls who can't even speak their own language properly.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

EstherWOct 9, 2006

A thoroughly unpleasant moviegoing experience, easily the most overrated movie of the year.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

LindaP.Jan 22, 2007

Banal Dialogue, trite acting, terrible overall.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

2

TheoT.Mar 13, 2007

Boring script-story telling. As if it was made by an apprentice. Many times had to press the forward button on dvd player just to get it over with. Every time the action was building up for one of the main cop characters the movie switch Boring script-story telling. As if it was made by an apprentice. Many times had to press the forward button on dvd player just to get it over with. Every time the action was building up for one of the main cop characters the movie switch over to the other parallel character without reaching any apex.An on-off pattern without any climax. Only exception the sceen at the elevetor towards the end of the movie. Some characters like the female shrink doctor had no reason to exist. Even when she realised the role of one of the characters she was not given any active role in the action. Only thing that saved it was the excellent play by Nicholson.Some of the images of the mob characters had the potential to project their inner feelings to the viewer and support the overall atmosphere of the movie.The images were there but not the script to support them. So they remained just the 'guys'. No doubt Scorsese deserved an Oscar but NOT for this one.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

1

AlexMar 4, 2007

Boring script, flat characters and an ungracefully superimposed message. what a disappointment.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

JabezMar 6, 2007

Shockiingly bad for a Scorcese film. Even if you excuse the hammy behavior (it certainly ain't acting), THE PLOT MAKES NO SENSE. I understand the concept of suspending belief to enjoy a film, but this requires parking your frontal lobes Shockiingly bad for a Scorcese film. Even if you excuse the hammy behavior (it certainly ain't acting), THE PLOT MAKES NO SENSE. I understand the concept of suspending belief to enjoy a film, but this requires parking your frontal lobes at the door. Hey, Marty did it--why can't we. And this won the Oscar!?? At least it was better than "Crash" and "Braveheart".… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

0

JimLApr 16, 2007

I simply just didn't like this film. Nothing Oscar worthy. There were other better films I tell ya that. Not worth my time to complain much though. Not a true Martin Scorsese film.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

2

LanaApr 30, 2007

This film is terrible. The character development is boring and the characters don't feel like they have anything to hide. This movie lacks any soul or emotion and the dialouge is mediocre at best. The actors at times seems to be reading This film is terrible. The character development is boring and the characters don't feel like they have anything to hide. This movie lacks any soul or emotion and the dialouge is mediocre at best. The actors at times seems to be reading off cue cards. Not the best of 2006, one of the most overrated.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

1

MikeAJun 20, 2007

This movie is bad. I can't see how people rate it anything above a 4. An all star cast can't save this. Nicholas doesn't convince as a gang leader. He doesn't scare anyone. Actually none of these actors play the tough guy This movie is bad. I can't see how people rate it anything above a 4. An all star cast can't save this. Nicholas doesn't convince as a gang leader. He doesn't scare anyone. Actually none of these actors play the tough guy well. Diacapro is just to soft to play his role. There's holes all through this film. Actually, it's so bad it's funny. The scene where Dicaprio gets his injured arm smashed on the table 3 times to prove he's not a rat is hilarious! That's all it took to convince a seasoned mob boss that he wasn't a rat!? Come on! Please! I didn't actually realize that this was a remake until reading this column. To me it was a rip-off of a 90's film STATE OF GRACE, a great Irish mob film set in New York staring Sean Penn, Ed Harris and Gary Oldman. Now this is a great gangster film! There were scenes in the Departed that to me, were taken straight out of, or very similar, to SOG. The story line is very similar aswell. If you want to see what a great "Rat" film looks like, get this out.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

2

BenF.Jun 3, 2007

Was the movie plot good? yes Was the acting good? yes...the problem I had with the movie is that it was distasteful. Extremely unrealistic. It takes extreme effort for someone to use that much profanaity in one sentance in the "real world".

0 of 1 users found this helpful

1

HomerBJul 26, 2007

Awful. The original was well-balanced and this one did nothing to so-call improve on the original. A lot the characters were boring and unsympathetic to watch. There was no good psychological build-up between the characters. There is no Awful. The original was well-balanced and this one did nothing to so-call improve on the original. A lot the characters were boring and unsympathetic to watch. There was no good psychological build-up between the characters. There is no sense of paranoia like how Infernal Affairs gave us. This movie lacked real themes and emotion. This film had far too many plot-holes and implausible scenes. Overrated film of 2006, indeed.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

0

jOSHCSep 22, 2007

Do we really need Martin Scorsese? Heresy though it may appear, the question interrogates not so much the man

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

cindynNov 30, 2006

Very disappointing film. It was very contrived and seemed totally unreal to me. No conparison to Goodfellas or Godfather. I like a movie I can sink my teeth into and this one was not it.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

2

RaymanJ.Jan 17, 2007

I disagree with Snake P. You either have it or you don't. People say it is unfair that Departed is fighting against the IA trilogy but where did Scorsese get his source material? Not only from the first but the 2nd and 3rd as well. When I disagree with Snake P. You either have it or you don't. People say it is unfair that Departed is fighting against the IA trilogy but where did Scorsese get his source material? Not only from the first but the 2nd and 3rd as well. When Scorsese made his first draft of the Departed which was soley based on IA, it flopped. Scorsese decided to borrow ideas from the prequels and sequels, thus which gave him a mediocre remake. What I also disagree is that Tony and Andy's characters had more of a personality, especially Andy's character. Andy was troubled person playing both bad and good cop. Although I love Matt Damon, his character was just a baddie period. No character development of interest here. The only saving grace in this film was Jack Nicolson. At least Scorsese decided to add some light to his character. That's show business and for your info, IA 2 was already written before IA 1 was ever made. The creators decided to release a more exciting cat-n-mouse chase than the prequel. IA 3 was the one that was written after the conclusion of IA. Honestly, Departed is light years away from being better than IA. Once again, you either have it or don't, and Departed simply doesn't.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

JonB.Jan 25, 2007

When I have to pause the movie 4 times because I''m bored says something. Sloooooow. Wahlberg too over the top. Damon = stiff. DeCaprio still looks like a kid. Nicholson just wasn't believable. A critics movie.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

JonKuligowskiFeb 17, 2007

This was a very good movie, until about 40 minutes from the end. It makes no sense at all. If DiCaprio had that evidence that he sent to Damons house, why would he just submit it to the police? Dont you think a police department like thatThis was a very good movie, until about 40 minutes from the end. It makes no sense at all. If DiCaprio had that evidence that he sent to Damons house, why would he just submit it to the police? Dont you think a police department like that would be cracking down more if they knew they had a mole? How did Wahlberg sneak into Damons apartment and kill him with the door wide open and nobody notice...and walk out looking like that? Im sure alot of police officers, especially the higher ranked ones would agree this movie does not make sense. I'm sure Damon cant delete DiCaprios biopsy on the computers and not have it on file anywhere that he deleted it.
This movie was very suspensful and kept me on the edge of my seat, until after Damon killed Nicolsons character.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

0

RedR.Nov 22, 2006

Completely overrated. Watch the original instead. Once again Hollywood messes up a foreign film.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

2

GoatlipsJan 30, 2022

Have people not seen Scorsese's masterpiece 'Goodfellas'? I struggle to understand how they could have and then rate this formulaic film so highly. Right from the start it's obvious that Scorsese was lazily reworking much of the GoodfellasHave people not seen Scorsese's masterpiece 'Goodfellas'? I struggle to understand how they could have and then rate this formulaic film so highly. Right from the start it's obvious that Scorsese was lazily reworking much of the Goodfellas formula, using Jack Nicholson as the foundation character, somewhat more like Pesci than De Niro though - as he isn't likeable - and even less mentally stable. As the story evolves, Nicholson's character's personality quickly becomes a very poorly researched (unresearched) mixture of bipolar, schizophrenic, and psychotic mental illnesses - poorly, and confusingly portrayed by Nicholson, no thanks to Scorsese's lack of help and direction (because Scorsese clearly only read the tabloid version of these mental illnesses). Another problem with Scorsese lazily dialing in his direction and reworking the Goodfellas formula is that the era the film's set in is a bizarre mix of '70s to modern day, but with little actually changes to the time frame. The pacing and structure of the film is so poor that when the main plot point occurs in the middle of the film you're left confused, thinking, "Is this really the moment the plot was leading up to, or is it just more build-up." But no, the main event really is halfway through the film and very anticlimactic. As, with most directors, Scorsese isn't the brightest of individuals so there's plenty of plot holes or illogical elements for you to force yourself to ignore, too. The second half of the film feels more like it should've been the first half's sequel - resultantly, in effect, seeming like two weak films being glued together. The first half is too short and the second half is too long, leaving you asking yourself, "Didn't the film end an hour ago?" Also, the second half reveals and exploits the extremely 'long game' played by one of the mobsters, which is obviously completely ridiculous - they don't just bribe people instead, still? Outside of Nicholson's poor and unbelievable performance, most other actors do a good job, especially DiCaprio. Mark Wahlberg, however, despite looking a bit out of place, is one of the few likeable characters. The first half of 'The Departed' is like a heist movie, and the second half is a vendetta, which features so many over the top, shock value, killings it's clearly ripping off 'The Godfather' in the style of 'To Live And Die In L.A.' To Live And Die In LA, despite the low production values, is far superior to this mess, plus it has an authentic retro ('80s) setting and soundtrack. Alternatively, just re-watch Goodfellas or the first two Godfather films instead. Overrated, weak reworking of the Goodfellas formula, with terrible structure, and lazy direction. 2/10* *It's probably a 4, but I'm trying to make up for all the "10/10!!!!!1" uncultured reviewers.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews