Vidas al límite

Bringing out the Dead, unfortunately, has fewer fans than it deserves. Why? Because this isn't simply a "New York" movie, or a movie about a paramedic, or about euthenasia, despite the ostensible setting and plot points.

Instead, Scorsese has created a cinematic myth about how haunted modern existence can be, and what it takes to be "saved" and find grace in a seemingly godless world. His vision of New York is all literate existential comedy, not a window into the rotten Big Apple. Mere satiric commentary on the tragedy of life in New York is for journeyman directors; Scorsese is doing something else entirely here.

In other words, this is that really rare beast--a literate film that is, first and foremost, still a great movie. In the plot and its implications, there's more here of Flannery O Conner or Virginia Woolf than there is here of, say, Tom Wolf. More pariticularly, Bringing out the Dead does with masterful filmmaking what Joyce's The Dead did in prose. This film is a truly eye-opening investigation into how the living exist in the shadow of the dead and dying.

The film accomplishes this incredibly difficult task on many levels--the cinematography alone should give you a clue that this is definitely not Taxi Driver or Goodfellas--there's something more sublime here (the beauty that American Beauty explains wonderfully is shown everywhere in this film, but Bringing out the Dead is less mundane, simple and "character" oriented). Every shot is right, and the numerous computer effects here--on display almost for their own sake in The Matrix--are here poetically put together by a master director.

So, just for it's approach to a subject that few movies or directors would even attempt, this film will be a classic. Oddly enough, one of the few movies it can be compared with is Hitchcock's Vertigo, which confronts the same issues in a different way. Scotty's (Jimmy Stewart) desire to "raise" the dead is as strong as Frank's, and audiences didn't much like Vertigo when it was released either.

The acting, the music, the incredible photography--they're all great, if you realize you are watching a literate, funny, well-plotted (as opposed to simply plotted) meditation on the ghosts that increasingly inhabit our technocratic dwellings.

Too good for a grade: see it on the biggest, best screen you can while you can. BTW--it's better the second time.

Sometimes you can watch a film and see that all the pieces are there and yet there's still something not quite right about it. 'Bringing Out the Dead' stars Nicholas Cage (while he was still highly-bankable at the Box Office) as a New York ambulance driver who's on the brink of burning out completely. He's seemingly lost the ability to sleep (properly) and turned to various substances to get himself through his - increasingly dangerous - nightshifts.

Now, back in 1999 when this film was released, Cage was pretty much at the top of his game and you could guarantee that he'd put in a good performance, especially under an equally great director. Here we have none other than Martin Scorsese at the helm who is more than capable at keeping hold of Cage's reigns and making sure he doesn't do that 'over the topness' he sometimes slips into. The premise is great and there's plenty of scope for the story and characters to evolve. The films sports an equally impressive supporting cast including Patricia Arquette, Ving Rhames and John Goodman. So, baring all that in mind, it's hard to see that anything could go wrong with it.

I certainly don't hate 'Bringing Out the Dead.' I just feel that with that much talent at its disposal it should be a lot better than it is. The actors and direction are amazing, but where it falls down is a general lack of focus as to where the story is going and what genre the film wants to be. It flips from everything from romantic comedy to gritty drama almost every other scene and even flirts with the possibility of a supernatural element (loosely). There's not an awful lot of motivation for the supporting cast and they just seem to do things to provide Cage with something bad/dramatic to react to. The films plays out like a string of sketches/mini episodes that are loosely strung together by the flimsy of narratives.

If you're a fan of Cage and/or Scorsese, this is a 'must watch.' However, some may get a little tired with waiting for something to happen.

I was genuinely curious about "Bringing Out the Dead". I am a fan of Scorsese, but I never heard about this motion picture until a few months ago. The movie follows a medical technician responding to tough emergency calls. There are tons of raw scenes that portray perfectly how crazy and chaotic New York might be during the night. Frank Pierce is a man hunted by the people that was not able to save, he lives with deep regrets and traumas. In order to cope with all this, he becomes addicted to alcohol and other substances, disconnecting completely from reality. On paper this movie is great: first responders see a lot of really difficult situations on a daily basis and this can have some serious consequences on a person's psyche, to the point where personal life and relationships are heavily impacted. I think that the director portrayed this aspect very well. Unfortunately, I had a hard time going through it, because it is really repetitive and I feel that the main character never really develops in any way, he just keeps living in the same way, without doing anything about it. Towards the end we finally see some progressions, but then the credits roll and we do not get to see if Frank will finally find redemption. Maybe someone might find this choice appealing because it leaves the audience in the mystery, but personally I did not enjoy it.

This film had a lot of potential, the acting is decent, the plot is extremely interesting and the side characters are appealing. However, the lack of progression and the exhaustingly repetitive sequences, made "Bringing Out the Dead" a tedious experience.

Bringing out the Dead is the most underrated film ever done by Martin Scorsese. It is one of the most well made films I've ever seen and is one of my favorite dramas of all time.

The film focuses on a paramedic called Frank played by Nicolas Cage. The film focuses on 48 hours of Frank's life as a paramedic and all the horrific things he has seen. As well as that Frank is also haunted by spirits of people who he couldn't save, befriends a young women called Mary played by Patricia Arquette and a whole range of strange partners.

The actors that Scorsese has chosen are a weird bunch as they're not really in Scorsese's other films and they're not really big name actors. As well as Nicolas Cage there's also supporting roles from people like John Goodman, Ving Rhames and Tom Siezmore. Everyone does a fantastic jobs even the actors who have much smaller roles than others.

This is much more surreal film than most other Scorsese films as we go into Frank's mind.

The reasons why this films succeeds is just that you really care about this characters and while the film dosen't really have much of a story it grips you the whole way through.

It also has a great soundtrack which includes artists like Van Morrison, R.E.M and the Who.

Overall the film is quite different to what you're usually expecting but it grips who the whole way though and it gets a full 5 star rating form me.

BRINGING OUT THE DEAD (1999) ***1/2

Starring: Nicolas Cage, Patricia Arquette, John Goodman, Ving Rhames, Tom Sizemore, Cliff Curtis Director: Martin Scorsese Running time: 120 minutes Rated R (for gritty violent content, language, and drug use)

By Blake French:

Martin Scorsese's "Bringing Out The Dead" is one of the only movies I have ever seen that does not remotely glamorize its subject matter. That is something that does not come naturally in the world of film. Movies glamorize almost everything they face matters with; whether it's violence, drugs, sex, or other behaviors. Movies persuade, advertise, and sell incorrect messages to hungry and excepting pedestrians. Not only is "Bringing Out The Dead" an anti-violence, drugs and glamour film, it also manages to deliver its message through one of the most talented actors in Hollywood clearly and understandably. This is one of the year's most unsettling and uncompromising productions, and also one of the year's best.

"Bringing Out the Dead" offers no story in its existence. But there is no actual need for a plot here, due to a strong, precise narrative through-line and focused point of view seen through its central character. He is Frank Pierce (Nicolas Cage), who narrates the film with a sense of depravity. He and his buddies, Marcus (Ving Rhames), Tom (Tom Sizemore), and Larry (John Goodman), work the evening shift at New York's Hell's Kitchen as Ambulance Drivers for an emergency hospital. They live a life full of stress, sweat, and desperation. Frank often comes to work pleading for his boss to fire him. The opening scene, which properly induces the desperate and gritty lives of the main characters, features Frank and Larry, being called to the home of Mary Burke, whose unhealthy father is having a heart attack. They stabilize him, rush the man to their emergency care facility, and go on with their lives.

Now, where many "lesser" movies would have developed a romantic subplot with the Mary character and Frank, "Bringing Out the Dead" is too focused and skillful to do that. There is affection between the two. But Frank is in such a position in his life that he just isn't prone to fall for a woman. Nor does he give in to any of the many hookers standing on the street blocks tempting him to keep them in business. He is on the verge of an nervous break down, and the film never pretends otherwise.

While for the most part, this movie didn't give into any major distractions or side-subjects, it did have several flawed and unexplained subplots. The story featuring Frank constantly being haunted by the ghost of a young girl he lost some time ago isn't really explained enough. Nor does an unusually bizarre scene later on payoff featuring Frank saving lost souls in pain beneath the streets of New York. And there seems to be an extremely dangerous drug featured in the movie, which strangely appears at the overdoes scenes where Frank is called to--this isn't detailed enough to pay off either. I do realize the purpose of us not knowing about this medical issue; we don't have the knowledge because Frank doesn't. But I still think there may have been a way to inform the audience on the context of this material, without making the hero look stupid. Also, the film is over narrated by Frank, who sometimes describes his interesting past experiences through words, not flashbacks or visions, which would have been much more intriguing.

Scorsese makes no sense of the chaotic, unorganized, unsettling medical experiences patients go through in the emergency room where Frank doctors in. The style he uses to depict the film in is flawless in this justification: the camera angles are mind-warping and fast paced, the atmosphere of the movie is gritty, with blood and vulgarism abound. The characters pace frantically as they travel across one end of the building to the next, not sure to where or whom they are going. The characters also are injected with a deep sense of lifeless scrounge, as they stare and gaze into each other's eyes, only to discover there is nothing in each other. In some aspects, this film is like "Saving Private Ryan": a tantalizing hell.

And Nicolas Cage delivers yet another fascinating performance here. His character is empathized with the entire way through, even if narration is used instead of illusion. He manages to depict his character through the torment and emotional damnation required. He pursues profoundness in scenes where his character realizes happiness in itself. "I fell like I saved someone," mutters Frank to himself. Good job, Frank. You saved yourself.

Brought to you by Paramount Pictures and Touchstone Pictures.