Martin Scorsese is best known for his gangster films: Goodfellas (1990), Casino (1995), Gangs of New York (2002), The Departed (2006), The Irishman (2019), and Killers of the Flower Moon (2023). Aside from Gangs of New York, these films unsparingly demythologize organized crime.
Thus Scorsese’s first foray into the mafia genre, 1973’s Mean Streets, is something of a surprise, for its depiction of New York’s Italian mafia may be on a much smaller canvas than Francis Ford Coppola’s The Godfather (1972), but in some ways it is even more romanticized.
The main character is Charlie Cappa (Harvey Keitel), a young Sicilian-American from Manhattan’s Little Italy. Charlie is an intelligent and sensitive young man of 25. He dresses very well. He reads authors like Hemingway, Hardy, and Dreiser. Charlie is also intensely Catholic but in a nearly blasphemous way. When he quotes Jesus, he sounds like he identifies with him a bit too much, like Charlie himself is the savior of mankind. He feels intense guilt because his family is involved in the mafia. But he rejects the Church’s path to redemption: confession and penance. Hence the voiceover that begins the film:
You don’t make up for your sins in church.
You do it in the streets. You do it at home.
The rest is bullshit, and you know it.
Charlie thinks he can redeem himself through acts of kindness, like Jesus ministering to the afflicted.
Charlie’s uncle, Giovanni Cappa (Cesare Danova), is a powerful mafioso who has taken Charlie under his wing. Giovanni’s criminal acts are all off screen. On screen, he is depicted as a consummate old-world gentleman. When a restauranteur who owes Giovanni money is behind on his payments, Giovanni’s advice is not to be impatient but simply to wait. When an impulsive young man shoots someone in order to ingratiate himself with the mob, Giovanni wants nothing to do with him and urges the lad’s father to send him to Miami until the heat dies down. When Charlie mentions that he was present at the shooting, his uncle tells him, “No you weren’t” and wants no further discussion.
Giovanni is also very protective of Charlie’s reputation. Thus he doesn’t approve of Charlie’s association with “Johnny Boy” Civello (Robert Deniro) and his cousin Teresa. The situation is delicate, however, and Giovanni is admirably sensitive to its moral complexities. First of all, Giovanni is “cumpari” with their family. Johnny Boy is even named after him. But he doesn’t want Charlie to associate with them because Johnny Boy is a bit crazy, and Teresa has epilepsy, which to Giovanni connotes madness. Second, Giovanni understands that Charlie feels sorry for them and wants to be nice. He even thinks this is to Charlie’s credit. Giovanni also knows they are neighbors, so Charlie can’t simply snub them. But still, he needs to disengage, because “Honorable men go with honorable men.”
The conflict of the film is that Charlie is already too involved with Johnny Boy and Teresa. Charlie is sleeping with Teresa, and he has vouched for Johnny Boy to Michael Longo, a loan shark. Like Giovanni, Michael is a patient man. But Johnny Boy has borrowed a lot of money from him and has been ducking his payments.
Johnny Boy Civello is a brilliant role for Robert Deniro. It is a compelling portrayal of an infantile parasite and con artist. He likes to gamble, whore around, and drink. But he doesn’t like to work. To fund his lifestyle, he cons people. Charlie has foolishly vouched for him, and when a mafioso vouches for a guy, that opens up a lot of loans. Maybe Charlie hoped Johnny Boy would turn his life around, but he’s basically an addict. He’ll drain everybody who associates with him of their money and reputations. The kinder they are, the more they will be victimized. When Johnny Boy runs out of people to con, he will turn to force. He’s already shown himself to be impulsively violent. Eventually, he’ll end up homeless, in jail, or dead, maybe all three.
Johnny Boy Civello is the first version of a character that turns up in other Scorsese films: Tommy De Vito in Goodfellas and Nicky Santoro in Casino, both played by Joe Pesci. All three characters are obnoxious, impulsive, sociopathic lowlifes who cause trouble for their friends, all of whom are sorely tempted to get rid of them. Both of Pesci’s characters end up getting killed by their long-suffering associates.
Johnny Boy’s most loathsome moment comes near the end of the film, when he blackmails Charlie by threatening to tell Giovanni just how entangled they are. Frankly, Charlie should have whacked him on the spot, with an extra bullet for the sheer moral obscenity.
Unfortunately, Charlie stays by Johnny Boy’s side until Michael the loan shark finally runs out of patience. You see, Michael isn’t quite the gentleman Giovanni is. He’s much younger, for one thing, and we are treated to a really petty con, where he steals cash from a couple of kids from the suburbs who want to buy fireworks.
As Charlie and Teresa try to drive Johnny Boy out of town, Michael pulls alongside, and a gunman sprays their car with bullets. Johnny Boy is hit in the neck, Charlie in the arm. Teresa is injured when the car crashes. All three survive, though, and Johnny Boy scurries like a rat into an alleyway to an unknown fate. Things would be a lot simpler for everyone if he bled out amid the trash cans.
Charlie will clearly have some explaining to do to his uncle Giovanni. But he’s a patient man. Let’s hope Charlie learns a lesson from all this. I guess Scorsese’s message is that the mafia would be a nice gentlemanly business if you could just stay away from the impulsive psychotic lowlifes.
Mean Streets has a deeply conservative message. The authority figures are right about everything. Uncle Giovanni was right about not associating with Johnny Boy and Teresa. The church is right about keeping redemption within its walls, not in the streets. Charlie’s mistakes spring from his grandiose secularized Christianity. He’s a libtard, in short.
Charlie, Teresa, and Charlie’s friend Tony all have “first-generation college student” auras. They have inflated egos, identity crises, and are deaf to the wisdom of their elders.
Tony, like Charlie, has an uncle in the mafia. Tony manages one of his uncle’s bars, where he and Charlie hang out, drink and carouse, and exchange literary and musical allusions. Tony buys a panther as a pet, but he wishes he could buy a tiger like in the William Blake poem.
Their respective uncles were strong men who created good times. Charlie and Tony are the weak men created by good times (and college educations in the late 1960s). Mean Streets ends with the sort of hard times you’d expect from weak men, but I found myself really rooting for Charlie Cappa and everybody else who takes this cautionary tale to heart.
I highly recommend Mean Streets. Although it is Scorsese’s third feature film, it was his breakthrough, establishing all the classic Scorsese tropes and launching one of American cinema’s most distinguished and enduring careers.
Scorsese’s glamorization of criminogenic antisocial misfits.
“To criminal anthropologists, the crime problems of southern Italy–the Mafia, the camorra, and brigandage–proved that Sicilians, Sardinians, & other inhabitants of the lower third of the country were racially inferior to the law-abiding citizens of the north. Their darker skins seemed to link them definitively to criminalistic races such as Bedouins, Gypsies & Africans.” –The Criminal Brain; N. Rafter
“Eugenicists collected family pedigrees showing how “degenerate” lineage produced criminals, alcoholics, lunatics, retarded individuals, beggars, hobos, & other antisocials. Eugenics provided a solution to this social problem: prevent them from reproducing, through sterilization, castration, lifelong isolation, or systematic “euthanasia”. In Germany, this combination of psychiatric theories of crime & eugenic treatment was called “criminal biology”. –Deadly Medicine; B. Massin
A.A.
Movie sucked.
You should review and analyze the deep meaning in the latest Tide detergent commercial.
Thinly veiled racism – “making clothes whiter”. Deep religious allegory – cleanliness is next to godliness. Misogyny – the woman washing clothes. Phony middle class values.
I tell ya it’s a work of genius.
Scorsese’s glamorization of criminogenic antisocial misfits.
Indeed.
Ashekazi are genetically almost identical to Sicilians which explains the Jewish mafia.
Not all of these shared haplogroups necessarily have common non-Jewish ancestors from Italy because many Sicilians from the Palermo region in the northwest, the Siracusa region in the southeast, and the province of Agrigento in the southwest descend in part from Sicilian Jews and Sephardic Jews who were forced to convert to Roman Catholicism in the 1490s. There had also been ancient Phoenician settlers in Sicily who were genetically similar to the Israelites.
https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9781644699850/html
The comparisons suggested the Ashkenazi circa 1350 had a mix of ancestry resembling populations from southern Italy or Sicily today, with components found in modern Eastern Europe and the Middle East mixed in. “That fits the historical data,” says Krishna Veeramah, a geneticist at Stony Brook University who was not involved in the work.
https://www.science.org/content/article/meeting-ancestors-history-ashkenazi-jews-revealed-medieval-dna
we show that traces of genetic flows occurred in the island, due to ancient Greek colonization and to northern African contributions, are still visible on the basis of the distribution of some lineages. The genetic contribution of Greek chromosomes to the Sicilian gene pool is estimated to be about 37% whereas the contribution of North African populations is estimated to be around 6%.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2985948/
As Sardinia, also Sicily was an important Punic trading post, especially on the western coast. Despite the paucity of samples from this area, the presence of Northern African ancestry on the island could be tentatively reconducted to the Iron Age (or at least Antiquity), because, although absent in previous time layers, it’s present in modern Sicilians.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8460580/
The island of Sicily had a sizeable Jewish population in late antiquity, as indicated by epitaphs, tomb decorations and other finds that are the widest-ranging from all of Italy besides Rome.
https://brill.com/display/title/18801
Sicilians, Maltese, and Ashkenazi Jews have EEF estimates of >100% consistent with their having more Near Eastern ancestry than can be explained via EEF admixture. They also cannot be jointly fit with other Europeans, and they fall in the gap between European and Near Easterners.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4170574/
In the second of these papers, Behar et al. (2013) also undertook an IBD analysis of genomic data from Jews and other Western Eurasian regional populations. After subjecting these data to spatial ancestry and admixture analyses, they observed that “Ashkenazi Jews show significant IBD sharing only with Eastern Europeans, North African Jews and Sephardi Jews” (as well as Cypriots and Sicilians), and only minimally with Middle Eastern populations, with Ashkenazi Jews having a strong genetic affinity with Sephardic Jews (Behar et al. 2013:29). Similarly, in the principal component analysis (PCA), Ashkenazi Jewish individuals formed a relatively tight cluster with Jews from Italy, the Middle East, North Africa, and Spain. However, this cluster was also positioned near several non-Jewish populations (i.e., Armenians, Cypriots, Druze, Greeks, and Sicilians) that were characterized as “Middle Eastern” (Behar et al. 2013).
Although these findings suggest a common ancestry for Ashkenazi, North African, and Sephardi Jews, the analysis also revealed support for an Italian source in the autosomal single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) analysis, thus suggesting a southern European origin. Furthermore, the assertion that “most lineages in the Ashkenazi Jewish population along the male and female lines trace primarily to the Levant” (Behar et al. 2013:8) is difficult to sustain when the Ashkenazi population clusters in equidistance from European (Cypriot, Greek, and Sicilian, Tuscan, and Abruzzian Italian) populations and only a single Levantine population (Druze), whose geographic origin is extremely complicated (Shlush et al. 2008). In fact, rather than demonstrating a strictly Levantine origin for contemporary Ashkenazi and Sephardi Jews, the Behar et al. (2013) study suggested a more diffuse, circum-Mediterranean origin for them.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332958595_The_Geography_of_Jewish_Ethnogenesis
https://web.archive.org/web/20250411094602/https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GmQ1cJPasAAOWgY?format=jpg&name=900×900
It’s one of his best.
Scorsese was like ZZTop, whereas most of ZZ Top’s songs sound similar just different lyrics, nearly all of Scorsese’s films were the same ole same ole. IMO, Taxi Driver was the only movie he put out that I would rank as an exceptional movie. Mean Streets was hard to watch all the way through.
MEAN STREETS isn’t easy to watch. It’s too close to life. It’s not a gangster movie but a film about gangsters, the actual life that is petty and childish. A real work of art.
Akshually, Scorsese’s films de-glamorize the mob. You must be thinking of Coppola.
The mafia phenom is a function of the loss of top-down authority. It’s encapsulated in the first scene of The Godfather (admittedly the rest of the film shows the above mentioned glamorization). When “courts of law” fail, “for justice you must go to Don Corleone.”
There is a law of conservation of authority; when it fails at the top, it drips down and finds new forms. Or so said G. Mosca, the creator of Elite Theory. But then, what did that wop know?
https://counter-currents.com/2025/10/an-offer-you-cant-refuse-mosca-explains-the-mob/
Good to see Trev back at the UR.
Oh yeah that’s what Siskel & Ebert or Scorcese himself will sell you, but in reality his films make the mob attractive/cool to young people.
Agree. Perhaps you would enjoy AFTER HOURS.
A rare Scorsese film – he emerged from slumming in the mafia gutter and made an excellent dark comedy.
That doesn’t negate his comment,
Indeed, it is. Trev offers original ideas and displays a great knowledge of film in his criticism. And his writing style is exemplary in its clarity and conciseness.
Video Link
Goodfellas, like the Wolf of Wall Street after it, does not deglamourize criminal life. In between the lame (and obvious) pop music montages, the world is so heightened and stylised (realer than real) that one can’t help but think, man I wish I was a gangster. Ray Liotta’s transformation into being a normal schmuck is a big old laugh with the audience: isn’t normal life shit? Wouldn’t you rather be coked up and robbing?
The Wolf of Wall Street had Belfort, a man who has faced no real accountability, appear at the end of the film. There was no criticism of his actions. It was the celebration of a playful Jew who knew how to scam white Americans and throw a good party. Both films, Scorsese’s easy money makers, celebrate criminal life in the same way Full Metal Jacket makes the army appealing. Do you think Scarface and the King of New York are loved by blacks because they are morality tales? These films appeal to fantasy, they do not question people’s desires, they placate and encourage unhealthy obsessions. The fall of the hero is just the expected emittance, like the necessary ending of a good fucking. True, most people are too cowardly to try and become a Henry Hill or a Jordan Belfort, but maybe in the little details, the stuff we deal with daily, it just might affect them for the worse.
It is no coincidence Scorsese’s greatest film is Taxi Driver, a film scripted by a nutjob Calvinist, a man who was reactionary without realising. A man who in Blue Collar implicitly says whites and blacks are incapable of working together. It also has a tacked on message about racial unity, one that in the past hour and half it spends convincing you doesn’t work.
Maybe you should watch Goodfellas with a person outside your sex dungeon bubble- you know the types who find a middle age man dressing up as a schoolgirl ‘queer’- then you might realise nobody takes the tacked on morality of these films seriously. Few would watch them otherwise.