Raging Bull

... in that he lost everything he ever had by age 40, although Kane didn't die broke by any means. An athlete expects to lose their prowess over time, but Jake lost everything else too. He did have a pretty good second act, partially and ironically because of this film, and even managed to live to age 95 and not die alone. That's an unexpected outcome when you first see him at age 42.

It's really interesting how this film is set up. You first see LaMotta (Robert De Niro) at age 42 in 1964 - bloated, working in a dive of a nightclub, practicing the third-rate act that keeps him fed and off the streets. His name and the year are shown in print. Then immediately you switch to LaMotta in 1941, in the ring, at age 19. Granted, Robert De Niro at age 36 when he made this does NOT look anything close to a teenager, but then there has to be some dramatic license.

This first fight shown in 1941 tells you what you need to know about the kind of world Jake inhabits. There are the violent punches of the fight followed by a decision against Jake with which the audience strongly disagrees. Fans throw things - everything from popcorn to chairs. Fights break out. A woman is trampled in the chaos. And then the organist tries to calm things down by playing the Star Spangled Banner. The audience does not come to attention.

So you've seen the end and the beginning of the story. It's fascinating and grabs one's attention, and even though you can look up and see how the actual Jake LaMotta's life went in those 23 years, the movie gives you all of the intimate scenes telling you the how. Jake craves love, food, recognition - he has a tremendous appetite for all of these things but he's also tremendously lacking in confidence and self control and strikes out violently as a result. It really is a fascinating portrait.

Easily one of the most powerful films I have ever seen. I have watched it at least ten times, and it only gets better and better with each viewing. Martin Scorsese is absolutely the greatest filmmaker of the last quarter century, and this film is his best. The story of how boxer Jake LaMotta watched his career and marriage crumble under the weight of his violent temper and deep-rooted misogyny is told with no punches pulled (excuse the bad pun), as Deniro (in what may be his best performance) and Scorsese unflinchingly explore what drove this man over the edge, and what ultimately may have pulled him back. The boxing scenes easily rank with the most brutal and violent moments ever put on film, shot in stark, unadorned black and white and utilizing unlikely sounds including shattering windows and animal cries to great effect. Thelma Schoonmaker's jarring, discordant editing in these scenes also deserves special mention. The scenes of domestic violence are not for the faint of heart, but there is really no other way to tell this story. If there is a more perfect exploration of why as men we act the way we do, then I'd love to see it, because this movie made me re-evaluate my life. 10/10

The routine use of black-and-white film to make movies seems to have ended in the mid-sixties, probably killed off by the advent of colour television. Since then black-and-white has been used very sparingly; even Polanski's `Chinatown', obviously conceived as homage to the films noirs of the 1940s and 1950s, was shot in colour.

`Raging Bull'- a biography of the boxer Jake La Motta who for a time held the world middleweight championship- is one of the few exceptions. The use of black-and-white seems to have been inspired by the fact that the film depicts real-life events that occurred in the forties and fifties. Scorsese has tried to capture the look of both the films and the newsreels of that period. This is remarkably effective for the boxing scenes, which have a raw, brutal power and graphically depict the aggressive nature of the sport. The other remarkable thing about the film is the performance of Robert de Niro, for which he won a well-deserved Best Actor Academy Award. De Niro actually learned to box for the film, and did all the boxing scenes himself without using a stunt double, but his portrayal of La Motta's private life is equally effective.

Some boxers- Henry Cooper comes to mind- are hard-hitting inside the ring but gentlemanly and restrained outside. La Motta, as portrayed in this film, did not fall into this category. De Niro portrays him as a man with a very short fuse, seething with anger and violence. Unlike his great rival Sugar Ray Robinson, an elegant practitioner of the art of boxing, La Motta tries to overpower his rivals with brute force rather than relying on skill. His aggression is not something confined to the ring, but rather an inherent part of his personality, and comes out in his dealings with others. He treats his beautiful wife Vicki particularly badly, frequently (and irrationally) suspecting her of infidelity and subjecting her to both verbal and physical abuse. Besides De Niro's dominating performance, there are also very good contributions from Cathy Moriarty as Vicki and from Joe Pesci as La Motta's loyal brother Joey, another frequent target of abuse despite his loyalty.

For me, this is a very good film, yet one that falls just short of the classic status that some have claimed for it. At times it is enthralling to watch, but at others, particularly in the first half, it seems to lack structure, as La Motta takes on a series of opponents without the significance of these fights ever becoming clear. More could have been made of the gambling-inspired corruption that infested the sport at this period and which may well have contributed to La Motta's sense of frustration- at one time it is made clear to him that his getting a chance to fight for the world title depends upon his taking a dive in a non-title fight. The main weakness, however, is a sense of emptiness at its centre, resulting from the lack of a character who can engage our sympathies. As I said, it is De Niro's performance that dominates the film, but for all his fine acting, even he cannot make us sympathise with a drunken, self-pitying, paranoid, violent wife-beater. As a character study of an unpleasant character it is excellent, but it can go no further than that. I cannot agree that this is the greatest film of the eighties; indeed, for me it was not even the greatest sporting film of the eighties. (I preferred both `Chariots of Fire' and `Eight Men Out'). It is an easy film to admire, but a difficult one to love. 7/10.

This is an interesting biopic and I can't fault the acting, directing or cinematography but Jake La Motta is too unlikeable and one-dimensional to be entertaining. It's probably a realistic and accurate depiction of the man and indeed many boxers but I simply can't find it in me to score more than a 7.

There's very little to like about the character portrayed here by Robert De Niro, other than to acknowledge that he took advantage of one of the few things he was good at i.e. thumping anyone who enraged him regardless of whether they were in the boxing ring or not.

The power of the movie comes from De Niro under the direction of Martin Scorsese, providing a wholly convincing performance of the furious, bitter, bovine pugilist with serious psychological issues. It is one of the truly great performances of that decade, perhaps of all time, nailing the establishment of a character it's genuinely difficult to have any empathy or sympathy with. If you dig deeper, you will not be surprised to find a serial misogynist who married seven times and who beat all of his wives. If this is your type of hero you might like to reconsider how you got there. If De Nero, Scorsese and cinema are your heroes, not too many will disagree with that.