Bringing Out the Dead (1999) User Reviews

"No one asked you to suffer. That was your idea."

[Hey_Sweden · 8/10 · 8 June 2020]

Martin Scorsese is rightfully lauded for many fine films, but still doesn't seem to get quite enough credit for this NYC-set character study. Paul Schrader adapts the novel by former EMS worker Joe Connelly, in which paramedic Frank Pierce (Nicolas Cage) has become seriously burnt out. He's spent long years on the mean streets of The City, working hard to save lives. But he is now haunted by the thoughts of those people he could not save, one girl (Cynthia Roman) in particular. Although he makes a connection with Mary (Patricia Arquette), daughter of one of his patients, it remains to be seen just how much this relationship will do for his fragile mind.

The role of a mentally unbalanced individual tormented by what he's seen and done is a natural for the talented Cage. Here Cage shows just how good he can be when working with strong material. (Although that's not to say that he doesn't have some VERY intense moments.) Scorsese is to be commended for his impressive use of surrealism, and the grim, seedy aesthetic he often applies to the film. It has great atmosphere, and equally fine use of locations.

The story is episodic in nature, as we see Frank work with a succession of partners: the amiable John Goodman (as Larry), an upbeat and energetic Ving Rhames (as Marcus), and a lively Tom Sizemore (as Tom Wolls). The whole cast does creditable work, and there are a pleasing number of familiar faces and reliable character actors and actresses in supporting roles: Marc Anthony, Mary Beth Hurt, Cliff Curtis, Nestor Serrano, Aida Turturro, Sonja Sohn, Afemo Omilami, Arthur J. Nascarella. Scorsese can be heard as a male dispatcher, Queen Latifah is the voice of a female dispatcher, and that's independent filmmaker Larry Fessenden in a cameo as a cokehead.

With a very eclectic soundtrack as accompaniment, striking cinematography by Robert Richardson, and some dizzying camera angles, "Bringing Out the Dead" proves to be an interesting, provocative, and heartfelt depiction - albeit with memorable comedic elements - of the grim side of life in NYC. Ultimately, it's a long, hard road to finding the strength and faith that Frank needs to carry on.

Eight out of 10.

An EMT first responder at the verge of a mental breakdown.

[fciocca · 5/10 · 18 February 2022]

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.

A very under looked film

[ollie1939-97-957994 · 10/10 · 11 February 2012]

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.

Powerful and engrossing cinema from a truly great team.

[hitchcockthelegend · 9/10 · 4 October 2008]

Frank Pierce is a member of the Nork York paramedics, serving the Hell's Kitchen district he is witness to some terrible incidents. As he starts to crack under the pressure of the job, and getting no help from a succession of zany partners, Frank may just find solace with an ex-junkie girl who's father he brought in dying of a heart attack.

Martin Scorsese can never be accused of not being adventurous, after dabbling in Eastern spiritualism with 1997s Kundun, he returns to New York and tackles a wing of America's tortured heroes. Based on the novel by Joe Connelly, Bringing Out The Dead is at times a difficult watch in many ways, but it's haunting poignancy is told with brilliantly adroit ease from one of America's famed directors, whilst it has to be said that the humour that is in there is darkly genius in its execution. We are along for the ride with haunted Frank for three days (and nights) as he and his borderline bonkers partners deal with overdoses, heart attacks, drunks and a notably cynical virgin birth! As Frank starts to see ghosts of people he couldn't save in the past, Scorsese and his team treat us to an adrenalin fuelled nightmare, the editing (Thelma Schoonmaker) is swift and explosive like, Robert Richardson's cinematography framing certain aspects of this journey with impacting deftness, and then we have the soundtrack.

Scorsese is always a man who takes great care in sound tracking his movies, in fact few modern day directors can touch his knack for a perfect soundtrack. Fusing Motown with 70s Punk Rock would seem an odd combination, but all of it works as the paramedics start to feel the strain and (in some cases) as the mania takes hold. It's rare to hear a New York Dolls track in a movie, to hear a Johnny Thunders solo track is as rare as a dog that speaks Norwegian, and here the use of Thunders' You Can't Put Your Arms Around A Memory is pitch perfect, impacting so. Such is the use of early Clash standards as our protagonists feed off each others precarious mental conditions, it's a soundtrack to savour basically.

Nicholas Cage plays Frank Pierce, and it's a great performance full of restraint and honesty, it's the sort of performance that his detractors tend to forget about such is its emotive simplicity. Tom Sizemore (wonderfully manic), Ving Rhames, John Goodman and Patricia Arquette fill out the cast and all do fine work, but I'm sure they would be the first to acknowledge the excellence of Paul Schrader's screenplay. This piece is far from being a masterpiece, but with it's intensity sitting side by side with a paramedics need for coping, it's clear that Scorsese and his talented team have made one of the most astute and undervalued pieces of the 90s. 9/10

Stylish, but lacking a certain something

[bowmanblue · 7/10 · 23 December 2017]

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.

One of the boldest movies of the year. ***1/2 out of ****

[Movie-12 · 8/10 · 24 November 1999]

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.

Hard To Watch, But Worth It

[Gene Hoke · 5 January 2000]

Frank Pierce is at the end of his rope. As portrayed by Nicolas Cage in Martin Scorsese's "Bringing Out The Dead", he is a burned out, alcoholic, insomniac New York City ambulance driver tormented by the ghosts of those he failed to save -- specifically, the ghost of Rose, a young, asthmatic woman he couldn't "bring back". The movie is basically a snapshot of Frank's life -- three days of hell as seen from his vantage point : a speeding ambulance by which a blurred, uncertain, frightening, and often oppressive world flies.

Frank tells us at the movie's outset that he hasn't saved a life in months, and that he's beginning to believe in things like spirits that leave a body and don't want to come back. He's starting to feel like a "grief mop", like his only real responsibility is to "bear witness" to death and suffering. Frank and his partner Larry (John Goodman) are attempting to resuscitate a heart attack victim as the movie begins, and as the man's daughter Mary (Patricia Arquette) looks on in horror, Larry is successful in pulling him back from death's door. The overrun hospital, however, shoves him into a corner and keeps him drugged up, shocking him back to "life" when necessary. Mary tells Frank she hadn't spoken to her father for a long while before his attack, and in fact had often wished he were dead, but that now there's nothing she'd like more that to just hear his voice again. She was once a junkie but has now been clean for months, she tells him. Frank seems moved by Mary, seems to want to "save" her -- perhaps he thinks if he can save her, he will be able to let go of the pain of losing Rose.

Frank's developing feelings for Mary provide a counterpoint to the insanity he encounters on emergency calls with his partners Larry (John Goodman), Marcus (Ving Rhames), and Walls (Tom Sizemore). Sometimes the calls involve merely picking up the local smelly drunk Mr. O, their "most frequent flier" who seems to think the hospital is a nice place to sober up. Other times they involve matters that are much more serious, like resuscitating a heroin OD in a club (a great scene) or assisting in the allegedly virgin birth of twins (haunting, and one of the movie's many examples of religious imagery). But no matter where Frank goes, he sees Roses' face -- he sees her everywhere, she comes to him in the guise of the nameless street people that cross his path.

There really is no plot to "Bringing Out The Dead", and that's a good thing because the movie isn't meant to be a straightforward narrative. It's meant to be a snapshot of a man's soul, of his inner demons, and a conventional plot would only cloud the movie's real point. The narrative thrust comes mostly from Frank's interactions with his partners -- each of them representing a different approach, a different way of dealing with the pain brought on by this nerve wracking job. Larry (Goodman) seems to be able to block out the emotional aspects of his job, he seems to see his position mainly as a means to an end, and in fact he tells Frank he'll be a captain one day. Marcus (Ving Rhames, in a scene stealing performance) puts all trust and faith in God, believing that if someone dies, it's just their time to go. Walls (a scarily effective Tom Sizemore) is a borderline psychotic, terrorizing patients (including dread locked street person Noel, well played by singer Mark Anthony) and bashing in his ambulance headlights with a baseball bat.

If these three provide the kinetic thrust of the movie, Frank and Mary provide it's emotional center. Frank finds himself drawn closer and closer to Mary, and in fact he tries to rescue her when she resorts to visiting scummy drug dealer Cy Coates (the excellent Cliff Curtis) at the Oasis, a scarily shot urban hellhole that seems to be a local haven for drug dealing. She needs some respite, however temporary and narcotic, from the pain, and in this sense she has a link with Frank (who drinks on the job and taps into his own medical supplies to get high). The movie seems to be saying that these two people need each other; perhaps each has what is needed to soothe the other's hurt.

"Bringing Out The Dead" is the fourth collaboration between Scorsese and screenwriter Paul Schrader, and it touches on their familiar themes of faith, guilt, hope, and redemption. Much has been written about the similarities between this film and "Taxi Driver", Scorsese's 1976 ode to urban rot. I feel these similarities are somewhat superficial. Though Frank and Travis Bickle are both lonely, disenfranchised, ill people, Frank wants to help people; Bickle just wants to clean the "trash" up off the streets. Bickle lashes out in rage; Frank lashes out in fear and desperation. Schrader's screenplay offers satisfying levels of complexity, so that ultimately, towards the end, when Frank does something totally unexpected and morally ambiguous, we understand exactly why he's doing it and can sympathize.

Of course, from a technical standpoint "Bringing Out The Dead" is flawless. Ace lensman Robert Richardson (who previously worked with Scorsese on "Casino") gives the city an appropriately gloomy, sick look, and his work is especially effective in a scene in which Cy dangles from a sixteenth floor balcony while fireworks explode behind him. Thelma Schoonmaker's expert editing is, as usual, outstanding -- she gives the fast paced scenes the charge they need, and provides some dizzying sped up camera effects during the emergency call scenes. Scorsese's choice of music is great, as is his work with the actors. Sizemore, Anthony, Curtis, Arquette, and especially Rhames are all good, but it's Cage who must hold the movie together, and he succeeds with a towering performance that is easily his best work since "Leaving Las Vegas". Cage is cast perfectly here; his tortured, implosive Frank Pierce is an indelible character.

"Bringing Out The Dead" is not for everyone. The movie's lack of a conventional narrative arc will probably confuse and alienate some viewers, and the way it uncompromisingly looks into the darkest corners of human nature with an unflinching eye will disturb others. Yet these qualities are Scorsese's hallmarks, and this film has links to many of his other works -- the confusion of "After Hours", the emotional indecision of "The Age of Innocence", the alienation of "Taxi Driver", the spiritual search of "The Last Temptation of Christ". "Bringing Out The Dead" is not easy to watch, and at times it's hard not to look away. But it's real, and it stays with you.

Bringing Out the Dead is another Scorsese Masterpiece

[Joe Moretti · 1 December 1999]

Director Martin Scorsese and screenwriter Paul Shrader, these two names alone stand for excellence and brilliance, put them together and you havebrilliant film making history as witnessed by their former collaborations ("Taxi Driver", "Raging Bull" and "The Last Temptation of Christ"). Add the totally compelling and very real "Bringing Out the Dead" to that list. Based on the novel by Joe Connelly, a former EMS worker, "Bringing Out the Dead" follows three long nights in the life of New York City paramedic Frank Pierce (Nicholas Cage) as he navigates through the life and death situations of the last era of the "mean streets" of New York City, the early 90's, all the while attempting to hold on to his sanity by a thread.

Scorsese creates a very real New York (before the gentrification of the Giuliani era) that is rarely seen in films. This is not the flashy and glitzy New York that is often shown in most movies. He goes deep into the psyche of a city that is crammed with 9 million people, some who are struggling just to stay afloat. As the character Mary says, "You have to be strong to survive in this city." Some of the scenes in the movie are so memorable and haunting such as Frank's hallucination of actually pulling people literally from the steam shrouded pavement and bringing them back to life and the harrowing, almost Christ-like sequence where Frank is saving a drug dealer from death as he dangles from a balcony.

Nicholas Cage, one of our finest actors working today, gives a brilliant performance of great emotional range that is draining to watch. You literally see him coming unglued piece by piece. This is his best performance since "Leaving Las Vegas". Patricia Arquette (Cage's wife) gives a very moving and subtle performance of a person who has been to hell and back while struggling to maintain some balance in the jungle. Goodman, Rhames and Sizemore turn out good performances as always playing Cage's co-pilots in the nightly journeys. Also standing out are Latin singer, Marc Anthony as a homeless crazy and Cliff Curtis as a drug dealer who provides an "oasis" for the stressed-out individuals of the city. An excellent director and a great script are a perfect formula for producing top-notch performances by actors and Scorsese and Shrader bring out the best in theirs.

With it's story of the lead character Frank cruising the streets making narrative comments about life in the city, comparisons will be made naturally to Scorsese's other brilliant work "Taxi Driver" with it's main character Travis Bickle, but those comparisons are normal and stop right there. Where Travis Bickle wanted to save people who did not need saving, Frank Pierce reaches out to people who desperately need saving, but does not always have the power to save as in the case of the homeless girl Maria, who haunts him constantly. Also Scorsese is too highly intelligent, creative and the ultimate professional to retread the same waters, he never takes the easy road. A Scorsese film is like any great film, it takes time to take it in and digest, because there are so many different layers added that need to be looked at long after the last reel finishes. This is a powerful piece of filmmaking proving once again that Martin Scorsese is one of the all-time great directors of this century. Highly Recommended. × × ××

A brilliant film

[JRoberts · 9/10 · 13 November 1999]

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.

Brilliant film with paramedics and urban jungle, a crazy ride

[KineticSeoul · 8/10 · 12 October 2010]

I just love it when Nicholas Cage takes on these types of roles, where he plays a slightly crazy to full crazy characters. Ving Rhames also puts on a pretty entertaining performance and I really enjoyed these characters dialogues. In fact I liked almost every exchange of dialogue in this movie. Okay the plot is about Frank Pierce(Nicholas Cage) who is a paramedic that tries to help people in the street of Manhattan. He gets some pleasure out of his job, but for the most part it's like a living hell for him. Now I haven't really experienced the lifestyle in the early 90's, but it seems pretty crazy and obnoxious how the movie portrays it. Especially inside the hospitals, I never seen a hospital that crazy and hectic. The way New York is shown in the early 90's is pretty gritty with a lot of people trying to stay afloat. Scorsese has made some brilliant films in the past and I really enjoyed this movie as well. Nicholas Cage was the perfect actor for this role and the way he cruises the streets in a ambulance while making narrative about the city life was entertaining although somewhat random at times. This is a film making done very well and powerful as well. Engaging movie with some great and entertaining performances. I especially liked the dark serious humor in this. Highly recommend anyone to see it.

8.5/10

Ambulance blues.

[dbdumonteil · 9 January 2003]

Martin Scorcese's heroes have always been some of kind of Christs:"Taxi driver" is the most prominent example,but the boxer in "raging bull" is another one.It was downright embarrassing he totally missed the point when he made his "last temptation"

Nicholas Cage is another modern Christ (check the poster),and the last picture leaves no doubt about it when he and Patricia Arquette look like a pieta.More a chronicle than a real story,this is a two-hour wandering through the deepest worlds of human despair.the hero experiments helplessness,culpability and remorse.His "victims" ,so to speak,come back to haunt him and he's gradually slipping into madness.It's hard to be a saint in the city .

As always in Scorcese's movies ,the soundtrack is particularly good ,including REM's "what' s the frequency Kenneth?" and 10,000 Maniacs'"these are days"(from an album called "our time in eden"!).The cinematography is often dazzling when the ambulance goes thru the neons at night.Nevertheless,if you're feeling down-in-the-mouth,avoid.

Narrative-wise it is unsatisfying but it has style and pace that makes it worth seeing

[bob the moo · 31 May 2004]

Frank Pierce is a New York City paramedic. We join his story when he is facing down a double shift of graveyard work despite being burnt out and tired he battles through. Facing the ghosts of those he has lost on the job, Frank tries to help the usual junkies and heart failures but gets involved with Mary when he gets called to her father's heart attack. Despite his tiredness, he tries to help Mary's more emotional pain.

My plot summary for this film is weak, I know that. However it is not weak because I am in a rush, it is weak because the film's narrative is also weak. The basic set up is interesting and this carries the film for the first hour but after this the film tries to settle into more of a story then it falls to bits. For the first half of the film the action is carried by it's visual style and it's pace – it is effortless to watch and is very slick and interesting. Indeed whenever the film stays away from it's story with Mary and focuses on style then it is most enjoyable. It may be very episodic during it's stylish tour of those in need of help but it's is enjoyable nonetheless. However when the film tries to follow a thread with Mary it becomes dull and you realize that this may have style in bucket loads but the substance was given out using an eggcup. For this reason I found it ultimately unsatisfying despite being worth a watch for Scorsese at work.

As a director he really pulls out the stops, it looks great and is visually never dull even if it's narrative is. The soundtrack is also very good even if it could easily be accused of excess in the same way as the visuals could be. Even though this is Scorsese's film, the cast still do OK if not great.

Cage is convincingly washed out for the duration even if isn't as good a character as he hoped. Arquette is not quite as bad as I've seen her but she is still quite poor here. She isn't great and it is partly her fault but also the fault of the material – after all she is given the poor narrative to carry. Goodman has presence if not much to do while Rhames and Sizemore really enjoy their OTT characters. Anthony and Turturro add to the film in minor roles (Anthony being especially good) but I didn't feel like Curtis worked in his role even if he was another well-known face and I was amused by Reyes in a pre-Scrubs medical role.

Overall this is a film that is all about the ride and, for that, it's worth seeing. I enjoyed it's energy, it's pace and it's style in terms of visuals and music, however the narrative is episodic at best and weak for the rest of the time. The best performances are mostly OTT, befitting the excessive mood set by Scorsese's direction but as enjoyable as it is on a stylish, pacey level it isn't satisfying as a total film or as a story.

Not essential Scorsese but interesting viewing

[eddie_baggins · 6/10 · 22 September 2020]

When we talk about Martin Scorsese films, one of the few films that rarely gains a mention is the master's 1999 dramatic thriller Bringing Out the Dead, a rapidly paced filmed that saw Scorsese re-team with his Raging Bull and Taxi Driver screenwriter Paul Schrader to mixed but at times brilliant results.

Adapting Joe Connolley's novel that examines the fractured mental state of New York City paramedic Frank Pierce (played by a wide eyed Nicolas Cage) who is haunted by the ghosts of those he couldn't save in his job whilst dealing with the Big Apple's crazy nightlife and collection of sick and sorry people that litter its streets, it's a unique journey that is still to this day it's own beast.

Backed by a rock heavy soundtrack, dizzying editing by Scorsese muse Thelma Schoonmaker and some standout cinematography by the great Robert Richardson (New York appearing like some type of hellish version of its real life self), Dead is a well-made film and one that will daze its audience with its quick-fire jumping from scene to scene as we follow Pierce across a couple of incident filled nights in this hyper-real city of drug addicts, homeless lost souls and those just trying to push forward.

In the peak of his 90's powers, before he become more well-known as an internet meme and a man whose off-screen antics are worthy of their own novels, Dead also features one of Nicolas Cage's most perfectly suited lead roles.

Initially seeming to be on top of his problems despite his clear issues, as Pierce descends deeper and deeper into a rabbit hole of trauma and horror's bought on by his job, Cage perfectly encapsulates a man teetering on the edge and while the film has support for Cage with the likes of Patricia Arquette, John Goodman and Ving Rhames, Dead thrives off the energy of its leading man, even if his never someone we can warm to or relate to in any particular meaningful way.

In many ways Dead feels like the poorer cousin of Scorsese classics like Taxi Driver and Wolf of Wall Street, character studies that happen to take place in Scorsese's favorite city, but unlike those films Dead isn't able to give us a truly memorable lead character or create a narrative that ends up culminating in an unforgettable cinematic ride.

Final Say -

As you'd expect from a Martin Scorsese film, Bringing Out the Dead is a proficiently made feature with one of Nicolas Cage's most perfectly suited roles but it lacks the heart and power of his best works and remains a lesser piece of his cinematic puzzle even if its far from the misfire some would have you had believe.

3 Frank Sinatra records out of 5

This isn't Scorsese's best picture but it captures a unique storyline and premise and is an absolute must see

[kevin_robbins · 8/10 · 24 January 2023]

Bringing Out the Dead (1999) is a movie that I recently rewatched for the first time in a long time on HBOMAX. The storyline follows an overworked ambulance driver in the city who keeps asking for time off but can't get a break. We watch as he encounters various circumstances and copilots on his nightly shifts and how his health and perspectives start to deteriorate while patients' lives are at risk...

This movie is directed by icon Martin Scorsese (Casino) and stars Nicolas Cage (Gone in 60 Seconds), Patricia Arquette (True Romance), Ving Rhames (Pulp Fiction), John Goodman (Roseanne), Tom Sizemore (Heat), Marc Anthony (Man on Fire) and Cliff Curtis (Sunshine).

The storyline, circumstances and characters for this movie are unique and well done. This movie is perfectly cast, and the soundtrack and dialogue are outstanding. There's a nice blend of comedy with the serious psychological stress the characters are experiencing. The cast depicts these emotions perfectly. The characters are very easy to root for and I enjoyed them all. Some sequences are more subtle than others but the final sequence on the hotel balcony is legendary and very well done.

Overall, this isn't Scorsese's best picture but it captures a unique storyline and premise and is an absolute must see. I would score this a 8/10 and strongly recommend it.

Bringing Out the Dead does not remember when they talk about the career of Cage or Scorsese

[eva3si0n · 7/10 · 26 January 2022]

Bringing Out the Dead does not remember when they talk about the career of Cage or Scorsese. This is not the most famous film as an actor or director and this is an omission. Firstly, this is the most realistic film I have seen about paramedics, and secondly, the chamber of action stung at 48 o'clock makes the film more of a thriller than a drama. A great picture about one of the most psychologically difficult professions, excellent acting Cage and at least somewhere shown the reality of American medicine.

Excellent movie

[dmwaves2000 · 10/10 · 4 November 2005]

As an emergency physician and film buff, this film is one of my favorites. Martin Scorcese utilized excellent film technique with his inventive camera shots integrated with a dark comedic plot (check out the triage nurse) to create a bright modern cinema masterpiece with rich characters, comedic irony, and a sense of perseverance against overwhelming angst and the dark underbelly of modern urban life. This film is a classic on a par with Harold and Maude, and the King of Hearts. Three thumbs up- (I'm dysmorphic)... In any case, this movie deserves to be watched by anyone involved in healthcare and anyone involved in EMS activities.

Good once it finds its rhythm

[SKG-2 · 9/10 · 25 October 1999]

After reading the novel by Joe Connelly this movie is based on(by the way, the title is a reference to MONTY PYTHON AND THE HOLY GRAIL), it seemed a perfect fit for director Martin Scorsese, writer Paul Schraeder, and star Nicolas Cage. After all, this is the mean streets of New York, this is about trying to find salvation and redemption in the pits of despair, and it features a character on the edge. But when things start out, I was disappointed. It seems like all three of them, Scorsese, Schraeder, and Cage, were straining to get the effect of the novel, and it felt disjointed. The narration by Cage seems to be covering up for what's not being shown, which always means trouble.

In lesser hands, this might have been a problem. However, Scorsese has the craft to match his passion, and he soon finds the rhythm. The narration is used less and less as the movie goes on, and Cage is gradually able to show his grief, rather than just talk about it. We still don't feel the impact of the story as much as we do in the novel, but we do feel something, thanks to Cage and Patricia Arquette(as the daughter of a patient he saves). Once it gets going, the black humor, courtesy of Ving Rhames and Tom Sizemore as fellow paramedics and Scorsese and Queen Latifah as dispatchers, helps fuel the picture as well. This isn't quite as good as Scorsese's other New York stories, but it is a worthy addition to his canon.

probably one of Scorsese's best

[ndrwdyng71 · 10/10 · 13 August 2003]

This film is grossly underappreciated. This represents director Martin Scorsese and writer Paul Schrader at their best. They gave us classics like TAXI DRIVER, RAGING BULL, and THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST, but they've outdone themselves here. Yeah, it's a masterpiece, but one that's not easily accessible.

Nicholas Cage plays Frank an ambulance driver who hasn't saved anyone in months, a man who is feeling guilty and about to break under the weight of the suffering and sorrow he sees in New York City. Scorsese, always working with religious sensibilities, turns this film into a three day descent into the underworld, with Frank being raised to life on the third day, just like Jesus was.

No story to speak of, but then that's the point--the lives of ambulance drivers are largely plotless. It's got the same strengths as other Scorsese classics--visually stunning, uncompromising in its portrayal of the darker side of human nature, and a dead-on portrayal of people at their most desperate. Add to that an almost dreamlike quality that makes the streets of New York look like some metropolitan hell. The thing that sets this film apart, however, is a genuine compassion for its characters. Scorsese's an excellent filmmaker, but he could sometimes be accused of portraying his characters a little coldly. This film is all heart, all the way through. This is the Scorsese of TAXI DRIVER and MEAN STREETS, the Scorsese who takes chances on projects that really mean something, the Scorsese that was missing in GANGS OF NEW YORK.

Rerun of "Taxi Driver"

[preppy-3 · 6/10 · 14 December 1999]

What's happened to Martin Scorsese? As if the remaking of "Cape Fear" wasn't bad enough now he's remaking his own movies! "Bringing Out the Dead" is basically a rehash of "Taxi Driver"--a man pushed to the brink by the urban hell of New York. It's well-directed (of course) and well-lit but Nicholas Cage and Rosanna Arquette are AWFUL. Cage being lousy is no surprise--Arquette I expected more from. Despite the fact that they're married in real life there scenes together are completely blank--no fireworks, no attraction, no nothing! Unfortunately, they're together most of the film. The supporting actors are terrific--Ving Rhames, Marc Antony, and especially Tom Sizemore. But the movie has been done before, the lead actors are lousy, script predictable...what's the point?

What the hell went wrong with this one??

[Infofreak · 23 July 2002]

Look, you can't find a bigger admirer of the previous Scorsese/Schrader collaborations than me, but I was profoundly disappointed when I first saw this movie on its initial release, and re-watching it now, I dislike it even more. It's hard to believe that Paul Schrader actually wrote this script and not some post-MTV hack trying to pastiche the great man. It covers familiar Schrader territory - 'Taxi Driver', 'Light Sleeper' - but does so with no real insight, originality or depth. The bottom line is that Nicholas Cage's character is simply NOT believable. It's a phony, mannered performance of "a man on the edge" that fails to convince or generate any kind of sympathy or empathy. Contrast Cage here with De Niro as Travis Bickle, and what more need to be said? Add to that the countless scenes with (then) wife Patricia Arquette that are totally devoid of any kind of chemistry (!), throw in three cliched sidekicks (the funny fat guy, the funny religious black guy, the scary and funny psycho guy , I mean, please!), and give the whole mess a pointless, often inappropriate soundtrack (Van followed by The Clash followed by Johnny Thunders followed by R.E.M. followed by Motown, on and on, like someone drunkenly playing their record collection at random), and what have you got? An awful movie that says nothing and says it badly. This is no 'Taxi Driver'!

And if you think it is unfair to compare this movie with 'Taxi Driver', one of the greatest of modern movies in my opinion, why is that? Is it too much to expect creative artists like Scorsese and Schrader to IMPROVE with age? Because to me, when someone has shown themselves capable of work as great as 'Taxi Driver' or 'Raging Bull' in the past, I expect MORE of them that some Hollywood hack, I expect GREATNESS. Anything less just isn't good enough. And 'Bringing Out The Dead' isn't even a GOOD movie, it is so poor that if it was made by an unknown first time director and writer we wouldn't even think about it for more than a day after viewing it.

Possibly the most disappointing movie of the last ten years.

Tragic.

[alice liddell · 2/10 · 7 February 2000]

I, hardly alone, worship Scorcese with a passion, and will defend to the death even minor efforts such as NEW YORK NEW YORK, AFTER HOURS and THE COLOR OF MONEY (though not KUNDUN). He is the true inheritor of Michael Powell in his reckless daring, joyous excess, subjective empathy, stylistic verve and innate conservatism.

So please, can I just say, and stay within the IMDb guidelines, how much I disliked this film. I will state my displeasure mildly, and you can multiply my negativity by quite a lot. The story, as has been repeated, has been done, better, before. The style and spiritual crises are too comfortable and not won from the traumas of the story. The dialogue and performances bear little relation to invention, entertainment, truth or real life. The whole project exudes one word: jaded. I was profoundly, distressedly, shockedly (sic?) disappointed.

Boring and pointless

[skullhead739 · 2/10 · 9 June 2020]

I just couldn't bare through the torture of this movie. Its extremely slow paced with crappy characterization and what seems like a tiny budget because the film pretty much is only in the ambulance or at the hospital. With a film solely based on characters they do a pretty crap job of making the viewer give a damn about them. So pretty much your just watching boring scene after boring scene in the same location about bad dialog and badly written scenes. The film has no proper plot direction!

I wouldnt suggest this to my worst enemy.

Lively, Polished Rawness, not a Masterpiece Though

[tedg · 26 November 2000]

After getting established, directors run out of their own bank of ideas. They cast about for something new and interesting -- and/or they become craft for hire. The former has more integrity,

So when a book with real gas appears, Hollywood jumps on it.

The good here is that there is some strange atmosphere here to be mined, and Scorcese does well enough. The surprise here is that Cage fits the recipe: he's usually too obvious an actor. But here his externality works to emphasize the character's rawness. Plus his partners are more internal in contrast.

The bad. Scorcese should know better how to adapt for cinema. There's some nice work here, like the three quick flashes of the daughter in the waiting room. Like the shots of the ambulance going down the road. But it is grafted on to a written narrative, and all the really good images are from voiceovers.

I have conflicting feelings about the common use of songs. It seems like a cheap shot if the visual values aren't strong. On the other hand, Van Morrison is used so effectively I'm truly impressed.

My brief review of the film

[sol- · 4/10 · 9 December 2004]

A dreary and depressing look at unhappy New York, not unlike 'Taxi Driver', and it even has the same writer and director. It is hard to blame Scorsese for wanting to make another 'Taxi Driver', as it is perhaps his best film, but I really feel that Scorsese and Schrader fail to do anything new with the material here. It is rather drone despite all of the bright colours and inappropriately happy music (another link to 'Taxi Driver'), but one can argue that Scorsese still handles the film well at times, and there are some notable performances. But the overall film is simply nothing anyone would want to watch. And I have seen it twice.

don't let the title fool you

[lee_eisenberg · 6/10 · 2 June 2005]

Contrary to what the name suggests, "Bringing Out the Dead" is not really about dead people. It tells the story of New York paramedic Frank Pierce (Nicolas Cage), who is feeling haunted by the ghosts of the people whom he failed to save. Some reviewers compared this movie to "Taxi Driver". That's partly true, but the true similarity is in its gritty portrayal of New York. From Frank's point of view, we definitely see New York as an eerie, almost dreamlike, place, whereas we always saw the real (albeit disturbed) world through Travis Bickle's eyes.

As for what I thought of the movie, it wasn't a masterpiece by any stretch, but we can all safely say that Martin Scorsese has never made a bad movie, per se. Cage's icy performance adds to the strangeness of everything.