M. NIGHT SCORSESE: a review of "Shutter Island"

“SHUTTER ISLAND” Directed by Martin Scorsese
**1/2 (two and a half stars)

The shadow of M. Night Shyamalan’s stunningly well orchestrated surprise twist ending of his 1999 breakthrough film “The Sixth Sense” continues to loom large over cinema (as well as serving somewhat unfairly as an albatross around the neck of its creator) and deservedly so. I will not forget the feeling I had on my initial viewing of that film: a gradual exaltation of newfound knowledge and realization. My perceptions of all that had arrived before those final moments had been decidedly altered and what made it so wonderful was that the ending was earned honestly through uncanny and staggeringly strong storytelling as well as containing a rich emotional resonance. And best of all, I NEVER saw it coming…not even for one moment.

Subsequent viewings of “The Sixth Sense” have held up with a brilliant magic because of that level of storytelling, which is not easy to pull off successfully as it has to be a trick without appearing to be a trick. The storytelling has to be strong enough where upon re-examination, the threads will not unravel as any surprises have to be completely organic thus making the story as a whole non-existent if that ending were to be changed.

With Director Martin Scorsese, we have one of the greatest gifts cinema can offer any viewer who enjoys movies. He is one of our most formidable filmmakers, a storyteller of the highest order whose talents cannot be praised enough. When Scorsese won his criminally long-overdue Oscar for 2006’s “The Departed,” it was not only a celebration of that extraordinary and intricately plotted film. It was also the esteemed recognition for a career that includes works no less than “Taxi Driver” (1976), “The Last Waltz” (1978), and “Raging Bull” (1980) among so many great films. Furthermore, if Martin Scorsese had only made “Goodfellas” (1990), he would still be one of the best filmmakers to ever hold a camera…and all other filmmakers would sit at his feet. After a four-year absence, Scorsese returns with the gothic psychological thriller, “Shutter Island,” his fourth collaboration with Leonardo DiCaprio. For the first time, Scorsese utilizes his tremendous gifts to weave a disturbing tapestry that leads to a huge reveal and while he certainly works up a frenzy and holds you in the mighty palms of his cinematic hands, I am not convinced the entire proceedings ultimately added up to much.

Set in Boston 1954, DiCaprio stars as Teddy Daniels, a United States Marshall who, along with his partner Chuck Aule (played by Mark Ruffalo), is sent to investigate the disappearance of a murderess who apparently has escaped from the titular island, an asylum for the criminally insane. The search introduces them to the graciously enigmatic head of Shutter Island, Dr. Cawley (the inimitable Ben Kinglsey, he of the sleek, powerful cranium and officious bow tie), as well as shady psychotherapist Dr. Nehring (played by the always sinister Max Von Sydow). Their questionable and unethical tactics and treatments make Daniels wonder if there is an overall conspiracy that led him to the island in the first place. Yet, the investigation also provides a slow unraveling of Daniels’ own psyche as each step closer to the truth presents him with a continuous barrage of grim memories from his stint as a World War II soldier at a Dachau death camp and endless nightmares starring his deceased wife (Michelle Williams) and the drowned children of the asylum’s escaped patient. Once the arrival of a hurricane cuts off communication with the mainland as well as Daniels’ means of leaving the island, the abyss, which Daniels continues to stare into ultimately begins to stare back, threatening to swallow him whole.

To say much more would ruin any surprises and revelations for you. I will say that “Shutter Island” is not staged as a modern horror film or an exercise in torture porn. It is a film whose roots are in classic (and even possibly B level) horror films. “Shutter Island,” however, is displayed with A level production values and directorial skill. It is more on the order of Stanley Kubrick’s “The Shining” (1980), or even aspects of Milos Forman’s ”One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest” (1975) or Terry Gilliam’s “Twelve Monkeys” (1995) with its heightened sense of reality and asylum sequences that truly climb up the walls. Even the physical landscape of the island, with its three increasingly isolated and perilous “hospitals” that culminate in the forbiddingly grim lighthouse presents a creeping claustrophobic doom where even the darkest corners of the mind offer no refuge.

Leonardo DiCaprio gives an effectively tortured and increasingly unhinged performance and he remains a fascinating actor to regard as he consistently surprises me with his abilities. Moreover, watching the efforts of Martin Scorsese along with his frequent legendary collaborators (cinematographer Robert Richardson, production designer Dante Ferretti, music supervisor Robbie Robertson and the brilliant editor Thelma Schoonmaker), is akin to perhaps viewing a great jazz quintet-on the level of Miles Davis’ great groups-while being seated in the front row. “Shutter Island” is a mastery of tone, mood and psychological descent and the film’s concluding shot is a blast of quiet and inevitable horror. Despite all of that praise, these attributes, no matter their great artistry, are all superficial enhancements to the story and source material, which is based upon Dennis Lehane’s original novel. There is that final surprise twist we have to confront, an ending that I would not dream to spoil but it is one that would otherwise seal or break the deal Scorsese has placed in front of us.

I have to return for a moment to “The Sixth Sense” to truly illustrate my point about perhaps why certain surprise twists work more than others. As I continue to ruminate over the magic of Shyamalan’s storytelling, I think what made me happiest was how effectively he had fooled me as his ending provided deeper thematic layers, thus transcending the standard ghost story. Shyamalan had a way to giving the audience completely all of the necessary information from the very beginning. Yet, how he presented it and when he presented it was key. Think of the now iconic “I see dead people” sequence. In that scene, Shyamalan has essentially given away the entire film but our focus remains riveted on the boy and his trauma and decidedly not Bruce Willis. The ending was so strictly interwoven into the entire tapestry, it never felt like a cheat. When Shyamalan returned in 2000 with his highly underrated “Unbreakable,” he pulled it off again and in my mind, it was even better. I am also thinking of films like Alan Parker’s “Angel Heart” (1987) or even more so, David Fincher’s “The Game” (1997) or especially, “Fight Club” (1999), where the reveal is an essential piece of the story’s overall fabric. Those films are simply unable to unravel and all of the techniques serve the story as a whole.

When it was all said and done, “Shutter Island” felt very shallow and artificial. For all of the sound and fury, it signified very little and once the surprise had been revealed, I have to say it was simultaneously the most obvious conclusion yet it was somehow completely unconvincing and somewhat of a cheat. It reminded me of the Jodie Foster psychological thriller “Flightplan” (2005), a film I enjoyed very much as I watched it but once it was over, I had to think to myself, “Wait a minute…”

Another film that came to mind was the mostly terrific “Sphere” (1998) from Director Barry Levinson and based upon the Michael Crichton novel. This was a mind-warp of a movie and I was caught in its underwater grip for the entirely of its running time until the extremely silly and unconvincing ending, which seemed to arrive for no other reason than the filmmakers had written themselves into a hole they could not get out of.

“Shutter Island” felt like that to me. It seemed that it was a story fully designed to arrive at a pre-conceived destination…even if that destination didn’t entirely make any overall sense whatsoever. Without going into the crucial details, it seemed that for the twist of “Shutter Island” to work fully, a host of characters, from doctors to patients, would have to be privy to certain levels of information about Teddy Daniels at certain—or all—times and I just cannot wrap my head around those possibilities and it just felt false. Perhaps I need to make a second trip to the island and piece it all together again but therein lies the problem. It shouldn’t have to take two viewings to fully comprehend the conclusion. An ending like this needs to work completely the first time and for me, it didn’t.

“Shutter Island” is not a bad film in the least as I feel that a filmmaker of Martin Scorsese’s immense skills couldn’t make a definitively bad film even if he made the attempt. Nothing was fully derailed, and overall, it was not a crushing disappointment but this was definitely not one of the masterful Scorsese’s great films, as it does not rattle the cages, alter the senses or stick to the ribs in any way.

In fact, Kingsley’s Dr. Cawley may best describe my feelings, when he initially describes the escape of the mental patient as if she “evaporated straight through the walls.” Unfortunately, the same can almost be said for this film as it has slowly yet surely evaporated from my memory.