Excellent movies have to leave me feeling fully satisfied at the conclusion. "Serpico" did not do this although it was an excellent character study.
I rooted for New York City police officer Frank Serpico throughout this non-fiction movie. Courageous and honest, he battled corruption endemic among colleagues and supervisors for many years. Al Pacino was outstanding portraying someone whose personality became unbearable to friends and allies as his efforts to report illegal activities were constantly stymied.
Toward the end of the movie, Serpico finally achieved some success when New York City's mayor appointed a commission to investigate police corruption and he testified about what was essentially organized crime. This victory came at great cost to his well-being and romantic life.
Unfortunately, the movie's end is unclear about whether justice prevailed. The epilogue says nothing about what happened to the movie's characters other than its namesake. I had numerous questions. Were supervisors like the commissioner involved in the payoff system or were they merely intentionally ignoring it? Were any police brass indicted or convicted? Which of the characters that I came to hate during the movie were made to pay for their crimes?
Answers to these and other questions would have induced me to give "Serpico" a higher rating. I wanted to give it a 9 because I was riveted enough to watch several scenes three or more times.
But, basic facts are important. Even if I conceded that the movie could have been made before there was a resolution to the corruption investigation, I still would penalize "Serpico" for not at least informing us viewers about the probe's progress, who Serpico implicated in his testimony and in his interviews with The New York Times and others, and which characters were at risk of prison.
Before writing my conclusion, I want to say something about what I consider numerous ridiculous posts on the IMDb message board. Several people said, in essence, that Serpico lacked character because of the way he treated people. The posters are looking at the trees, not the forest.
In fact, Serpico demonstrated great character because he was courageous in fighting a corrupt system although going along would have been personally beneficial. The movie is a great character portrayal because it shows how this battle turned an offbeat, but relatively sedate person into someone who was often temperamental, obstinate, arrogant, and nasty.
Serpico had many flaws, but his fortitude and ethics are far more important. At minimum, I would assess him as of having far superior character to any of his colleagues who participated in the corruption or knew about it and did nothing even if they were pristine outside of the office.
Some of the comments I read remind me of the debate about Oskar Schindler of "Schindler's List." He had numerous flaws too, but the importance of what he did meant he had great character.
Back to the review. As a character portrayal, "Serpico" deserves a 9. It also deserves a 9 for its portrayal of Serpico's conflicts with his colleagues and its ability to keep viewers interested in his struggles.
As a movie, though, "Serpico" deserves a lower score because it is a bit too long, some scenes about his personal life could be edited better, the timeline and length of Serpico's police service are unclear, some of the supplementary characters are indistinguishable at times, and, most importantly, I was left unsatisfied at the end because I didn't know what happened to the bad guys.
I gave "Serpico" a 7.
ZWrite
I rooted for New York City police officer Frank Serpico throughout this non-fiction movie. Courageous and honest, he battled corruption endemic among colleagues and supervisors for many years. Al Pacino was outstanding portraying someone whose personality became unbearable to friends and allies as his efforts to report illegal activities were constantly stymied.
Toward the end of the movie, Serpico finally achieved some success when New York City's mayor appointed a commission to investigate police corruption and he testified about what was essentially organized crime. This victory came at great cost to his well-being and romantic life.
Unfortunately, the movie's end is unclear about whether justice prevailed. The epilogue says nothing about what happened to the movie's characters other than its namesake. I had numerous questions. Were supervisors like the commissioner involved in the payoff system or were they merely intentionally ignoring it? Were any police brass indicted or convicted? Which of the characters that I came to hate during the movie were made to pay for their crimes?
Answers to these and other questions would have induced me to give "Serpico" a higher rating. I wanted to give it a 9 because I was riveted enough to watch several scenes three or more times.
But, basic facts are important. Even if I conceded that the movie could have been made before there was a resolution to the corruption investigation, I still would penalize "Serpico" for not at least informing us viewers about the probe's progress, who Serpico implicated in his testimony and in his interviews with The New York Times and others, and which characters were at risk of prison.
Before writing my conclusion, I want to say something about what I consider numerous ridiculous posts on the IMDb message board. Several people said, in essence, that Serpico lacked character because of the way he treated people. The posters are looking at the trees, not the forest.
In fact, Serpico demonstrated great character because he was courageous in fighting a corrupt system although going along would have been personally beneficial. The movie is a great character portrayal because it shows how this battle turned an offbeat, but relatively sedate person into someone who was often temperamental, obstinate, arrogant, and nasty.
Serpico had many flaws, but his fortitude and ethics are far more important. At minimum, I would assess him as of having far superior character to any of his colleagues who participated in the corruption or knew about it and did nothing even if they were pristine outside of the office.
Some of the comments I read remind me of the debate about Oskar Schindler of "Schindler's List." He had numerous flaws too, but the importance of what he did meant he had great character.
Back to the review. As a character portrayal, "Serpico" deserves a 9. It also deserves a 9 for its portrayal of Serpico's conflicts with his colleagues and its ability to keep viewers interested in his struggles.
As a movie, though, "Serpico" deserves a lower score because it is a bit too long, some scenes about his personal life could be edited better, the timeline and length of Serpico's police service are unclear, some of the supplementary characters are indistinguishable at times, and, most importantly, I was left unsatisfied at the end because I didn't know what happened to the bad guys.
I gave "Serpico" a 7.
ZWrite