Raging Bull, 1980. Martin Scorsese.

Dir. Martin Scorsese, 1980, USA, 129mins

Cast: Robert De Niro, Joe Pesci, Cathy Morianty, Frank Vincent, Nicholas Colasanto, Theerea Salalana

Review by Siôn Thomas Markham

One winter morning, many years ago now, I sat down to watch Raging Bull. I had seen it before and had enjoyed it. But this time was different as I was suffering hang-over guilt from an incident the night before. It was in this state of mind that I experienced the Jake La Motta story and gained a greater understanding of what I believe Scorsese was trying to say through this character.

Raging Bull can simply be viewed as a sports film on a par with its contemporary, Rocky. You may think it a bio-epic merely charting the life of Jake La Motta (De Niro). But no, this film digs a lot deeper, exploring themes that can be recognized universally - well, by those with a Y chromosome, as the premise of the film deals with troubled male identity. This is apparent in the character of Jake La Motta and also, to a lesser extent, his bother Joey. This is why I, sitting in a pit somewhere in Sheffield, England, can make a personal connection with the film’s anti-hero, even though it is set in the Italian ghettos of New York City in the 1940s.

The story of Raging Bull begins in the later stages of Jake La Motta’s life. He stands alone in a dressing room, overweight and repulsive, a shadow of his former self, framed so as to seem cornered-in. We cut to the younger Jake La Motta, again cornered-in, but this time in the boxing ring. From there on in, Scorsese begins the Jake La Motta story, bringing the audience right into his demonic world. We are taken through his boxing career, his relationships with his wife Vicky (Moriarty) and his brother Joey (Pesci). We witness his attempts at night club management and then as a stand-up comic. Jake fails at everything, his spiral downwards portrayed so brilliantly and so convincingly that you can’t help feel a slither of sympathy for this most wretched of humans. Ultimately, it is Scorsese’s genius for subtle yet powerful story-telling that makes Raging Bull a classic.

The character of Jake La Motta is brilliantly brought to life both in Scorsese’s direction and De Niro’s performance. De Niro underplays the role and gives the character a strong physical presence. Indeed, his performance brings a new meaning to the concept of the method; he gained weight for the later part of the film, putting the shooting schedule on hold! The subtlety in direction and performance can be viewed in the scene where Jake first confronts his brother. “Did you fuck my wife?” This accusation comes out of nowhere, but yet, throughout the narrative, we have slowly begun building to this moment.

Through La Motta’s characterisation, we know the psychology behind his actions. He is an obsessive paranoid. Once he gets a thought in his head, that’s it. He only sees what he wants to see, without reason - whether it’s to do with his constant eating or what he believes to be his wife’s deception. Scorsese’s characters are often in need of redemption. La Motta is a hybrid of both Charley from Mean Streets (1973), sharing his need for painful retribution, and Travis Bickle in Taxi Driver (1976), with his psychotic obsession.

Scorsese uses the camera as a subjective tool. As in Taxi Driver, slo-mo is used to convey the murky world of the streets of New York. In Raging Bull, it also helps us see events from La Motta’s point of view - when his eyes first latch onto the young Vicki, for example. Michael Chapman, the film’s cinematographer, is responsible for the film’s stark black-white look. This style gave it an edge, especially in what can easily be argued as Raging Bull’s best scene. Jack La Motta has been jailed for selling alcohol to minors. We see a single shard of light spill into an otherwise jet-black cell. Jake is alone. He has no-one left to fight. His wife has left him, his brother has gone and his boxing career is long over. And so, he begins to repeatedly punch the wall over and over, screaming, “Why? Why? Why?”

I think what one will take away from this film is the absorbing drama of the fight scenes, completely unlike that of Rocky (1976) and Rocky 2 (1979). In Rocky, we watch the film as a spectator would watch any sport. But in Raging Bull, we feel every jab and hook; we are right there in the ring with Jake. We feel his brutal punishment. Again, this is due to the fantastic photography by Michael Chapman and the Oscar-winning skills of Thelma Schoonmaker, the editor.

This film was no doubt another personal journey for Martin Scorsese, made in the hang-over period from his previous work, New York, New York (1977). During the latter’s production, Scorsese was heavily into cocaine. The film received grave criticism and caused Scorsese to fall victim to profound depression. Previously, De Niro had approached Scorsese to make the life story of Jake La Motta and Scorsese had rejected it. It was only when he saw La Motta’s self-destructive side that he made a personal connection with the subject. So, armed with Mardik Martin and Paul Schrader’s script, (Scorsese had previously collaborated with Martin on Mean Streets and Schrader on Taxi Driver), Scorsese set about crafting Raging Bull like this was to be his last film. A labour of love, if you will!

When first released, Raging Bull was heavily criticised for its violent imagery and it was not a box office hit. However, it was nominated for a string of Oscars but only picked up two for Best Actor and Best Editing. Scorsese lost Best Director to Robert Redford for Ordinary People (1980). But which one has had a greater impact? Nevertheless, Raging Bull was voted as the best film of the decade. Not surprisingly, as this was the decade of Romancing the Stone (1984), Beverly Hills Cop (1984), Dirty Dancing (1987) and Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure (1988). Raging Bull surpasses all of them, and their kind, in every aspect of the film-making process.