Tags
At some point in the last couple of years I added a movie to my Netflix DVD queue. I don’t even know how it sparked my interest. It made it onto my streaming list and then sat there, generating scant further interest. I had completely forgotten what it was that made me add it in the first place – if it was much of anything at all. From its blurb, I had it pegged as another Goodfellas cultural epic – a disco era period piece with big name actors in colorful costumes.
Eventually, of course, what Netflix giveth, Netflix will taketh away. American Hustle leaves streaming at the end of August and I figured I’d take in this film while I still could.
It probably took a half-an-hour-or-so into the movie until I started thinking, “this reminds me a little of ABSCAM.” I further thought that the concept of a highly-fictionalized account of ABSCAM scandal, vaguely remembered from my youth, was a good one and moreover it even rang a bell. The link between American Hustle and real events became clear (explicit really) by the middle of the movie and, as it ended I was thinking that I should try to find that other movie that had a similar theme. I couldn’t recall waht it was, but there was some older dramatization of ABSCAM that was gnawing at my memory the whole time I watched.
A little internet searching later and I realized that THIS was THE dramatization of ABSCAM and, indeed, the only one. Small references have made it into film and TV over the years, but no other attempt has been made to focus a story on it – whether accurately, fancifully, or almost-completely made up. I finally went back to check on Netflix’s rating (4.4 for me, 3.5 for the rest of y’all) and saw that I’d already rated it a 5-stars*. I little account history digging informed me that I had watched it shortly after it hit the rental markets, almost 10 years ago. For what its worth I would give it a five again today, despite that nagging feeling that the film was just a little bit derivative.
It’s a bit shocking to me, really. I’ve just watched an entire film without it even occurring to me that I’d seen it before. Robert DeNiro’s cameo was a complete surprise to me as were many of minor plot twists and turns. Even KNOWING that I watched this in 2014 does not help me recall having watched it in 2014. I’m sure a lot of things happened in 2014 that I don’t remember. I am just surprised not only that this is one of them but that I let go of the experience so completely**.
In any case, I realize that one of the reasons I like it as much as I did/do is that it ties in with a recent theme in this here blog. The film isn’t a cops v. robbers or heroes v. villains; it’s a film without heroes or “good guys” in any traditional sense. The main characters of the story, based on real-life grifters Mel Weinberg and Evelyn Knight, are fairly sympathetic. Nevertheless, they are actual criminals – they made their money through confidence schemes and selling counterfeit art. The politicians come off as ALMOST innocent victims of the sting – except that they really did disburse favors in exchange for money, which is illegal, immoral, and unethical. Even the original marks of Weinberg’s schemes (the fictional counterpart for whom is named Irving Rosenfeld and is played by Christian Bale) don’t feel exactly sympathetic. They’ve gotten themselves into a pinch by being, in some ways, bad people and now are willing to hang themselves out to dry for a chance to get money for nothing.
For me, the would-be “bad guys” of this film are the FBI agents, particularly the agent who cooked up the scheme and the ambitious boss who pushed it. It doesn’t help them, in our minds, that ABSCAM is associated with law enforcement excess – the use of the “sting” to arrest people for crimes that the FBI themselves initiated. From there, the FBI has not redeemed themselves. 2023 sees public trust in the FBI at all-time lows. And yet… these are police investigating criminal activities and preventing theft, bribery, and corruption. Are they really “bad guys” in any traditional sense?
Which makes you think.
Yes, this moral ambiguity is an excellent literary device and can make for riveting television and film. All the same, by enjoying it for its entertainment value are we allowing it to demagnetize our collective moral compass? Theft, fraud, bribery, and political corruption are all real crimes with real victims. Even as Carmine Polito** explains that everything he did, he did for the people of New Jersey, his actions were still criminal and what he did still has victims. In case of political corruption and the like, the victims may be a lot harder to pinpoint than the beneficiaries. A politico who directs a contract to someone as a favor obviously benefits that contractor – who may well be a good guy and an asset to his community. There is still, however, a victim somewhere. That victim might be another contractor who didn’t bother to bid knowing he had no chance of winning because he plays his business straight and doesn’t have the right connections. Maybe the latter sort simply don’t live in New Jersey. If true, that makes New Jersey a lesser place, which is the real crime and against the people.
So enjoy the likes of American Hustle with me, and try to remember that you did so. I hope, however, that neither of us are wishing for an America dominated by mafiosi, political machines, and ruthless cattle ranchers.
*This was before I started writing in this blog about movies so, no it didn’t make my blog nor my list. I will go back and add this link, though.
**The one and only thing that was familiar was the name “Carmine Polito.” When the character, a former mayor of Camden New Jersey, was introduced by name, I thought “yeah, yeah… this is a real person. I remember him.” But he is not real. He is a fictional remake of Mayor Angelo Errichetti, who was sentenced to six years in prison (he served just shy of three) for his role. That fictional name, though, was apparently the one and only thing that I remembered from having watched this film.