Discussions
Explore the latest discussions related to this domain.
Blow(2001) is Misunderstood and Overlooked
Main Post:
I recently saw the film Blow for the first time and I was genuinely surprised by it's reputation and the response it gets online and from critics. It has it's fans. And even a fairly high rating on some sites. But I see a common criticism about it though that I just don't get. That it's mediocre at best, a rip off of Boogie Nights or Goodfellas, or that it glorifies drug use too much and is overly sympathetic towards the lead character George Jung.
I didn't think about Goodfellas, Boogie Nights or Scarface at all while I was watching Blow. Just because it's another crime drama about the rise and fall of a drug kingpin that doesn't mean it's the same film. The structure of Blow, the direction, and the tone is significantly different than those three films. Blow is a much more dramatic take on the rise and fall of a drug kingpin with more emphasis on the affect the rise of an empire has on family and how alienating it truly is. Those other films are admittedly films I prefer over Blow but they don't quite hit the same way in my eyes. Those films are more stylized, more over the top in nature and focus more on action, comedy or violence to engage the audience. And that approach works well. I love those movies. But Blow is not as bombastic and it takes a different approach that I feel works in it's own way just as effectively.
As for the glorification of drug use or selling drugs? Why is Blow the film that receives this criticism the most? All of these kind of films do this to some degree. And I would honestly argue that Blow does it nowhere near as much as it is heavily criticized for. This is where I am going to be providing massive spoilers. But this is a film from 2001, am I really spoiling anything?
I don't know about you but having a drug overdose while your child is being born is not what I would call glorifying anything. Let alone having a scene where Jung is straight up cut out of his deals by his own partner and left with nothing. There is even a scene where his entire fortune is seized or taken by a foreign government. And his own wife rats him out. He doesn't go out with a bang like Tony Montana or get a plea deal and live in protective custody like Henry Hill. He loses it all, goes to jail, gets out of prison and is set up by a former friend of his for good just when he thinks he has the plan all figured out and he's decided he's going to do one last job. And in the process he loses his heart. He destroys his relationship with his daughter. Arguably the last person that actually cared about him that was left in his life.
If anything it's a cautionary tale of why you shouldn't be a drug kingpin. You will constantly be on the run, never able to truly settle down at any point, potentially become an addict yourself, nearly die, and if you do try to stop since that is the only way of life you know, you will eventually be back to doing it again and wind up in jail with no one left in your life that cares about you because you blew every chance you had at a clean life away. The man couldn't even be there during his father's last days because his own mother didn't trust him anymore and his daughter winds up cutting him out of her life. Where is the glorification?
And yes, I am also aware of how this film takes creative liberties in terms of what actually happened in real life. That doesn't bother me. This is why these films are labeled as "based on a true story." they are creative fiction. They take real events or real people and create a narrative and a script around them that is not entirely accurate. If I want a completely accurate depiction of the events I will just read the book Blow or watch a documentary. And it not being exactly like the book isn't an issue for me either. Films are a different medium all together. What works in the book might not necessarily work the same way in the film.
And what people see as the film being overly sympathetic is actually part of a really clever script. This is an element of the film I feel is very misunderstood. What comes across as making Jung into this sympathetic figure is actually a facade. It's the idealized vision of what Jung thinks he is and what he thinks his life story was. But it's all fake. This is why you have the scene at the end of the film where it's revealed that his happy ending where he sees his daughter again was all in his head and it was just a fantasy. It's overly sympathetic at times by design. This is what Jung wants people to think actually happened. But the reality is that he was all alone and there was no redemption arc in the end. He was a sad old man in prison with no one left in his life that cared about him let alone wanted to hear his story. He blew his chances at redemption and he is never getting another shot.
Blow to me is a genuinely great film that to this day doesn't get enough credit for it's stellar direction by Ted Demme, the performances by the cast featuring some of the best work of Depp, Cruz, Liotta, and Ruebens careers, and a compelling and unique script that utilizes one hell of a final shot that really makes you think. I can't think of another film in this genre that has a pay off like Blow does.
Top Comment:
Its not. Tons of people love that movie