Too much of everything

Overrated

A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

180805: Hitchcockesque. Stands the test of time well and totally overdue for a sequel.

Cape Fear (1991) - The movie directed by Martin Scorsese and acted by Robert De Niro as this is their next film after Goodfellas (1990). This film is a remake of the same titled film in 1962. The plot journey is quite slower in the first half but things getting interested when then complex started with the character of Max Cady (Robert De Niro) is looking for his revenge. I am very impressed with Robert De Niro performance since Godfather II (1974) & Taxi Driver (1976). In this film, he is fully transformed himself to a psychopath murderer. Overall, I will give 7/10 for this crime, thriller and drama.

The original "Cape Fear" is a bone-chilling tale of pre-meditated violence. While all the elements of that original are indeed here in this remake, the new elements that director Martin Scorsese adds to the tale only cheapen that visceral sense of terror.For a basic plot summary, "Cape Fear" tells the story of lawyer Sam Bowden (Nick Nolte), wife Leigh (Jessica Lange), and daughter Danielle (Juliette Lewis). When Max Cady (Robert De Niro), an ex-con freshly released from prison who was unsuccessfully defended by Sam, begins to terrorize the family, they must make some difficult decisions in order to deal with such a terror.All the basic elements of the classic Peck/Mitchum thriller are present in this version of the tale, but its the new elements that downgrade the experience. I realize that Scorsese wanted to be his own little twist on the story, but unfortunately all the additions are negative rather than positive:For example (spoilers included):-Making the family a "troubled unit" does no service to the plot. Gregory Peck as the stout, unshakeable lawyer is better than Nolte's more ambiguous soul.-The subtle romantic hints between Danielle and Cady are utterly ridiculous. For this story to really work, the daughter character needs to be pure as the driven snow, not on the verge of being roped into a romantic relationship with him! Of all the changes made to the original in this effect, I found this change to be the most "unforgivable".Finally, though no fault of anyone's, the performance of Robert Mitchum in the 1962 version is un-matchable (e.g. iconic). De Niro gives it his best effort, but it just isn't quite as good.Overall, then, I will be steering people AWAY from this version and TOWARDS the original after this viewing. This isn't a bad movie, per se, but it clearly takes a back seat to the expertly crafted '62 version.

What Robert Zemeckis did with his masterful homage to Hitchcocks Thrillers "What lies beneath", is what Scorsese is doing with his remake of "Cape Fear", an every-minute-intense Suspensethriller without a clear line of "right or wrong".This aspect is what makes this movie very interesting, the protagonist (played believable by Nick Nolte) and the antagonist (played expertly by Robert De Niro) are both neither right or wrong.This is also the reason why many people don't think that this movie is as good as it really is (in my opinion anyway), because in the end there is no happy conclusion were good defeats evil, the movie even ends without triumphant music, the only thing you hear during the credits are the waves of the lake they are at in the end. For me that's something unique and therefore great, because it fits the theme of the movie. Justice and Injustice: How we see it as ordinary people and how the justice system sees it, because without it, our society would crumble.But even without those themes and interesting ideas this would be a great movie on a technical level alone. The camera-work is exceptionally great, and very much like Hitchcock would have done it, if he had directed this film, same for the editing (that's one reason for the Zemeckis reference above, the other reason is...). The score by Elmer Bernstein is based on the original score from Bernard Herrman, and some pieces he originally composed for Hitchcoks "Torn Curtain", is amazing, although it feels odd at first hearing such music and seeing such a Hitchcockian intro sequence in a movie from 1991, but it works.Now to the acting: Everyone is superb in this film. Most of all Juliette Lewis, who plays one of the most believable teenagers i ever saw, most of all in a scene she shares with Robert De Niro, where he lures her on his side. Speaking of him, he is more frightening in this movie as ever and it's great.There are even some visual effects used in this movie (the first time for Scorsese, who used effects for great use ever since, most effectively in his masterpiece "Shutter Island") which hold up so well, that i wasn't even sure at times if there where any to begin with.If we have to talk about weaknesses, there is only one scene in the movie which feels like it had no purpose whatsoever, but to create a bit more drama. It's the scene in the final act, where Juliette Lewis character burns De Niro, so that he jumps off the boat into the water. Now she and her mother free Nick Nolte and they could try to flee, but De Niro immediately comes back and everyone is in the exact same situation as before. It's even more strange because De Niro showed them only minutes before how it doesn't bother him that much to get burned...it's not a bad scene and nice to see that the little teenage girl is capable of helping herself, but in the end it had no effect on the final act. Except for that tiny little weird moment i loved the movie very much and think it's one of Scorsese's best with "Bringing out the dead" and "Shutter Island" which are my favourites...