Casino vs. Goodfellas: Why I Prefer the Underdog Scorsese Classic

by

Without a doubt, Goodfellas is widely admired, isn’t it? In our ranking of Martin Scorsese’s finest works, we placed it at the top spot. To be honest, it’s hard to decide between Goodfellas and a few other iconic films of his, such as Raging Bull, Taxi Driver, or even some others. Truly, it seems these remarkable movies are in a three-way tie for Scorsese’s best film.

Well, let me share something interesting with you: I’m quite fond of “Goodfellas”, it’s a fantastic film indeed. But here’s an unexpected twist – I must confess that I lean more towards “Casino”. Shocking, isn’t it? Believe it or not, I’m far from the only one who feels this way when it comes to our movie preferences.

To put it simply, “Casino” isn’t a poor film by any means; on the contrary, many would argue that it’s quite excellent. However, it doesn’t quite reach the heights of “Goodfellas,” one of Scorsese’s most acclaimed works. I have five reasons why I find “Casino” superior to this renowned film. Let me explain.

It’s Rare That We Actually Get To See A Robert De Niro Character Sweat

The film “Casino” is centered around Robert De Niro’s character, Sam “Ace” Rothstein, who is a fictional representation of Frank Rosenthal, a real-life gangster. Hired by the Chicago mob, his role is to manage their casinos and boost their earnings. This narrative is inspired by the nonfiction book, “Casino: Love and Honor in Las Vegas”.

To safeguard Sam’s wellbeing, the criminal network enlists Sam’s old acquaintance, Nicky (portrayed by Joe Pesci), to act as a “guardian.” Despite his exceptional skills at his profession, Sam finds himself in a challenging situation due to the grisly scene involving a hammer, which is one of my favorite intense moments from the film, symbolizing the unjust retribution meted out to cheaters.

In a different twist, Nicky proves to be unpredictable, leaving Sam uncertain about how to deal with him. This becomes more complicated when it’s revealed that Nicky is involved in an affair with Sam’s wife – a topic I’ll discuss further ahead. What intrigues me about this situation is that De Niro is deviating from his usual roles. In the movie, he plays a Jewish-American bookmaker who stands out as an outsider among the predominantly Italian Mafia.

In his line of work, he’s required to be tough, but he’s not your typical Mafia tough guy. In fact, frequently, you can see him breaking a sweat. This portrayal is what makes me believe this film is one of Robert De Niro’s finest performances. It’s intriguing because we rarely witness this actor, who usually appears unfazed, visibly scared for his life.

In the world of Casino, it’s uncommon and refreshing to witness a frightened Robert De Niro, as opposed to his usually intimidating roles. However, if you’ve watched Cape Fear or many other films he’s been in, you know that a terrifying De Niro is not rare. But a timid or scared De Niro? That’s a sight we don’t get to enjoy often.

I Also Prefer Joe Pesci’s Performance In Casino Over Goodfellas

It could be pointed out that Joe Pesci seems to reprise a similar role in “Casino” as he did in “Goodfellas”, although some might argue it’s a slightly diminished version. This assessment appears valid given that in both films, Pesci’s character is associated with the Mafia and exhibits reckless behavior.

As a die-hard movie enthusiast, I must confess that Joe Pesci’s portrayal of Nicky in “Casino” truly resonates with me due to their shared past with the main character, Sam.

One could express it this way: They may appear as friends, reminiscent of characters in “Goodfellas”, but they have conflicting interests in business, unlike the camaraderie portrayed in “Goodfellas”. In both movies, Pesci’s character is problematic, but in “Casino”, it’s his liabilities that primarily drive the tension.

This significantly alters everything. What stands out most to me is the tension between Pesci and De Niro throughout the movie, with Pesci holding a notable influence over him – a dynamic not seen in “Goodfellas.” In this aspect, I believe this performance by Pesci surpasses his role in “Goodfellas,” which carries significant weight given that he is an essential element of that film.

Sharon Stone’s Performance Is So Potent In This film, And We Don’t Have Something Like It In Goodfellas

Indeed, I am aware of your upcoming statement. Let me tell you about Lorraine Bracco, a talented actress known for her role on The Sopranos. However, she truly shined in the movie Goodfellas where she portrayed Henry’s wronged wife. You hit the nail on the head! She was superb in that film (who could forget the scene where Henry wakes up with a gun pointed at his face?).

In my opinion, Sharon Stone’s character as Ginger, Sam’s wife (and former prostitute and con artist) in Casino, is remarkably strong and influential. This is particularly true because she isn’t the type of woman who would threaten her husband with a gun; instead, she’d be the one to have an affair with his childhood friend and then ask him to murder her husband.

Despite this situation, it’s difficult not to feel sympathetic towards her, given her honesty about their relationship before marriage and her attempts to dissuade him from proposing. Unfortunately, the proposal persisted, leading to a wife who harbored feelings of wanting to end his life.

In many aspects, Ginger seems to be equally responsible for Sam’s decline, if not more so, much like Pesci’s character in the film “Casino”. I appreciate this element of her portrayal because she’s undeniably loathsome, yet given that all characters in “Casino” are reprehensible, she blends seamlessly within the cast.

In terms of Lorraine Bracco’s character in “Goodfellas”, I often perceive her as more of a sufferer, voluntarily so, but still, a sufferer in the story. However, Ginger is far from being a victim; instead, she embodies chaos, and I find that aspect quite captivating.

I Like Casino’s Setting Better Than Goodfellas

I have a fondness for historical dramas, particularly those set in the 1960s (one of the factors fueling my excitement for the upcoming Fantastic Four film), and Goodfellas encompasses several decades, ranging from the ’60s to the ’80s. Moreover, I appreciate the New York and New Jersey backdrop since I am originally from Jersey myself. It’s enjoyable to witness some of that regional charm as I am familiar with places such as JFK airport, and Upstate New York.

To put it simply, movies filmed here, whether they’re modern tales or period pieces, don’t appeal to me much. In fact, Brooklyn, New York, doesn’t seem exotic or special to me – it’s just the place where I enjoy my yearly steak at Peter Luger.

Despite having visited Las Vegas before, the city remains distinctive for me, since I only explored the Strip and didn’t venture into the desert. The desert, to me, seems quite intimidating. Interestingly, the environment itself plays a significant role in Casino, much like a character in the film, with its dark atmosphere contrasting against the bright lights. I find this contrast particularly captivating, and I believe it makes the movie even more intriguing than Goodfellas.

Regarding the deaths portrayed in both films featuring Pesci, the death scene in “Casino” is undeniably more chilling. In contrast to his other movie appearances where he meets his end, the death scene in “Casino” stands out as being downright terrifying. This is exemplified by his character being killed in a secluded room adorned with a fish motif, only to be followed by a brutal and prolonged demise in an Illinois cornfield, where he is beaten with baseball bats before being buried alive.

You could rephrase it as: “Indeed, death plays a significant role, but let’s not overlook that cornfield. It, like all the settings in ‘Casino’, leaves a lasting impression and I believe surpasses those in ‘Goodfellas’. However, this isn’t the only reason why I favor ‘Casino’ over ‘Goodfellas’. This point might cause some contention…

Honestly, As Much As I Love Goodfellas, I Think It’s A Tad Bit Overrated

Instead of naming the most popular gangster movies like The Godfather or Goodfellas, I’d like to share my personal favorite – it’s Scarface.

This version retains the original meaning while providing a more conversational and natural-sounding tone, using simpler language to engage the reader and make the text easier to read.

I mention that point since I’m not biased towards the film Goodfellas. To put it another way, I have no personal stake in it. I appreciate the movie, but it’s not my top pick when it comes to gangster films. In fact, I believe it’s slightly overvalued in that category.

I make this statement because I frequently notice it listed among many “Greatest Movies Ever Made” rankings (for instance, on IMDb, users have ranked it as number 17 in their Top 250). However, despite my affection for the film “Goodfellas”, it wouldn’t make it into my top 20. In fact, it wouldn’t even crack my top 50.

Although I consider “Goodfellas” to be among Martin Scorsese’s finest works, I wouldn’t rank it higher than films such as “Taxi Driver”, “The King of Comedy”, or “Casino”. In fact, I would place it below his lesser-known gem, “After Hours”. Despite my appreciation for Goodfellas, it doesn’t elicit the same level of affection from me compared to those other movies.

I do love love Casino.

What do you think? I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Read More

2025-04-22 14:08