The climax in the Barry Levinson film "Sleepers." Father Bobby (Robert De Niro) takes the stand and lies to protect Tommy Marcano (Billy Crudup) and John Reilly (Ron Eldard). I do not own this video. No copyright intended!
@@Becks.V. to me, this movie is about the question "what is justice". Is it the law? Is it always unjust to kill? Or can it be justified to do so? By what? How do you decide? How can a priest decide if he can justify lying before god? Should he do so? How can some people decide that the laws don't apply to them? Does it put them on the same level as other criminals? Or are they, by some moral code, even obliged to break some laws? How would you decide? Will Brad Pitts character continue breaking the law and lie for other killers that aren't his friend? Why exactly did he make that exception? What if we all acted like them? So no, to me, not a revenge story.
Suat 36.............Totally agree! It reminds me a lot of his performance as Monsignor Desmond Spellacy in the tragically under-rated 1986 film, 'True Confessions'. I strongly recommend you watch this if you haven't already seen it!
A true master of his craft - totally believable, eyes, words, everything - if he was my Priest I would go to Church more often, just in case my absence upset him!!!!
Beautifully described my friend.. this film haunts yet intrigues me with it’s authenticity of such a scary yet true to life story of how them institutions were
@@boxtieclaimed to be, but it almost certainly isn’t…. No-one has since found any of these people, and also that period in Hell’s Kitchen is quite well known about because there was a notorious Irish organised crime group operating there, who are well known about. The story here doesn’t come up in any of that story, and the figures that lead it were Jimmy Coonan, and Mickey Featherstone. Neither were in youth facilities as children or on trial for anything other than organised crime related stuff. I would think the writer had some intimate knowledge of abuse, and abuse In institutions - whether personal or anecdotal- so that is probably the basis of the truth. No doubt then, in some way, that the story could claim to be true in a lot of ways. But the murder, trial and everything else in the film is almost certainly false, and the people didn’t exist (well, in the way they were depicted anyway)
He did wrong. That does not make him a bad man, but he did do a bad thing. As much as they suffered, I don't think they actually needed him - they manipulated the entire case anyway. Someone like him, I would think he felt guilty for it afterwards, whatever the reason. Not to mention the legal implications. Though in the book, nobody ever did find out about the perjury. They wanted revenge which I understand but they emotionally blackmailed him into lying in court. The purjury could have destroyed his position and standing if it went south. Ironically, if they had told him what happened in the prison when he asked them as kids, he would have bent over backwards to help them.
I find the priest so precise in what he says he doesn't look at those men and see men he looks at the young innocent boys he once knew and like a father should frazes them boys didn't commit this crime which is true cause at heart there childhood was robbed from them such a great film
Scene is lost on people that have never had a religious upbringing. A moral man. Deep, pure, pragmatic religious faith. The conflict in his heart - lying on oath - effectively heresy. All done to save the lives of killers, guilty of murder to satisfy revenge. Unbelievable conflict.
How this never got the accolade it deserves is criminal. Everything in this movie is great, the casting, the acting, the script, the engaging story, and even the direction
@@sonyabelmontfarenheght1189 yes very true...tho there roles in meet the parents films were less demanding acting wise then in sleepers I suspect. I seen the gag real for the meet the parents films and both these actors looked liked they had a lot of fun making the films. Its full of outtakes where they could not stop breaking character and laughing!!!
Very good sound track background. Like somewhat unreal and surrealistic. You are happy because they are free despite they shouldnt. Bittersweet feeling. De Niro...is any role he does not nail it?
ive read the book and seen the film, and i for one believe it to be true...i dont know how someone could make up a story as horrific as this unless they have witness it firsthand
and the justice for all.....the boys deserved it, they were set free....because the system ruined them....somebody always nows what is right to do.....even f he is a priest...
The way he clutched to that copy of "The count of monte cristo" says everything.. I've never watched this movie but I definitely know what I'm going to watch this weekend.. soon as I can find a VCR and a Block Buster 😢😅❤❤ jokes aside 90's movies great cast, moderate budget & even after the cinema you could watch them with royalties paid back to production 😊
Possible plot hole there? The priest comes out of nowhere saying he was with tommy and john that night, but if it really was the case isn't it the first thing tommy and john should have say to the cops? Like, the cops made their case, and no one ever heard the priest story, but now that he tells it everyone just magically believes him?
@@mjkrbjcw I love the film but it is full of plot holes.. Another one is surly as 2 hired hitman with mob connection they would had tracked down on nokes and killed him long before this. Hell he was having dinner in there local pub so he must had lived close!?
Briiliant when the guy stood in front of the mirror and smiled he knew he eas going to kill that guard that abused him. It never quite leaves you. Abuse has such long reaching consequences.🇿🇦
Because Father Bobby had three ticket stubs to prove they were at the game. And the film is set in the 80s the time before CCTV was everywhere so they couldn't prove Father Bobby was lying
Sure, a lawyer could pick that apart but Brad's character was the prosecution lawyer - it was part of the strategy where he can control the events. The biggest so called 'screw-up' was letting the child abuser on the stand and even the judge told him that he had undermined his own case by doing so. But he knew what he was doing. Did cost him his job at the end of it though.
The point is the jury at that time would consider it unthinkable that a priest would lie on the stand....it wasn't so much about the ticket stubs imo....
@@majalovric6920 Exactly! A priest, police officers, care workers, teachers etc would be considered credible witnesses. And there would not be any harsh cross-examination. But I did feel bad for him that he was asked to purger himself. I don't think they actually needed him but his statement sealed the deal.
It was sad but very well done movie - so emotional and touching. The acting was perfect. It was great to see Dustin Hoffman, Brad Pitt, Robert De Niro, Billy Crudup, Ron Eldard, Minnie Driver, young Brad Renfro in one film. They all did a wonderful job. This deep film only proves that the greatest movies were in the 90's.
A good film but greatest?????????? A long way out. Over the past almost 100 year,s there have been very "great" movies. For example, "Les miserable" original, Robert Donat in the count of Monte Cristo, To catch a thief, Never take no for an answer, Roman holiday, Rain man, really the list is endless. The 90,s was not the greatest time for film, only in your mind.
Magnolia296........'The greatest movies were in the 90's' - Are you serious?!? Try these few gems from the '70's and maybe you will realise how ridiculous your statement is: 'Taxi Driver', 'Vanishing Point', 'Chinatown', 'The Exorcist'. 'The Last Picture Show', 'Marathon Man', 'Solaris', 'Le Cercle Rouge, 'Midnight Express', 'All the President's Men', 'The Last Detail', 'The Sting', 'Dog Day Afternoon', 'A Woman Under the Influence', 'Frenzy', 'The Passenger', 'Breaking Away', 'Don't Look Now', 'Badlands', 'The French Connection', 'Apocalypse Now', 'The Conformist'......
@@conorspillane4913 after seeing him in Troy I'm thinking not very good. Maybe I'm wrong though coz I thought Chris Pine was superb as The Bruce in Outlaw King
Brad Pitt as he finished questioning priest ,he holds tickets up ! As if to say " well thats it they innocent then", Fine actor playing a lawyer acting ha ha . Even though we rooting for John &Tommy , am with Shakes its still sad see a priest lying on the Bible All these years later i still dont know what "boiled Gin " ? is ,which supposedly killed John -Overall though a top film . The revenge scene &courtroom climax worth waiting for
It’s not boiled gin, it’s boiler gin Boiler gin is basically slang for illegal homemade gin. Because it hasn’t gone through the safety regulations like other alcohol products, homemade alcohol can be dangerous to consume if it’s not made correctly. And since John was in the criminal trade, he likely drank homemade liquor from less than reputable sources. Meaning the liquor likely had more hazardous chemicals in it than it should have had. Though it also didn’t help that John was likely an alcoholic and thus succumbed to liver disease as well.
On the charges of "murder in the first degree" by either of these two gentlemen for having their lives destroyed by a paedophile and killing him for it? How do you plead? NOT FUCKING GUILTY! It's not very democratic or liberal, but fuck it! Neither is abusing young kids who can't defend themselves either.
great movie, sadly debunked as " wish fulfilment " (apparently the author of the story may have suffered the abuse shown, but there were no revenge killings) Mores the pity.
better for him/her God's punishment is the worst and God is the most just and you can take that to your grave. . . if it happened to my son though. . . I'm not sure how I'd react, but it's not going to be nice
Like two ticket stubs would get them cleared of first degree murder. They haven't used the father as an alibi and he is testifying a month after the fact. I love this movie but this scene irks me. it's pretty much a fantasy,Carcaterras story is just not very believable.
@@majalovric6920 Even a priest that shows up after very long time and not the next day, like "Listen,I've had to hand out alot of hail Marys,several Our fathers,I had to move perishes to not be associated with some scuzzy colleagues... it's been a busy month. But I just showed up to tell you that THESE TWO BOYS never killed that particular guy that particular evening. How I know? Well,I got these three ticket stubs and me plus them makes three people. You can't refute that. What? Oh,the accused said they were double teaming a Puerto Rican little person at the time of the murder? Okay...but the accused are clearly untrustworthy,bigoted crack heads who shouldn't be trusted. First off, it's called a midget,secondly ,I will gladly go to hypothetical hell for these two based on some vague sense of decency on my part and thirdly, I'm a god damn priest. Case dismissed?" Yeah,he might not be especially doubted but as soon as you ask one follow up question,the whole thing falls apart. A priest being more believable than established facts or lies is pretty baffling. Pitts lawyer phrasing the argument the way he did also felt like a dead giveaway. But as long as we stay away from the whole"A true story",it still works cause of every other aspect except the writing. Like,why is Minnie drivers character such a raging whore and groupie to this gang of severely damaged boys/guys?
he swears on the holly book and lies...if the lord is forgiving and understanding...he understands why he does this...im Catholic and i did some bad shit and did mad jail once....and you something the priest from my church in Seaford ... wrote me and helped a wee bit...i stayed by my beliefs and and still do...and did my 4 years...when i got out of jail...i went looking for farther niven...but hed moved on...but il never forget how he spoke for me too the crown court judge in Lewes.....i got 4 instead of 6 ... iv been out of jail for 9 years now...and im not looking too go back..got daughters and mum and dad and i have too be there for them....Peace
I think the reason Father Bobby did what he did was not only for his boys but to make up for his own traumatic past. Remember earlier in the film when he comes to visit Shakes in Wilkinson's, he tells Shakes about his time there with his friend and how it destroyed his friend and turned him into exactly what it turned John and Tommy into. This was Father Bobby's way of not only saying his two boys but making up for where he failed with his best friend.
Wonder if the book mentions the relationship between Father Bobby and the narrator after the court case. I can only imagine that he never went to see Father Bobby again as penance for such a big ask. Edit: From the book, it doesn't look like they ran into each other again. Shakes is later married with children and Father Bobby becomes the head of the school, still looking after the kids there.
Actually this isn't a true story. This was a big deal back in the 90's when the book came out. Most people, including me, believe that Lorenzo Carcaterra made this story up, along with another book he claims is a true story "A Safe Place" to hype it, like "The Amityville Horror" was done back in the 70's.
5:07 Ok, he shows some stubs and everybody's like uuuhh and aaaahh. But then again, he could've been with anyone at the game, right? How do the stubs relate to Reilly and Marcano in any way? Can someone shine some light in this, are the tickets personalised in any way? But then again, how? I mean they both never went to the game?! And why produce them in the first place when it's all about his word as a priest in the end and nothing else would've been needed to prove his credibility? .... I'm confused. But great scene!
@@serioussilliness2064 He "buys" the tickets a little earlier from Fat Mancho in the store. He asks for cigarettes and gets cigarettes and an envelope and the tickets were in it
Did the ticket stubs have the names on them? Sorry for being daft, just wondering? If there were no names on them, it would be harder to prove the alibi?
