← Back to Reviews
 

Prince of the City


Prince of the City -


Butchie from The Wire said it best: "Conscience do cost." NYPD Detective Daniel Ciello (Treat Williams) learns this the hard way in Sidney Lumet's solid police corruption epic. Like the Strike Team in The Shield, Ciello's SIU takes a little evidence for themselves every now and then. Eventually, the voice inside Ciello's head becomes too loud to ignore, so he goes undercover to expose the rot in the system, a decision that makes him consider doing the unthinkable: betray his partners. Williams, in one of his first roles, is strong as Ciello. He gives the detective an everyman quality that puts you in his shoes and the way he expresses his assignment's escalating pressure got under my skin. I also like how he and Lumet let the audience rather than themselves decide if Ciello is a good person and if his corruption is borne from necessity or the thrill of the steal. The way the movie highlights the divide between the working-class NYPD and the more elite, status-seeking lawyers - exemplified by Bob Balaban’s performance as the tweedy Santimassino - who hire Ciello to go undercover is another nice touch. It makes you wonder how much better the American legal system would operate if each group was more willing and able to understand its counterpart. Not to mention, while this applies to most of Sidney Lumet’s work, it's a must-see for lovers of movies set in New York City, especially since it's one of the few to be filmed in all five boroughs. Regardless, this is not a classic like Lumet's most popular movie about police corruption, Serpico. One glaring flaw is that the source of Ciello's apprehension, betraying his partners, lacks emotional weight. You don't have to be a police commissioner to know that this is a cardinal sin amongst cops, but I would have liked to have seen the SIU together more beyond the opening sting operation scene and the few perfunctory moments of them cracking wise with each other. The editing also limits the emotional resonance overall because too many scenes end before it seems like they should and jarringly shift to much different locations. I described the movie as an epic for a reason - it is nearly three hours long - but since it's long as it needs to be to tell its story, I do not think this is a mark against it. Despite its drawbacks, this is still a very good and very underseen entry in Lumet's filmography. Even so, if you haven't seen Serpico yet, you should watch it first.