User Score
7.7

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1176 Ratings

User score distribution:
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Oct 6, 2010
    3
    This movie is pretty much an overrated remake of Infernal Affairs. When I first saw this movie I thought it would be AMAZING since it had won the oscar fo best picture and all. I was very disappointed and all I remember was mostly people saying the F word over and over again. Some parts of the movie tries to have crude humor but it fails miserably. Now I saw this movie before I saw theThis movie is pretty much an overrated remake of Infernal Affairs. When I first saw this movie I thought it would be AMAZING since it had won the oscar fo best picture and all. I was very disappointed and all I remember was mostly people saying the F word over and over again. Some parts of the movie tries to have crude humor but it fails miserably. Now I saw this movie before I saw the original infernal affairs I saw infernal affairs about a year after an thought the original was much much MUCH better. This movie lacks proper character development and we feel no emotion for the characters. The only thing better about this remake is the mob boss played by Jack Nicholson. This movie is WAY overrated and I really don't recomend watching it. I however can recomend watching the original movie. The orginal movie "Inferna Affairs" has what this movies missing(a heart). Expand
  2. Mar 31, 2012
    1
    Uninteresting. It is very overrated. It is too bad that Marty won for this film when he clearly had better work that was overlooked. The accents seem so forced and the storyline is just another gangster film.
  3. ZackB.
    Jul 14, 2008
    3
    I really wish someone would explain to me how this is a good movie. Is the acting great? You bet. Direction? Sure. But, how about this... There is absolutely no way in my mind that the events portrayed in the movie could ever be considered believable. Leonardo DiCaprios character wouldn't have survived any longer than the amount of time it took Jack Nicholson to find him after I really wish someone would explain to me how this is a good movie. Is the acting great? You bet. Direction? Sure. But, how about this... There is absolutely no way in my mind that the events portrayed in the movie could ever be considered believable. Leonardo DiCaprios character wouldn't have survived any longer than the amount of time it took Jack Nicholson to find him after hearing that there was a rat in the group. Secondly, if there is a leak in a department, they would bring in from outside the group to investigate, not just tell the guy in charge to do it. I dislike this movie only for the reason that I find it amazingly unbelievable and ludicrous. Expand
  4. TerenceH.
    May 23, 2008
    3
    While the original Hong Kong version was plausible due to their cultural standards, Scorsese's version was way below imaginable standards. While the HK verison had some plot devices, there was a lot implausible gaps and forced concepts that didn't work out in the American version. Like a boss sitting in the front of a car so the mole can communicate in the back. A gang boss will While the original Hong Kong version was plausible due to their cultural standards, Scorsese's version was way below imaginable standards. While the HK verison had some plot devices, there was a lot implausible gaps and forced concepts that didn't work out in the American version. Like a boss sitting in the front of a car so the mole can communicate in the back. A gang boss will never sit in the front of a car! Using cell-phones to bring down a gang is just lame and un-inspiring! Colin Sullivan, who claimed to not be able to use the password on his computer all of a sudden uses it to delete Costigans profile on his very own computer seconds later. The list goes on and gets very tiresome to mention. Didn't anyone review these forced issues and plotholes before making the film? That's right, they just tried to copy IA, forgetting about the lost in translation consequences. Its a shame that America never bothered to release the IA trilogy instead in theaters. The original stories encompassed balanced story-telling, better suspense and emotional content, slick cat-and mouse chase, psychological dept, and well-developed and intriguing characters. We also get to see how being in the police and triads truly bring grief in their lives. The Departed was done sloppy in comparison only saved by typical Scorsese violence and swearing. The characters in Departed were lame and boring. Billy Costigan (Leo Dicpario) is the only character probably that got his role right. Matt Damon, a good actor, had a very dull and typical bad guy character in comparison to Andy Lau's tormented role in IA. Martin Sheen was a poor father figure and a watse of time. and of course, there are other lame, pointless filler characters that aren't worth mentioning. Sadly, Scorsese will get praises from the audience no matter how he makes his films. Had Scorsese's name not been on the director's list, this film would had got a worser rating. All in all, it was IA that was more realistic. People say Departed is, but tell yourself this, not one person swears that much, nor do you see bloodshed like that in reality. 4 guys getting bullets in their heads one after another? There was a reason why IA had the bullet in the head scenerio but Scorsese and Monahan just really never knew what it meant, did they? Expand
  5. TerryJacobs
    Dec 20, 2007
    1
    Overrated. Unfortunately, overexcessive swearing and violence makes this film too unrealistic. Scorsese is starting to lack polish in his films.
  6. JaneD
    Jul 3, 2008
    2
    For once ,I agree with the negative reviews here. I simply didn't like the film and Scorsese's way beyond fictional views. I don't see how anyone could give this film a 8 or above.
  7. JCA.
    Oct 2, 2007
    0
    Not necessary. Martin, William, leonardo, Matt, Mark, and Jack put together a performance that goes way over the top and totally unexpected. But 90 minutes in the movie, you can expect the violent killings at the end due to a non-stop functional randomly made-up look into crazy lives that is impossibly accurate.
  8. KevinD
    Jun 7, 2009
    2
    Why is Mark Wahlberg affecting a Bostonian accent in this movie: he's FROM Boston! And, as usual, Scorcese can't direct a believable female character at all. Ever. This-- ALL this said-- it is certainly a better movie than his post-2000 attempts: the tedious GANGS OF NY and the unwatchable THE AVIATOR...faint praise, indeed.
  9. JoyceC.
    Oct 2, 2007
    0
    Martin Scorsese is obsessed with sinful everything. This movie is written, and every character never does follow the ten commandments, only the devils.
  10. DavidS.
    Oct 9, 2006
    0
    A waste of film on every level. Scorsese is in bad need of a dominatrix.
  11. StevenW.
    Jan 3, 2007
    3
    I've noticed that most of the positive comments of this movie tend to come from people who are essentially Scorcese worshippers - people who will praise anything the 'great director' comes up with. While this film might have its merits, this movie suffers from terrible characterisation, enough to kill this film. As somebody called JR M posted earlier, "Since much of the I've noticed that most of the positive comments of this movie tend to come from people who are essentially Scorcese worshippers - people who will praise anything the 'great director' comes up with. While this film might have its merits, this movie suffers from terrible characterisation, enough to kill this film. As somebody called JR M posted earlier, "Since much of the movie revolved around a sense of sympathy or at least belief in the tribulations of his character, Decaprio's cardbard portrayal destroyed any emotional engagement in the character". It was hard to care about a guy who spent the whole movie whining. [***SPOILER***] I cheered when Dicaprio's character got shot, and then I asked myself, 'Hey, aren't I supposed to be rooting for this guy?' His character was poorly concieved, poorly written, poorly characterised, and above all poorly (over) acted. Expand
  12. LindaL.
    Jan 6, 2007
    3
    I don't see how this movie made anyone's "Best of 2006" list -- except that the critics love Scorsese. It's a far-from-groundbreaking "rat in the police dept" story with tons of bloody gun violence and almost no satisfaction plotwise. Acting is OK, but It's like "Goodfellas" and "Pulp Fiction" minus any style or humor ... and you'll hear the f-word enough to last I don't see how this movie made anyone's "Best of 2006" list -- except that the critics love Scorsese. It's a far-from-groundbreaking "rat in the police dept" story with tons of bloody gun violence and almost no satisfaction plotwise. Acting is OK, but It's like "Goodfellas" and "Pulp Fiction" minus any style or humor ... and you'll hear the f-word enough to last you the rest of your life. Expand
  13. Terry
    Jan 7, 2007
    2
    Steven is right about this movie getting high ratings due to Scorsese worshippers. This movie is poorly contrived in comparison to the original HK movie. The cast is either poorly used or miscast. In the HK one, the Matt Damon character is more interesting and has a dual personality. Martin Sheen is so dull as Leo's supervisor. This movie also lacks the emotion of the original . How Steven is right about this movie getting high ratings due to Scorsese worshippers. This movie is poorly contrived in comparison to the original HK movie. The cast is either poorly used or miscast. In the HK one, the Matt Damon character is more interesting and has a dual personality. Martin Sheen is so dull as Leo's supervisor. This movie also lacks the emotion of the original . How this movie is getting high ratings seem to be pure propaganda to boost Scorsese's failing career. To simply put it, America lacks in the ideas department. If this film gets any oscar at all, there goes any integrity Americans have for foreign films. Expand
  14. LuisM.
    Nov 10, 2006
    2
    The worst script of this year!!! The last 30 minutes of the movies are a completely nonsense!!
  15. GeorgeR
    Oct 11, 2006
    1
    I
  16. BretT
    Oct 12, 2006
    3
    When I saw the preview for the movie I instantly knew that it was a remake of Infernal Affairs. I was excited to see the movie translated, until of course I sat down and watched it. The film was poorly translated. Most of the character nuances were lost. Now this wasn't to say that the acting was bad. In fact Nicholson and DiCaprio did a great job, but Matt Damon was pitiful. In the When I saw the preview for the movie I instantly knew that it was a remake of Infernal Affairs. I was excited to see the movie translated, until of course I sat down and watched it. The film was poorly translated. Most of the character nuances were lost. Now this wasn't to say that the acting was bad. In fact Nicholson and DiCaprio did a great job, but Matt Damon was pitiful. In the original movie of the characters had a habit of tapping. It was an important part of the movie that was completely removed. Also, the music was very poorly selected and implemented. Nothing like having your ears suddenly blown off in the middle of the movie. Then they turn it down sharply and two seconds later turn it off completely. Makes you wonder how much time they spent on the movie. Expand
  17. BenK.
    Jan 15, 2007
    0
    Unfortunately, Scorsese won best director. The original director did a much better job and some how Scorsese won best director for telling a weaker story. American cinema is dead at best.
  18. RobinW.
    Jan 20, 2007
    3
    I had to back up my TIVO when I saw Scorsese get up & start speaking at the podium! I guess I didn't get the word that The Departed was in the running for best director...likely, because it's ridiculous that it be considered & placed among the ranks of films actually worthy of the nomination for Best Director! Really...I like Scorses's films, for the most part. But I had to back up my TIVO when I saw Scorsese get up & start speaking at the podium! I guess I didn't get the word that The Departed was in the running for best director...likely, because it's ridiculous that it be considered & placed among the ranks of films actually worthy of the nomination for Best Director! Really...I like Scorses's films, for the most part. But let's face it, even those considered to be among the best at their craft can bomb now & then. The Departed was entertaining at first, but ended up a monumental disappointment & certainly not "award-worthy!" It took too much work to stay involved in the movie. I witnessed so many blatant flaws, it was incredible. A completely convoluted movie - one that should have been a Movie of the Week or on HBO...but a Golden Globe contender? Actually, I think I was okay with the movie until about the last 40 minutes. But, whether I liked the movie or not, it wasn't worthy of a Golden Globe - or any award, for that matter! It did explain to me, however, why Nicolson sat at the front table & the cameras graced us with shots of the various 'smug' looks he had plastered across his face whenever somebody on stage looked down at him & brought him into their 'moment' on stage. He sat back in his chair like he was Omnipotent! It was sickening. I like Nicolson as an actor. I also believe he's a very shrewd business man. But let's get serious. If this movie was so great, why wasn't Nicolson up for best actor? That makes no sense! And, Scorsese seemed awkward on stage - I'm thinkin' he had to feel a tad out of place, suddenly, having to look into the faces of those directors he was up against who actually deserved to be in the best director category this year. The one other thing that made me lose complete respect for what the Golden Globes event represents, was Warren Beatty being honored. Let's see...he won 'best director' for REDS way back when...he's been in more forgettable films than memorable. He hasn't done anything in years, except get himself in the limelight hoping people actually believe he belongs in politics...for which he proved himself to be a big buffoon & that Tom Hanks found a way to make Beatty seem somehow amazing...well. that - alone -deserves some kind of awward! I'll say one thing for Nicolson...despite his 'better than thou' attitude, he has proved himself to be an excellent actor. That doesn't mean everything he's in is worthy of an award. It all makes sense to me now...Scorsese winning for "Best Director," Nicolson behaving as if only a select two or three were worthy of his attention, and Beatty being honored...quite a threesome there. Expand
  19. AsiaK.
    Jan 27, 2007
    3
    Honestly, Jack Nicholson took over the screen, and not in a good way, Matt Damon's character was too one-sided, and we never really understood what motive the shrink girlfriend had to sleep with Di-Caprio's character... AND it was too long. The last image was just too obvious and dissapointing... as was the whole flick.
  20. D.G.
    Jan 27, 2007
    2
    This is an over-rated made for t.v dramedy. A perfect "Oscar" type film; both safe and inoffensive. The actors perform their best acting schticks (Jack Nicholson) and do it well - ho hum. It took me a while to realize that it was more comedy than drama. Watch out for the BAD photoshopped photo of the girl on the bike and the rat at the end. Also, more money should have been spent on the This is an over-rated made for t.v dramedy. A perfect "Oscar" type film; both safe and inoffensive. The actors perform their best acting schticks (Jack Nicholson) and do it well - ho hum. It took me a while to realize that it was more comedy than drama. Watch out for the BAD photoshopped photo of the girl on the bike and the rat at the end. Also, more money should have been spent on the sets rather than actor's salaries (Jack Nicholson). At least they might have elevated it beyond the look of a daytime soap. Save your money and wait until it comes out on DVD. Expand
  21. GiovanniN.
    Feb 10, 2007
    1
    Very bad movie. Full of dramatic errors, completely illogical, sometimes even ridiculous: Why should the shrink fall in love with Damon? Why should she fall in love with di Caprio? Has she a macho-problem? And: What a strange coincidence that the two guys sleep with the same woman. Why did Costigan risk to see the shrink who worked on floor under the police? Costello knew that Costigan Very bad movie. Full of dramatic errors, completely illogical, sometimes even ridiculous: Why should the shrink fall in love with Damon? Why should she fall in love with di Caprio? Has she a macho-problem? And: What a strange coincidence that the two guys sleep with the same woman. Why did Costigan risk to see the shrink who worked on floor under the police? Costello knew that Costigan was an ex-statie: Why did he suspect him sooooo late? The police had a second mole in the Costello gang - but Costigan didn't know it? The police could have arrested Costello much more earlier: They had enough proves and more than enough witnesses? Or the scene with die Chinese guys: The head of operations tells his team that they could locate Costello by cell phones - and 30 seconds later all the cell phone signals dissappear. Evidently one member of the team must have been the mole. And what happened to the brown envelope Costigan gave the shrink? Much too long, stupid script, sometimes even unintentionally funny. And a language that is shocking nobody anymore. Expand
  22. D.A.
    Feb 20, 2007
    3
    Enjoyable until the last 1/2 hour and then you suspend all belief feel cheated for investing time to have it taken away with random happenings. With the second mole you may as well have had John rambo come up in the left and kill the whole gang, in fact I would have prefered that, in fact im off to watch rambo and at least you know that he's gonna kill everything cause it's not Enjoyable until the last 1/2 hour and then you suspend all belief feel cheated for investing time to have it taken away with random happenings. With the second mole you may as well have had John rambo come up in the left and kill the whole gang, in fact I would have prefered that, in fact im off to watch rambo and at least you know that he's gonna kill everything cause it's not meant to be REAL like this which is so UNREALISTIC, oh well bring on Rambo 4. Expand
  23. PeterM.
    Mar 20, 2007
    1
    After viewing this movie, I only wish I hadn't Departed with my money to purchase the tickets! The violence portrayed is so gratuitous and constant that by the time the climax arrivies it degenerates into a bad joke. Another title for this film could have been, "People being shot in the Head". If Americans regard this ultra vulgar, ultru violent movie as the best of the year, then After viewing this movie, I only wish I hadn't Departed with my money to purchase the tickets! The violence portrayed is so gratuitous and constant that by the time the climax arrivies it degenerates into a bad joke. Another title for this film could have been, "People being shot in the Head". If Americans regard this ultra vulgar, ultru violent movie as the best of the year, then America has problems. Not worthy of Scorsese and his team. Expand
  24. JM
    Apr 2, 2007
    0
    I have lost so much respect for all the people who raved about how good this movie was. It's a shame that THIS is the movie that scorcese wins an oscar for. Weak, convoluded plot that falls apart if you think about it too much. Absolutely no character development whatsoever.
  25. JaredC.
    May 1, 2007
    0
    Scorsese at the top of his game. Yah sure. The acting was well done and the plot was pretty good but overall the movie was unexpecdedly boring. For example: when Alec Baldwin and Mark Wahlberg were in that meeting room confronting the staff, they talked so quickly with them saying random things that just made me wonder.
  26. RichR.
    May 4, 2007
    3
    Leo was great, Jack was asleep, Matt was as boring as ever, Markie Mark was a joke. All this film does is underscore the fact that Good Fellas was one of the greatest films ever made. None of these guys can touch Ray Liotta's genius; he's America's most under-rated and underappreciated actor by far.
  27. TinaH.
    Oct 10, 2006
    1
    I hated it. I couldn't follow the plot or get involved with the characters. I was just lost a lot of the time. The violence was gratuitous and the script was a mess. I just didn't buy the whole thing. I have seen Scorsese do some great films. This was not one of them.
  28. Ladyfinger
    Oct 12, 2006
    3
    Violence, blood and gore does not a movie make. There are more holes in the story than Swiss cheese. The acting was superb but there wasn't much to work with as far as the story goes. I could rip it apart but it will be deleted as spoilers. If you like endless bloodshed in which almost everyone comically buys the farm then you will like this. Not my cup of tea as it was totally Violence, blood and gore does not a movie make. There are more holes in the story than Swiss cheese. The acting was superb but there wasn't much to work with as far as the story goes. I could rip it apart but it will be deleted as spoilers. If you like endless bloodshed in which almost everyone comically buys the farm then you will like this. Not my cup of tea as it was totally ridiculous as Jack should have whacked Leonardo as there wasn't any bond between the two. Expand
  29. WalterAdamson
    Oct 15, 2006
    2
    I went to see this fim because I like the work of the leads and the Director, but in my opinion this was a complete waste of time. Lame, actors doing a job for their fees, no tension of any sort, and lots of distracting blood, guts, swearing and women with their heads in the laps of smelly old men - the main point of which seemed to be to distract from the emptiness of the whole event. II went to see this fim because I like the work of the leads and the Director, but in my opinion this was a complete waste of time. Lame, actors doing a job for their fees, no tension of any sort, and lots of distracting blood, guts, swearing and women with their heads in the laps of smelly old men - the main point of which seemed to be to distract from the emptiness of the whole event. I enjoyed the original. Hire it. Don't waste your money on this one. Expand
  30. Sanzen
    Oct 15, 2006
    2
    Caught The Departed last night and I have to say, its one abject failure of a remake. I was expecting it to be good, and truth be told, I wanted it to be good because it is based on Hongkong
Metascore
86

Universal acclaim - based on 39 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 36 out of 39
  2. Negative: 0 out of 39
  1. 100
    A new American crime classic from the legendary Martin Scorsese, whose talent shines here on its highest beams.
  2. A ferociously entertaining film.
  3. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    90
    This reworking of a popular Hong Kong picture pulses with energy, tangy dialogue and crackling performances from a fine cast.