Fingers (1978) Poster

(1978)

User Reviews

Review this title
27 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
a very calm-cool-collectedly made film about a truly unstable being
Quinoa198413 October 2006
Well, Reservoir Dogs fans, if you've been wondering really where the film is where Mr. White plays Mr. Blonde, this might be it. Only don't expect the same form of psychopathic behavior. Keitel's Jimmy Fingers is a sort of time bomb at times needing to be either detonated or waiting to be set off, and there's even an echo too (or rather the other movie is an echo of this) in Do the Right Thing. But James Toback's script is very particular about his various, half annoying half dangerous tendencies carrying around a radio and a knack for classical music and grit. And Keitel moves in this world like a man so within his own mind that the only way he can act sometimes is in bottling it up before it comes out. It's a very tough performance to pull off, as there's more fascination in what the character completely lacks than in his virtues. It's sometimes teeters even on becoming very uncomfortable to sit through, just in the psychological sense. We may not hate Jimmy Fingers, but he can test patience like it's nothing.

Still, Keitel makes it such a character of idiosyncrasies and at the same time a weird kind of charm that at first sort of reminded me of his debut in Who's That Knocking at My Door. He's aiming for concert pianist, of the level on Carnegie Hall standards. But his father also has him collecting/making bets, and thus getting into things of a sometimes violent and ugly nature. And there's always that radio, blasting out the 'golden oldies' of the kind they used to play on CBS FM in New York. There's even a touch of the Brando-type character in Keitel's mood and mannerisms at times, plus that compulsory sexual nature with women. Towards the end of the film this becomes almost too perverse to handle, and Toback always deals with such dicey material head-on, without pulling any tricks with the camera (in fact, he only so occasionally moves it). While the filmmaker tests the waters with possibly become unnerving and off-its-hinges with watching such unconventional material, more or less he pulls off what he wants, and Keitel is a force to be reckoned with as an actor here. He may lack the realistic volcanic force and wit of a Mr. White, but the not-totally-sadistic Mr. Blonde comes out with just a great hint of the obsessed artist in there too (and what great music there is).

In terms of referring to the 2005 French remake, the Beat That My Heart Skipped, I found that it might be one of those rare cases where the remake does out-do the original, at least in terms of dramatic involvement and in really getting more into the relationship between the father and son (plus there was more ambiguity in terms of the young man's mind state in the French version). But Fingers still holds its own decades later by standing out in the crime genre of the period, and it's up there in Keitel's underrated cannon of work.
20 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Worth seeing for Keitel's performance.
Hey_Sweden8 March 2012
"Fingers" is the offbeat, intriguing study of one dysfunctional character, Jimmy (Harvey Keitel), a man who straddles two distinct worlds. In one, he's the reluctant debt collector for his mobster father Ben (Michael V. Gazzo), and a man who won't hesitate to use violence to get the job done. However, he's also an obsessive music lover, and talented pianist with the lofty ambition of performing at Carnegie Hall. He puts off what will prove to be a brutal confrontation at the end to pursue the spaced-out Carol (Tisa Farrow). Writer / director James Toback's unique little movie is more than just the typical NYC gangster picture. It does feature excellent use of NYC locations, and it does have some very brutal moments, but is a decidedly laid back rather than intense experience, with deliberate pacing. The movie is marked by a very erotic quality, whether Jimmy is making the acquaintance of the sexually charged club owner Dreems (Jim Brown, in a captivating low key portrayal), or having an encounter with Julie (Tanya Roberts). We even get a glimpse of Keitel nudity, 14 years before he bared all in Abel Ferrara's "Bad Lieutenant". The movie has a serious, somber mood, yet at the same time is not without some humour. It's a very good vehicle for Keitel, who really throws himself into the twisted main role; other familiar faces such as Danny Aiello, Ed Marinaro, Marian Seldes, Lenny Montana, Tom Signorelli, Frank Pesce, and Zack Norman comprise the supporting cast, and the movie is now notable for co-starring two future 'Sopranos' regulars, Tony Sirico as young mobster Riccamonza and Dominic Chianese as Arthur Fox. But Keitel is truly the one to watch playing an obviously flawed, yet compelling individual with more than his fair share of psycho sexual problems, a certain arrogance, and a tendency towards explosive behaviour who also wants something more out of life. Film fans looking for something a little off the beaten path and deserving of more attention are advised to check out "Fingers", as it refrains from ever being too predictable and tells its story in a very straightforward manner. It's gritty and provocative and rather memorable as well; it's not for all tastes but is rewarding for those who seek it out. Seven out of 10.
11 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Unfortunately always in the shadow of "Taxi Driver".
Mikew300122 May 2002
This early movie of actor Harvey Keitel is still rather unknown and was always overshadowed by the successful Keitel and de Niro movies like Scorsese's "Mean Streets" and "Taxi Driver". With Scorsese and di Niro being absent in this production, it was Keitel's time for a leading part.

He plays the schizophrenic character "Fingers", a brutal repo man who is dreaming of a classical piano player career in a distant future beyond violence. He falls in love with an ignorant woman, tries to convince his father and mentor of his musical talents, but also has to take any dirty job to survive. Finally he takes his famous "last job" and tries to get a large amount of money from a brutal Mafia youngster, but has to face his biggest enemy - and his last big showdown.

"Fingers" is a rather calm movie which leaves enough place for Keitel to show the different personalities of "Fingers". There are dirty back roads, a bloody showdown and the tristesse of other sad New York stories, but not the glam and the roaring action of the Scorsese movies. And there are always evidences of hope and love which are finally crushed by the wheels of reality... Watch out for "Fingers", one of Harvey Keitel's best performances ever.
16 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Overlooked 1970s gem. Toback's best, and one of Keitel's.
Infofreak9 March 2002
'Fingers' is the kind of movie that makes me value the 1970s over any other decade. A complex portrait of Jimmy Fingers, an ex-debt collector turned wanna be concert pianist (Harvey Keitel, in one of his top five performances), who finds himself drawn back into his old line of work as a favour to his aging gangster father (Michael V. Gazzo, 'The Godfather 2', 'Fear City'). Fingers isn't the most likable character, is obsessed by sex and music, both doo wop (which he plays at top volume on a boom box) and classical, and is obviously doomed to fail.

Keitel is absolutely mesmerizing on screen, and the movie is filled with a supporting cast of interesting faces, including Jim Brown ('Slaughter'), Tisa Farrow (Fulci's 'Zombie Flesh Eaters'!), Danny Aiello ('Do The Right Thing', 'Jacob's Ladder'), future "Angel" Tanya Roberts, and at least two Sopranos. I don't know why 'Fingers' isn't mentioned as much as the more celebrated 1970s crime movies of Scorsese and Coppola. Godard and Tarantino are both fans of this movie, and you will be too if you give it a look. Great stuff!
30 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Figuring out "Fingers"
sol-kay11 September 2004
Warning: Spoilers
****SPOILERS**** Outlandish motion picture that tries to cover too much ground and in the end gets buried under it. Harvey Keitel, Jimmy "Fingers" Angelelli, comes across as a borderline psycho who's about to explode, which is just what he does at the end of the movie. Jimmy is pressured by wanting to become a Carnegie Hall caliber Bach playing pianist and at the same time doing his job for his dad Ben, Michael V. Gazzo, a Mafia loan shark.

Jimmy who's very sexually active with the ladies he even seems to be interested in men as well. We get to see Jimmy early in the film making eye-contact with an obviously gay waiter at a restaurant as if he wanted to pick him up. Jimmy unfortunately has a very severe prostate condition that becomes inflamed and unbearable when ever he has sex. It turns out that having sex for Jimmy is more like rape and his prostate condition drives him almost out of his head.

I did like the brutal mobster, debt collector, contrasted by the sensitive artist, pianist, angle of the movie. This contradiction stems from Jimmy's gangster father Ben and pianist mother Ruth, Marian Seldes, who we later see in a hospital ward suffering from a mental breakdown. Writer/Director James Toback seemed to add something in "Fingers" straight out of the movie "Taxi Driver", which Harvey Keitel also stared in, into the story.

We have Jimmy falling in love and then wanting to save Carol (Tisa Farrow) who's, when we first see her, a sculpture. Later when we meet Carol's boss or pimp Dreems, Jim Brown, we realize that Carol is hooker which makes her a combination of both Iris & Betsy in "Taxi Driver".

You begin to think that Jimmy like Travis Bickel in "Taxi Driver" will in the end dispatch Dreems and his henchmen and save Carol from her life of sin and have her back living with her parents and family. Instead the movie just can't make up it's mind and as it comes to it's brutal conclusion Carol and her pimp Dreems are totally written out or forgotten about! It's as if they were put in the film just to fill in some time to make it a full-length 90 minutes motion picture!

I felt that Jimmy's unrestrained brutality in the movie was more due to his failure to become a concert pianist then to his painful sexual experiences due to his prostate condition. Since his prostrate is treatable with medication but his failure as a concert pianist isn't. It's just that Jimmy can't mentally get it all together whenever he's on stage playing th piano and being judged by music critics.

We see Jimmy in action early in the film when he cold-cocks the massive and powerful pizza store owner Luchino, Lenny Montana, who owed his lone shark dad Ben money that he lent him. But as the movie goes on it's obvious that Jimmy is getting more and more out of control because his both uncontrolled and painful sexual urges. Jimmy virtually rapes Julie, Tanya Roberts, in order to intimidate mobsters Riccamonza's, Tony Sirico, girlfriend who also owes Jimmy's dad money. Later Jimmy forces himself on Carol who you thought up until then he was trying to rescue from a life on the streets and practically rapes her as well. The worst and most sickening act by Jimmy is when as an act of revenge he savagely beats and murders Riccamonza who had Jimmy's father killed. Jimmy murders Riccamonza by blowing his eyes out of his eye-sockets like he said that he would do earlier in the movie; luckily for Riccamonza he was already dead when that happened!

As the movie "Fingers" ends we see Jimmy stark naked playing the piano in his apartment with absolutely no musical skill at all and obviously insane. All alone in the world, everyone that he loved and cared for have either died or left him, Jimmy is just waiting for the men in the white suits to take him away in handcuffs and a straight-jacket.
8 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
I admired it a lot more than I liked it.
MOscarbradley3 July 2021
"Fingers" is now generally regarded as James Toback's best film; Jacques Audiard clearly liked it enough to remake it as "The Beat that My Heart Skipped" and with Harvey Keitel in the lead it could sit quite comfortably on a double-bill with Scorsese's "Mean Streets". Keitel plays Jimmy 'Fingers', a gifted classical pianist with a passion for fifties and sixties pop tunes who, rather than using his fingers on the concert stage, acts as a sometimes vicious collector for his loan-shark father, (Michael V. Gazzo), and the movie comes over as a gangster flic with art-house pretentions.

A fairly young Keitel is terrific as always and he makes the psychotic musician a pretty scary figure while the supporting cast sometimes feels like a who's who of the casts of "The Godfather" movies, "The Sopranos" etc. But the film itself is much too loose for its own good and it meanders when it should be gripping us. Still, Toback makes good use of his New York locations and the whole thing is just weird enough to make an impression. It was never going to be 'popular' but it has cult movie written all over it.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Sad, beautiful film
agapejournal6 June 2003
This hard to find film is well worth the search. Kietel gives an amazing, painful performance as a brilliant pianist whose self-destructive neurosis seems to keep him from ever achieving greatness. The film has been called mysognyistic most likely due to the portrayal of little Jimmy "Fingers". I'd have to say the film itself deals a fairly rough hand to the character's mysogny. Jimmy's social ineptness with women is painful to watch. He alternates between the utmost charm and just plain disturbing street thugishness. All in all it's a powerful film and one of Kietel's best performances.
24 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
James Toback's finest & probably Harvey Keitel's as well
JasparLamarCrabb24 November 2011
Warning: Spoilers
A dour character study featuring what may very well be Harvey Keitel's best performance. Keitel is a would-be concert pianist torn between the world of art and crime. His institutionalized mother wants him to play Carnegie Hall, while his father, a low-life Mafioso, wants him to continue as his bag man. Keitel's performance here is ferocious. He's sensitive and clearly artistic while at the same time ruthlessly (and violently) loyal to his father. In the end, all he wants is love and without it he can't respond to anything or anyone, including his would-be girlfriend (Tisa Farrow). Writer-director James Toback has had a spotty directing career over the years and has yet to fulfill the promise he displays here. Though there's limited action and only a few (brutal) spurts of violence, FINGERS is extremely exciting, harnessed by Keitel's brilliance. The strong supporting cast includes Michael V. Gazzo as Keitel's father, Jim Brown as a very nasty pimp, Danny Aiello, Marian Seldes, Tanya Roberts and Dominic Chianese in a very unlikely role. Filmed in New York with great cinematography by Michael Chapman.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A gritty and powerful film
ebh6 January 2000
Harvey Keitel indeed does his best work here, as lil' Jimmy "Fingers", a prodigy concert pianist turned debt collector, who works for his domineering father. Shot in cruel hues by cinematographer Michael Chapman, and excellently directed by the obsessive James Toback, this film is a rare gem of a find. Even football great Jim Brown has never been better. And you know what, this is one of Jean-Luc Goddard's favourite movies of all time!! Enough said.
15 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
The story of one super conflicted dude
bandw1 April 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Jimmy "Fingers" Angellelli (Harvey Keitel) is an aspiring concert pianist, but also a debt collector for his father who is a small-time racketeer. In addition Jimmy has enough sexual conflicts for a dozen men - sometimes he is shy, sometimes overly aggressive, most times attracted to women, sometimes attracted to men, but always sexually confused. And all of this is complicated by a serious prostate problem that makes the sexual act problematic in any case (be prepared for the most graphic prostate exam ever filmed).

Jimmy's personality split between his better nature and being a thug is by implication handed down to him by his parents. His artistic side came from his mother, who was a pianist (now institutionalized) and his baser side came from his father Ben (Michael Gazzo). Ben is past his prime and depends on Jimmy to do his dirty work. In many ways Jimmy, who is a man in his thirties, is still a child. He is still trying to please his parents and make sense of his sexuality.

Interesting themes, but I didn't buy a lot of what is presented. If Jimmy really had a shot at performing at Carnegie Hall, he would need to have been practicing six hours a day and studying with a mentor. We see scant evidence of that, so I just didn't believe in his talent as a pianist. Keitel is so obviously not playing the piano in those scenes where he is supposed to be playing Bach that it is disconcerting; his fake emotionalizing at the piano is embarrassing. Plus he is not very protective of his hands, to say the least.

Michael Gazzo seemed to be able to talk only in an irritating shout. His overacting got on my nerves every time he made an appearance. And how was it that such a crude man was ever married to a classical pianist? Jimmy's sense of duty to his father did not seem well grounded. How can you have much allegiance to a father who tells you, "I should have strangled you in the crib"?

However, Keitel gives a powerful, nuanced performance and that is the main attraction.

This is the story of a man who is torn in so many directions that you are pretty certain that the ending is not going to be pretty, so don't expect to be uplifted when it's all over.

This was essentially remade in France in 2005 as "The Beat That My Heart Skipped" (De battre mon coeur s'est arrêté). I think that film is more subtle and the personalities more well developed.
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
I feel like I've been fingered
MBunge20 July 2011
Warning: Spoilers
This late 70s film is nicely filmed and looks very good. Now, if I were going to follow the adage of "if you can't say something nice, say nothing at all", there would nothing else I could say about Fingers. Since I'm something of a bitter prick, there's a whole lot more to this review. This aimless mess is fully of caricaturish performances and scenes that look like outtakes accidentally left in the movie. When watching it, I frequently couldn't believe what writer/director James Toback was offering to me on screen and spent much of the last half of Fingers laughing at the gaudy, overwrought, nonsensical nature of it.

Jimmy (Harvey Keitel) is a man in his late 20s who desperately wants to be a concert pianist. He practices relentlessly and childishly mouths along with the notes as he plays. Jimmy is also an obviously disturbed young man with an explosive temper and a needy desire for the opposite sex. He's got a mother in a mental ward and a father who's a loan shark. This story concerns the thoroughly disconnected strands of Jimmy getting a chance to audition for Carnegie Hall, his fixation on a woman he sees out on the street one day and his father asking Jimmy to collect on two outstanding debts. Along the way we see a scuffle over Jimmy's 1970s purse-sized portable radio and cassette player, a rectal exam, a bathroom sexual encounter that resembles a man trying to squeeze under a limbo bar and football great Jim Brown portraying the forerunner of South Park's Chef.

This film is just ridiculous. It appears to be an middle class take on a Taxi Driver-ish breakdown with an undercurrent of homosexuality thrown in, but it's so meandering and parts of it are so exaggerated that it's hard to know for sure. There are moments in this movie that come out of nowhere and then vanish back into oblivion. The three separate plot threads are so fragmented and halting it's as if the script were written longhand by someone with Parkinson's disease. It's kind of difficult to accurately describe Fingers because there are so many odd moments that are played completely seriously when they actually belong in the gag reel as the end of one of Burt Reynolds' Cannonball Run movies. I mean, writer/director Toback literally spends the better part of a minute showing a couple of white chicks sucking on Jim Brown's nipples. What do you say about that?

Harvey Keitel is…well, Harvey Keitel and yes, he does end up naked at one point looking into the camera with a "What do you want me to do about it?" look on his face. He does a nice job with the symptoms of Jimmy's personality disorders but there's nothing whole or coherent about the role he was given. Tisa Farrow as the woman Jimmy's obsessed with speaks and moves in a monotone. As for the rest of the cast, all you can do is play "Spot the future member of The Sopranos".

When talented creators do crappy work, their admirers often feel compelled to pretend otherwise. That's about the only explanation I can come up with for why this thing made it to DVD. It's astonishingly poor storytelling put to no good use.
12 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Keitel Great
SnoopyStyle12 April 2020
Troubled pianist Jimmy Fingers (Harvey Keitel) pursues artist Carol (Tisa Farrow) with his radio but she is with Dreems (Jim Brown). He gets his musical skills and madness from his institutionalized mother. He's also a ruthless debt collector for his aging mobster father Ben (Michael V. Gazzo). He's the only one left working for him. His father has a large debt to collect but the arrogant gangster is refusing to pay the over-the-hill Ben.

This is Keitel's Taxi Driver. It is lesser known and not as great. The commonality is the lead. Keitel is masterful. He has so much internal fire. He is a man ready to explode at any moment. Now, times have caught up with filmmaker James Toback recently. He's had a career of extraordinary highs and ugly lows. It doesn't get much lower than he is today. That is beside the point. For this movie, there is greatness and his name is Harvey Keitel.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
An Odd Film From the 70s
Mike_Yike6 April 2020
Warning: Spoilers
"Fingers" looks almost as if the screenplay were written by a person who began by imagining a half dozen really odd characters and then set about putting them all in some kind of movie. The end result was Fingers.

Kietel plays a violent, none-too-bright young man, Jimmy, who likes music almost too much. He also plays classical piano. He is the movie's odd character #1. His father, odd character #2, loans money to almost anyone who asks, which of course is a problem. Jimmy meets odd character #3, a young woman named Carol. Jimmy yearns to have Carol for his girlfriend although they have almost zero communication and best I could determine, she is something of a prostitute. Carol is at the beckon call of odd character #4, an ex-pugilist, Dreems, played by Jimmy Brown. I'm not sure if Dreems is Carol's pimp or some alternate-style boyfriend. The oddity of the characters made that kind of hard to figure out.

I gave the film a 6 for no real good reason other than I made it all the way through to the end. Maybe it deserved a 5 or a 4, all things considered.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
one hell of an ugly little bugger
christopher-underwood22 February 2010
Some may love this early Keitel movie but it is one hell of an ugly little bugger, with awkward sex, a fumbled rape and a vigorous rectal exploration. The drab 70s streets of New York are atmospheric but not much else is.

Keitel carries around transistor radio on which he plays late 50s early 60s pop wherever he goes. At home however he is practising to be a concert hall pianist and we have to listen to large bouts of Bach while he pretends to be oh so involved. It is a strange fidgety performance, clearly at the behest of Toback, who has his mother in a mental hospital and his mobster father acting even more like a nut.

Sorry not for me.
11 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A vile but fascinating character.
pinback-324 October 1999
Why do we want to spend the hour and a half that it takes to watch this movie in the company of a character so loathsome that we would do anything to avoid him if we met him in real life? Jimmy Fingers is arrogant, self-obsessed, sexually violent and just plain creepy. O.K., there are moments in which we get to see that he has a better side, when he comforts a destitute women who is crying in a doorway, or when he sticks by his small time hoodlum father, in spite of the fact that he is even more repellent than Fingers himself. There is so much in this movie to make you squirm from the no-holds barred, bloody violence and a painful proctological exam to the scenes in which Fingers annoys everyone in earshot by playing loud doo-wop music on his portable tape player and threatening violence towards anyone who objects. With its fine acting and totally unpredictable story-line, this film is undeniable entertaining, but it's appeal is a rather masochistic one.
12 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
One of Keitel's best performances .....
PimpinAinttEasy15 April 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Dear Harvey Keitel,

your performance was the best thing about Fingers - a film about a tough young man torn between his loyalty towards his gangster father (Michael.V.Gazzo) and his ambition to become a piano player. The scenes where you're playing the piano were really intense and beautiful. You must have worked your ass off. You were also at your very best in the scenes where you're collecting debts for your father and living the gangster life. The film is a very deterministic character study about a young man struggling to escape his roots.

Made almost ten years after the Manson killings, it is also about the dark side of sexual liberation when a mixed race threesome ends in violence (an alpha male black gangster smashes together the heads of two white women when they refuse to kiss each other). There is also a funny scene when you literally jump on a woman in a restroom and indulge in casual sex.

Michael.V.Gazzo is a very talkative and cunning gangster, not too different from the role he played in Godfather 2. Jim Brown is effortlessly menacing and nasty as the black gangster. Spike Lee almost certainly based Radio Rahim in Do The Right Thing on your character who walks around playing loud songs on a tape recorder. There was one remarkable bit of editing when a scene of violence cuts straight to you playing the piano, Harvey.

Best Regards, Pimpin.

(8/10)
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
One of the best films of the 1970s
GravyChugger12 January 2023
FINGERS is a brilliant film. Superficially it is a tough, gripping and unusual crime film about a violence-prone collector of gambling debts, but beneath the surface it is a psychologically complex (and presumably autobiographical) portrait of a man struggling with self-worth, sexual inferiority, and impending mental illness.

Harvey Keitel stars as Jimmy, an aspiring concert pianist who is striving to impress his mother, who is a once-promising piano prodigy now confined to a mental institution. He also longs for the acceptance of his father (Michael V. Gazzo), a two-bit loan shark who used to be a big-shot bookmaker. Jimmy's father occasionally requests (demands, really) that Jimmy collect money owed by clients who are delinquent on their payments, which typically requires intimidation or violence. Jimmy is conflicted: He wants to be a peaceful musician, but his father's approbation means a great deal to him as well.

Meanwhile, Jimmy strikes up a bizarre tryst with a beautiful, emotionally reclusive woman named Carol (Tisa Farrow), whose heart belongs to a quick-tempered former boxer (Jim Brown). Jimmy and Carol rush into a sexual relationship, but she is wholly apathetic toward Jimmy, seemingly using him as a means by which to pass the time between meetings with her real boyfriend.

Jimmy is always reaching for various modes of acceptance, regardless of the source: He is deeply flattered by attention from gay men, and is even distracted greatly when an underage girl visibly finds him charming. He even forces himself on an ultimately willing gangster's moll. (Jimmy's constant pursuit of sexual acceptance seemingly mirrors that of writer/director James Toback, whose own pursuits became public knowledge when the #metoo movement formed.)

The performances are searing (Keitel and Gazzo are especially compelling), the writing is uncommonly sharp, and Toback's direction is impressive, despite the film's low budget roots. The NYC locations are often as grimy and unnerving as the content itself, adding to the film's already brooding and seedy tone. The occasional bursts of violence are also upsetting: When Jimmy employs violence, he is brutal and animalistic.

FINGERS is essential viewing for crime movie buffs and connoisseurs of emotionally charged, psychologically layered cinema alike. Its lean 90 minute run time contains a great deal of content, owing to its abundance of subtext. It is Toback's finest offering, and stands as one of the finest films of its decade.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Toback is maddeningly single-minded...
moonspinner5518 July 2017
The pianist/loan shark collector at the center of writer-director James Toback's "Fingers" is a quirky, volatile character, one with a defensive edge and a hair-trigger temper. Yet, by the end of the film, he's in far worse shape than he was at the beginning, making him not so much a crestfallen anti-hero as simply a bad example. Harvey Keitel is marvelous in the lead--tense and coiled, yet magnetic--and he's allowed room by the director to give his character some boyish shading (when he's playing his beloved vintage pop tunes on his cassette recorder in public). But the character has no life outside of his duties for his father, his attraction to a teasing sculptress and his dark, personal world of music. He has no friends, he fights with everyone he comes into contact with, he argues with his doctor doing a prostate exam and his virtuosity at the piano does not pay him back in kind. Some see this, Toback's directorial debut, as a portrait of a character in hell, but by not writing a full, rounded life for this man, it's a movie traveling a dead-end street. It seems extremely lazy and monotonous from a narrative standpoint, although the picture (filmed in wintry New York City, with its brown buildings and bare tress) certainly looks good. Personal taste will have to decide its ultimate impact. ** from ****
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Keitel's best performance.
jvorndam4 March 1999
It doesn't appear that many people have seen this little gem. "Fingers" is James Toback's first (and still best) film and contains an edgy vivacious performance from Harvey Keitel. The on-location filming in New York City adds to the desperation of the struggling wannabe pianist played by Keitel. Fascinating character study.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Harvey's World
billcr126 September 2012
Harvey Keitel is Jimmy fingers, a man divided by his passion for the piano and his day job as a collector for his mobster father. He is the perfect choice for this dark and schizophrenic role, since it matches his personality. His father is Italian, and he wishes him to carry on in the family business, and his Jewish mother hopes for him to become a concert pianist, and so that is what he must choose from. It is pretty straight forward, as he slips back and forth from sitting at a keyboard, performing classical music, and in the next moment, beating someone for not paying his debts in a timely manner.

I love Keitel as an actor, but I found Fingers tedious and I didn't really care what happened to the nut case in the end. A 5/10 for Harvey.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An educated look at the underside of life.
Doctor_Bombay8 April 1999
Many times over the years James Toback has been referred to as ‘brilliant', and a good deal of those times the film ‘Fingers' is mentioned in the same sentence.

It stands right there with Resevoir Dogs, Bad Lieutenant, and Mean Streets-all Harvey Keitel films which have over the years gotten far more applause than they did earlier..

Actually the premise is just enough unique: the concert pianist from the wrong side of the tracks, the carefree and confused collector for his bookie father.

Toback's dialogue is very raw, but it is on target for the very raw world he describes.

Michael Gazzo gives one of his best performances ever as Keitel's father.

Not to be missed, but if you look to Toback to recreate this magic with his later efforts, ‘The Pick-Up Artist' or `Exposed', don't waste your time. Even his recent `Two Girls and a Guy' might have been `Two Mil Down the Drain' without the superb performance of Robert Downey Jr.
11 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Much better than taxi driver !
thewholebrevitything29 January 2005
Martin Scorsese' "Taxi Driver" is often touted as the great film to go into the mind of a disturbed and violent new yorker on the verge of psychosis. I believed that until i saw James Toback's "fingers".

Honestly fingers does what taxi driver tried to do, but in a much much better fashion ! Fingers is far more textured than taxi driver. The characters are more 3 dimensional and its a far more acute representation of a man on the edge. Harvey Keitels interpretation of such a character makes de niros interpretation of travis bickle look shallow, insipid and flat.

In terms of cinematography Fingers looks better, is edited better, is shot better and the acting is much more believable. fingers just has a lot more 'substance' to it - that great abstract thing that great films have.

Unbelievable that this film scores only a 6.6 at this website. I voted it a 9/10.
3 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Muddled, Unrewarding and Typical of Its Time, Though Keitel Is Good
MogwaiMovieReviews8 July 2023
Muddled and meandering, every plot element of this film is incompetently handled, even though the acting throughout is exemplary, and Keitel is near his very best. Having said that, he performs perhaps the most unconvincing attempt at miming to a piano that has ever been recorded on film. Multiple times.

There's no real story here: every part of the puzzle that is introduced - the woman he falls for, his love of 50's pop music, his dream of being a classical pianist, the pimp, the prostate exam, his father's heart condition - none of it is explored in any detail and none of it leads to anything at all; all these meaningless threads just turn to mist and disappear into the air. You could remove every one of the above and replace them with other details and it wouldn't change the outcome of the film one bit. So what was the point? Why were they put there in the first place? Why did this story have to be told? What was it trying to say?

The ending is dour and bleak and very much of its time: though some will try to make the case "Fingers" deserves to be spoken of with the same reverence as, say, Scorsese's Taxi Driver, there's really no reason at all to think so. It's just another one of those endlessly grimy, depressed and paranoid non-thrillers of the seventies, that didn't need to be made, and didn't aim for or achieve anything worth remembering.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
All Thumbs...
ThurstonHunger21 April 2022
Ugh, this feels like a very misguided notion on what the director thought it was to be a man. Even backdating this for 70's...it's just not very good.

Perhaps enjoy the cinematography and a historical window to NY, or play spot the celeb - bonus points if you recognized Dominic Chianese as the piano maestro. Also I didn't know that Mia Farrow had a sister who "acted."

Maybe there's a sliver here of Man as Urban Animal? Not really a theory I really want to get behind. Another trend from the 70's was to see criminals as victims, and there is a dose of that here. Dad and Mom both overtly reject their tortured son, but watching that son is its own brand of torture. I will say that Keitel's classical pianist facial dancing during performance rivals the most orgiastic moues of arena guitarists.

To be clear, a film about an anti-hero or a miscreant can be very compelling, but this film despite Keitel's energetic effort does not spark the gap.

Honestly, his boom box was the most fascinating part of the film. The notion that "there's a mixtape for that" predates the more boring modern "there's an app for that" hands down.

It's been a long time, but you and I might want to wash our minds out with "Bronx Tale" after watching this.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Two?
Gary-16120 August 2000
Obscuro-a-go-go seventies flick. Seems to be a self portrait of the director himself, how he sees himself. And by all accounts (including his own) it's an accurate portrait. He sees himself as an artist and artists are also gangsters outside the petty mores of straight society. He is vain and selfish and of course women dig him like crazy and get off on being abused. A women in a toilet immediately has sex with his majesty although they've never met. He is just too irresistible. Said girl went on to star in 'Charlie's Angels'. A better class of toilet then. In a final bit of vanity, the artist goes mad as well. He wants to be Van Gough, nothing less will feed his ego. Final shot is Mr.Torbuck as the untamed savage, music can no longer soothe the beast within, etc. One long love letter to himself. Went on to make some nonsense with Rudolf Nureyev and Nastassia Kinski.

Film is a sort of omnibus of seventies attitudes and cinematic style. Bit of second hand Scorcese here and there. Lurches wildly into self parody.
15 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed