This is a very strange book. Over fifty percent of it - and I’m not exaggerating - is the author summarising the plot. The entire middle section is a plot summary, and then the author will occasionally chime in with a bit of trivia, or a quote from an interview he had with a background character. There’s no real analysis, except for the author explaining the subtext of a scene, which is obvious to anyone who just watches the film, or, bizarrely, reminding us that the racism in the film is bad, and the characters are bad for being racist, and that racism is bad generally - yes... we know! (I was unsurprised to see the author prominently display his Twitter handle in his author’s bio). The summarising reminded me of when I was an undergrad. If I had to write an analysis of a book and I was pressed for time, I avoided much actual analysis and instead summarised the book’s plot in fancy language to fill out the word count, while sprinkling in some half-baked “analysis” here and there.
The most interesting information in the book is drawn from other books/writers. You will notice every interesting fact about the production is drawn either from GQ’s 2010 Oral History of Goodfellas, or David Thompson’s interview with Scorsese in Faber’s “Scorsese on Scorsese”. It starts to get awkward as you notice everything interesting is sourced from that article and that book.... Why not just read those instead? The author of this book brings no real new information, aside from some interviews with some of the films “B-Players) (i.e an interview with the actor who plays Henry’s little brother). In the end, this book feels like a weird appendix to that article and that book - in spite of the fact that this book is more expensive than the former and longer than the latter.
The weirdest thing about this book was the fact that, aside from interviewing some “B-players” (which were fine, but hardly enough to make for an interesting book) and a new interview with Scorsese at the end, virtually everything in this book could have been constructed by Googling things about Goodfellas on the internet. Almost everything is culled from sources readily available online for free: on IMDB trivia pages, the GQ History, the Wikipedia page for the film and the books it is based on, the Wikipedia pages for the songs used in the film, etc. It’s like you’re not really reading an original book, but a curated experience of researching Goodfellas on the internet - the author has saved you the time of all that Googling, of all those tabs open.
But isn’t this inevitable for a book about a movie production in the age of the internet? Aren’t all sources nowadays ultimately going to already be accessible on the internet?
No!
Recently, Sam Wasson wrote about the making of Chinatown. His lively style and historical analysis managed to create a vivid, compelling narrative about the central personalities involved, while also providing a comprehensive overview of the production, while also introducing new, totally unheard of information about the film (i.e Edward Taylor being Robert Towne’s secret co-writer for most of his career). Similarly, Michael Benson’s great recent book on the making of 2001: A Space Odyssey offers the most comprehensive look at the production of the film to date, full of new information, while also depicting a compelling narrative about the creative process of two geniuses collaborating.
It’s unclear whether the author of this book couldn’t find an interesting story as with Wasson and Benson’s books (which is fair - not every film production is going to be as interesting as those of Chinatown and 2001), or if he just wasn’t sufficiently bothered to find the story.
It ends with an interview with Scorsese, and it’s the best thing in the book by far. So why not just read David Thompson’s interview book instead?
As a final note, I have no idea why the author of this book wrote it in the first person. Weird.