Why "The Hustler" Works

When my father first showed me The Hustler, I couldn't finish it. I was a pre-teen. I loved sports movies, and my dad thought that I would like this one as well. The reality is that I couldn't pay attention long enough. Where was the color? The whole movie wasn't about sports like the Mighty Ducks or Angels in the Outfield. I watched about 30 minutes of the film and got bored by the time the B-story rolled around. Luckily enough, this was not my final exposure to the film. When I was at USC studying film, I borrowed this little gem and watched it in the beautiful library (admittedly while I should have been partying... silly me). Thankfully, the second viewing was a richer experience. I finally understood all the parts at work. I realized that "Fast" Eddie Felson (played by Paul Newman) had a drinking problem. I understood that he needed to overcome his pride. I understood what was happening with his relationship with Sarah (Piper Laurie). What I didn't understand was a complexity of Eddie's character that made him appeal to the audience. Eddie is an asshole. He drinks. He hits a woman. He gambles money that isn't his. He bullies his friend and manager and ultimately abandons him. He's arrogant. He's challenging. He's a braggart. I always assumed protagonists could simply be awful people and it would have no impact on the story as a whole. I loved The Godfather, Scarface, Taxi Driver, Sweeney Todd, No Country for Old Men, There Will Be Blood, Pulp Fiction, Raging Bull, Unforgiven, The Departed, and many other films where the main characters ranged from morally ambiguous to dangerously sociopathic. When I began to write films about similar characters in my film classes, I expected no pushback. The opposite was true. Every time I had a character who leaned towards the side of evil, I heard strong opposition from my teachers and fellow classmates. "I don't understand this character." "Who are we rooting for?" "Why do we care?" What I came to learn was that while all of the anti-heroes and the villains who had become main characters were not necessarily sympathetic, but they were empathetic. Sympathetic would mean that they are likable. Empathetic means that they are relatable. Tony Montana lives the American Dream. Michael Corleone wants what is best for his family. Sweeney Todd wants to get someone back for what they did to him. Travis Bickle wants to make the world a better place. All these men want the love of a beautiful woman. These characters are relatable. That's why we care. That's why we root for them. I always thought I liked the bad guys in movies, but I realized that there was a hidden art of making bad guys empathetic (and even sometimes sympathetic). Tommy from Goodfellas might be a killer, but he is also a goofball (I avoid using the term "clown" because he hates that comparison). Tommy also demands respect. While he has negative qualities, he balances them with positive qualities. Take the example of Lester Burnham (Kevin Spacey) from American Beauty. He's a man who blackmails his boss, smokes pot, takes a job flipping burgers, and buys a sports car. This is all before he almost has sex with a girl in high school. Why do we actually end up caring about Lester? Like many others, he's going through a mid-life crisis. He's wondering if his life choices were correct. He realizes that he's not happy and he wants to change his situation. Many people can relate to these issues and struggles. Furthermore, Lester has a lot of positive qualities that he demonstrates throughout the movie. He's smart, he's honest, and he's resourceful. He's not afraid of change in order to make his life better. Lester's positive qualities balance with his negative qualities to turn him into a three-dimensional character. The legend of Eddie Felson survives because of similar character mechanics. While he is rude, arrogant, and abusive, he is passionate, skillful, and ambitious. Everyone wants to be good at something and appreciated for it. Eddie wants Minnesota Fats to appreciate that Eddie's skill level is greater than Fats'.

When Eddie falls in love with Sarah, he becomes vulnerable. Perhaps he neglects her, but when she departs, Eddie cannot hide his anger and sorrow. Underneath his brash exterior lies a vulnerable man.

Love is just one of his vulnerabilities. Eddie also is powerless to his gambling problem. He drains his own money supply and empties the pockets of everyone around him who is willing (and even reluctant) to give him money. He has no other way of making money and he is willing to mooch off anyone willing to support him.

The film ultimately leads to an ironic conclusion. Eddie gets one of the things he wanted throughout the film, but it comes at the cost of the other thing he wanted and this resolution is therefore bittersweet.

While I have matured as a student of film, I still disagree with the idea that flawed characters are rare. Many have more in common with Eddie or Walter White than we do with Hercules, Harry Potter and other archetypal heroes. We all have our flaws that often outshine our positive qualities. True heroes are humble and often relate to their own flaws. Larry Bird said, after he won one of his NBA championships, that he had much left to work on in his own game. He was focused on his flaws.

Eddie Felson is a reminder to ourselves that we are all flawed, but we are all capable of helping ourselves succeed. The fact that Eddie has much in common with the audience is what makes the film work.