i saw raging bull yesterday(2nd scorcece hehe), yeah i taped it. i love his stuff, but its very similar to arthur miller and other broadway authors-i think quentin is the one that invents his own type of movies-its scorcece that recreates.
hey next thursday casino is coming on tv were i am-looks like were making al into a film guy afterall
[quote=“al bundy”]
hey next thursday casino is coming on tv were i am-looks like were making al into a film guy afterall
[/quote]
Where are you? Just in case i’m in the same placem so i can watch it again!
Just saw CAPE FEAR. IMO, the best De NIro performance in a Marty movie after Raging Bull. His Max Cady was the shit! Cant compare the movie to the original because I havnt see it.
[quote=“MiaRose”]
Where are you? Just in case i’m in the same placem so i can watch it again!
[/quote]lol austria
damnit!
ok i watched it, i dont think you missed too much-but ill watch it a few more times since i taped it.
go ahead, rub it in why don’t you? :
;D
actually now i think the nmovie is awsome, that oprah song at the beggining, the “oh ma mama” song that came after, the plot, the spargettis that own the casino and the music when those spargettis sit there with there oxygen masks in there hand ordering the death of all there hand guys. the movie iz da shitt.-but i think oliver stone took scorsese’s movies much further-i dont think a gangster drama by scorsese could come near oliver stone movies like “the doors”, or “nixon”
[quote=“al bundy”]
i dont think a gangster drama by scorsese could come near oliver stone movies like “the doors”, or “nixon”
[/quote] dude, just remember that scorsese isnt just about mobs. He has only done two movies that are straight up mob movies(Goodfellas and Casino; havent seen Mean streets but i herd it is not a typical mob movie). Please go see Taxi Driver and tell me what you think. I hav a pretty good feeling that you will gain more respect for Marty.
of im shure i will from what i hear, but still, what are two movies?-oliver is a smart as guy(whent to yale, wrote a 900 page text when he was about 14), and his spectrum of what to make movies on is deffinately much wider, the doors, jfk, nixon, midnight express-i mean with all do respect for marty but has he got nothing better to make films about than the shit he makes films about?(even though some of it is fun).
although oliver stone said that scorsese’s class saved his life, he took his movie styles just much further.
Well,I have seen some Stone movies(JFK,Platoon,Salvador,Natural Born Killers and a movie he wrote Scarface) and I have to dissagree. Well Oliver is a great filmaker,no doubt about it. I am a HUGE Salvador fan and I am one of the ten people who likes Natural Born Killers but I have to say Martin is a much better filmaker. I think that Scorsese is the best damn pefectionist since leone every shot,scene,music score,EVERYTHING is imagined in his head. I have to say that it is very impressive to see that,I mean unlike certain directors he plans god damn everything in the movie. In every respect everything comes together,but with stone he experements. For example in Natural Born Killers everything is experemental,In alot of ways Natural Born Killers is not a movie in the classic sense and thats good but which do you prefer a movie that comes together everything works or a experemental at flim or something that is ART. Another thing about there movies you think about some directors it is “dialouge” or “action” you don’t think that with scorsese you think “his style I love it” when you think stone you think"HE IS FUCKING CRAZY!". Stone is reinventing a movie and doing a fine job but Scorsese is a MASTER of the movie bussiness. I would say that in every sense scorsese is a better filmaker. Watch NBK and Goodfellas back to back and see what you think.
BAD art. And not art either.
[quote=“MiaRose”]
yeah king of comedy was pretty shitty.
[/quote]
I beg to differ. Robert DeNiro and Catherine Scorcese feed off each other brilliantly. Just thinking about…
Catherine: ROO-PERT!
Robert (angrily pressing stop on the tape-recorder): MOM!
…makes me chuckle.
Martin Scorcese is a very very good film director. I just don’t like the British movie press and fans portraying him as some kind of blokey laddish film maker “wot makes movies with gangsters and swearing and like” when he is much more than that. That is not to discredit Mean Streets, Goodfellas, Casino and Gangs of New York. But what makes them good films is that they are personal and made by a director who has to ability to make films like The Last Temptation of Christ, Kundun, After Hours, Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore and The Age of Innocence. Out of that list I have not seen Kundun but I would like to. My personal favourite of that list is After Hours a brilliant black comedy.
Incidentally The Last Temptation of Christ is being shown in Britain on Channel 4, Thursday 17th March 11:05pm. It is an excellent film and well worth a look if you can catch it.
As for Quentin Tarantino he only got compared to Martin Scorcese in the early days because the characters in his first film were crooks and Harvey Keitel was in it.
[quote=“al bundy”]
of im shure i will from what i hear, but still, what are two movies?-oliver is a smart as guy(whent to yale, wrote a 900 page text when he was about 14), and his spectrum of what to make movies on is deffinately much wider, the doors, jfk, nixon, midnight express-i mean with all do respect for marty but has he got nothing better to make films about than the shit he makes films about?(even though some of it is fun).
although oliver stone said that scorsese’s class saved his life, he took his movie styles just much further.
[/quote] Ok. Your entitled to your opinions. Im just suggesting that you see a few more of Scorsese’s films so you can make a truly educated opinion for yourself. To tell the truth, i really cant tell you my opinion on which drector is better, Marty or Oliver, because I have only seen like 3 of Stone’s movies (U turn, NBK, and Any Given Sunday). So we can both go do some studying on these directors and come back with better arguments.
well, as for scorcese and british opinion, shuold we value a nation whose most popular cinematic export in the past two decades is Wallace and Grommit? A dog and a man obsessed with cheese and tea time. Scorcese’s grasp of human psychology would make Freud blush all the way back in London town, all coked up in some dark bedroom and wearing his prostitute’s dress, paying her an extra 5 quid to call him Dora and another ten to open an umbrella in his bunghole?
IMO, of course.
[quote=“fattybassam”]
well, as for scorcese and british opinion, shuold we value a nation whose most popular cinematic export in the past two decades is Wallace and Grommit? [/quote]
Wallace and Grommit are great! Martin Scorcese is going to make a documentary about the British cinema that meant so much to him.
Anyway The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover was made in the last two decades (1988) and that is fucking brilliant. Here is a still:
1989 actually, but what does Peter Greenaway has to do with all this?
[quote=“fattybassam”]
well, as for scorcese and british opinion, shuold we value a nation whose most popular cinematic export in the past two decades is Wallace and Grommit? A dog and a man obsessed with cheese and tea time. Scorcese’s grasp of human psychology would make Freud blush all the way back in London town, all coked up in some dark bedroom and wearing his prostitute’s dress, paying her an extra 5 quid to call him Dora and another ten to open an umbrella in his bunghole?
IMO, of course.
[/quote]
Have you heard of Alfred Hitchcock??
Well being due to being dead Alfred Hitchcock’s films have been quite poor in the past two decades (boom-tish). 1989 you say Johny, I’ll have to check again but you might be right as I think ‘Drowning By Numbers’ was made in 1988.
The reason I mentioned Peter Greenaway’s gangster-cum-foodie-cum-arthouse-cum-revenge movie was as a counter comment on fattybassam’s statement, “shuold we value a nation whose most popular cinematic export in the past two decades is Wallace and Grommit? A dog and a man obsessed with cheese and tea time.” By first stating that Nick Park’s films are great and that the idea that all (sorry if it looks like I am twisting your words fattybassam) British films have been lacklustre in the past two decades (1985-2005) is not strictly true. I could have chosen any number of films but ‘The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover’ was the one that sprang to my mind.
Whilst we’re on the subject of contemporary British cinema I was in a bookshop flipping through ‘Shepperton Babylon’ and came across a story about when John Maybury (writer and director of Love Is The Devil: Study for a Portrait of Francis Bacon’) came face to face with Richard Curtis (The Tall Guy, Four Weddings and a Funeral, Notting Hill, Love Actually, Bridget Jones’s Diary) during one of Robbie Williams’s Sinatra-type concerts. Mr. Maybury aggressively grabbed Mr.Curtis by his lapels and said, “It’s people like you who’ve ruined British cinema for people like me.” Looking at his profile on the Internet Movie Database he might have a point, ‘Love Is The Devil’ was made in 1998 and the film he made after that is very recent, 2005.
Oh dear, I seem to be taking this forum off topic. Darn!