Martin Scorsese

Discussion and info on people in film, ranging from directors to actors to cinematographers to writers.

Moderator: DarkImbecile

Post Reply
Message
Author
mteller
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:23 pm

Re: Martin Scorsese

#251 Post by mteller » Mon Feb 27, 2012 11:55 am

Considering how much Minnelli is all over that list, I'm guessing they referenced the wrong Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.

User avatar
Forrest Taft
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 8:34 pm
Location: Stavanger, Norway

Re: Martin Scorsese

#252 Post by Forrest Taft » Mon Feb 27, 2012 12:05 pm

Love that Health was mentioned. Hopefully he'll at one point help getting the film released (via the Film Foundation perhaps?)!

User avatar
Matt
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Martin Scorsese

#253 Post by Matt » Mon Feb 27, 2012 1:09 pm

If Scorpio Rising is not on that last (and it isn't), you can guarantee that it's nowhere near definitive. I've personally heard Scorsese talk about its great personal importance, particularly in the use of popular songs to drive and comment on the narrative. Imagine Scorsese movies without popular music and you imagine Scorsese without the influence of Scorpio Rising.

User avatar
Dylan
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:28 pm

Re: Martin Scorsese

#254 Post by Dylan » Mon Feb 27, 2012 2:36 pm

No Fellini, either, and Scorsese has gone on record many times listing 8 1/2 among his top five (along with Citizen Kane, The Leopard, The Red Shoes, and The Searchers). So, it's just a random list, a very good one, but he cuts out personal favorites to make room for those less discussed. On a related note, I know somebody (a lover a cinema, but more casual than most of us here) who's now interested in seeing Europa '51 because of this list and that's not a bad thing.

User avatar
zedz
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm

Re: Martin Scorsese

#255 Post by zedz » Mon Feb 27, 2012 4:06 pm

Matt wrote:If Scorpio Rising is not on that last (and it isn't), you can guarantee that it's nowhere near definitive. I've personally heard Scorsese talk about its great personal importance, particularly in the use of popular songs to drive and comment on the narrative. Imagine Scorsese movies without popular music and you imagine Scorsese without the influence of Scorpio Rising.
I just applied the closely-related Antonio das Mortes test to the list as well, and found it wanting.

Which is a relief, because given the profligacy of his enthusiasms I would have expected Scorsese to be well beyond constrictive must-see lists. Or at least, constrictive must-see lists that weren't into four figures.

Titus
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 4:40 pm

Re: Martin Scorsese

#256 Post by Titus » Mon Feb 27, 2012 7:34 pm

The Searchers isn't on there either. Cold Bishop's speculation is almost certainly right.

User avatar
Jeff
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Martin Scorsese

#257 Post by Jeff » Wed Mar 21, 2012 3:05 pm


User avatar
flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: Martin Scorsese

#258 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Wed Mar 21, 2012 7:50 pm

Talk about burying the lead...

User avatar
matrixschmatrix
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm

Re: Martin Scorsese

#259 Post by matrixschmatrix » Wed Mar 21, 2012 8:01 pm

flyonthewall2983 wrote:Talk about burying the lede...
I know, Next of Kin is way down there

User avatar
Drucker
Your Future our Drucker
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 9:37 am

Re: Martin Scorsese

#260 Post by Drucker » Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:41 pm


User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Martin Scorsese

#261 Post by mfunk9786 » Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:25 pm

Especially because I don't necessarily get a kick out of the process of actually going to the theater to see a 3D film, this might even be a controversial stance between me, myself, and I - but I sort of see Scorsese's point. Seeing Hugo on the big screen in 3D was a once-in-a-lifetime experience, while watching it at home in 2D, in my experience, has yielded some less spectacular responses from viewers.

User avatar
swo17
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Martin Scorsese

#262 Post by swo17 » Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:34 pm

On the other hand, Hugo was the last film I intend to see in 3D. I liked the effect and the film well enough, but I decided while watching that I'd have gotten just as much out of it (and anything else) in plain, old-fashioned 2D.

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Martin Scorsese

#263 Post by mfunk9786 » Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:37 pm

Here's the difference for me: Now that I've seen it in 3D, I feel like I get the same amount out of 2D, but if I'd seen it in 2D first, I don't know that I'd be saying that.

User avatar
Cold Bishop
Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 9:45 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Martin Scorsese

#264 Post by Cold Bishop » Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:44 pm

Finally, Shusaku Endo in 3D!

User avatar
FerdinandGriffon
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 11:16 am

Re: Martin Scorsese

#265 Post by FerdinandGriffon » Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:59 pm

Cold Bishop wrote:Finally, Shusaku Endo in 3D!
Rofl. I knew the Shinoda was lacking a certain je-ne-sais-quoi!

User avatar
movielocke
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am

Re: Martin Scorsese

#266 Post by movielocke » Tue Oct 08, 2013 2:32 pm

I finally got around to Casino, after hearing good things about it recently by folks nostalgic for nineties cinema.

I was honestly a little apalled, this might be at the bottom of the Scorsese I've seen (along with New York New York), the whole film came across like a high kitsch, over the top and extremely cheesy version of Goodfellas that at times seemed to have more in common with Showgirls than Goodfellas. Maybe its just the Vegas locale--which lends itself to such epic levels of kitsch--but the film fell flat for me on almost every level. But I was more let down by the story and somewhat fractured narrative focus. It seemed like there was a great story there about Pesci. It seemed like there was a great story there about DeNiro. But neither story seemed to become all it could be. At times DeNiro's story was perfunctory and stilted (the 'falling in love' marriage stuff all seemed to come out of nowhere and handled in a 'get it out of the way' manner) in a way that made it seem simultaneously both too short/compressed or much too long, the scenes and chemistry don't work, so maybe it could just be played with yet another perfunctory line detailing a few more years of success in the Casino business, or maybe we need more time and scenes with the characters to believe the scenes in the first place. Either way, it seems like a compromised approach that doesn't work at all when presented. And Pesci's story often seemed to have holes in it, so much so that it's often startling when he resumes his narration, because you've forgotten he's telling his story too in the interim between stories.

The seeming universal default to extreme violence, murder and mayhem as a solution to every problem with no sense of nuance, and no recognition that hundreds of people are dying every day under the portrayal presented contributed to my skepticism of the world the film sketched. It just seemed hard to swallow that the mob would blatently be robbing banks every day and murdering half a dozen people every day and still having the country, county and city looking the other way. Sure, the mob gets away with murder, but not at this scale and regularity, though perhaps truth is stranger than fiction...

mostly unrelated, but I did wonder if Scorsese meant the long, mumbled conversation before Stone and Pesci kiss to be a sort of tribute to Notorious?

LavaLamp
Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2013 12:59 am

Re: Martin Scorsese

#267 Post by LavaLamp » Sat Nov 02, 2013 10:32 am

There's no dedicated thread for these films, so I'll post here:

Mean Streets (1973): Amazing, powerful, and underrated. Very urban, gritty, and '70's. Good use of music - the use of the Stones in the bar scene is brilliant. Always liked this quote, which sums up the film to some extent: "You don't make up for your sins in church. You do it in the streets. You do it at home. The rest is bull$&#$ and you know it."

Bringing out the Dead (1999): Extremely underrated, and one of my top ten '90's films - this has unfairly been compared to TD, though they're two completely different types of movies. Recently re-watched this, and was very moved by the paramedic main character (Nic Cage) & his empathy for the people on the streets - IMHO, this is definitely NC's best role. The scenes that especially get to me are: when he keeps seeing that young woman's face on random people, and also when all of the "ghosts" come out of the streets in the dream/fantasy sequence. The harsh lighting here is fantastic - really sets the mood. Also, BOTD boasts an incredible & very diverse soundtrack - who else but MS could use songs by REM, The Clash, The Marvelettes, 10,000 Maniacs, Van Morrison, Stevie Wonder, etc. in the same film and make it work?! This is probably my favorite soundtrack in a Scorsese film....

Casino (1995): This is another underrated movie that is also unfairly compared to a previous MS film (in this case Goodfellas). However, I strongly prefer Casino to that earlier film (part of this may be that I saw C. first). Great portrait of '70's/'80's Las Vegas, with excellent acting by all involved. I felt really pulled into the story & environment, which is tough to do. James Woods & Sharon Stone are brilliant in this, and this may be the best role(s) for them both.
Last edited by LavaLamp on Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:39 pm, edited 2 times in total.

nolanoe
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 10:25 am

Re: Martin Scorsese

#268 Post by nolanoe » Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:20 am

I have only ever seen Goodfellas cut, on german TV. Ha, imagine. Thus, I am sort of unable to discuss it in detail.

Casino is, however... kind of the "Transformers 3"/"The Dark Knight Rises" of Scorsese: every single one of his mannerisms and treats is turned to the MAX! I mean, it's got a tracking shot set to the entirety of "Can't You Hear Me Knockin". Not that that alone isn't incredibly awesome (it is), but it's also a BIT much.

Bringing out the Dead is vastly underrated, probably because it seems like "another" Taxi Driver/After Hours. Either way, it includes one of my favorite Cage performances and is pretty striking stylistically.

oh yeah
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 7:45 pm

Re: Martin Scorsese

#269 Post by oh yeah » Sun Nov 03, 2013 4:16 pm

Bringing Out the Dead is definitely underrated; admittedly, I'm not a very big Scorsese fan, but I'd put it just below Mean Streets and Taxi Driver (and possibly Goodfellas). I'm always a sucker for gritty NYC films, and with that and the druggy atmosphere and the whole theme of redemption for even the lowest among us, it's the film of Scorsese's that most feels like an Abel Ferrara film -- which is probably why I like it so much.

User avatar
Altair
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2013 12:56 pm
Location: England

Re: Martin Scorsese

#270 Post by Altair » Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:36 am

Having read Nicholas Pileggi's original book Wiseguy from 1985 that served as basis for Goodfellas four years later, it struck me how accurate the film is. While the book isn't beautifully written, it is compulsively readable and it so becomes clear that Scorsese didn't depart from the facts much at all - more, he "streamlined" events to create a clearer narrative (ironically, as part of the film's greatness is the way it interweaves so many different parts of Henry Hill's life). Surprisingly, Joe Pesci's career-defining Tommy DeVito (real-life counterpart: Tommy DeSimone) doesn't play as large a part in the book as he does in Scorsese's version; perhaps the force of his character and the whole subplot about "whacking" Billy Bats and the subsequent dire consequences presented themselves as entirely cinematic to Scorsese over, say, a complex college football rigging scheme Hill setup in reality.

User avatar
liam fennell
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:54 pm

Re: Martin Scorsese

#271 Post by liam fennell » Tue Nov 05, 2013 10:10 am

I'm a little late here but I'd like to chime in and say Casino is my favorite Scorsese! I'm more into aesthetics than stories, though. Casino is, to me, a very risky and experimental work. It's a kind of hyper-montage with DeNiro and Pesci rapping non-stop in voice over through the entire thing. It is certainly Goodfellas+++ and it does seem all very familiar in the wake of that film but I think in the best possible way. The experimentation is only possible because he's on familiar ground and he has to build on it. Marty and editor Thelma Schoonmaker are really going for it here, walking the tightrope on a giant scale. I think successfully but I certainly do understand why people would find it problematic, particularly on a narrative level.

There is just so much to admire in Casino - I love DeNiro's crazy costumes, the use of the Contempt song, the strange Saul Bass title sequence set to choral music, and even the way the mob bosses are lit like a Caravaggio painting while eating dinner in their garage or whatever it is. One man's kitsch is another man's treasure?

User avatar
zedz
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm

Re: Martin Scorsese

#272 Post by zedz » Tue Nov 05, 2013 2:53 pm

liam fennell wrote:There is just so much to admire in Casino - I love DeNiro's crazy costumes.
You mean the rest of you don't dress like that?

LavaLamp
Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2013 12:59 am

Re: Martin Scorsese

#273 Post by LavaLamp » Wed Dec 11, 2013 2:28 pm

Casino will always be unfairly compared to Goodfellas because it came out afterwards & both feature DeNiro & Pesci; both stars play gangsters in both films; the Pesci character has a similar temperament in both films, and comes to a similar end (for that matter, his character in Raging Bull is almost the same character he plays in GF & C.).

However, it's clear that the two films are very dissimilar. The Las Vegas ambience that permeates Casino is obviously completely absent in Goodfellas; the storyline is completely different in these two films; Casino also doesn't have Henry Hill or even a Henry Hill-like character, though it does have both Sharon Stone & James Woods in extremely distinct & well-defined roles; there are no characters like these two in GF. Stone was deservedly nominated for best actress re: her role in the film.
Last edited by LavaLamp on Mon Dec 16, 2013 4:02 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
colinr0380
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

Re: Martin Scorsese

#274 Post by colinr0380 » Thu Dec 12, 2013 6:45 pm

Also compared to the more straightforward, although problematic in its own self-mythologizing way, narration in Goodfellas, Casino also has that sharing of the non-stop narration between a couple of main characters, allowing for both the 'looking inward' by the De Niro character and 'looking at' him from Pesci's perspective during their voice overs. While Henry Hill in Goodfellas is extremely flawed, Sam Rothstein in Casino is even more extreme, almost a blank character outside his interest in betting, and even more obviously being influenced and almost destroyed (deservingly so perhaps) by the more vibrant (and therefore more annoying, flawed, delusional, drugged out and self-destructive) characters surrounding him.

oh yeah
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 7:45 pm

Re: Martin Scorsese

#275 Post by oh yeah » Tue Jan 14, 2014 11:22 pm

I just watched Casino for the first time in years the other day, and I'd agree it's one of Scorsese's best -- possibly second only to Mean Streets. I love how balls-out the whole thing is, stylistically, and the cinematography and editing are probably the most precise and thrilling of any Scorsese film. It's a fascinating and wonderfully dense film that feels like it has a lot more to offer than the comparatively simple Goodfellas. And really, isn't the denouement of Casino a lot more emotionally draining than that of Goodfellas?
SpoilerShow
Nothing in the way the latter film wraps up compares with Pesci's cornfield baseball bat ambush, or Stone's hallucinatory motel OD (love that odd-angled shot right up against the hallway wall).
I'm definitely not one of Scorsese's biggest fans, but I do really enjoy five or six of his films (including the latest Wall Street, with its classic Quaalude 'trip'), and I think this one is at the top of the pack. I guess a part of my preference for it is that I love 3+ hour films that really immerse you in their worlds, and have a novel-like narrative density. There's only so many times you can watch something like Goodfellas, masterful as it is, but Casino takes longer to dissect.

Post Reply