Martin Scorsese

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

Moderator: DarkImbecile

Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Mr Sausage
Not PETA approved
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Martin Scorsese

#301 Post by Mr Sausage » Sat Mar 14, 2015 1:17 pm

domino harvey wrote:Why would I not be counting Jesus? And Melies, and the changed names and dramatic licenses of Casino
Well, it is an adaptation of a novel whose central point was its deliberate inaccuracy. I's hesitate to call this a biopic for the same reasons I'd hesitate over Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter.

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

Re: Martin Scorsese

#302 Post by matrixschmatrix » Sat Mar 14, 2015 3:22 pm

Highway 61 wrote:I think the problem is with the term "biopic." The films Scorsese made about real-life people like Jake LaMotta, Henry Hill, and Jordan Belfort share neither the conventional narrative arc, nor the sentimentality, of what the biopic genre has come to imply in the last 15 years.

Kundun and The Aviator seem like the only examples that follow the biopic template.
Those were the two I was thinking of, for the same reason. I mean, if Goodfellas is a biopic, then I certainly can't see why anyone would want to see less of them from Scorsese.

User avatar
willoneill
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:10 am
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Re: Martin Scorsese

#303 Post by willoneill » Sat Mar 14, 2015 4:25 pm

domino harvey wrote:Why would I not be counting Jesus?
1. Last Temptation is an adaptation of a novel, not the bible itself. The last 40 minutes or so kinda reinforce this point.
2. Anyone's faith or beliefs aside, there's no definite proof Jesus was real.

User avatar
warren oates
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 12:16 pm

Re: Martin Scorsese

#304 Post by warren oates » Sat Mar 14, 2015 4:33 pm

willoneill wrote:Anyone's faith or beliefs aside, there's no definite proof Jesus was real.
Paul Verhoeven and his scholar friends would disagree.

User avatar
FrauBlucher
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:28 pm
Location: Greenwich Village

Re: Martin Scorsese

#305 Post by FrauBlucher » Sun Mar 15, 2015 12:18 am

FrauBlucher wrote:I love Scorsese but quite frankly I'm tired of his indulgence in biopics.
I wasn't talking about Scorsese's whole cannon. It was more of a reference to his last 10 to 15 years, which for me is much less interesting than his early and middle periods. From the Dali Lama (although I did like Kundun), Howard Hughes, Jordan Belfort, to the films he has in developement of Sinatra, The Ramones (this could be interesting) and now Mike Tyson, is a direction that I find uninspiring.

But, I am very excited and looking forward to Silence, which is in line with his work I like best; the films that intimate religious dogma and challenge faith.

I think Scorsese's much more recent and most important work in this period has been as film savior, historian and archivist.

User avatar
Dr Amicus
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 10:20 am
Location: Guernsey

Re: Martin Scorsese

#306 Post by Dr Amicus » Tue Mar 24, 2015 5:46 am

And adding to all the potential projects, a film of Kenneth Branagh's recent production of Macbeth.

Listening to Branagh on the Kermode & Mayo show, he sounded extremely hopeful that this would be made - implying it would be once Silence is completed.

User avatar
Ribs
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm

Re: Martin Scorsese

#307 Post by Ribs » Mon Aug 10, 2015 8:09 pm

Scorsese to direct DiCaprio in adaptation of Devil in the White City

This sounds great - as a huge fan of Gangs of New York it'll be great to see Scorsese dipping his toe in something vaguely similar again.


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

Re: Martin Scorsese

#309 Post by oh yeah » Fri Sep 18, 2015 2:28 am

I seem to keep on going back and forth on which Scorsese films are the best and which are weaker, all depending on which I've seen most recently -- e.g. my appreciation of Taxi Driver went way down after the latest watch, as I find it a decent but very problematic and strangely dull film (Manny Farber remains the most astute observer of its flaws as well as pleasures); also, I initially went crazy for Mean Streets but now I'd place at least 4 or 5 of his pictures above it; I went from loving The Departed when it first came out to dismissing it for years to finding a new, if more reserved, appreciation for it upon another viewing last year; and on and on. And, of course, for years I went back and forth on if Casino was better than Goodfellas or vice versa, etc.

But I feel pretty comfortable saying for certain now, after watching Casino for the nth time, that it's my favorite Scorsese, perhaps tied with the incredibly underrated and incredibly awesome After Hours (any other fans here? it's like Eyes Wide Shut's wackier, wilder cousin-film). The narrative density of Casino makes it so very re-watchable in a way that more famous film from 1990 doesn't quite have, and in terms of aesthetics -- editing especially -- it's probably Scorsese's ultimate achievement. Especially in the first hour, it's just dazzling -- almost experimental in its abstract kinetic whirlwind and rejection of traditional film narrative/style.

It's also interesting how The Wolf of Wall Street resembles Casino in particular -- but really, that film has a style all its own, lacking the operatic Dante-meets-Bosch decadence of Casino and the down-to-earth neighborhood-guys hangout of Goodfellas. I think Wolf is at its core an addict's film: the drug use present in previous Scorsese films comes to the forefront and changes from subtext to text. You can tell that Scorsese is both vicariously reveling in the cocaine, 'ludes, and scores of other things, while at the same time dismissing it and quite clearly depicting the lower depths one gets dragged to when in the muck of active addiction. And yet, because Scorsese so authentically and lovingly portrays the highs and good times of the drug experience, instead of showing everything about it to be uniformly bad, many people have trouble with this moral ambiguity. Of course, this is silly and Scorsese should be commended for being truthful instead of holding a one-sided agenda. Yet maybe also a case could be made that Wolf, despite indeed harshly condemning Belfort and his ilk, is on a formal level such a rush, such a sustained enjoyable experience like a three-hour coke orgy (there's only one or two scenes that really show Belfort bottoming out and becoming violent, dangerous), that it is in danger of "glorifying" all the things it ostensibly condemns. I don't know if I agree with this, but I'd definitely argue that Wolf is more of a pleasurable or "fun" film to watch than Scorsese's previous rise-and-fall/gangster films in the same vein.

User avatar
George Kaplan
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 7:42 pm

Re: Martin Scorsese

#310 Post by George Kaplan » Fri Sep 18, 2015 8:56 am

I would agree that CASINO is Scorsese's best film, and that BRINGING OUT THE DEAD is very under-appreciated; but I find it curious that there seems to be so little love, here, in the current conversation, for KING OF COMEDY which I'd place very near the top. Also, I prefer THE AGE OF INNOCENCE to GANGS OF NEW YORK, and THE WOLF OF WALL STREET and SHUTTER ISLAND (a huge improvement upon a pedestrian novel) to THE DEPARTED and THE AVIATOR. HUGO I found to be an extreme test of patience, even in 3D which did nothing to compensate for the hopeless casting of Asa Butterfield in the lead (among other deficiencies), making it easily my least favorite of his films. On the other hand, I will always have a very soft spot for the very flawed, but very rewarding NEW YORK, NEW YORK.

User avatar
jazzo
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 12:02 am

Re: Martin Scorsese

#311 Post by jazzo » Fri Sep 18, 2015 10:11 am

After Hours is my favourite, too. I don't think it's as perfect as Goodfellas, which I'm pretty sure (at least in this point in my life) I consider the most accomplished synthesis of every cinematic element, but goddamn, does that film have heart and soul. Seeing After Hours on video for the first time in the late eighties was life-changing for me -- well, seeing that and Something Wild -- and those two films, along with Rosemary's Baby, became my litmus test for relationships. If my potential partner didn't love all three of those films, I knew deep down there was no chance it was going to work. Stupid, I know, (especially in a a creepy Eddie Simmons football test kind-of way), but what are you gonna do? Self-respect's self-respect.

Casino's a weird one for me. After seeing initially, I hated it. Over the course of however long it's been since it first came out, I've seen it about three more time, and I still have the same problems with it, but for some reason, they bother me less and less as I sit back and admire the film-making.

I also love the shit out of Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore, and have a real affection for Bringing Out The Dead.

King of Comedy. Masterpiece.
Raging Bull. Masterpiece.

His New York Story, Life Lessons, is, perhaps the greatest portrayal of an artist creating something in cinema, (although I have a real fondness for Bleek cancelling out the rest of the world to compose a song in Mo' Better Blues).

Last Temptation and Hugo are simply breathtaking. Age of Innocence is devastating.

Mean Streets makes me feel nervous from beginning to end.

I love the operatic nature of Cape Fear, and the Gothic melodrama of his Twilight Zone episode, Shutter Island.

When I taught high school, I ran a film club as an extra-curricular, and Taxi Driver (and Texas Chainsaw Massacre) were the only two films that provoked a visceral, ill feeling. They loved them both, but they also felt sick afterwards.

So, if film is my favourite art form of the 20th Century (and it is), and he's the greatest film-maker to have come out of that art form (which, personally, I think he is), then I guess that means I consider him the greatest artist of the 20th Century. I wonder, if he wasn't just a working class Italian-American boy from New York, would more people consider him that? I don't know. I honestly don't believe anyone understands (or has understood) the medium and its potential as well as he does, and even on his most work-for-hire assignments, he injects something of himself into them. I think The Departed and The Aviator are his two weakest films, and I find Kundun, oddly enough, the coldest of his films, almost in spite of the beauty of every frame, but even those have elements that are fascinating.

User avatar
hearthesilence
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC

Re: Martin Scorsese

#312 Post by hearthesilence » Fri Sep 18, 2015 10:37 am

I guess this has gone the way of the Taxi Driver sequel. And the remake of High and Low. And the adaptation of Nick Tosches' biography on Dean Martin (which I actually would have liked to see).

Re: favorites, heck I'll play this game. Ranking my 15 favorites…

1. Raging Bull
2. Taxi Driver
3. Goodfellas
4. The King of Comedy
5. The Age of Innocence
6. Mean Streets
7. After Hours
8. My Voyage to Italy
9. The Last Temptation of Christ
10. No Direction Home
11. Life Lessons (from "New York Stories")
12. Hugo
13. Kundun
14. The Last Waltz
15. Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore

User avatar
copen
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 5:43 pm

Re: Martin Scorsese

#313 Post by copen » Fri Sep 18, 2015 2:40 pm

I watch Taxi Driver and The Departed more often than any of his other films. Decaprio's miscast as a tough guy in The Departed, but once you get past that, it's Scorsese's best in many years (including the 3 that followed it).
The speed fueled Goodfellas is hard to watch on repeated viewings, and I never did like Casino for the same reason. And The Wolf of Wall Street completely sucked as far as i'm concerned.

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

Re: Martin Scorsese

#314 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Fri Sep 18, 2015 4:46 pm

Top 3

1. The Color of Money
2. The Last Waltz
3. The Departed

User avatar
FrauBlucher
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:28 pm
Location: Greenwich Village

Re: Martin Scorsese

#315 Post by FrauBlucher » Fri Sep 18, 2015 6:11 pm

Love everything from the 70s, 80s, and most of the 90s. After that, well, meh. I do hope that Silence, which I've been looking forward to for a long time, has a young Scorsese feel to it. More gritty than flash.

User avatar
hearthesilence
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC

Re: Martin Scorsese

#316 Post by hearthesilence » Fri Sep 18, 2015 6:34 pm

I'm a bit more mixed about the '90s, but I mostly I agree. Of the two I listed that post-date Gangs of New York, No Direction Home is a fantastic doc (even though D A Pennebaker deserves a lot of credit - his '66 footage virtually makes the film). And I really think Hugo deserves high praise, I've posted a lot about it elsewhere but it really is one of his most personal films, and a rare instance where those personal connections don't feel so diluted in the enormous, $100+ million budget commercial productions that define his latter years.

User avatar
FrauBlucher
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:28 pm
Location: Greenwich Village

Re: Martin Scorsese

#317 Post by FrauBlucher » Fri Sep 18, 2015 6:50 pm

I like some of the 2000s but they don't rate as high for me in his cannon. I did like Hugo a lot, my fave from his late period, and No Direction Home was as great as Shine a Light was awful.

User avatar
jazzo
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 12:02 am

Re: Martin Scorsese

#318 Post by jazzo » Fri Sep 18, 2015 8:29 pm

Hugo's just lovely. No real villains, just damaged, lonely people trying to make a connection. I was so touched by it.

User avatar
sir_luke
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:55 pm

Re: Martin Scorsese

#319 Post by sir_luke » Fri Sep 18, 2015 11:07 pm

jazzo wrote:I also love the shit out of Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore
I honestly thought I was alone in this. I don't think I've ever actually heard another human being speak highly of this film, but I absolutely love it. I think it's one of the great family dramas, and it's sweet and hilarious to boot. The chemistry between Burstyn and Kristofferson is so refreshingly real.

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

Re: Martin Scorsese

#320 Post by Dylan » Sat Sep 19, 2015 12:39 am

sir_luke wrote:
jazzo wrote:I also love the shit out of Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore
I honestly thought I was alone in this. I don't think I've ever actually heard another human being speak highly of this film, but I absolutely love it. I think it's one of the great family dramas, and it's sweet and hilarious to boot. The chemistry between Burstyn and Kristofferson is so refreshingly real.
Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore is one of my favorite Scorsese films as well (probably top 5), but other than my father (who first showed me the movie when I was in high school) I too haven't come across anybody else who holds it in such high regard - until now that is. But I think it's terrific, with a great script and wonderful performances, and the opening sequence is a terrific homage to the designs of William Cameron Menzies - particularly Gone With the Wind and Invaders From Mars - and one of Scorsese's most beautiful scenes (though it's a hyper-stylized & retro prelude to what turns out to be a straight and rather low-key drama, and some people have issues with that... but I didn't).

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

Re: Martin Scorsese

#321 Post by movielocke » Sat Sep 19, 2015 12:23 pm

My top three would probably be the departed, after hours, and goodfellas. Alice doesn't live here is criminally underrated, it's a terrific piece. Casino is my least favorite, it's like a bad pastiche made by a Scorsese imitator, I found nothing to like in it other than some of the Montage editing.

User avatar
copen
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 5:43 pm

Re: Martin Scorsese

#322 Post by copen » Sat Sep 19, 2015 1:11 pm

I tried to watch Who's That Knocking At My Door 1967 very recently. Couldn't get through it. It seemed like a mix of Mean Streets, Cassavetes, and a student film.

User avatar
Randall Maysin
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2013 12:26 pm

Re: Martin Scorsese

#323 Post by Randall Maysin » Sat Sep 19, 2015 3:08 pm

I'm someone who finds Scorsese's basic persona as a filmmaker - grandiosity, flashiness and self-seriousness unmitigated by any sense of self-deprecation - generally pretty repulsive, so, happy exceptions like Goodfellas aside, the films of his I find most pleasing are the ones where he applies his basic predilections as a filmmaker to subject matter where it would seem to not belong. Alice, a hugely uneven movie with flashes of greatness, or at least really-goodness, is really improved by the anger and absurdism he brings to it, and The Age of Innocence is one of the most excitingly alive and well-directed period films I've ever seen (although I still think the actual material its based on fundamentally sucks). So I wish he would still try to do things like this that are out of his wheelhouse, but he doesn't seem to want to do that.

It's nice to see that Alice has its fans. I think a sizable percentage of this movie is awful, but then there are things like those incredible scenes with Diane Ladd, especially the little one with her and Ellen Burstyn suntanning behind the diner they work in, that I know I will treasure, and remember, forever.

User avatar
hearthesilence
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC

Re: Martin Scorsese

#324 Post by hearthesilence » Sat Sep 19, 2015 5:35 pm

Randall Maysin wrote:The Age of Innocence is one of the most excitingly alive and well-directed period films I've ever seen (although I still think the actual material its based on fundamentally sucks).
Wow, okay. As mentioned, I think it is indeed a great film, but the book itself is also a masterpiece. The film beautifully captures the tone and language, but the book is so rich and dense, there's a lot of wonderful material that didn't make it on to the screen.

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

Re: Martin Scorsese

#325 Post by Jeff » Thu Oct 29, 2015 12:59 am

Scorsese has signed a multi-year, multi-film deal with Paramount. They'll distribute Silence, and finance and distribute The Irishman, Devil in the White City, and a Leonard Bernstein biopic.

A Steve Zaillian script is already in place for The Irishman, and DeNiro recently said it will shoot in 2016. DeNiro, Pacino, Pesci, and Bobby Canavale participated in a table read earlier this year. A package for Devil in the White City was the subject of a major studio bidding war based on a script treatment by Billy Ray, so I'd imagine it will follow The Irishman. The Bernstein film is being written by Spotlight's Josh Singer. It looks to be the furthest down the line, but theoretically all of these films will be made by 2019 when the Paramount deal concludes. As we know, Scorsese project announcements are always very much subject to change.

Post Reply