 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
Anyone holding out any hope that this will be one in the "win" column for Scorsese? I have read one comment comparing this to "Mean Streets" and "Taxi Driver" - it would be nice to see, if true. Any predictions?Also - anyone think that Scorsese is one of the "great" American Directors? I think he's made a couple of really good movies - "Taxi Driver" & "Mean Streets", a few good ones - Goodfellas, Casino, Raging Bull, The Age of Innocence, and some "What the hell?" - "Cape Fear", "The Color of Money". So I don't know if he's one of the "greats" but at least he may keep Spielberg from winning an Oscar this year.
I gave at the office!
Follow Ups:
I consider Taxi Driver, Raging Bull and Good Fellows masterpieces of cinema art, with Casino and Mean Streets not far behind and The Age of Innocence demonstrating his skill with more sublime filmfare, even though it doesn't have the "guy-flick" appeal of most of his other films. Even The Last Temptation of Christ, regardless of the controversial subject matter, deserves mention as a gutsy albeit arguably miscast effort. Cape Fear, being a remake, is a good film but will suffer by comparison with the earlier version for many folks; I'd rather have seen him tackle something a little more original.AuPh
is the one that does it for me; I think Martin Scorcese is a brilliant director, American or not
He knows his subject and he gets the best out of his actors, I don't think Robert De Niro has ever been more credible as an actor than when he's been in a Scorcese film
Eric
Tokyo
Eric, De Niro is one of few great actors of our time, no doubt about it. As such he doesn't need much help to open up. I however would not deny that there is a possible synergy between him and Scorsese, but that by itself doesn't make Scorsese a great director. Work of a "great" director should be considered against the best of his peers, and if looked from that perspective I don't think he is in the first dozen.As you know very well, the competition in that first dozen is fierce.
You like to separate the movies into "American" vs. something else - something I refuse to do.In that light would you say Scorsese is a great American director, or a great director? And do you see any difference between the two?
Does it all come down to the "subtle" distinction between Best Athlete and Best High School Athlete?
My point is that he is the quintessential American director, using themes class struggle which are inherently American as told through an immigrant's eyes.Would you not agree?
Note: If so, it'll probably be the only thing we agree on today, so don't blow it! :o)
Cheers,
AuPh
I agree he is a quintessential American director, but that was not my question.I don't see any connection between being that and being great director. Coca-Cola is a quintessential American drink, and Crysler is a quintessential American car.
Do you really believe 100 years from now people will be as willing to watch Raging Bull as 8 1/2?
If you answer NO, then you have to put him at least one notch below those normally considered great... period.
See, told ya, we would sooner agree on politics than on movies... :-))))
And bestowed some high praise. In describing Scorsese as quintessential you're saying as a director he's pure and highly concentrated. In short, the most typical. Quintessence is the fifth element, the substance of heavenly bodies and is latent in all things.
...Raging Bull, OTOH, is at least a 4 on a 1 to 5 scale. Also, it should stand the test of time unless boxing is banned, and as movies about sports and personal struggles go it's pretty solid. Oh well, to each his own; it looks like we're batting a perfect game today. :o)AuPh
There's so many double and triple meanings behind what is put on and off the screen. Scenes shot on location feel surreal yet those shot on fabricated sets have a strong tone of believability. Dream sequences mesh with actuality so much towards the end that one isn't certain if the end scene is real or an afterlife sequence from the suicide.Fellini just didn't know which way to go with the film so he put all possibilities on the screen at the same time and left it up to the viewers perception to decide the path. For every path the viewer could interpret, it ends up making sense. Fellini plays with our minds previsualization capacity, stretches our visual perception, and fools our memories.
Scaffoldings are built towards the sky and encompass nothing but what is imagined. What was filmed gives no definite structure but ultimately conveys several lucid ideas. It redefines narrative film and shows a glimmer of potential of what can be done with the medium.
Tom §.
***Also, it should stand the test of time unless boxing is banned, and as movies about sports and personal struggles go it's pretty solid.Well, another formulaic film about an athlete struggle. Are you a fan of these? I have to say that this is a completely American phenomenon - those silly and immature against-all-odds sports movies.
I suggest you do this test: if the film bores you into sleep, make sure to watch it again - you might be onto a masterpiece.:-)))))))))))))
Back to politics?
I made it through 30 minutes okay, but after I started dozing off I decided my time would be better spent communing with folks here at AA until the sandman finally arrived.AuPh
You know, next time around it might be 45 minutes.TCM had it? Nice for them.
I am about to give up completely on Bravo and AMC. I watched the Bounty last night on AMC and it was torture. They turn a 2 hour film into a 3 hour ordeal. It is beyond enoying, it is at the point of killing the whole idea.
To say that RAGING BULL is "just another movie about sports and personal struggles" is like saying THE OLD MAN AND THE SEA is a book about a guy who catches a fish...To draw a distinction between "greatest American director" and "greatest director" is to miss a crucial point -- a film may speak equally to the all the world's people through story/emotion (aka Charlie Chaplin's work) or through cinematography, especially black and white cinemagraphy (too many examples to list). With this criteria, RAGING BULL's compelling narrative and striking photography (especially the tightly-edited, surreal fight scenes) qualifies Marty Scorces as one of the world's Marty greatest directors.
IMO Scorces is without doubt the greatest living American director, a title I don't bestow lightly.
If the American industry produced 200 films on the same theme, then The Old Man and The Sea would perhaps start blending into that crowd, but not with Tracy's performance, of course.Hundreds of silly films on athletes IS an American tradition, like it or not, like the westerns are. And taken from that perspective the Bull IS formulaic.
I don't think it is wrong to identify the American directors (actors too) as a special category. They do have very distinct flavor (jist like the French or Italian ones), and they do represent the national cinema wich has generally been isolated and lagging in artistic area.
To me again this is like being a US champ, but only an Olympic bronze winner. You can use either title depending upon the context, and both represent different views of the same achievement, allowing you to put it into RIGHT perspective.
It can be said, that it is the inability to see things from the world perspective is what limits the American movie industry acievements.
> > > It can be said, that it is the inability to see things from the world perspective is what limits the American movie industry acievements < < <The Americans DO see the world perspective... it's called MONEY... the US film industry was founded on the premise of delivering technology-driven entertainment to the masses in exchange for the almighty dollar. I think the European countries have always been more concerned with making films that are either purely artistic works or vehicles to examine the human condition for social or political purposes.
Money vs. art..... the eternal struggle goes on.
:o)
I hoped I'd hear from a Scorsese "fan", which it sounds like you are. I don't think I'd disagree too much with what you said, other than things like "Masterpiece" vs. "Really Good Movie" which is admittedly a fine distinction.I guess what it comes down to is how you define a "great" American director. If you define it as one of the top 20 American directors, I might agree with you (haven't really given much though to a "top twenty" - might be an interesting thread). If you define it as a director who's quality of output can stand up to any other great director in the world, then I'd have to disagree.
On an unrelated note - Have you seen the trailer to "The Two Towers"? It looks pretty intense, possibly better than the first movie. Unfortunately it will probably be after the first of the year before I get a chance to see it.
I gave at the office!
(nt)
I love Scorsese's movies. A part of me always likes to see 'Hollywood' films (big stars, big sets, tight story), but I often feel disappointed afterwards. Scorsese's movies, however, deliver the goods. His films are often rich with treats for the film scholar yet accessible too. His strength is storytelling with flair -- he makes the best display of style and technique for the sake of the story rather than just self-indulgence or show.Gangs of New York was supposed to come out last year, then this summer. There's been gossip about fights between the director and the studio, recuts, reshoots ... doesn't look pretty. Maybe next year.
Speaking of Spielberg, his movie with Leonardo Di Caprio (Catch Me If You Can) will come out the same week as Gangs of New York. Some competition, huh?
NT
Scorsese himself has predicted that his odds of winning for Best Director will be zero for lifetime. He has three nominations for Best Director and two for Best Screenwriting which puts him in the august company of Orson Welles, Howard Hawks, and Hitchcock.Spielberg was supposed to direct Cape Fear while Scorsese was adapting Schindler's Ark. They swapped projects and Spielberg won for Schindler's List.
Do I think Scorsese's one of the great American Directors? A resounding yes. The man has an incredible body of work. I realize your list wasn't meant to be complete but I think After Hours and The King of Comedy need inclusion.
Scorsese was in a couple of episodes of Curb Your Enthusiasm and in one Larry David welcomes him to L.A. Scorsese mentions having lived in L.A. in the past and after a beat laughs nervously and says, "But I was asked to leave." I roared.
Should we care about the Oscars? I don't think so.
(nt)
No I've not but will be checking it out. Like mvwine's post I too checked him out with IMDb and was surprised at the number of things he's been in. Helps me plan my winter viewing.
Yes, my list was just off the top of my head, but after reading your post, I looked him up at IMDB - What is amazing to me is that he acted in many more movies than he's directed!And should we care about the Oscars? Let's see - Steven Spielberg has more oscars than Woody Allen - hmm, I guess that answers the question, at least for me.
I gave at the office!
I really loved when he talked about Italian cinema. He was incredibly eloquent, pleasure to listen to and was wealth of good information. But then you look at his movies - and I am utterly unimpressed. His work is good, some perhaps even very good, but never excellent. And that separates him from great directors.This is the same impresion I get from listening to Tarantino. If only he stayed with telling movies stories! Man, I HATE his movies! The Fiction should be reshot to make it a 30 minutes film - then it would be remarkable. But I suspect what I liked in it was not what the movie was made for. Perhaps just an accident.
which you can say about many directors, which make those who are consistently good stand out even more. Another is Coppola - Although he gets high marks from me for trying to preserve a lot of Napa Valley's heritage, and makes some good wine, too. Oh, we were talking movies, right?Coppola is hit and miss, but The Conversation, Apocalypse Now, and the first two Godfathers make up a pretty good filmography.
Tarentino hasn't impressed me that much. "Pulp Fiction" is good, but that's about all I can say. Maybe we're just too old, Victor, and we don't "get" it.
I gave at the office!
Curious, you wrote down exactely what I would have....
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
