list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Gangs of New York on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Gangs_of_New_York/202978/default.aspx Title: Gangs of New York
Year: 2002
Director: Martin Scorsese
Plot: The violent rise of gangland power in New York City at a time of massive political corruption and the city's evolution into a cultural melting pot set the stage for this lavish historical epic, which director Martin Scorsese finally brought to the screen almost 30 years after he first began to plan the project. In 1846, as waves of Irish immigrants poured into the New York neighborhood of Five Points, a number of citizens of British and Dutch heritage who were born in the United States began making an open display of their resentment toward the new arrivals. William Cutting (Daniel Day-Lewis), better known as "Bill the Butcher" for his deadly skill with a knife, bands his fellow "Native Americans" into a gang to take on the Irish immigrants; the immigrants in turn form a gang of their own, "The Dead Rabbits," organized by Priest Vallon (Liam Neeson). After an especially bloody clash between the Natives and the Rabbits leaves Vallon dead, his son goes missing; the boy ends up in a brutal reform school before returning to the Five Points in 1862 as Amsterdam (Leonardo DiCaprio). Now a strapping adult who has learned how to fight, Amsterdam has come to seek vengeance against Bill the Butcher, whose underworld control of the Five Points through violence and intimidation dovetails with the open corruption of New York politician "Boss" Tweed (Jim Broadbent). Amsterdam gradually penetrates Bill the Butcher's inner circle, and he soon becomes his trusted assistant. Amsterdam also finds himself falling for Jenny Everdeane (Cameron Diaz), a beautiful but street-smart thief who was once involved with Bill. Amsterdam is learning a great deal from Bill, but before he can turn the tables on the man who killed his father, Amsterdam's true identity is exposed, even though he has concealed it from nearly everyone, including Jenny. Gangs Of New York was the first film in two years from actor Leonardo DiCaprio; ironically, it was at one time scheduled to open on the same day as Catch Me if You Can, the Steven Spielberg project that DiCaprio began filming immediately after Gangs wrapped. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 44
Number of Lists: 61
Number of blog posts: 4
Number of discussion threads: 7
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Sun, 16 Aug 2009 18:28:44 GMTGangs of New York2002Martin ScorseseThe violent rise of gangland power in New York City at a time of massive political corruption and the city's evolution into a cultural melting pot set the stage for this lavish historical epic, which director <a href="/players/P___110533/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Martin Scorsese</a> finally brought to the screen almost 30 years after he first began to plan the project. In 1846, as waves of Irish immigrants poured into the New York neighborhood of Five Points, a number of citizens of British and Dutch heritage who were born in the United States began making an open display of their resentment toward the new arrivals. William Cutting (<a href="/players/P____17559/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Daniel Day-Lewis</a>), better known as "Bill the Butcher" for his deadly skill with a knife, bands his fellow "Native Americans" into a gang to take on the Irish immigrants; the immigrants in turn form a gang of their own, "The Dead Rabbits," organized by Priest Vallon (<a href="/players/P____52070/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Liam Neeson</a>). After an especially bloody clash between the Natives and the Rabbits leaves Vallon dead, his son goes missing; the boy ends up in a brutal reform school before returning to the Five Points in 1862 as Amsterdam (<a href="/players/P____18926/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Leonardo DiCaprio</a>). Now a strapping adult who has learned how to fight, Amsterdam has come to seek vengeance against Bill the Butcher, whose underworld control of the Five Points through violence and intimidation dovetails with the open corruption of New York politician "Boss" Tweed (<a href="/players/P_____8575/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Jim Broadbent</a>). Amsterdam gradually penetrates Bill the Butcher's inner circle, and he soon becomes his trusted assistant. Amsterdam also finds himself falling for Jenny Everdeane (<a href="/players/P___195733/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Cameron Diaz</a>), a beautiful but street-smart thief who was once involved with Bill. Amsterdam is learning a great deal from Bill, but before he can turn the tables on the man who killed his father, Amsterdam's true identity is exposed, even though he has concealed it from nearly everyone, including Jenny. Gangs Of New York was the first film in two years from actor <a href="/players/P____18926/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Leonardo DiCaprio</a>; ironically, it was at one time scheduled to open on the same day as <a href=/films/196133/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Catch Me if You Can</a>, the <a href="/players/P___112325/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Steven Spielberg</a> project that DiCaprio began filming immediately after <a href=/films/231673/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Gangs</a> wrapped. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide44Tag Target (>10)61473http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t30556bxlv7.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Gangs_of_New_York/202978/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/2/27/40717.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 2/27/2009 6:02:08 PM
Body: In episode #108, we posed a simple question: Which movie should be turned into a graphic novel? Your responses to the question became the fodder for a great conversation. Turning the typical page-to-screen progression on its head, we dig into the strengths and weaknesses of each medium. We discuss the possibility of seeing Mystery Train, Walkabout, The Man Who Fell To Earth, Zardoz, Hero, Die Hard, and Gangs of New York crammed into little action-packed drawings. We check in with Karina for a hindsight conversation about awards season. She poses the question: Who would win in a fight, Benjamin Button or Iron Man? The answer is as obvious as it seems, but not for the reason you think. Want to win a copy of Watchmen: The Official Film Companion? Send us an e-mail telling us what film you think has the best production design in entire history of cinema. It’s that simple. E-mail filmcouch [at] spout [dot] com. (Subscribe to FilmCouch–Spout’s weekly movie podcast–in the iTunes store or to our RSS feed and an episode will download each Friday) 0:00 - Intro 3:22 - From film to comic. 26:40 - The Oscars. What happened? filmcouch-110 Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 23:02:08 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com2/27/2009 6:02:08 PM In episode #108, we posed a simple question: Which movie should be turned into a graphic novel? Your responses to the question became the fodder for a great conversation. Turning the typical page-to-screen progression on its head, we dig into the strengths and weaknesses of each medium. We discuss the possibility of seeing Mystery Train, Walkabout, The Man Who Fell To Earth, Zardoz, Hero, Die Hard, and Gangs of New York crammed into little action-packed drawings. We check in with Karina for a hindsight conversation about awards season. She poses the question: Who would win in a fight, Benjamin Button or Iron Man? The answer is as obvious as it seems, but not for the reason you think. Want to win a copy of Watchmen: The Official Film Companion? Send us an e-mail telling us what film you think has the best production design in entire history of cinema. It’s that simple. E-mail filmcouch [at] spout [dot] com. (Subscribe to FilmCouch–Spout’s weekly movie podcast–in the iTunes store or to our RSS feed and an episode will download each Friday) 0:00 - Intro 3:22 - From film to comic. 26:40 - The Oscars. What happened? filmcouch-110 Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/paul/archive/2009/2/27/40678.aspx Post By: paul
Post To: paul on spout.com
Post Date: 2/27/2009 6:01:09 PM
Body: In episode #108, we posed a simple question: Which movie should be turned into a graphic novel? Your responses to the question became the fodder for a great conversation. Turning the typical page-to-screen progression on its head, we dig into the strengths and weaknesses of each medium. We discuss the possibility of seeing Mystery Train, Walkabout, The Man Who Fell To Earth, Zardoz, Hero, Die Hard, and Gangs of New York crammed into little action-packed drawings. We check in with Karina for a hindsight conversation about awards season. She poses the question: Who would win in a fight, Benjamin Button or Iron Man? The answer is as obvious as it seems, but not for the reason you think. Want to win a copy of Watchmen: The Official Film Companion? Send us an e-mail telling us what film you think has the best production design in entire history of cinema. It’s that simple. E-mail filmcouch [at] spout [dot] com. (Subscribe to FilmCouch–Spout’s weekly movie podcast–in the iTunes store or to our RSS feed and an episode will download each Friday) 0:00 - Intro 3:22 - From film to comic. 26:40 - The Oscars. What happened? filmcouch-110 Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Paul Moore
]]>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 23:01:09 GMTpaulpaul on spout.com2/27/2009 6:01:09 PM In episode #108, we posed a simple question: Which movie should be turned into a graphic novel? Your responses to the question became the fodder for a great conversation. Turning the typical page-to-screen progression on its head, we dig into the strengths and weaknesses of each medium. We discuss the possibility of seeing Mystery Train, Walkabout, The Man Who Fell To Earth, Zardoz, Hero, Die Hard, and Gangs of New York crammed into little action-packed drawings. We check in with Karina for a hindsight conversation about awards season. She poses the question: Who would win in a fight, Benjamin Button or Iron Man? The answer is as obvious as it seems, but not for the reason you think. Want to win a copy of Watchmen: The Official Film Companion? Send us an e-mail telling us what film you think has the best production design in entire history of cinema. It’s that simple. E-mail filmcouch [at] spout [dot] com. (Subscribe to FilmCouch–Spout’s weekly movie podcast–in the iTunes store or to our RSS feed and an episode will download each Friday) 0:00 - Intro 3:22 - From film to comic. 26:40 - The Oscars. What happened? filmcouch-110 Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Paul Moore http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Re_Top_5_Overrated_Movies/190/39484/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: flair
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 1/13/2009 6:35:16 PM
Body: 1) Gangs of New York (2002) As Pippin points out, in the land of overrated Scorsese, there are plenty of choices. But this represents the apogee: a meticulously researched, carefully staged, beautifully filmed, soulless, empty-headed, costume drama variation on all his other celebrations of violence. No matter how compelling the characters and intriguing their stories, Scorsese always manages to miss their heart. That's forgivable in rubbish like "Goodfellas" or a cartoon like "The Departed," where we know he's just filling time between spasms of bloodshed. But consider the resources that went into recreating this vanished world, only for Marty to once again fail at Storytelling 101. In an earlier era, Scorsese would be the batty uncle in the attic. Today, he's an award-winning director. Who says there's been no progress in the treatment of the mentally ill? 2) In the Bedroom (2001) Anyone who has ever lost a family member through crime, and struggled through the resulting legal proceedings, understands the continued heartbreak and frustration involved, and the amount of forbearance and character required to get through the days. For the sake of a cheap twist, this disgraceful twaddle dishonors all those sacrifices. 3) The Hospital (1971) I'm not sure this movie is still well-known enough to be truly overrated, but at the time this shrill, misogynistic, self-satisfied and self-defeating satire actually attracted some good notices. The combination of bombastic screenwriter Paddy Chayefsky, pedestrian director Arthur Hiller and george C. Scott in real social realist mode as the bitter alcoholic he was born to be, er, play, trample whatever green shoots of antic comedy that attempt to poke up their heads. Diana Rigg, an actress I usually like, gives the worst performance of her career simply by playing her ludicrous character, The Girl, straight. 4) Stage Beauty (2004) I understand the criticism of "Shakespeare in Love," but that's "Battleship Potemkin" compared to this pale copy. Not only do Claire Danes and Billy Crudup make Gwynneth Paltrow and Joseph Fiennes look like Brangelina, this movie actually borrows the silliest storyline element from "Goldfinger." No, not the attack on Fort Knox, the part where one fling with Sean Connery cures Honor Blackman of her lesbian proclivities. Here, it's boyish Claire who supposedly entices Billy away from the boys; perhaps he just didn't notice a difference. ZZZZZZ. (Billy lost even more cred off-screen by leaving pregnant girlfriend Mary Louise Parker for Claire. No, truly, I'm not making that up. Talk about sexual confusion. Fittingly, Claire then left Billy for an avowedly gay actor.) 5) Closer Certain productions work acceptably on stage, where the immediacy of the acting and the intimacy of the setting can overcome contrived writing. With the right cast, "Closer" makes for an interesting if chilly theatrical experience. Blown up on screen, with little effort to expand the stagey settings and set-up, every bit of plot machinery and line of by-the-numbers dialogue gets cruelly exposed. The high-profile cast is not exactly bad, but strikes few sparks. In a sexual rondelet of two couples, it doesn't help that Natalie Portman exudes all the allure of an average 12-year-old playing dress up, while Jude Law opts to push his boyishness to new extremes.
]]>Tue, 13 Jan 2009 23:35:16 GMTflairTop 51/13/2009 6:35:16 PM 1) Gangs of New York (2002) As Pippin points out, in the land of overrated Scorsese, there are plenty of choices. But this represents the apogee: a meticulously researched, carefully staged, beautifully filmed, soulless, empty-headed, costume drama variation on all his other celebrations of violence. No matter how compelling the characters and intriguing their stories, Scorsese always manages to miss their heart. That's forgivable in rubbish like "Goodfellas" or a cartoon like "The Departed," where we know he's just filling time between spasms of bloodshed. But consider the resources that went into recreating this vanished world, only for Marty to once again fail at Storytelling 101. In an earlier era, Scorsese would be the batty uncle in the attic. Today, he's an award-winning director. Who says there's been no progress in the treatment of the mentally ill? 2) In the Bedroom (2001) Anyone who has ever lost a family member through crime, and struggled through the resulting legal proceedings, understands the continued heartbreak and frustration involved, and the amount of forbearance and character required to get through the days. For the sake of a cheap twist, this disgraceful twaddle dishonors all those sacrifices. 3) The Hospital (1971) I'm not sure this movie is still well-known enough to be truly overrated, but at the time this shrill, misogynistic, self-satisfied and self-defeating satire actually attracted some good notices. The combination of bombastic screenwriter Paddy Chayefsky, pedestrian director Arthur Hiller and george C. Scott in real social realist mode as the bitter alcoholic he was born to be, er, play, trample whatever green shoots of antic comedy that attempt to poke up their heads. Diana Rigg, an actress I usually like, gives the worst performance of her career simply by playing her ludicrous character, The Girl, straight. 4) Stage Beauty (2004) I understand the criticism of "Shakespeare in Love," but that's "Battleship Potemkin" compared to this pale copy. Not only do Claire Danes and Billy Crudup make Gwynneth Paltrow and Joseph Fiennes look like Brangelina, this movie actually borrows the silliest storyline element from "Goldfinger." No, not the attack on Fort Knox, the part where one fling with Sean Connery cures Honor Blackman of her lesbian proclivities. Here, it's boyish Claire who supposedly entices Billy away from the boys; perhaps he just didn't notice a difference. ZZZZZZ. (Billy lost even more cred off-screen by leaving pregnant girlfriend Mary Louise Parker for Claire. No, truly, I'm not making that up. Talk about sexual confusion. Fittingly, Claire then left Billy for an avowedly gay actor.) 5) Closer Certain productions work acceptably on stage, where the immediacy of the acting and the intimacy of the setting can overcome contrived writing. With the right cast, "Closer" makes for an interesting if chilly theatrical experience. Blown up on screen, with little effort to expand the stagey settings and set-up, every bit of plot machinery and line of by-the-numbers dialogue gets cruelly exposed. The high-profile cast is not exactly bad, but strikes few sparks. In a sexual rondelet of two couples, it doesn't help that Natalie Portman exudes all the allure of an average 12-year-old playing dress up, while Jude Law opts to push his boyishness to new extremes. http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Re_Top_5_Overrated_Movies/190/39479/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: flair
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 1/13/2009 5:56:38 PM
Body: [quote user="pippin06"] [quote user="leeroy711"] [quote user="SkyPilot"] 3. Amelie [/quote] Boooooooooo!!! I love this one and everything else by Juenet. The rest of the list I can't disagree with but mine would look more like: 1. Platoon - Hamburger Hill was better........... trust me. 2. Goodfellas/Casino/Taxi Driver - I didn't really get into a Scorsese film until The Departed. These others were OK, but that's about it. If it weren't for Oliver Stone, Martin Scorsese would be the most overrated director. 3. Shakespeare In Love - this was when I stopped watching or caring about the Oscars 4. Gladiator - see No. 3 - And I actually liked Black Hawk Down better for a Ridley Scott film. 5. Shawshank Redemption - This one was clever but c'mon. No. 1 on IMDB's top 250 list is just ridiculous. [/quote] leeroy, I think you are harsh on Scorsese, and he didn't only make those three flicks prior to the Departed. In the land of overrated for Scorsese, I submit Gangs of New York and The Aviator. I hate them, and they were nominated a million times for a million awards (and were some in the long line of Scorsese's no-Oscar curse). Though, I totally agree with Gladiator (also doesn't hold up to repeat viewings) and Shakespeare in Love. I was hot when the latter won Best Picture thanks to the alpha-campaignig of the Weinsteins. Saving Private Ryan is a much better film, and I personally and generally prefer romances to war movies any day, but come on. And now I see why Shawshank might be considered overrated Ok, I concede on that point, but I'm with leeroy on Amelie. [/quote]
]]>Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:56:38 GMTflairTop 51/13/2009 5:56:38 PM[quote user="pippin06"] [quote user="leeroy711"] [quote user="SkyPilot"] 3. Amelie [/quote] Boooooooooo!!! I love this one and everything else by Juenet. The rest of the list I can't disagree with but mine would look more like: 1. Platoon - Hamburger Hill was better........... trust me. 2. Goodfellas/Casino/Taxi Driver - I didn't really get into a Scorsese film until The Departed. These others were OK, but that's about it. If it weren't for Oliver Stone, Martin Scorsese would be the most overrated director. 3. Shakespeare In Love - this was when I stopped watching or caring about the Oscars 4. Gladiator - see No. 3 - And I actually liked Black Hawk Down better for a Ridley Scott film. 5. Shawshank Redemption - This one was clever but c'mon. No. 1 on IMDB's top 250 list is just ridiculous. [/quote] leeroy, I think you are harsh on Scorsese, and he didn't only make those three flicks prior to the Departed. In the land of overrated for Scorsese, I submit Gangs of New York and The Aviator. I hate them, and they were nominated a million times for a million awards (and were some in the long line of Scorsese's no-Oscar curse). Though, I totally agree with Gladiator (also doesn't hold up to repeat viewings) and Shakespeare in Love. I was hot when the latter won Best Picture thanks to the alpha-campaignig of the Weinsteins. Saving Private Ryan is a much better film, and I personally and generally prefer romances to war movies any day, but come on. And now I see why Shawshank might be considered overrated Ok, I concede on that point, but I'm with leeroy on Amelie. [/quote] http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Top_10_Scene_Stealers/190/37066/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: SkyPilot
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 11/7/2008 2:48:03 PM
Body: Some of these movies are better than others, but they all share one thing in common: whenever the following actors leave the screen, you wish they'd come right back. 10. Kurt Russell: Stuntman Mike in Death Proof 9. Mickey Rourke: Marv in Sin City 8. Gene Wilder: Willy Wonka in Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory 7. Bill Murray: Carl Speckler in Caddyshack 6. Jack Nicholson: the Joker in Batman 5. Brad Pitt: Chad Feldheimer in Burn After Reading 4. Daniel Day-Lewis: Bill the Butcher in Gangs of New York 3. Heath Ledger: the Joker in The Dark Knight 2. Anthony Hopkins: Hannibal Lecter in The Silence of the Lambs 1. Harrison Ford: Han Solo in Star Wars: A New Hope
]]>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 19:48:03 GMTSkyPilotTop 511/7/2008 2:48:03 PMSome of these movies are better than others, but they all share one thing in common: whenever the following actors leave the screen, you wish they'd come right back. 10. Kurt Russell: Stuntman Mike in Death Proof 9. Mickey Rourke: Marv in Sin City 8. Gene Wilder: Willy Wonka in Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory 7. Bill Murray: Carl Speckler in Caddyshack 6. Jack Nicholson: the Joker in Batman 5. Brad Pitt: Chad Feldheimer in Burn After Reading 4. Daniel Day-Lewis: Bill the Butcher in Gangs of New York 3. Heath Ledger: the Joker in The Dark Knight 2. Anthony Hopkins: Hannibal Lecter in The Silence of the Lambs 1. Harrison Ford: Han Solo in Star Wars: A New Hope http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Re_Top_5_Overrated_Movies/190/36936/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: leeroy711
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 11/4/2008 10:31:14 AM
Body: [quote user="pippin06"] leeroy, I think you are harsh on Scorsese, and he didn't only make those three flicks prior to the Departed. In the land of overrated for Scorsese, I submit Gangs of New York and The Aviator. I hate them, and they were nominated a million times for a million awards (and were some in the long line of Scorsese's no-Oscar curse). [/quote] I referred to those three because they are all on IMDB's top 250 list and I just don't see why. And I think I'm still pissed at him because in 1999 I actually spent good money to see Bringing Out The Dead in the theaters. Great directors don't make movies like that. On a side note: I think the very following week, at the same theater, I paid the same good money to see Eye of the Beholder......................... That was a bad month.
]]>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 15:31:14 GMTleeroy711Top 511/4/2008 10:31:14 AM[quote user="pippin06"] leeroy, I think you are harsh on Scorsese, and he didn't only make those three flicks prior to the Departed. In the land of overrated for Scorsese, I submit Gangs of New York and The Aviator. I hate them, and they were nominated a million times for a million awards (and were some in the long line of Scorsese's no-Oscar curse). [/quote] I referred to those three because they are all on IMDB's top 250 list and I just don't see why. And I think I'm still pissed at him because in 1999 I actually spent good money to see Bringing Out The Dead in the theaters. Great directors don't make movies like that. On a side note: I think the very following week, at the same theater, I paid the same good money to see Eye of the Beholder......................... That was a bad month. http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Re_Top_5_Overrated_Movies/190/36935/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: leeroy711
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 11/4/2008 10:20:12 AM
Body: [quote user="SkyPilot"] Of the three Juenet films I've seen, I've liked Amelie the least. My favorite by him is Delicatessen. I'll have to see Hamburger Hill. I think part of why I like Platoon so much is that I watched it with my dad when I was 13. I wonder if love of the film is a coming-of-age, nostalgia thing for a lot of dudes? Like someone insisting Little Monsters is great, but they haven't seen it in sixteen years. [/quote] I think you're on to something there. I can definately attribute the beginning of my love affair with the Coen Bros. films to when my Dad took me to see Fargo in the theater. [quote user="SkyPilot"] Wow, Scorsese the 2nd-most overrated director ever! I agree that Goodfellas and Casino are just good gangster movies at best, and The Departed knocks the lining out of 'em both. On the other hand, even though I don't love Taxi Driver--and I don't even particularly enjoy it--when I've watched it (twice), I've had this sensation that something new was happening. Like the "You talkin' to me scene," the date with Cybil Shepherd, the meal with Jodie Foster--there's something there for me, something raw and real and scary. [/quote] All the Scorsese films I mentioned have one thing in common: I felt the pacing was way too slow and they build up to an ending that is very unsatisfying. In fact, now that I think about it, Gangs of New York was pretty much the same experience for me. If a film's going to be that long winded, it should do a better job of wowing you to complete the story in the end. I will say that The Departed was obviously his best work, and it took me about a year and a half to finally decide that I should watch it.
]]>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 15:20:12 GMTleeroy711Top 511/4/2008 10:20:12 AM[quote user="SkyPilot"] Of the three Juenet films I've seen, I've liked Amelie the least. My favorite by him is Delicatessen. I'll have to see Hamburger Hill. I think part of why I like Platoon so much is that I watched it with my dad when I was 13. I wonder if love of the film is a coming-of-age, nostalgia thing for a lot of dudes? Like someone insisting Little Monsters is great, but they haven't seen it in sixteen years. [/quote] I think you're on to something there. I can definately attribute the beginning of my love affair with the Coen Bros. films to when my Dad took me to see Fargo in the theater. [quote user="SkyPilot"] Wow, Scorsese the 2nd-most overrated director ever! I agree that Goodfellas and Casino are just good gangster movies at best, and The Departed knocks the lining out of 'em both. On the other hand, even though I don't love Taxi Driver--and I don't even particularly enjoy it--when I've watched it (twice), I've had this sensation that something new was happening. Like the "You talkin' to me scene," the date with Cybil Shepherd, the meal with Jodie Foster--there's something there for me, something raw and real and scary. [/quote] All the Scorsese films I mentioned have one thing in common: I felt the pacing was way too slow and they build up to an ending that is very unsatisfying. In fact, now that I think about it, Gangs of New York was pretty much the same experience for me. If a film's going to be that long winded, it should do a better job of wowing you to complete the story in the end. I will say that The Departed was obviously his best work, and it took me about a year and a half to finally decide that I should watch it. http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Re_Top_5_Overrated_Movies/190/36924/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: pippin06
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 11/3/2008 10:59:21 PM
Body: [quote user="leeroy711"] [quote user="SkyPilot"] 3. Amelie [/quote] Boooooooooo!!! I love this one and everything else by Juenet. The rest of the list I can't disagree with but mine would look more like: 1. Platoon - Hamburger Hill was better........... trust me. 2. Goodfellas/Casino/Taxi Driver - I didn't really get into a Scorsese film until The Departed. These others were OK, but that's about it. If it weren't for Oliver Stone, Martin Scorsese would be the most overrated director. 3. Shakespeare In Love - this was when I stopped watching or caring about the Oscars 4. Gladiator - see No. 3 - And I actually liked Black Hawk Down better for a Ridley Scott film. 5. Shawshank Redemption - This one was clever but c'mon. No. 1 on IMDB's top 250 list is just ridiculous. [/quote] leeroy, I think you are harsh on Scorsese, and he didn't only make those three flicks prior to the Departed. In the land of overrated for Scorsese, I submit Gangs of New York and The Aviator. I hate them, and they were nominated a million times for a million awards (and were some in the long line of Scorsese's no-Oscar curse). Though, I totally agree with Gladiator (also doesn't hold up to repeat viewings) and Shakespeare in Love. I was hot when the latter won Best Picture thanks to the alpha-campaignig of the Weinsteins. Saving Private Ryan is a much better film, and I personally and generally prefer romances to war movies any day, but come on. And now I see why Shawshank might be considered overrated Ok, I concede on that point, but I'm with leeroy on Amelie.
]]>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 03:59:21 GMTpippin06Top 511/3/2008 10:59:21 PM[quote user="leeroy711"] [quote user="SkyPilot"] 3. Amelie [/quote] Boooooooooo!!! I love this one and everything else by Juenet. The rest of the list I can't disagree with but mine would look more like: 1. Platoon - Hamburger Hill was better........... trust me. 2. Goodfellas/Casino/Taxi Driver - I didn't really get into a Scorsese film until The Departed. These others were OK, but that's about it. If it weren't for Oliver Stone, Martin Scorsese would be the most overrated director. 3. Shakespeare In Love - this was when I stopped watching or caring about the Oscars 4. Gladiator - see No. 3 - And I actually liked Black Hawk Down better for a Ridley Scott film. 5. Shawshank Redemption - This one was clever but c'mon. No. 1 on IMDB's top 250 list is just ridiculous. [/quote] leeroy, I think you are harsh on Scorsese, and he didn't only make those three flicks prior to the Departed. In the land of overrated for Scorsese, I submit Gangs of New York and The Aviator. I hate them, and they were nominated a million times for a million awards (and were some in the long line of Scorsese's no-Oscar curse). Though, I totally agree with Gladiator (also doesn't hold up to repeat viewings) and Shakespeare in Love. I was hot when the latter won Best Picture thanks to the alpha-campaignig of the Weinsteins. Saving Private Ryan is a much better film, and I personally and generally prefer romances to war movies any day, but come on. And now I see why Shawshank might be considered overrated Ok, I concede on that point, but I'm with leeroy on Amelie. http://www.spout.com/blogs/the_american_dream/archive/2008/4/27/27884.aspx Post By: The_American_Dream
Post To: The_American_Dream Blog
Post Date: 4/27/2008 10:56:45 PM
Body: To review this movie it helps actually to try to figure what it is. And it is allot of things. Part of it is like allot of Scorsese films, particularly more recent ones, in that it is another attempt at getting an Oscar. It is also a costume drama. A classic style mob movie with murdered fathers and revengeful sons. And all this with a great cast and in a richly stylized setting. Now I am going to do what I usually do and that is to work though what I set out in that first paragraph. Trying to allot a paragraph to each thing. All the while trying to bring out an honest dialogue about the good and bad, the weak and strong et cetera of the movie. And for this one, that is going to be a bit of a monster undertaking. First, on Scorsese. I haven't seen allot by him. "Age of Innocence", "Taxi Driver" maybe some other works but not "The Aviator" not "Raging Bull" some but not all of "The Departed". All of these I want to see but that is beside the point in that you do not need to see all of what Scorsese has done to get a picture of what he is doing. And what he is doing is this; trying to get his fair share of Oscar which he deserves and got for "The Departed". But for the longest time, probably since "Taxi Driver" was nominated for four Oscars in 1976, he has been working for what "The Departed" got him. This becomes most evident in movies like "Gangs of New York" because he goes for moving drama set in some time past which he works very hard to bring in full life to the screen. He tried this in "Age of Innocence" and everybody hated that. Does this drive make this movie or his movies in general bad, no. This drive forces allot down the throat of a movie, and good stuff too, but it also loosens the movies spine and all that good stuff cannot work with out a proper backbone. That being said, lets look at what this movie has to offer. I would like to say that what this movie offers, it does to the fullest. "Gangs of New York" is a costume drama in every way. It takes place in during the Civil War, so from soldiers uniforms to the various garbs of the different gangs this movie is covered. And it isn't just the costume that makes "Gangs of New York" as costume drama. There are three masted ships and elaborate upper-class parties and all manor of period picture things. Scorsese has done this before in "The Age of Innocence" and had every detail researched, the difference here is that this movie has at its center a basic plot that we know and love. The mob movie. It is long, tried and true, plot line that Scosese has allot of practice in. This one is like allot of others. There is a mob war, one side looses and that sides leaders son goes into exile. He comes back and becomes friendly with his fathers enemy all the while plotting revenge. He tries and fails to kill his fathers enemy. Comes back after a long and hard recovery to do what he first set out to do meanwhile seducing a beautiful girl. Eventually he triumphs in a thrilling and violent war and life goes on. Guess what happens in "Gangs of New York". You have seen it but this is just as good as any other, even a bit different. Its 1860's setting gives a different feel while maintaining the styles of gangs (some wear prim blue cloths with stovepipe hats while the others are wearing more ragged red stripes). Again though, nothing really new just another spin on it. It is fine. I have all ready talked somewhat on the look of the film. But it really does have a bit of its own life, worth spending more than a few mentions. "Gangs of New York" has a beautiful color pallet. Allot of warm colors periodically punctuated by colors more hot or more cold than your usual yellows and oranges. But it can seem almost overly so. How much this way or how much that way can people dress? It is very beautiful to watch and allot of the imagery seems to come from woodblock illustrations of the time, busy theaters, sculpted mustaches and the like. And even more, occasionally the video ramps to add dramatic effects to usually innocuous actions like door opening or around turning. All this is cool and works. But again it is more okay than really good. Looking at it it is a little more push on the action that does not need to be there. So what is a break down of all this. Over all, everything is good. Four stars, I liked it. But go back to what Scorsese is doing here, force feeding this to be a masterpiece. And it is but it comes off a bit over weight. By that I mean it is so loaded with trying to be great that it beaches it self like a whale to some degree. For a final word I would tell those interested to see it. It is a worth while and beautiful movie with great actors and great design. Just not exceptional enough on some level. All the same four stars, I really want to end this one a positive note.
]]>Mon, 28 Apr 2008 02:56:45 GMTThe_American_DreamThe_American_Dream Blog4/27/2008 10:56:45 PM To review this movie it helps actually to try to figure what it is. And it is allot of things. Part of it is like allot of Scorsese films, particularly more recent ones, in that it is another attempt at getting an Oscar. It is also a costume drama. A classic style mob movie with murdered fathers and revengeful sons. And all this with a great cast and in a richly stylized setting. Now I am going to do what I usually do and that is to work though what I set out in that first paragraph. Trying to allot a paragraph to each thing. All the while trying to bring out an honest dialogue about the good and bad, the weak and strong et cetera of the movie. And for this one, that is going to be a bit of a monster undertaking. First, on Scorsese. I haven't seen allot by him. "Age of Innocence", "Taxi Driver" maybe some other works but not "The Aviator" not "Raging Bull" some but not all of "The Departed". All of these I want to see but that is beside the point in that you do not need to see all of what Scorsese has done to get a picture of what he is doing. And what he is doing is this; trying to get his fair share of Oscar which he deserves and got for "The Departed". But for the longest time, probably since "Taxi Driver" was nominated for four Oscars in 1976, he has been working for what "The Departed" got him. This becomes most evident in movies like "Gangs of New York" because he goes for moving drama set in some time past which he works very hard to bring in full life to the screen. He tried this in "Age of Innocence" and everybody hated that. Does this drive make this movie or his movies in general bad, no. This drive forces allot down the throat of a movie, and good stuff too, but it also loosens the movies spine and all that good stuff cannot work with out a proper backbone. That being said, lets look at what this movie has to offer. I would like to say that what this movie offers, it does to the fullest. "Gangs of New York" is a costume drama in every way. It takes place in during the Civil War, so from soldiers uniforms to the various garbs of the different gangs this movie is covered. And it isn't just the costume that makes "Gangs of New York" as costume drama. There are three masted ships and elaborate upper-class parties and all manor of period picture things. Scorsese has done this before in "The Age of Innocence" and had every detail researched, the difference here is that this movie has at its center a basic plot that we know and love. The mob movie. It is long, tried and true, plot line that Scosese has allot of practice in. This one is like allot of others. There is a mob war, one side looses and that sides leaders son goes into exile. He comes back and becomes friendly with his fathers enemy all the while plotting revenge. He tries and fails to kill his fathers enemy. Comes back after a long and hard recovery to do what he first set out to do meanwhile seducing a beautiful girl. Eventually he triumphs in a thrilling and violent war and life goes on. Guess what happens in "Gangs of New York". You have seen it but this is just as good as any other, even a bit different. Its 1860's setting gives a different feel while maintaining the styles of gangs (some wear prim blue cloths with stovepipe hats while the others are wearing more ragged red stripes). Again though, nothing really new just another spin on it. It is fine. I have all ready talked somewhat on the look of the film. But it really does have a bit of its own life, worth spending more than a few mentions. "Gangs of New York" has a beautiful color pallet. Allot of warm colors periodically punctuated by colors more hot or more cold than your usual yellows and oranges. But it can seem almost overly so. How much this way or how much that way can people dress? It is very beautiful to watch and allot of the imagery seems to come from woodblock illustrations of the time, busy theaters, sculpted mustaches and the like. And even more, occasionally the video ramps to add dramatic effects to usually innocuous actions like door opening or around turning. All this is cool and works. But again it is more okay than really good. Looking at it it is a little more push on the action that does not need to be there. So what is a break down of all this. Over all, everything is good. Four stars, I liked it. But go back to what Scorsese is doing here, force feeding this to be a masterpiece. And it is but it comes off a bit over weight. By that I mean it is so loaded with trying to be great that it beaches it self like a whale to some degree. For a final word I would tell those interested to see it. It is a worth while and beautiful movie with great actors and great design. Just not exceptional enough on some level. All the same four stars, I really want to end this one a positive note. http://www.spout.com/blogs/solafekxela/archive/2007/8/27/18841.aspx Post By: solafekxela
Post To: solafekxela Blog
Post Date: 8/27/2007 12:52:01 AM
Body: “That was the only time he was truly happy,” said Roky Erickson’s mother on his guitar playing. The leader of the rock band the 13th Floor Elevators struggled with drug abuse and schizophrenia, but every time he got to play, he really was happy. First time director Keven McAlester makes this clear in his documentary on the musician, You’re Gonna Miss Me. Detailing his rise and fall, the film has perfect pace, tone, and style.As the film progresses, it is hard to believe that the story has remained untold for so long. The band was responsible for coining the term “psychedelic rock” and is described as one of the only bands able to transition from the 60s to the 70s, two very different musical eras. Like a good musical documentary, McAlester’s film is focused on the person himself but never lets you forget about his music. Though little archival footage is used that actually shows Roky (as he is always called in the film) in action, the music permeates throughout the film, though dwindling in the second half. However, the editing by Clark Andrew Vogeler and Jeffrey M. Werner (who worked on Gangs of New York and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind) is what makes the film so effective. It is possible that not another documentary exists that is so perfectly paced, especially with the complex tonal transitions that occur. The film begins with an engaging introduction to Roky’s music and the entertainment he provided for so many. When ZZ Top describes you as “crazy”, you know you are certainly a unique individual. When the film, and Roky’s life, becomes a little more turbulent, the film becomes a nearly devastating portrayal of a talented man’s life nearly wasted away by drugs, and the resultant mental instability. By book-ending the film with the court case that will decide how Roky can live in the future, McAlester hints at the serious direction the film will take in the later acts.The visuals in the film are neither distracting nor dull, particularly for a documentary. There is a heightened sense that McAlester understood the importance of making the film feel like part of Roky’s life and work, perfectly replicating his style. Additionally, the way each shot is framed prevents any sense of condescension. The characters are certainly quirky and troubled, but the film does not serve only to point out their flaws. There is a very evident admiration for them, consisting almost entirely of the musician’s family and friends. Anyone who has experienced the life of a musician, knows the challenges of taking care of someone with severe mental instability, or has a genuine interest in either of these will love McAlester’s film. It is one of the most engaging, exciting, and emotional documentaries of the past ten years, particularly because it doesn’t serve simply to tackle an issue, like all of Michael Moore’s efforts. Instead, it is a character study that provides, more subtly, a viewpoint on the struggles of not only a musician, but someone who must depend on his family for support in extremely difficult times. Seeing Roky’s progress at the end of the film is truly remarkable and uplifting, especially after experiencing, along with the characters, the journey of a Schizophrenic. Humorous and hypnotizing is the tale of a family concerned with someone simply because they love him, and it always feels as though the filmmakers love them as well. You’re Gonna Miss Me is beautiful to look at and listen to, and deserves much recognition as a truly entertaining documentary that doesn’t target audiences based solely on political affiliations.
]]>Mon, 27 Aug 2007 04:52:01 GMTsolafekxelasolafekxela Blog8/27/2007 12:52:01 AM&ldquo;That was the only time he was truly happy,&rdquo; said Roky Erickson&rsquo;s mother on his guitar playing. The leader of the rock band the 13th Floor Elevators struggled with drug abuse and schizophrenia, but every time he got to play, he really was happy. First time director Keven McAlester makes this clear in his documentary on the musician, You&rsquo;re Gonna Miss Me. Detailing his rise and fall, the film has perfect pace, tone, and style.As the film progresses, it is hard to believe that the story has remained untold for so long. The band was responsible for coining the term &ldquo;psychedelic rock&rdquo; and is described as one of the only bands able to transition from the 60s to the 70s, two very different musical eras. Like a good musical documentary, McAlester&rsquo;s film is focused on the person himself but never lets you forget about his music. Though little archival footage is used that actually shows Roky (as he is always called in the film) in action, the music permeates throughout the film, though dwindling in the second half. However, the editing by Clark Andrew Vogeler and Jeffrey M. Werner (who worked on Gangs of New York and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind) is what makes the film so effective. It is possible that not another documentary exists that is so perfectly paced, especially with the complex tonal transitions that occur. The film begins with an engaging introduction to Roky&rsquo;s music and the entertainment he provided for so many. When ZZ Top describes you as &ldquo;crazy&rdquo;, you know you are certainly a unique individual. When the film, and Roky&rsquo;s life, becomes a little more turbulent, the film becomes a nearly devastating portrayal of a talented man&rsquo;s life nearly wasted away by drugs, and the resultant mental instability. By book-ending the film with the court case that will decide how Roky can live in the future, McAlester hints at the serious direction the film will take in the later acts.The visuals in the film are neither distracting nor dull, particularly for a documentary. There is a heightened sense that McAlester understood the importance of making the film feel like part of Roky&rsquo;s life and work, perfectly replicating his style. Additionally, the way each shot is framed prevents any sense of condescension. The characters are certainly quirky and troubled, but the film does not serve only to point out their flaws. There is a very evident admiration for them, consisting almost entirely of the musician&rsquo;s family and friends. Anyone who has experienced the life of a musician, knows the challenges of taking care of someone with severe mental instability, or has a genuine interest in either of these will love McAlester&rsquo;s film. It is one of the most engaging, exciting, and emotional documentaries of the past ten years, particularly because it doesn&rsquo;t serve simply to tackle an issue, like all of Michael Moore&rsquo;s efforts. Instead, it is a character study that provides, more subtly, a viewpoint on the struggles of not only a musician, but someone who must depend on his family for support in extremely difficult times. Seeing Roky&rsquo;s progress at the end of the film is truly remarkable and uplifting, especially after experiencing, along with the characters, the journey of a Schizophrenic. Humorous and hypnotizing is the tale of a family concerned with someone simply because they love him, and it always feels as though the filmmakers love them as well. You&rsquo;re Gonna Miss Me is beautiful to look at and listen to, and deserves much recognition as a truly entertaining documentary that doesn&rsquo;t target audiences based solely on political affiliations. http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/murder/MemberTagFilms.aspxmurder
Number of films tagged: 8748

Number of people who tagged: 157

Number of times used: 830

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 02:57:25 GMT8748157830Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/revenge/MemberTagFilms.aspxrevenge
Number of films tagged: 5189

Number of people who tagged: 145

Number of times used: 489

]]>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 23:13:41 GMT5189145489Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Boring/MemberTagFilms.aspxBoring
Number of films tagged: 177

Number of people who tagged: 105

Number of times used: 207

]]>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 23:44:27 GMT177105207Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/drama/MemberTagFilms.aspxdrama
Number of films tagged: 525

Number of people who tagged: 102

Number of times used: 624

]]>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 22:39:10 GMT525102624Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/violence/MemberTagFilms.aspxviolence
Number of films tagged: 952

Number of people who tagged: 82

Number of times used: 240

]]>Sun, 15 Nov 2009 12:34:09 GMT95282240Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/crime/MemberTagFilms.aspxcrime
Number of films tagged: 401

Number of people who tagged: 70

Number of times used: 303

]]>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:51:32 GMT40170303Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/religion/MemberTagFilms.aspxreligion
Number of films tagged: 1123

Number of people who tagged: 67

Number of times used: 176

]]>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:31:00 GMT112367176Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/violent/MemberTagFilms.aspxviolent
Number of films tagged: 97

Number of people who tagged: 57

Number of times used: 153

]]>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 04:28:06 GMT9757153Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/politics/MemberTagFilms.aspxpolitics
Number of films tagged: 698

Number of people who tagged: 54

Number of times used: 194

]]>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 04:07:45 GMT69854194Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/corruption/MemberTagFilms.aspxcorruption
Number of films tagged: 1236

Number of people who tagged: 47

Number of times used: 108

]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:02:59 GMT123647108Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/BLOODY/MemberTagFilms.aspxBLOODY
Number of films tagged: 33

Number of people who tagged: 37

Number of times used: 44

]]>Mon, 10 Aug 2009 05:13:56 GMT333744Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/long/MemberTagFilms.aspxlong
Number of films tagged: 53

Number of people who tagged: 35

Number of times used: 63

]]>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 05:08:36 GMT533563Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Changed-My-Life/MemberTagFilms.aspxChanged-My-Life
Number of films tagged: 46

Number of people who tagged: 27

Number of times used: 60

]]>Tue, 12 Jun 2007 03:22:35 GMT462760Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/gangs/MemberTagFilms.aspxgangs
Number of films tagged: 32

Number of people who tagged: 27

Number of times used: 43

]]>Sun, 03 May 2009 23:37:04 GMT322743Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/irish/MemberTagFilms.aspxirish
Number of films tagged: 25

Number of people who tagged: 27

Number of times used: 40

]]>Sat, 15 Aug 2009 03:09:31 GMT252740Tag