Gangs of New York

Started by Gold Trumpet, January 08, 2003, 03:57:05 PM

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3
User actions

tpfkabi

#30
January 14, 2003, 02:19:04 PM
so let me make sure i get it straight. the butcher was actually born in north america, so he claims he is an american above others who are not born on the continent? during the movie i was thinking this was kind of dumb since his ancestors had to immigrate here just like the others...it would only make sense if he was indian
I am Torgo. I take care of the place while the Master is away.

Ravi

#31
August 16, 2003, 03:16:17 AM
I finally saw this movie tonight.  Better late than never.  I was disappointed to see that the film was basically a revenge story.  Couldn't the writers have come up with something else?  The love story is half-hearted and not entirely convincing.  Those are my main complaints about the film.  GONY is a good film, but not a great one, and certainly not one of Scorsese's best, which is unfortunate, considering how much time and effort went into it.

Pastor Parsley

#32
September 17, 2003, 09:08:59 AM
I liked Gangs, although it seemed way too drawn out.  I'm a big fan of Scorsese, but, I'm beginning to wonder whether he is capable of making a movie that isn't about New York.  It's getting old...move on Marty.

Find Your Magali

#33
September 17, 2003, 09:32:57 AM
Quote from: Pastor ParsleyI'm a big fan of Scorsese, but, I'm beginning to wonder whether he is capable of making a movie that isn't about New York.

Well, gosh, just off the top of my head:

Kundun
Casino
Cape Fear
The Last Temptation of Christ

I'm thinking he's capable....

SoNowThen

#34
September 17, 2003, 10:07:48 AM
Damn straight.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

mutinyco

#35
September 19, 2003, 12:17:44 AM
And I'm thinking only one of those holds my interest. But I won't say which.
"I believe in this, and it's been tested by research: he who fucks nuns will later join the church."

-St. Joe

cine

#36
September 19, 2003, 12:59:53 AM
My own personal hierarchy of interest:

Casino
The Last Temptation of Christ
Cape Fear
Kundun

I enjoy all of them.. and I don't feel Scorsese should move onto something else. He has a voice, he knows his history, and he's passionate about the topics.. Would you have told Ingmar Bergman that his spiritual films were getting old?  It's the same idea.

mutinyco

#37
September 19, 2003, 10:09:03 AM
I enjoy Cape Fear as entertainment. I like that Marty brought an edge to a commercial film. But I'm of the opinion that if Casino, Kundun, and Christ were lost forever it wouldn't affect humanity in the slightest. They're utterly useless.
"I believe in this, and it's been tested by research: he who fucks nuns will later join the church."

-St. Joe

SoNowThen

#38
September 19, 2003, 10:13:30 AM
Hehehe. I'm 180 degrees...

Cape Fear is the only Marty movie that I don't love with every ounce of my body and soul.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

Derek

#39
September 19, 2003, 10:15:23 AM
What is it about The Color of Money and Cape Fear that makes them exist on a lower level than movies like Taxi Driver, Raging Bull and Goodfellas?I think they're just as good.
It's like, how much more black could this be? And the answer is none. None more black.

SoNowThen

#40
September 19, 2003, 10:23:23 AM
Color Of Money is brilliant.
I just rewatched Cape Fear a month ago, because all you guys seem to like it. All I see is Marty saying "I owe the studio this for helping Last Temptation... I wanna make Age Of Innocence... I need to whore myself so I can get better projects made".

Plus I find the lighting to be so flat and boring.

Basically, all the stuff Marty clearly added (the family disputes, the references to older thrillers, the bits of humor) are great. The cookie-cutter studio commisioned script with its hammy plot points is what I just can't handle.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3
User actions