The King of Comedy (Martin Scorsese, 1983)

Discussions of specific films and franchises.
Message
Author
User avatar
hearthesilence
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC

Re: The King of Comedy (Martin Scorsese, 1983)

#26 Post by hearthesilence » Tue Aug 22, 2017 2:16 pm

Apparently Vanity Fair already made this observation last year. First here, then here.

And hell, why not supply some technical deets? I watched this on the recent Blu-Ray disc, which did indeed look excellent, though the black levels may have seemed a little bit crushed.

calculus entrophy
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 11:32 am

Re: The King of Comedy (Martin Scorsese, 1983)

#27 Post by calculus entrophy » Tue Aug 22, 2017 3:25 pm

Perhaps the common thread is Trump's pastor, Norman Vincent Peale, and his "genre" of "Positive Thinking", which ultimately leads to a psychotic breakdown. YMMV.

My favorite King of Comedy anecdote was when they were trying to find the right look for Rupert, and they came across a mannequin that had a particular outfit they liked, and DeNiro just went with the whole look of the actual mannequin as well.

Kind of sums them both up.

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

Re: The King of Comedy (Martin Scorsese, 1983)

#28 Post by hearthesilence » Tue Jul 14, 2020 5:25 pm

Someone asked Greil Marcus about The King of Comedy, which I thought I'd share here just in case the post gets lost from the internet as it's not for an established publication. During the occasions he's written about a film, it's usually because it has something to do with popular music, so this is something like a rare exception:

I’ve always thought it was one of Scorsese’s best—along with Taxi Driver, Raging Bull and The Departed—and one of the most penetrating and disturbing movies of the last many decades, speaking the same language of failure and fantasy as Melvin and Howard. It’s also a horror movie, on the same level as Eyes without a Face, Halloween, and Psycho—each about an obsessive, possessed person, and with no supernatural elements at all. It’s so creepy I have trouble watching it, or sometimes thinking about it, or wondering what kind of person Robert DeNiro must be to have been willing to take on such a role at all. But there are dozens of moments from the movie that invade my thoughts at any time: Rupert running through the TV office, him sitting in his own basement studio and interviewing himself, the way his girlfriend picks up an object from a table in the house of the Jerry Lewis character—which is one of the great meta-roles in film history. The autograph coven. Jerry Lewis eating dinner by himself. The contempt he throws at Sandra Bernhard as he walks out. It’s a movie in perfect pitch. You can’t get out from under it.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The King of Comedy (Martin Scorsese, 1983)

#29 Post by therewillbeblus » Tue Jul 14, 2020 5:57 pm

It's always been one of my favorites too, but I also prefer Scorsese's attempts to create bizarre amalgamations of tone beneath deceptively smooth surfaces. This one tackles the burdened psyche in a few different ways that stretch 'dark comedy' to its breaking point, especially pertaining to the dissonance between how one sees themselves and the world sees them. Though my favorite Scorsese film is probably Bringing Out the Dead because it confronts that messy existential burden in a manner that refuses to rest comfortably in any seamless directorial flourishes to save the audience from the raw turmoil, and in that way I see these films as sisters; one draining us of resilient energy via social discomfort in forcing those collisions, and the other via individualized segregation emphasizing our physical and perceptive isolation from corporeal environment and spiritual access. My other favorite, The Wolf of Wall Street is pure entertainment, though Scorsese pulls the rug out from under us a few times in transforming a physical comedy into horror, and then dances between these moods enough times to breed a chaos not unlike the narrative itself.

Jack
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2023 5:53 am

Re: The King of Comedy (Martin Scorsese, 1983)

#30 Post by Jack » Sun Oct 22, 2023 5:59 am

It gives me a little hope that this thread has been going on for almost 20 years so I hope someone can reply but I just watched The King of Comedy for the first time and tried to answer my question with no luck so far. When Rita and Rupert are at Jerry’s house why does Rita steal the little cube? What is the point of that? Why make special emphasis on it if it’s not going to be brought up again or mean anything. I’ve only seen a couple people mention it at all and they seem to brush it off hopefully somebody had an answer because it’s really bugging me.

User avatar
The Curious Sofa
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:18 am

Re: The King of Comedy (Martin Scorsese, 1983)

#31 Post by The Curious Sofa » Sun Oct 22, 2023 11:30 am

Jack wrote:
Sun Oct 22, 2023 5:59 am
It gives me a little hope that this thread has been going on for almost 20 years so I hope someone can reply but I just watched The King of Comedy for the first time and tried to answer my question with no luck so far. When Rita and Rupert are at Jerry’s house why does Rita steal the little cube? What is the point of that? Why make special emphasis on it if it’s not going to be brought up again or mean anything. I’ve only seen a couple people mention it at all and they seem to brush it off hopefully somebody had an answer because it’s really bugging me.
Pauline Kael cited that moment as an example of what she saw as the film's vacuous mean spiritedness. Never having been a fan of the movie myself, I agree with her.

User avatar
Walter Kurtz
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2020 3:03 pm

Re: The King of Comedy (Martin Scorsese, 1983)

#32 Post by Walter Kurtz » Sun Oct 22, 2023 12:12 pm

The Curious Sofa wrote:
Sun Oct 22, 2023 11:30 am
Pauline Kael cited that moment as an example of what she saw as the film's vacuous mean spiritedness.
Pauline Kael is the epitome of vacuous mean spiritedness. I've never been a fan of her... and her trippy, rippy, zippy, dippy teen-age Archie-comic superficial valley-speak that launched a bunch of male sycophants to write like a bunch of eighth-grade girls jotting down entries into bedroom diaries.

I much preferred Susan Sontag, a contemporary of hers with an infinitely greater intellect.

PS. Along with others I'm also a fan of The King of Comedy.

And a fan of that Seinfeld episode where Kramer reclaims the Merv Griffin set... installs it in his apartment and conducts interviews with his mates. They both come from the same sort of imagination.

User avatar
The Curious Sofa
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:18 am

Re: The King of Comedy (Martin Scorsese, 1983)

#33 Post by The Curious Sofa » Sun Oct 22, 2023 12:33 pm

Walter Kurtz wrote:
Sun Oct 22, 2023 12:12 pm
The Curious Sofa wrote:
Sun Oct 22, 2023 11:30 am
Pauline Kael cited that moment as an example of what she saw as the film's vacuous mean spiritedness.
Pauline Kael is the epitome of vacuous mean spiritedness. I've never been a fan of her... and her trippy, rippy, zippy, dippy teen-age Archie-comic superficial valley-speak that launched a bunch of male sycophants to write like a bunch of eighth-grade girls jotting down entries into bedroom diaries.

I much preferred Susan Sontag, a contemporary of hers with an infinitely greater intellect.

PS. Along with others I'm also a fan of The King of Comedy.

And a fan of that Seinfeld episode where Kramer reclaims the Merv Griffin set... installs it in his apartment and conducts interviews with his mates. They both come from the same sort of imagination.
You aren't saying anything Kael's detractors haven't said a billion times before and disparaging her intellect at the expense of Sonntag's is the biggest yawn in that debate. Craig Seligman has written an entire book on a comparison of the two, should you be interested (it's considerably more nuanced than your assessment). Kael put her finger on what bothered me about The King of Comedy, it's so petty, it can't even leave its one seemingly decent character untainted. It's the type of satire which has never has worked for me, a shooting-fish-in-a-barrel exercise, there to make the viewer feel morally superior to a bunch of cretins.

I don't think this is the place for a general debate about Pauline Kael, but when Jack mentioned Rita's theft and and said that he looked for whether it had been discussed, Kael's review immediately came to mind. For me that seemingly minor moment is everything I dislike about the film.

User avatar
Roger Ryan
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city

Re: The King of Comedy (Martin Scorsese, 1983)

#34 Post by Roger Ryan » Sun Oct 22, 2023 1:17 pm

Jack wrote:
Sun Oct 22, 2023 5:59 am
… When Rita and Rupert are at Jerry’s house why does Rita steal the little cube? What is the point of that? Why make special emphasis on it if it’s not going to be brought up again or mean anything…
I see this action as defining the difference between the two characters in how they perceive themselves in this situation. While Rupert is conning his way into Langford’s life, he would never think to steal anything from Langford; that would go against his own moral code, delusional as that may be. Once Rita realizes Rupert is not actually welcome in Langford’s world (Pupkin is no “better” than her), her discomfort and anger manifests itself in taking a souvenir, something that the wealthy Langford is not likely to even miss. Importantly, Rupert does not see her do this as the viewer could imagine his disapproval of this action. It’s a short ironic moment to contrast a small theft with how Pupkin will justify his far more destructive behavior through his delusional belief that his talent can benefit Langford.

User avatar
Walter Kurtz
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2020 3:03 pm

Re: The King of Comedy (Martin Scorsese, 1983)

#35 Post by Walter Kurtz » Sun Oct 22, 2023 7:32 pm

The Curious Sofa wrote:
Sun Oct 22, 2023 12:33 pm
... disparaging her intellect at the expense of Sonntag's [sic] is the biggest yawn in that debate. Craig Seligman has written an entire book on a comparison of the two,... considerably more nuanced than your assessment).
Wow. You mean a several hundred page book can be more nuanced than a one sentence statement? Who would've thought? I save nuances for highbrows not Paulinistas.
She sure was a zangy, tangy writer, though, wasn't she?

Post Reply