criterionforum.org

I praised Casino to knock down Goodfellas a peg just a couple posts above, but after re-watching the latter film recently I've gotta say it's pretty flawless and I'm back in love with it again like I was on that first viewing years ago. Without getting too far into it, it's just such a masterful work of editing (and sound editing), juxtaposition and narration and just general film style -- like some compendium, Narrative Filmmaking 101. No wonder it's been so widely copied -- it's a blueprint, and an exhilarating blueprint with a fascinating story, at that. I once read someone liken Scorsese directing Goodfellas to Mozart conducting a concerto and, while the hyperbole's silly, I still can't get over how note-perfect the film really is, how temporarily intoxicating it is to be in its thrall. And as a side-note, the book it's based on, Wiseguy, is quite good, if not extraordinary -- for my money, the best non-fiction look at the mafia has got to be Joe Pistone's Donnie Brasco (the film of which I've never been able to get through).

Happened to catch One Night Only - Don Rickles and in the midst of all the comedians Martin Scorsese and Robert De Niro's Casino tribute was the best. Search for it on your DVRs.

Martin Scorsese to Direct Ramones Film.

Just so we don't get too excited

http://deadline.com/2014/08/not-so-fast ... go-826143/

Yeah, really. The only thing they said was "attached," and that's far from a guarantee. It's been ten years since Scorsese was attached to direct that Dean Martin biopic with Tom Hanks as Dino and a script based on Tosches script. It's been about as long that he was set to direct "Silence," and it's only now that it's coming to fruition, but Daniel Day-Lewis was also attached to it and he's no longer available. Then there's the "High and Low" remake he was producing for Mike Nichols. The guy keeps a lot of stuff on the back burner.

The Dean Martin biopic goes back even further then 10 years. I was recently flipping through Cameron Crowe's interview book with Billy Wilder and the two of them discussed it around 1996-1997. Gangs of New York gestated even longer, around 25 years. Unless I see proof of filming taking place, I'd be cautious about any "attached" or "next project" with Scorsese's name on it.

Though he isn't in it, I'd highly recommend the recent ESPN 30 For 30 doc Playing For The Mob about Henry Hill's involvement in point-shaving. It happened around the time of the Lufthansa heist and it features several scenes from Goodfellas, and Ray Liotta does the narration.

Hope it doesn't happen. Tyson's life is already far too much like a tabloid parody of LaMotta's Raging Bull arc -- complete with violent spousal abuse, repeated bouts of self- and other-destruction, and a zero self-awareness late career reinvention as a literal pop culture joke on himself.

Couldn't agree more. The only way this project could be worthy of Scorsese's time is if it paints such an unflattering portrait of Tyson that it undermines pop culture's ironic appreciation of him.

I love Scorsese but quite frankly I'm tired of his indulgence in biopics.

flyonthewall2983 wrote:Might direct Jamie Foxx in Mike Tyson biopic.

No aspect of this film sounds like a good idea

I agree with the general skepticism based on the one-sentence summary, but I felt the same way about what became The Social Network, so who knows?

I'd give it a shot, but frankly I'd much rather seem him doing The Irishman next.

Something tells me than Scorsese's role in this - if involved at all - will be as producer, but who knows. It doesn't seem like a film a lot of people will be interested in seeing.

FrauBlucher wrote:I love Scorsese but quite frankly I'm tired of his indulgence in biopics.

Hasn't he only done, like, two?

matrixschmatrix wrote:

FrauBlucher wrote:I love Scorsese but quite frankly I'm tired of his indulgence in biopics.

Hasn't he only done, like, two?

No, he has made at least eight feature films about real life figures (not counting any docs)

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.

Add Sinatra to this as Scorsese will be making a film about his life after he finishes Silence.

domino harvey wrote: No, he has made at least eight feature films about real life figures (not counting any docs)

Belfort, Hill, Dalai Lama, La Motta, Hughes .... Who else are you counting? Not Jesus, I hope.

Why would I not be counting Jesus? And Melies, and the changed names and dramatic licenses of Casino

Highway 61 wrote: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.

And Tyson fits right in with those people. I'm surprised that Spike Lee isn't being considered for this, considering he directed the HBO special about the one-man show.

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.

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.

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.