Nice call with the pet store scene in MAY/DECEMBER; I hadn't really focused much on that scene unto itself so it was nice to think about it.
The reasons you cite for KOTFM (Great director! Shamefully forgotten moment! Tells Us the TRUE Story of America) are all the reasons it is an Important Movie but...does it always tell its story well? Does it choose its approach to the story wisely? Is it well cast? Is it well paced?
I don't really think so. It has all the ingredients to make a great movie but it didn't actually emerge as one. Like The Irishman, it needs a real editor. Not just to cut down the length, but also to shape it into a movie of narrative drive and cohesion.
While KOTFH is further down my list than Keith's, I thought the answers to your questions were all a resounding yes -- particularly in the approach and casting. The shift in focus during development from law enforcement to DiCaprio's character held my attention on the murders themselves rather than the pleasure of watching someone solve them. And I felt that casting DiCaprio was a strong choice as well. I'm used to finding him charming at the very least, and that invites a kind of closeness to the character that Scorcese immediately starts to subvert.
Re: editing, I think Schoonmaker understands Scorcese's intentions and can build her work around them. In this case, conventional narrative drive took a back seat to exploring what a lust for power and an embrace of white supremacy can wreck on the world. I'm not saying that those concepts couldn't have been explored in a tighter, more conventional film, but they saw that a film that prioritizes narrative drive wouldn't be compatible with the story they wanted to tell.
I'll perhaps shoot myself in the foot here by saying I tend to prefer Scorcese's later work, and most of the classic gangster stuff just doesn't really do it for me. There's a messiness to films like Shutter Island and The Departed that weirdly speaks to me, and that might be part of why I enjoyed KOTFM more.
Look I always prefer when people like movies, except for the ones which generate burning rage within me (THE BLIND SIDE comes to mind...I was very early on hating that one!) but I just can't see KOTFM as a good movie. It lurches around wildly, Fraser and De Niro are miscast -- I'll at least admit to finding DiCaprio interesting in the subversion even if I'm not sure it works -- and it's not *interesting*.
How do you make a movie about a crime this monstrous and evil and make it so dry? A director and editor more in control of the material would have made the horror come out. Compare this movie to CHINATOWN, about a much less salacious crime (control of the city's water) and then look at how much more successfully Polanski and co. bring out the horror of the corruption and rot beneath the city.
Re: your #1, no great director's lapses into self-parody bug me more than Scorsese's---and not many think Scorsese's self-parody phase started as early as I think it did. I keep wanting to watch KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON, and then just picturing it opening with "Gimme Shelter" blaring as Leo solemnly intones, "Ever since I was a kid, I wanted to be a killers of the flower moon" and thinking, nope, life is too short.
But, you know what? Maybe life isn't too short to give Scorsese another chance. Maybe life is too short not to give Scorsese another chance. The man's made a dozen great movies, a bunch of good ones, and if he repeats himself once in a while, I can live with that.
I’m glad ALL OF US STRANGERS is connecting with people. As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, it’s one of my favorite films of last year, and one I see having a lot of replay value. Much like Haigh’s WEEKEND, it gets across the feeling of being gay and lonely and yearning for a connection beautifully.
Nice call with the pet store scene in MAY/DECEMBER; I hadn't really focused much on that scene unto itself so it was nice to think about it.
The reasons you cite for KOTFM (Great director! Shamefully forgotten moment! Tells Us the TRUE Story of America) are all the reasons it is an Important Movie but...does it always tell its story well? Does it choose its approach to the story wisely? Is it well cast? Is it well paced?
I don't really think so. It has all the ingredients to make a great movie but it didn't actually emerge as one. Like The Irishman, it needs a real editor. Not just to cut down the length, but also to shape it into a movie of narrative drive and cohesion.
While KOTFH is further down my list than Keith's, I thought the answers to your questions were all a resounding yes -- particularly in the approach and casting. The shift in focus during development from law enforcement to DiCaprio's character held my attention on the murders themselves rather than the pleasure of watching someone solve them. And I felt that casting DiCaprio was a strong choice as well. I'm used to finding him charming at the very least, and that invites a kind of closeness to the character that Scorcese immediately starts to subvert.
Re: editing, I think Schoonmaker understands Scorcese's intentions and can build her work around them. In this case, conventional narrative drive took a back seat to exploring what a lust for power and an embrace of white supremacy can wreck on the world. I'm not saying that those concepts couldn't have been explored in a tighter, more conventional film, but they saw that a film that prioritizes narrative drive wouldn't be compatible with the story they wanted to tell.
I'll perhaps shoot myself in the foot here by saying I tend to prefer Scorcese's later work, and most of the classic gangster stuff just doesn't really do it for me. There's a messiness to films like Shutter Island and The Departed that weirdly speaks to me, and that might be part of why I enjoyed KOTFM more.
Look I always prefer when people like movies, except for the ones which generate burning rage within me (THE BLIND SIDE comes to mind...I was very early on hating that one!) but I just can't see KOTFM as a good movie. It lurches around wildly, Fraser and De Niro are miscast -- I'll at least admit to finding DiCaprio interesting in the subversion even if I'm not sure it works -- and it's not *interesting*.
How do you make a movie about a crime this monstrous and evil and make it so dry? A director and editor more in control of the material would have made the horror come out. Compare this movie to CHINATOWN, about a much less salacious crime (control of the city's water) and then look at how much more successfully Polanski and co. bring out the horror of the corruption and rot beneath the city.
Re: #7, this movie isn't a swan song. It's a heron song. That's okay. I can't tell birds apart either.
Re: your #1, no great director's lapses into self-parody bug me more than Scorsese's---and not many think Scorsese's self-parody phase started as early as I think it did. I keep wanting to watch KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON, and then just picturing it opening with "Gimme Shelter" blaring as Leo solemnly intones, "Ever since I was a kid, I wanted to be a killers of the flower moon" and thinking, nope, life is too short.
But, you know what? Maybe life isn't too short to give Scorsese another chance. Maybe life is too short not to give Scorsese another chance. The man's made a dozen great movies, a bunch of good ones, and if he repeats himself once in a while, I can live with that.
I’m glad ALL OF US STRANGERS is connecting with people. As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, it’s one of my favorite films of last year, and one I see having a lot of replay value. Much like Haigh’s WEEKEND, it gets across the feeling of being gay and lonely and yearning for a connection beautifully.
Love the list. Wildly diverse.
Re: NOSFERATU
IDK. I hope Eggers regains the fastball