ScreenCrave.com » Martin Scorsese

Leonardo DiCaprio and Martin Scorsese Reteam for ‘The Wolf of Wall Street’

Damon Houx — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 17:26:29 +0000

Though it’s hard to compare the individual films, Leonardo DiCaprio is getting closer to Robert De Niro‘s record for working with Martin Scorsese. Today it was announced that Scorsese and DiCaprio will be teaming up for the fifth time to make The Wolf of Wall Street, which will begin shooting this August.

This news comes from Deadline, and it’s always good when we hear about a new Scorsese film. Though the master may be getting up there in age, he’s still got it, and showed a lot of energy and enthusiasm with his last film Hugo, which won a number of technical Oscars and had the most nominations that year – which is about as exciting as a good rebounding record.

The only way this material could be more timely is if it were made last year, as it chronicles a hard partying Wall Street multimillionaire, who will surely be partly blamed for the financial mess America is currently in. The Wolf of Wall Street should be a strong Oscar picture for 2014.

And for the record, De Niro and Scorsese worked together eight times from 1973′s seminal Mean Streets to 1995′s Casino. It would be great to see them re-team here, though no additional casting was announced. But for connective tissue it’s worth noting DiCaprio and De Niro worked together in 1993′s This Boy’s Life and in 1996′s Marvin’s Room. DiCaprio and Scorsese’s first film together was the troubled 2002 film Gangs of New York, which they followed with 2004′s The Aviator, 2006′s best picture winner The Departed, and 2010′s Shutter Island. In fact, Hugo was the first non-documentary that Scorsese has made without DiCaprio in over a decade. Their relationship has never felt as organic as Scorsese’s did with De Niro (how could it?), partly because DiCaprio has often been one of the main reasons that those films got financed. But it’s been artistically productive, regardless.

Who would you want to see in The Wolf of Wall Street?

Reviewing Ebert’s ‘Greatest Films’: ‘Peeping Tom’ (1960)

Jaime Lopez — Fri, 06 Apr 2012 17:58:28 +0000

Years ago, ScreenCrave contributor Jaime Lopez privately began tackling Roger Ebert’s “Greatest Films” list, an ever-expanding monolith of celluloid currently comprised of 354 films. With 254 under his belt and 100 films left to go, Lopez has set himself to put these remaining films’ “Greatness” to the test–reviewing both the movies themselves and Ebert’s response.

This week’s inaugural film essentially destroyed its director’s entire career. How many movies are responsible for bringing down a director, especially one responsible for five of the greatest films in history of British Cinema? Peeping Tom (check out Ebert’s original review) is such a film, and views a tormented character raised by a psychologist who pushed the limits of voyeurism for scientific purposes. The results are dark, as you’ll see after the jump.

The Players:

Director: Michael Powell
Writer: Leo Marks
Cast: Carl Boehm (Mark Lewis), Moira Shearer (Vivian), Anna Massey (Helen Stephens), Maxine Audley (Mrs. Stephens)

The Plot:

[Warning--Spoilers Ahead!]

A mild-mannered man with major skeletons in his closet (his entire childhood was essentially a prolonged experiment by a cruel psychiatrist) is bent on regaining a sense of control in his life by becoming a voyeur. As a filmmaker by day/serial killer by night, Mark deceptively arranges to shoot “documentary footage” of his subjects/victims, intent on capturing the frightened expressions of his prey in the moments prior to killing them. Eventually, Mark becomes close to a potential victim and becomes intensely conflicted (“I can’t photograph you, I lose everything I photograph”).

The Good:

The Performances – Having the type of sixth sense that blind people often have in movies, Maxine Audley plays Helen’s mother and is responsible for some of the more eerie and suspenseful scenes in the film, as her curiosity towards Mark grows. Her ominous lines of dialogue are nicely suited for this horror film, and her cold suspicious expressions are pretty chilling. Carl Boehm is also very effective. Strangely, something about him reminds me of Orson Welles.
Voyeurism – In 1960, thematically, voyeurism was ahead of its time. Most of us think of voyeurism as a more modern problem, mostly enabled by today’s technology. Here, we are made to think about ourselves as voyeurs, of sorts, when we watch movies. This film has resonance today, reminding us of reality television and the quasi-private access it provides.
Historical Significance: – Before directing Peeping Tom, Mr. Powell had co-directed 4 of the British Film Institute’s (BFI’s) Best 100 films of all-time, including The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp (1943) and The Red Shoes (1948). Peeping Tom stands at number 78. Nevertheless, Peeping Tom is perhaps just as well known for essentially destroying Michael Powell’s career. Though considered a masterpiece today, the controversial subject matter, violence and sexual imagery, all of which seem tame now, plagued it with a murderous disapproval from critics that essentially extradited Powell from film.

The Bad:

“Horror” – Younger audiences may not be impressed by the “horror” element, as many have been desensitized by the over-produced gore of more modern films. Despite legitimate suspense, the method of killing did strike me as a bit too simple to be fully convincing.

Peeping Tom trivia:

Alfred Hitchcock is said to have foregone a press screening for Psycho, seeking to avoid the negative publicity directed at Peeping Tom, especially since both films deal with mild-mannered serial killers with a Freudian relationship to their parents. Having worked as a still photographer for Hitchcock during the silent film era, Powell and Hitchcock were actually friends for much of their lives. Martin Scorsese is a huge admirer of this film, sponsoring revivals and restorations during the 1970’s.

Brief Words for Mr. Ebert:

Yes, Peeping Tom takes a hard look at the psychological implications of its protagonist, but it doesn’t go much deeper than this with it’s supporting characters. Mrs. Stephens held strong potential, as she represented a bold and realistic suspicion of Mark. Unfortunately, her blindness limits her ability to create a more direct confrontation. Much of this movie’s “greatness” seems to come from its backstory; the line between a great film and a film with a great “backstory” seems blurred. A good film, nonetheless, Peeping Tom offers a solid visceral and psychological experience.

Good, Bad or Great Movie: GOOD

Do you consider Peeping Tom to be Good, Bad, or Great?

Next Week’s Film: The Terrorist

‘Raging Bull 2′ Is Happening, Without Martin Scorsese Or Robert De Niro, Because Hollywood Hates Us All

Travis Woods — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 21:26:11 +0000

Raging Bull is many things—uncompromising, vicious, beautiful, daring, funny, harrowing, and brilliant. Modern movie sequels tend to be, with very few exceptions, absolutely none of those things. So, of course, it makes sense that Hollywood would churn out a Raging Bull sequel 32 years after the original battered its way into celluloid history, and will be doing so without the two most pivotal elements that made the original so excellent—director Martin Scorsese and star Robert De Niro. So this should go well.

There have been rumors of a Raging Bull II since 2006, when the book of the same name by Chris Anderson, Sharon McGehee, and Jake LaMotta (the boxer who inspired the original film) “in order to provide a ‘companion piece’ to Martin Scorsese’s original.” And, according to /Film, the film is finally happening.

Director Martin Guigui will be helming the film from a script by himself and Rustam Branaman, with casting set to begin in June. Raging Bull II will concern “the early days of Jake LaMotta’s life, and then pick up again in the days after the end of Scorsese’s film.” Basically, all the unnecessary portions that weren’t needed in the original masterpiece—so we can look forward to Raging Bull II: The Excess Fat, Reheated.

How bad an idea is this? Well, Robert De Niro—who will now star in anything—will not be reprising his role of boxer Jake LaMotta. Instead, William Forsythe will be picking up the paycheck for the role.

Who knows where this will unnecessary sequelization of films where go—perhaps in 2014 we can look forward to The Second To Last Temptation Of Christ, Mean Streets II: Street Harder, or After After Hours.

What do you think of the Raging Bull II news?

AMC To Launch ‘Goodfellas’ Television Show

Travis Woods — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 17:58:01 +0000

This seems like something that could be amazing, or utterly terrible: AMC, the network that is home to such televised excellence as Breaking Bad and Mad Men, along with popular favorite The Walking Dead, is now also the home of Goodfellas: The TV Series. That’s right—the classic Martin Scorsese gangster film starring Robert De Niro, Joe Pesci, and Ray Liotta is being adapted into a television series.

The 1980s film was based on the Nicholas Pileggi non-fiction book Wiseguy, and is widely regarded as a classic gangster movie, following the rise and fall of a young hood who reaches the near-top of a mob family, only to be undone by falling into the world of cocaine dealing.

Pileggi will co-write with Jorge Zamacona (Homicide: Life on the Street) and the two will exec produce with Irwin Winkler (producer of the filM) and his son David Winkler.

While details beyond the above are sparse, Pileggi did mention over a year ago that a Goodfellas TV show would work best as a prequel:

Of course, you can’t pick up from Goodfellas, since we murdered everybody, or rather, everybody was murdered! There’s nobody left. But I think we’re going to figure out a way to do the early years – sort of a prequel. The part of the movie people often like best is the opening third, where all the funny stuff is happening, and there’s so much we could fit in.

While all of this sounds interesting, and AMC certainly has an excellent track record, wasn’t the original Goodfellas good enough? Can a TV show really capture the greatness of the story? Do we really need another mob drama after The Sopranos and Boardwalk Empire?

Source: /Film

The Artist, Hugo Lead DGA Nominations

Damon Houx — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 20:14:11 +0000

For those who like playing Oscar pools, DGA nominations tend to be a good harbinger for the actual Oscar nominations. So it’s worth noting what made the cut: Michel Hazanavicius‘s The Artist, Woody Allen‘s Midnight in Paris, Martin Scorsese‘s Hugo, Alexander Payne‘s The Descendants, and David Fincher‘s The Girl With Dragon Tattoo all got nominated today.

The most surprising omissions are Tate Taylor for The Help, Terrence Malick‘s The Tree of Life, and Steven Spielberg‘s War Horse. Taylor being left out suggests that the film – though it should receive a number of nominations – will mostly have heat in the acting categories, and is probably not going to get the best picture prize. Malick’s Tree of Life had its best shot of getting love in the direction category (though best cinematography is all but assured), and this lack of inclusion means that it’s unlikely that Tree will be a sneak-in best picture nomination. The lack of Spielberg is probably the most surprising, and also suggests the film is not getting Oscar traction, though he could be in and Fincher could be out when the nominations finally come in.

Fincher getting is probably the most surprising inclusion – Allen and Scorsese are both old timers and beloved, though have a low chance of actually winning, while Payne and Hazanavicius are behind two of the most obvious best picture nominees. Dragon Tattoo screened late, and so it could be a surprise picture nominee – though Rooney Mara’s chances of getting nominated for best actress just went up – though this could also be an apology vote to those who thought he should have won last year for The Social Network.

What all this says is that The Artist is now clearly the front-runner.

Who would you vote for as Best director this year?

Martin Scorsese To Continue Making Films In 3-D; Talks ‘Taxi Driver 3-D’

Travis Woods — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 16:47:02 +0000

Oh… oh no. After declaring that holograms are the future of filmmaking, Martin Scorsese has apparently decided to kill time until then by making the rest of his films in 3-D. Seriously. Despite that 3-D seems to be, for the most part, a cheap marketing gimmick that results in dark, under-lit footage, and requires annoying glasses and random excuses to thrust things close to the movie screen, one of the greatest American filmmakers has decided to attach the maddening filmmaking technique to his films.

In an interview with Deadline, Scorsese spoke of his love of 3-D while discussing his new film, Hugo. He apparently loves the process so much that he is thinking of filming all of his future films in 3-D. “Quite honestly, I would,” he said, to the horror of pretty much everyone everywhere. “I don’t think there’s a subject matter that can’t absorb 3-D, that can’t tolerate the addition of depth as a storytelling technique.”

Oh, Marty. Marty, Marty, Marty, say it ain’t so. But that’s not all—the director also mused about which of his previous films would work best in 3-D, and one of his responses was, well, shocking:

“Aviator, maybe? Maybe Taxi Driver… because of the intimidation of the main character, his presence is everywhere, a frightening kind of presence.”

Taxi Driver? In 3-D? Actually, that would be kind of insane, in a fun way. But still: Taxi Driver?

What do you think of the Scorsese news?

Source: The AV Club

Hugo: Movie Review

Damon Houx — Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:00:34 +0000

One of the side effects of Martin Scorsese being one of America’s greatest living directors is that every new picture is viewed under the magnifying glass of greatness. Is Hugo another in a line of great movies, or is it a muddled attempt at trying to do something out of his reach? Is it an old man picture, with modest pleasures but a looser grasp? Those seem to be the categories the film’s critics slotted the film into, with many adults deciding that Scorsese failed at directing a film for children, to which the only evidence is anecdotal. But the film is good, possibly great (time will tell), and the most engaging and engaged picture Scorsese has made in a while.

The Players:

Director: Martin Scorsese
Writers: John Logan
Starring: Asa Butterfield, Chloë Grace Moretz , Jude Law, Sacha Baron Cohen, Ben Kingsley, Emily Mortimer
Original Music by: Howard Shore
Cinematography by: Robert Richardson

The Plot:

Hugo Cabret (Butterfield) is an orphan who lives in a Paris train station where he gets his independence by making sure all the clocks are still working. He meets George (Kingsley) – a toymaker – when he’s caught stealing parts. Hugo has entered into thievery mostly to stay alive, but also to repair the automaton that his late father (Law) rescued, which he thinks holds a secret his father wants him to have. It will only work with a key, one he finds around the neck of fast friend Isabelle (Moretz), and the ward of George. George and Hugo bond over Hugo’s gift for repair, but George holds many secrets that he and Isabelle help to unravel.

The Good:

Martin Scorsese: Being known as a master director helps attune one’s awareness. Which begs the rose question about any other name. This doesn’t feel as distinctly “Marty” as Casino, but he’s also played with a certain austerity before in pictures like Age of Innocence, so this isn’t such a stretch. But from the opening tracking shot (with digital assist) to the wooshing camera around Hugo’s workplace, Scorsese cues the viewer to pay attention early on, and shows that he’s in complete control. And there’s something to be said for a director with vision, in an era where many filmmakers fall back on masters and TV framing. But with Scorsese, you expect nothing less.
For the Love of Cinema: Though the IMDb ruins it, there is a reveal later in the picture about one of the characters who was involved in silent cinema. The film then turns into a story about the origins of film, and the role this character played in shaping cinematic fantasies. And though Hugo is much more grounded than that work, it communicates the joy of that cinema just the same, and how movies can be escapist in the best possible sense. In that way Hugo is a better appreciation of the silent era (and loves it more) than The Artist.
Gentle Journey: The story of an orphan who seeks to get closer to lost parents is familiar terrain of young adult literature, and of animated cinema (how many Disney films feature dead parents?) And though that is the starting point, the film creates a microcosm world in the train station. There’s the nasty-seeming cop (Cohen), who is ashamed of his wounded leg, but wants to romance a flower seller (Mortimer). There’s an older couple who fancy each other, but her dog keeps biting him. And then there’s the old book seller (Christopher Lee), whose frightening exterior reveals a much warmer heart. In that way Hugo is about the harmony that comes from a happy community, and this may be Scorsese’s warmest film. And though some of his attempts at a period or genre mimicry don’t work perfectly (New York, New York and Cape Fear come to mind), Scorsese nails this one.

The Bad:

Indifference: The worst thing about this film is that it’s not going very wide this weekend, and it doesn’t appear to have been marketed that strongly. It’s a weird film in that it takes its time (kids films that aren’t Potter-ish run around 100 minutes, this is over two hours), but it’s also a very interesting film that can’t be pigeon-holed readily. It is an orphan’s adventure, but then it becomes something more. If Martin Scorsese had directed a gangster picture, it would open big and people would be raring to watch, but because he’s directing a kids film, it’s possible this could get lost in the Holiday shuffle.

Overall:

Scorsese’s love of cinema glows bright throughout Hugo, but that’s not the only reason why it charms. There’s heart and characters, comedy and adventure, all of which work well. Hugo is an ode to both assembled families and silent films, Hugo is a heartfelt love letter.

Rating: 9/10

Hugo opens November 23.

Trailer:

Martin Scorsese Says Hologram Films Are The Future Of Cinema

Travis Woods — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 19:44:08 +0000

Oh, no. It appears that brilliant director Martin Scorsese, after directing the 3D film Hugo, is so enamored with 3D film technology that he is not only singing its praises, but pointing towards its future—stating that 3D will eventually lead to holograms (as in, the film actually taking place around you), and that holograms are the future of filmmaking.

“If everything moves along and there’s no major catastrophe, we’re headed toward holograms,” Scorsese told the audience at Hugo’s Los Angeles premiere, adding a little advice to directors: “You have to think that way. Don’t let the fashion and the economics inhibit you.”

While 3D still sucks, the idea of hologram films could be pretty cool, but I’m not sure if Martin Scorsese is the guy I want to usher in that form of new entertainment technology—Scorsese is an amazing director, but do you want to sit in a room with Travis Bickle while he shaves his head and does pushups for an hour? Or get your ribs shattered open as you and Joe Pesci get pummeled with baseball bats and buried alive in a shallow grave? This may be the first time anyone would ever want to watch Madonna’s Swept Away—at least you’d be able to sit on a beach for a few hours.

What do you think of Scorsese’s ideas on film’s future?

Source: The AV Club

New Trailer for Martin Scorsese’s Hugo

Damon Houx — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 18:33:54 +0000

Martin Scorsese‘s children’s movie Hugo is starting to build good word of mouth after a New York screening. The first trailer was a little more slapsticky and was selling the film more to children than film fans, and it seemed to suggest a lesser film, but it looks like the film is better than that, and the new trailer sells the scale and wonder. Check it out…

Asa Butterfield and Chloë Grace Moretz star as children in the middle of an adventure with Butterfield’s Hugo Cabret trying to get closer to his father (Jude Law) and his robot invention. Where the first trailer played up the presence of Sacha Baron Cohen and his station conductor, who seems a riff on Inspector Clouseau. Now there’s more of the old genius character played by Ben Kingsley.

Again, word is good. There’s no telling if it’s going to be an Oscar contender, but Scorsese’s last couple films have been so mixed, it would be nice to see him hit something out of the park. I like this trailer, and can see how the other trailer was more of a bait and switch (it was attached to Harry Potter). We’ll know for sure come November 23, when the film is released.

What was the last Martin Scorsese film you unabashedly loved?

Criterion and Hulu Plus Equals Great Art Films

Damon Houx — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 21:09:09 +0000

For those looking to catch up on their classics, Criterion’s deal with Hulu plus opens up the door for the cheap explorer. Recently Criterion is now including some of their supplements with the Hulu deal, which means for $7.99 a month you can watch George Lucas talk about Kurosawa’s The Hidden Fortress, or hear Martin Scorsese wax on about Frederico Fellini. They’ve also added an additional 100 titles to their first announcement.

Those titles include, but are not limited to: Robert Bresson’s L’Argent , Michelangelo Antonioni’s L’eclisse, Max Ophüls’ La Ronde , Akira Kurosawa’s The Bad Sleep Well, Jean Renoir’s Boudu Saved from Drowning, Orson Welles’ Confidential Report, Jean-Luc Godard’s Masculin Féminin, Alain Renais’ Night and Fog, Fiend Without a Face, the Hanzo the Razor series, Ingmar Bergman’s Scenes from a Marriage Carl Theodor Dreyer’s Vampyr, and Andrei Tarkovsky’s Ivan’s Childhood.

As so much of the news of late portends, we’re unavoidably heading to a digital future. Criterion is staking out their position on this road by joining with Hulu, and have said they’re looking to eventually get more and more supplements digitized for this format. For Criterion collectors this is either an annoyance or a non-issue, the hard copies are still available, but for those looking to to get a sample of cinema history, every single director above (many with multiple titles on Hulu) is considered a master.

Criterion has established itself as the watermark of quality for older titles, and many directors (like Wes Anderson) have sworn by Criterion as their teacher when it comes to the old classics. Ultimately this feels like a stop-gap in how we will eventually be able to collect and/or absorb home video in the future, but as most Criterion DVD’s and Blu-rays have $30 to $40 list prices, for those who want to dip their toes in, this is a relatively cheap way to have instant access to many in the collection.

But if this is the future, Criterion will no longer have items to collect, and as the Criterion label has appealed to collectors, we shall see how that changes their brand.

How much do you watch through streaming?

DiCaprio Reunites with Scorsese for The Wolf on Wall Street

Krystal Clark — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 18:04:52 +0000

Leonardo DiCaprio and Martin Scorsese just can’t get enough of each other. The duo have decided to collaborate on another film project called The Wolf on Wall Street. No, it’s not about an actual wolf and it’s not a horror film (damn!) but we’re sure it will be just as enticing.

Both DiCaprio and Scorsese became attached to the project shortly after their collaboration on the Oscar winning film The Departed. “Based on Jordan Belfort’s memoir, Wolf chronicles the author’s debauched, hard-partying rampage in the world of high finance during the go-go ’90s. Belfort’s law-breaking bender eventually landed him in federal prison.”

“After almost four years in development, I can’t begin to tell you how thrilled I am to finally be working with Leo and Marty on this,” said Belfort. “They’re the ultimate dream ream, and it was definitely worth the wait.”

This will mark the fifth film that the duo have worked on together. But DiCaprio still falls short of the eight that Robert De Niro has in the can with the Scorsese but he’s getting there.

What do you think of DiCaprio and Scorsese taking on the film?

Source: EW

De Niro, Al Pacino, Joe Pesci Confirmed for Scorsese’s The Irishman

Krystal Clark — Wed, 15 Dec 2010 21:59:09 +0000

Earlier this week it was confirmed that Martin Scorsese and Robert De Niro would join forces again for their ninth feature film entitled, The Irishman. De Niro has been talking about the film since early this spring and now it looks like everything’s really coming together. In an interview with MTV, he revealed that not only was he on board, but so was Al Pacino and Joe Pesci.

De Niro originally said that he wanted The Irishman to be a two-part drama, but unfortunately it only looks like they’ll be able to pull off one. They do have some financing and according to the actor, “[W]e do have the one that we’re definitely doing. Me, Joe Pesci, Pacino and Marty Scorsese directing.”

The Irishman is based on the book, I Heard You Paint Houses and centers on a hitman named Frank “The Irishman” Sheeran. The book chronicles his various “assignments.” He supposedly killed Jimmy Hoffa and Joe Gallo and a slew of other missing and murdered people. Steve Zaillian, who worked with Scorsese on Cape Fear and Gangs of New York might adapt the screenplay.

De Niro has worked with both Pacino and Pesci in multiple films in the past, but we’ve never seen all three in the same project. This is going to be epic.

What do you think of the cast for The Irishman?

ScreenCrave.com » Martin Scorsese

Leonardo DiCaprio and Martin Scorsese Reteam for ‘The Wolf of Wall Street’

Related Posts

Reviewing Ebert’s ‘Greatest Films’: ‘Peeping Tom’ (1960)

The Players:

The Plot:

The Good:

The Bad:

Peeping Tom trivia:

Brief Words for Mr. Ebert:

Good, Bad or Great Movie: GOOD

Related Posts

‘Raging Bull 2′ Is Happening, Without Martin Scorsese Or Robert De Niro, Because Hollywood Hates Us All

Related Posts

AMC To Launch ‘Goodfellas’ Television Show

Related Posts

The Artist, Hugo Lead DGA Nominations

Related Posts

Martin Scorsese To Continue Making Films In 3-D; Talks ‘Taxi Driver 3-D’

Related Posts

Hugo: Movie Review

The Players:

The Plot:

The Good:

The Bad:

Overall:

Rating: 9/10

Trailer:

Related Posts

Martin Scorsese Says Hologram Films Are The Future Of Cinema

Related Posts

New Trailer for Martin Scorsese’s Hugo

Related Posts

Criterion and Hulu Plus Equals Great Art Films

Related Posts

DiCaprio Reunites with Scorsese for The Wolf on Wall Street

Related Posts

De Niro, Al Pacino, Joe Pesci Confirmed for Scorsese’s The Irishman

Related Posts