holymoses541

Don’t you all forget that after seeing this movie, John Hinckley went out and tried to assassinate Ronald Reagan. Would that indicate that "Taxi Driver" is an influential film. In more basic terms, however, the reason this is such a good movie is because it shows how close the categories of "hero" and "psychopath" are, and indeed, how close these categories are to normal life. Travis(Robert De Niro) is a young, lonely, slightly obsessive taxi driver, who displays in the course of the movie, the two main male passions - sexual love and fatherly love. The first of these is directed towards a young professional, Betsy(Cybil Shepherd), a campaign worker for a Presidential candidate; the second towards a child prostitute, Iris acted by Jodie Foster. the first of these passions brings him into fleeting contact with the cold aloof world of US politics characterized by empty sloganeering and an absence of policies. By actually meeting the candidate, Palatine in his cab, Travis begins to instinctively realize the connection between the messed up New York streets with their pushers and prostitutes and the opportunism and cynicism of those who defile their responsibility. After being misunderstood and rejected by Betsy, these vague political misgivings crystallize around his dented male pride and lead him to plot the assassination of Palatine. As he prepares himself for this, however, his paternal feelings are aroused by the plight of Iris, the child prostitute, whom he resolves to rescue. Already living on the edge, he decides that the best way to do this is by killing her pimp. In his mind these two goals become almost identical. Killing the apathetic. patronizing politician, who is socially or politically responsible, and the pimp, who is individually responsible for the abominations of modern city life, like child prostitution, have little to separate them. Indeed, only the candidate's security guards make the difference. Foiled in his first attempt, it is only the second of these goals that he manages to accomplish. Ironically, the courage that would have had him damned as a sociopath in the first case, allows him to become a hero in the second. This film raises the question: Is someone who takes a gun and tries to blow away a President or one of the other fakirs of the frenetic passivity of ungovernment, a hero? The answer is probably yes.

"Goodfellas" is a film based on a true story told in Nick Pilleggi's book "Wiseguy" and is about the 30-year exploits of a young New York kid named Henry (Liotta- who should have been at least nominated for an Academy Award), You can visibly see his transformation from a young, energetic gangster to an older, paranoid man constantly on the run. Soon, Henry and his two best buds Jimmy (DeNiro in one of his most sadistic role ever!) and Tommy (Pesci, whose delightfully evil here), paint the town red and cause chaos towards rival hoods. Henry later marries a local girl named Karen (Bracco), who seems like putty in Henry's hands, but becomes shocked when she discovers her husband's true colors with the mafia. With tension filled scenes and a gripping script which is narrated by the 3 leads, (a concept used in another brilliant Scorsese film "Casino") the viewer will feel every bit of the heat that is simmered by the cast and atmosphere. Plus, a lively soundtrack consisting of rock music and old Italian love songs make the movie more enjoyable to the viewer. The only flaws that might make the viewer cringe are the slightly grim violence (check out the beginning of the movie. Whew!), Martin Scorsese delivers the ultimate gangster flick, and his argueably finest movie ever. Complete with an ensemble cast consisting of Robert DeNiro, Ray Liotta, Joe Pesci, and Lorraine Bracco, the actors leave no stone unturned as they play their parts with a lot of heart and soul, as if it would be the big- gest roles of their lives. On top of all this, look at the camera work. Notice the scene in The Copacabana where Henry Hill introduces us to his mob buddies. Notice how the camera doesn't cut away and how we are able to get a glimpse of each character and have an understanding of who they are and what their importance is. Also, look at the famous shot in which the camera follows Henry and Karen from their car all the way to their table. It is almost four minutes long!!! The camera work again comes into play in a more subtle manner in certain scenes of the movie. Notice how the camera is sped up during the events of May 11, 1980. Every single scene, including the kitchen scene, are given a sense of urgency due to this camera work. There is one amusing scene with Catherine Scorsese as Pesci's mother. DeNiro and Scorsese are among the very best in their respective fields. They have been a very successful team on such classic films as Mean Streets ,Taxi Driver (there best for the 70s),The King of Comedy, Raging Bull (there best for the 80s) Casino and Cape Fear. Goodfellas is the very best film they've made together for the 90s. "Goodfellas" is a prime crime thriller, not to be missed! Watch this excellent mob thriller... or be whacked!!

Raging Bull" is based on a true story about Jake La Motta (Robert De Niro), a boxer from the late-1940s and the early-1950s who basically destroys himself and those around him because of a bad temper and poor decision making. Joe Pesci is amazing in his supporting role as Joey, Jake's brother. Same with Cathy Moriarty as Vicki, Jake's wife. I'm so glad that Robert De Niro won his first Oscar for Best Actor in this movie. Scorsese's direction is ingenious, and in my opinion, "Raging Bull" is the best directed film for the 80s. How he lost the Oscar to Robert Redford for "Ordinary People" still puzzles me to this day. Like i mentioned in my commentary for Goodfellas the team of Scorsese and DeNiro made great films together. Scorsese shaped this film and made it his own through symbolism. The title signifies an uncontrollable rage inside the ring, which spills over into LaMotta's personal life, alienating those closest to him. The boxing arena only serves as a background for in-depth character development. The real engine that drives the movie is his jealous obsession with his wife, and fear of her sexuality. The use of fog, fluids, and LaMotta's refusal to fall in the ring expose his character, and his ultimate downfall.Scorsese introduces the fog motif in the very first shot of the film. The viewer has an objective perspective of the fog that surrounds LaMotta in his career and in his mind. When LaMotta is in the ring, the crowds are obliterated, and the only sign of them is when flashbulbs go off. When he is in the sauna sweating off the necessary four pounds, he is again surrounded by fog. The fog associated with his boxing career symbolically and visually establishes LaMotta as a very isolated individual, who does not have a grasp on reality or relate to people well. He leads an egocentric life based on his own thoughts and suspicions. His judgment becomes clouded by his paranoid fears that his wife is sleeping with other men, until he eventually believes that his brother has slept with her. In the last fight scene when he loses his middleweight title, the crowd is no longer clouded. When the judges and his wife are splattered with LaMotta's blood, the camera is in very sharp focus. This scene is followed very quickly with LaMotta's retirement as an overweight loser, the loss of his wife and children and his jail time. The fog has similarly cleared in his mind as he realizes his mistakes. He screams, `Why? Why? Why?' in his jail cell, and later apologizes to his brother, admitting that he was a bum. Scorsese links the end if the film to the beginning as LaMotta smokes a cigar and self-induced fog covers his face. He knows his downfall was his own doing. The use of fluids also links LaMotta's experience in the boxing ring to his fear of his wife's sexuality. Close ups of sweat pouring off his face emphasizes physical exertions as a substitute for sexual relations, as Vickie constantly complains that he is too busy fighting to have sex with her. The first time he sees Vickie in the pool, she is linked to a large body of pure water. After their first sexual encounter, he calms himself down with ice water. Gradually, the fluid symbol begins to transform. After he loses his first fight with Sugar Ray, the water in the bucket, with a close up of his fist, signifies his increasing anger and rage. About that time, he starts to suspect Vickie of having sex with other men. The water squeezed on him in between rounds no longer purifies him physically or symbolically, because he is becoming mentally disturbed. The water sponged on him in his last fight with Sugar Ray, at the beginning of his decline, is red from blood. He is tainted by his obsession, as is his wife when she is sprayed with his blood. Scorsese again links the elder LaMotta with his youthful boxing self by having him drink water before he goes out to recite. He is symbolically pure now that he knows his past mistakes. To LaMotta, the true sign of a man is his ability to remain standing. Scorsese consistently shows weakness lying or sitting down, and strength, power and control standing up. LaMotta stands to have his brother Joey punch him in the face. He refuses to fall when the mob tells him he has to take a fall. He knocks Sugar Ray down twice, and prides himself even after he loses the middleweight crown that Ray never knocked him down. However, while he sits in between the rounds, his brother/manager yells at him. When he sits down after the lost match with Sugar Ray, he cries, showing his weakness. He is sitting when he hangs up the phone on his brother without apologizing, and when he is in the jail cell at the time of his ultimate downfall, having lost his title and his belt in order to post bail. This pattern of domination and control only while standing extends outside of the ring to LaMotta's relationship with Vickie. He stands behind his wife, pulling her hair or slapping her. He dominates her with violence the way he would in the ring, but he is powerless on his back or sitting, demonstrating his fear of sexuality. He has to stand up to regain some control after their first encounter laying on his back, saying `What are you doing to me?' He knows that she has the real control. The first time LaMotta sees Vickie, she towers over him on the other side of the fence. She dwarfs him sitting on his lap. Scorsese shoots her going up stairs or in extreme close ups and LaMotta farther away so he seems smaller than she does. Since he feels so inferior, he resorts to violence to feel that he has control over her. Because he refused to fall in the ring, LaMotta was bound to fall outside of the ring. Fall he did, and he became a sad, pathetic, broke, lonely, overweight man. De Niro is amazing – the method stuff alone is great, but his whole performance is intense. DeNiro puts all of his juices in this performance. He gained 40 pounds to portray the obese has-been LaMotta. But if gaining and losing pounds was a sure-bet for a great performance, every actor in Hollywood would carry an Oscar. DeNiro involves himself completely in the role. You never see DeNiro on screen; you see LaMotta. In one scene, LaMotta recites the famous `I coulda been a contender, I coulda been someone' from On The Waterfront. It's easy to say that this is just DeNiro doing Brando, but as Roger Ebert pointed out, `it's DeNiro doing LaMotta doing Brando doing Terry Malloy.' Even though DeNiro isn't the first to use method acting, he is one of the few who have mastered it perfectly. "I can still hear those cheers, they still ring in my ears and for years they remain in my thoughts. 'Cause on time I took of my robe and, oops, I forgot to where shorts... I recall every punch, every hook, every jab, the worst way a guy can get rid of his flab... As you know my life wasn't fab... And though... And though I'd rather hear you cheer as I delve into Shakespeare "A horse! A horse! My kingdom for a horse" but I ain't had a winner in six months. And though I'm no Olivier, if it was him he would say that the thing ain't ring, the thing is the play. So give me a stage, where this bull here can rage, and though I can fight I'd much rather recite: That's Entertainment. ..... that's entertainment"....

Well what can i say another movie you can't refuse. Dont you all forget that The Godfather was a hard act to follow. It had an enthralling plot and the acting was second to none. So, when part two was released, you could be forgiven for being sceptical back in the seventies. But this film was and still is pure class.There's so many good things in this movie it's ridiculous. Great performances all around from Al Pacino, Talia Shire, Diane Keaton, Robert Duvall, Lee Strasburg, John Cazale and especially from Robert DeNiro who is the only one who could fill Marlon Brando's shoes. DeNiro does such a great job at acting as Brando's Vito Corleone that he won an Oscar. The first time two actors won an Oscar for playing the same character. Great writing by Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola. Highly under-appreciated but great acting by Richard Bright and Bruno Kirby in bit parts. A well written score is a staple of this movie. Flawless directing of the two coinciding stories of young Vito Corleone and his aging son Michael as the heads of a powerful mob family. I especially love the scenes of young Vito Corleone as an up and coming mobster and wish there were more of them. When the camera follows DeNiro as he moves from rooftop to rooftop, falling into the abyss filled with crime and corrpution, it will affect him and his family forever. DeNiro is slick and smooth as the young Vito Corleone. The rise of Michael Corleone's power is superbly captured by Coppola and delivered with cold hearted villainy by Al Pacino, in his finest performance. Strasberg is also solid in his performance of Hyman Roth. I would have liked to know the orgins of Luca Brasi, Johnny Fontaine, and Tom Hagen. As well as Sonny's rise to power. The book covers Luca Brasi's orgins with the Corleone's but... I would have to gon and say that The Godfather II is not really a movie about the mafia. The themes that run throughout the film are of power,corruption of power and family. Coppola expertly tells the parallel stories of a father and his son with the use of flashbacks and flashforwards. He simultaneously shows how the father builds an empire and how his son subsequently unwittingly destroys it. The scenes involving the son Michael Corleone are very serious in nature,whereas the scenes involving the father,a young Vito Corleone, are presented in a more jovial manner.Before a flashback or flashforward, Coppola uses an effective technique of having children or the mention of children in the scene in order to emphasize the generational link through children. The flasback scenes are also photographed using different methods of lighting to contrast the different moods.Metaphorically, the story of the Corleones parallels the rise and subsequent corruption of America. The ultimate symbol of America in the form of the Statue of Liberty appears throughout the film. The assassination of Hyman Roth the jewish Mafia chieftain, is eerily similar to the assassination of Lee Harvey Oswald the alleged assassin of President John Kennedy. Coppola effectively uses symbols such as the orange to represent evil. Several scenes show characters that do evil holding an orange (the fruit being a biblical symbol of evil).In an early scene Johnny Ola an emissary for Hyman Roth brings an orange to Michael Corleone from Miami. In a flashback scene, Don Fannucci (the black hand), is seen handling an orange before his demise. Michael Corleone is eating an orange as he plots the murder of his enemies. Coppola also uses catholic religious rituals as backdrops in major murder sequences. As Vito Corleone murders Don Fannucci there is a religious procession on the street. As Michael's brother Fredo is being murdered he is reciting the Hail Mary prayer. In the end Michael loses his soul and family to maintain his power.This is a worthy sequel to the flawless movie The Godfather. Try my Robert De Niro Movie Quizzz http://apps.facebook.com/flixster/quiz?q=674675&lsrc=

Once Upon a Time in America is not only a classic film, it is a summation of every gangster film before it. A pitch-perfect movie, and one that definitely ranks among the Godfather. And just like Godfather II ,an epic that withstands all Gangster films in the genre...There are two versions of this film. The USA version was a disaster whereas the european one (240 minutes length) is a very masterpiece. This epic chronicles the rise and fall of a group of Brooklyn Jewish gangsters over the period of fifty years. Much of the film is set in the character's past. This serves to expound his mental and emotional state in old age as we approach the film's finale. Most importantly, it creates an atmosphere of nostalgia and regret which permeates the whole film, underscored beautifully by Ennio Morricone. Relatively speaking, the film is lengthy and the plot intricate with it's layers upon layers of flashbacks and flash-forwards. Naturally, some people will be put off on their first viewing, as the tendency is to try and make sense of everything going on - to rationalise and make linear the non-linear structure. Any attempts to do so will undoubtedly cause frustration because, just as in life, the film asks as many questions as it answers and leaves some loose ends untied. In reality, the temporal and geographical settings along with the plot are there to add context and framework. They may be the formalities you argue over at the end of the film but are there only as a backdrop to the main themes of love, friendship and regrets. These are the things that remain after everything else has long been forgotten, and it's the indescribably beautiful way in which these ideas are expressed in story-telling format, which creates a film that lives long in the memory. Leone - as in all his films - gives great attention to seemingly small details without, in my opinion, being artsy, pretentious or excessively indulgent. When De Niro's character is stirring his cup of coffee, this becomes a focal point in the film for fully one whole minute, and why not? Leone's films are as much about everyday life as they are about friendship, American capitalism, revolutions, the Old West or any other grand themes you care to mention. The director is constantly reminding us that everyday actions are just as important. They are the 'stuff' of life and deserve just as much attention. It's only when the value of this point is lost that his films may appear to be slow-paced or dragged out. And how does he attempt to convey the depth of human feeling. That which even the greatest of poets find difficult to express? Without trying too hard to articulate, Leone allows for the film's imagery and sounds to achieve that which might otherwise be missed in a thousand lines of dialogue. When the protagonist returns to his old hunting ground after 35 years of absence, we can only try to imagine the emotional pain he's been feeling throughout this time. When Fat Moe asks the question "What have you been doing all these years?" his reply is "I've been going to bed early." This tells us as much as we need to know about the previous 35 years. After all, how could you hope to articulate or quantify the great sense of loss he must have felt in all that time? To add anymore on the subject would undermine it completely and I think the director fully appreciated this. Instead, we draw our own conclusions from both the haunted look in De Niro's eyes and from Morricone's reverential orchestral score which is at times so mournful, but always sweepingly majestic. The potential of film as a medium to leave you believing you have witnessed something truly profound is seldom fulfilled to the extent I believe it has been with this film. It could not have had nearly the same impact on me had it not received the input of both Leone and Morricone. Together, they have collaborated to produce a cinematic experience, which transcends far beyond the sum of their individual contributions. A partnership forged in film to rival the likes of that forged by Lennon and McCartney in music, at least in recent decades. Morricone's genius is a match for Leone's and sometimes leaves you wondering, which came first, the story or the music. There is no doubt they both inspired each other to reach unprecedented heights in their respective fields and I would strongly recommend to all readers who have persevered so far that you watch all the films they have worked together on. Sitting here writing this Im trying to think why it is so astounding. Firstly, its Robert DeNiro(And everyone who knows me knows i am a De Niro fan...). He effortlessly assumes the role of Noodles, underplaying him to full effect, every statement is profound and poetic because of its honesty: "You can tell who the winners are at the starting gate; you can tell the winners and you can tell the losers." Similarly listen to the speech he gives to Deborah on the beach after their romantic meal, he opens his heart to her and is shattered by her rejection. Look at the close ups on his face and his tearful eyes, a man consumed with an inward passion. Look at his reunion with 'Senator Bailey' at the end, you are almost convinced he had never met him. Where was DeNiro's Oscar? Secondly, the score to the film is utterly breathtaking. Especially the theme that links Noodles and Deborah, Morriconne's signiture sweeping orchestral score harmonised by a solo female voice. Romantic and devastatingly beautiful. Listen out for the pan pipe score when the young members of the gang are running away (in slow motion) from Bugsy who is armed with a gun.The score is sublimly atmospheric, even the strange but insightful use of Lennon and McCartney's 'Yesterday'. Where was Morriconne's Oscar? Thirdly...EVERYTHING else; Directing, Cinematography, Set Design, Supporting Roles, Screenplay etc etc WHERE WERE THE OSCARS? The Acadamey has disgraced itself, but we do not need their approval to rate this as one of the greatest cinematic accomplishements ever put onto celluloid. This flim evokes all emotions, making you laugh, cry, feel simply astounded, and wanting this flim not to end. I simply urge people, to go and see this flim, be patient, stock-up on goodies, and prepare to be enriched by this masterpiece.