Al Pacino and Joe Pesci might co-star with Robert De Niro in Martin Scorsese’s THE IRISHMAN
Sep 14
We deliberately steer away from posting rumour news headlines that end in question marks. (This guy might star with this chick in That Movie??) Often variations of the same rumour will leak and dribble over movie blogs for a week or two before a publicist or a studio gets around to denying or confirming it. This particular rumour news, however, is far too exciting to leave alone…
The almost always trusty Deadline Hollywood blog reported today that Oscar winners Al Pacino and Joe Pesci are ‘circling’ The Irishman, a project that already has Martin Scorsese attached to direct and Robert De Niro attached to star. The film is based on the book I Heard You Paint Houses, a fascinating account of a dark side of American history. The book’s title comes from the first words Jimmy Hoffa ever spoke to Frank “The Irishman” Sheeran. To paint a house is to kill a man. The paint is the blood that splatters on the walls and floors.
The mere fact that there will be another Scorsese-De Niro film collaboration is exciting enough, but add long-time collaborator Joe Pesci and Al Pacino into the mix and expectations become extraordinarily high.
Scorsese has directed De Niro on eight occasions, producing some of the most impactful and memorable films of all time, including Mean Streets, Raging Bull, Taxi Driver and Goodfellas. The last time they worked together was 1995′s Casino. Joe Pesci co-starred with De Niro in Raging Bull, Goodfellas and Casino.
Al Pacino first appeared with De Niro in 1977′s The Godfather Part II, though they didn’t share any scenes together until the critically acclaimed Heat in 1995. They have since appeared in some stinkers together (Righteous Kill, for instance) clearly needing the guidance of proven mobster story master Martin Scorsese to bring out their best. In my opinion, anyway.
Hopefully this casting gets locked in and the project gets under way soon. Everyone has full schedules and timing will be everything. We may not hear about this one again for a while.
In the meantime, I’m going watch Goodfellas yet again while I wait for Scorsese’s HBO series Boardwalk Empire to start.
10 sports movies I am watching instead of the FIFA World Cup
Jul 05
So, the FIFA World Cup 2010 is on, and while Australia’s Socceroos crumbled to yet another dismal early-exit from the tournament, I’ve decided to re-watch some of my favourite sporting movies instead of enduring what remains of the event. After all, the running time for a lot of films is pretty close to a single game of soccer. I might just tune in to the final.
Note: I’m not saying these are the greatest sporting movies of all time. They are films from my collection that I’ve been watching while the World Cup is on, since I’m not much of a soccer fan but the hype has put me in a sporty mood. If there’s a sports movie you enjoy, please leave a comment below (or nag me on facebook like everyone else).
#10 THE KARATE KID (1984)
Forget the recent remake with Will Smith’s kid and Chackie Chan, the 1984 original will always stand as the first martial arts film to break into the children’s market. Wax on, wax off! Daniel Larusso coming to terms with his new town and bonding with Mr. Miyagi, whooping that gangs ass after they beat him up on the beach (oh, spoilers, by the way…). The Karate Kid has actually gotten better with age, the retro style adds a timeless quality that most films lack when they age so quickly. My kids will be seeing this, and they will always understand that, as a 6 year old boy, this movie meant a great deal to their Daddy. That little bastard on the playground never picked on me again the day after I saw this…
#9 HAPPY GILMORE (1996)
Please bear with me… I saw this as a teenager and, at the time, it was the funniest thing on the planet. Of course, now I’ve matured past the humour of it, but the nostalgia still remains when I put it on. Adam Sandler as a no-good hockey player whooping Shooter McGavin’s ass on a golf course? Timeless. Who hasn’t tried the Gilmore Shot when playing golf with their buddies? This film sprung to mind because I find myself partly quoting this flick whenever I try to watch soccer: “Get in the net, baaalll!”
#8 CADDYSHACK (1980)
If I’m going to watch Happy Gilmore, I’ll need to watch Caddyshack right afterwards to wash the taste out. Bill Murray, Chevy Chase and a gopher on a golf course. This will always be a classic.
#7 SLAPSHOT (1977)
Wonderful things happen when you put Paul Newman in a hockey jersey and let him swear a whole bunch. Still the best ice hockey film ever made, you’ll find this on any of those ‘proper’ best sports movies lists and with good reason. Helps that I adore ice hockey, a sport that, like soccer, usually results in only a few goals per game, but at least you can smack the shit out of your opponent in the process.
#6 COOL RUNNINGS (1993)
John Candy, how I miss your delightful humour. Remember, kids, your bones do not break in a bobsled. No, no. They shatter. Would you believe I only discovered recently that Cool Runnings is based on the true story of the Jamican bobslead team qualifying for the Winter Olympic Games? I mean, I was 12, how was I supposed to know? I always thought it was just a super-clever original premise. Anyway, this Disney classic hasn’t aged well at all, but nothing beats that delicious early-90s nostalgia.
#5 THE WRESTLER (2008)
The return to form for Mickey Rourke snagged him a Golden Globe for Best Actor (he was robbed at the Oscars) and put one of the most controversial ’sports’ back under the spotlight for a brief moment. Yeah, I consider it a sport. The stuff these guys can achieve in the ring is (sometimes) staggering, and this film wonderfully illustrates how much they go through to entertain their huge fan-base. Tell you what, you go and tell one of these beefy blokes in person that what they do isn’t real, and if you can still speak coherently afterwards, I’ll listen to your side of the argument.
#4 FIELD OF DREAMS (1989)
Lads, don’t watch this one with your Father. I had no intention of seeing this (baseball AND Kevin Costner? No thanks…) until my wife enforced it with one of those embargos where I had no choice. Sorta maybe had me a little sooky toward the end there… Let’s just leave it at that.
#3 ROCKY (1976)
Not just for the thumping music, inspiring journey and slurring Sly, but also for the screenplay. Rocky is an independent film that is pure legendary. People are often surprised when I remind them Rocky won the Oscar for Best Picture that year… might have something to do with all of those average sequels that blurs their appreciation. Still, any budding screenwriters out there who need a good template and an inspirational story to keep them going, remember Sly wrote the script in a matter of days and it landed him an Oscar nod.
#2 JERRY MAGUIRE (1996)
Cameron Crowe’s would-be romantic comedy Jerry Maguire is easily forgotten as a sports film. It coined one of the most repeated and mocked lovey-dovey quotes of the past two decades: “You had me at ‘hello’.” whimpers a tearful Renée Zellweger to a desperate Tom Cruise (who wasn’t quite completely nuts yet). There’s also the aged classic “Show me the money!!” which Tom screams down the phone in an effort to sign Rod Tidwell, a role which won Cuber Gooding Jr. an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor. The less said about his career after that night, the better. It’s the corporate backstabbing and eventual success of Tidwell that keeps me coming back to this one.
#1 RAGING BULL (1980)
Beyond being a great sports movie, Raging Bull is a brilliant film that stands above many others. Robert De Niro and Joe Pesci up-front and Martin Scorsese behind the camera, the cinema lessons learned from watching this classic boxing film about Jake La Motta are endless. Unfortunately, watching Scorsese’s directorial brilliance in Raging Bull now also serves as a reminder to just how horrible Shutter Island actually is. I guess you really can’t win ‘em all.
Reel Short: SON OF A DON
Jul 04
Student films are often drab, dramatic affairs with plenty of cinematic value but not much bang for their buck. Herbert James Winterstern’s project as part of his studies at SCU (School of Cinema University of Southern California) turns that trend on its head. Son Of A Don, a funny, stylistic and enjoyable short film shot entirely on the robust RED camera.
Clearly inspired by Scorsese’s Goodfellas and Casino, and incorporating popular music, Son Of A Don is a good example of style and entertainment first, drama and reasoning later. This is especially evident when the final scene takes place… you’ll see what I mean.
Yet it’s still a great laugh and a fun, enjoyable short film that definitely delivers on the promise of its premise and uses Hollywood techniques in a minimal-budget short format. Definitely worth the watch for budding filmmakers and anyone looking for a change of pace for 15 minutes. Enjoy.
REEL SHORT
Each Sunday Reel Thinker shares a short film we have enjoyed.
As independent filmmakers ourselves, we enjoy a good, wholesome, well-told short film. Not only do they provide something for us to aspire to, quality short films demonstrate that the format can achieve wonderful, memorable film experiences for the viewer. We look forward to sharing the short films we’ve discovered & enjoyed.
ROBIN HOOD review: welcome back, Mr Scott
May 13
Where should I begin? I walked into Robin Hood with low expecations. I haven’t enjoyed a single Ridley Scott film made in the last decade: Gladiator was empty and hollow if you removed the action scenes, Kingdom Of Heaven was a confused cop-out of a war flick, and … okay, so I didn’t see A Good Year or American Gangster, but can you blame me? On top of that, I was starting to worry about burned out doing all these reviews of mediocre-to-competent films lately, concerned that I’d lose my way and start giving Brett Ratner flicks high marks while violently abusing Scorsese flicks (okay, that actually happened, but moving on …).
To nobody’s greater surprise than my own, I loved Robin Hood. I loved every minute of it. From the opening frames, the film grabbed my by the heart and mind and dragged me happily through one of the best cinematic experiences I can remember. I’m starting to understand what all those Avatards were banging on about when they cried about Pandora not being real, and wept in anguish as the catharsis of the film faded away — Robin Hood transported me to Europe circa 1199, and I didn’t want to leave. That’s right, I didn’t want the movie to end. I haven’t felt that in a long, long time.
What’s so good about it? you ask with raised eyebrows. Well, that’s the thing about great movies; it’s hard to put into words exactly why they work, exactly why they hit you on an emotional and cerebral level. It probably has something to do with Brian Helgeland’s labyrinthine but compelling script; it probably has a lot to do with the fine performances all around; it’s definitely got something to do with the rich production design and astounding visual effects; and it definitely has a lot to do with the film’s gorgeous presentation. What it doesn’t have anything to with, however, is Russell Crowe.
Patriotism be damned — if Russell Crowe turns in a sub-par performance, I’m going to complain. To be fair, his performance here isn’t so much ‘sub-par’ as it is a little off the mark. It’s clear that at some point in the editing process the tone of the film was changed (for the better), and Rusty’s performance, dedicated to film on set, couldn’t be changed to fit it. So Crowe comes off as dull — yet competent — in a vibrant, thrilling and joyous universe.
And how vibrant it is! The sound of a hundred wooden shafts thunking into the surround sound speakers was enough for me to grit my teeth in instinctive fear. The lilting medieval score gave a kind of mischievous bent to the action, building the England of 1199 as a fundamentally better place than anything we’ve known, somehow; while the gorgeous photography makes the heart yearn for simpler times, when the countryside was green and the sky was silver, when the work was hard but the heart was full.
3D would have absolutely ruined this movie. There, I said it. It’s a home truth, too. What little visceral punch may have been gained by having arrowheads fly at the audience’s face in gasp-inducing 3D would pale in comparison to the beauty bestowed upon the film by the 35mm cinematography. Some of the deep-focus shots of the English forests, with golden beams of sunlight and perfectly-framed boughs of green, are downright painterly in their beauty. So good are they, in fact, that they reminded me of Kubrick’s brilliant Barry Lyndon; and when a modern filmmaker can be compared favourably to Stanley Kubrick, you know to pay attention.
The plot plays fast and loose with history, but given how dubious the record-keeping of the twelfth century was, who really cares? You might as well complain that it clashes with the plot of Robin Hood: Men In Tights or that delightful Disney adaptation — what matters is how the film resonates right here, with modern audiences. And Robin Hood carries with it a message, to which I alluded above, not unlike that of Avatar: without that thing we refer to as “nature,” Homo sapiens is as nothing; and without that thing we refer to as “freedom,” a concept for which there shouldn’t need to be a word, humanity itself is worth nothing. These compelling ideals infuse the plot with urgency and sincerity.
There’s a real sense of time and place, even despite the anachronistic themes of environmentalism and freedom; costumes, sets and locations all speak of a time when death often came at the pointy end of a sword (or the blunt end of a hammer); a time before Shakespeare invented half of modern English; and a time before fashion took ordinary people and twisted them into unnatural creatures in high-heels and make-up and botox. As I say, this seems to be a fundamentally better time, despite the slavery and oppression, and the fact that Robin Hood is doing his best to return the world to peaceful equilibrium with nature is compelling on a fundamental level.
The performances are exemplary across the board, and the board is broad indeed. Rusty turns in a heartfelt if misplaced performance as the eponymous archer, while the likes of Cate Blanchett, Mark Strong, Danny Huston, Max von Sydow and William Hurt all turn in equally exceptional work: each one of them is clearly in the head and heart of their respective character, and the authenticity and sincerity they bring to their roles really helps enrich the film’s overall atmosphere. Cate Blanchett’s performance could have been a little more internal, but her determined character works well opposite Crowe’s Robin regardless. This is all proof not only of the actors’ skills, but of the director’s, and age hasn’t dulled Scott’s sensibilities in the slightest.
Rounding out the cast are a handful of lesser-known but no less talented folk, populating England and France with memorable and honest characters. Oscar Isaac’s King John is an almost sympathetic character, anachronistically modern in his “me-me-me” attitude, but relatable nonetheless, while Matthew McFadyen puts in an amusingly down-trodden turn as the Sheriff of Nottingham, Robin’s future nemesis. Robin’s merry men, who are sadly neglected in the film’s third act, bring a real sense of wit and fun to the proceedings, which took me completely unawares.
And that’s what really propels Robin Hood over the line, from competent historical epic to potential classic of the genre: a sense of fun. Those who endured Ridley Scott’s Gladiator, Black Hawk Down and Kingdom Of Heaven know that jokes are few and far between in his films. But in Robin Hood there is a constant and palpable sense of adventure, a sense that has been lacking from cinema for far too long. Last year’s Star Trek had a stab at it, but it hasn’t really been nailed since the Lord of the Rings films, and Ridley Scott was the last person I expected to bring adventure back to the big screen.
The action scenes, too, don’t disappoint (like they did in Kingdom of Heaven): seamless (and I mean, seamless) visual effects lend credibility to thousands-strong battle scenes that are gritty, grimy and glorious. Ridley Scott hasn’t lost his eye for visual perfectionism, and some beautiful third-act battle photography tugs heartstrings as much as it stirs heroism. My only complaint in these scenes is that they are bloodless. Several characters take severe neck wounds, which, for the sake of a PG-13 rating, don’t bleed. Not even a little bit! Remember that cringe-inducing femoral artery surgery scene from Black Hawk Down? Blood made that scene. Here, while it far from breaks the scenes, the bloodlessness does dent one’s suspension of disbelief.
The fun, the performances, and the battle scenes would be fine on their own, but to top it all off, there’s a complex and rewarding narrative composed of multiple threads that all tie together towards the end. Though some early scenes seem a little useless until backed up by later scenes, Scott uses this technique to build the viewer’s attention: attaching names to faces, castles to shires, and people to movements puts you in the world, and it all pays off handsomely in the end.
I could dribble on for considerably longer about Ridley Scott’s Robin Hood, perhaps comparing it with Mel Gibson’s equally good epic Braveheart, but suffice it to say, this is the most cathartic, most immersive, and indeed best movie I’ve seen in a cinema in a long, long time. Easily the best film yet of 2010, and better than anything I can remember from 2008 or 2009, to boot: Ridley Scott has kicked off the new decade with trademark style and bravado. Let’s hope it’s a trend he can maintain.
Robin Hood score
96/100
Ridley Scott planning ALIEN prequels … in 3D
Apr 26
This news has been kicking around for a while, so it’s about time we weighed in on it with our take. It seems almost too good to be true, doesn’t it? That Ridley Scott would return to the Alien universe three decades later and shoot a prequel — or two — himself? After 25 years of crappy sequels and woeful crossovers, the guy who kicked the whole franchise off is coming back to reinvent the series himself. That’s remarkably good news.
The “What?” news is that he’s shooting in 3D. I never would’ve imagined Ridley Scott going 3D, but he’s joining the likes of Steven Spielberg, Peter Jackson and Martin Scorsese and choosing the format for his next picture. I’m still sceptical on the whole 3D thing, but I guess I’ll withold final judgment until all these films (Tintin, The Invention Of Hugo Cabret, and the Alien prequels) come out.
In a recent interview with Collider, Ridley Scott discusses the technical differences of shooting in 3D and how they affect the dark, moody style he adopted for the first Alien film. 3D films are digital by necessity, and shooting digital is a very different enterprise to shooting on film, and it’s good to hear Scott calmly chat about how he’s going to set about maintaining his perfectionist vision in these prequels.
Scott has also confirmed that the prequels will set out to explore who / what the “Space Jockey” (the big dead guy in the chair in the first xenomorph flick) is, and will again feature a female protagonist (but not Ripley, obviously). I’m not hugely fond of the first Alien (I think James Cameron’s sequel is where the party’s at, personally), and that Space Jockey thing helped set up the mystery and horror of the film for me, so I’m not sure going back and explaining it is such a good idea — sounds like the reboot of The Thing, now I think about it.
Scott reckons we should keep an eye out for the first Alien prequel in late 2011 / early 2012. I reckon we should keep an eye on Ridley Scott’s sanity. When have you ever known him to shoot a prequel, let alone two in a row, and in a fad format that may well be dead in a few years’ time at that? It’s time to re-evaluate my understanding of Scott as a more classical filmmaker — not necessarily a bad thing. Heck, I don’t even like Alien or Gladiator that much, so it’s not like I’m super disappointed in Scott’s fall to the dark side.
Okay, maybe a little bit disappointed.
OPINIONS COUNT