Gaston088able, if you'd just stop responding to me, there wouldn't be a fight.
However, I wish you would at least entertain the notion that maybe you're wrong about Cameron. I think of Scorsese and the 2nd best filmmaker we have, after Cameron. That's not too shabby of placement for Marty. But, you seem to think of James Cameron as one of cheap filmmakers like Michael Bay, and for no good reason.
@LukeLovesRose why are you keep insulting me? psychopath?...just yesterday i want to see this video again and for my surprise i found like 10 comments from you about me....i thoutgh we have finished our "fight" in the other page ...when i was reading this comments i have to write back to you. Thats what im saying to you, our "fight" was in other page like 3 months ago or more i dont remember...but your comments here were about 2 months ago, just yesterday i read them!
Gaston088able, the last time I wrote about you or wrote to you, was 6 fucking months ago, you psychopath.
Anyway, moving on to your ranting and raving, until you can actually see through Cameron's genius visual style, SHUT UP! And I'm not talking the sweeping grandeur shots or the effects. I'm talking about the way an actor is shot. How the shot is composed. What goes into the background or foreground, while Leo or Kate are talking.
I hope you "luke" understand my point, yes i like t2, titanic, i enjoy avatar in cinema becuase it was a great ride....but that isent what filmaking is all about! Art is more than just entertaining!
one thing is to make something about story and characters with some technical use to enhance the story, like masters of the level of SCORSESE,KUBRICK,POLANSKY (to name a few) ...and other thing is just make a film that the CORE is about effects and technicals show-off, with 0 meaning in story and characters. There is a diference! ...finally if you "lukelovesrose" think that KUNDUN, THE AGE OF INNOCENCE,THE AVIATOR, are just good looking and nothing interesting(to you) you dont get those stories!
i want to put on record that im not saying that cameron is a bad filmaker...but it isent his "thing" telling storys about characters and relantionships that have resonance in real life or make a reflection of life, (that is the main purpose of art, TO SAY SOMETHING)....he is a great craftman, a guy very wise in his technicals kwnolodge that improves the technical making of films,YES IT IS TRUE....but camerons cinema doenst show the real purpose of what the art of film is about!
LukeLovesRose...its ok, not everyone gets TRULLY GRAT FILMAKING! Scorsese is also a very good in the technical aspects, look THE AGE OF INNOCENCE,THE AVIATOR, GANGS OF NEW YORK, KUNDUN, CASINO, SHUTTER ISLAND, HUGO...You think i never saw a kubrick film? yet you are the guy who said "cameron is the modern kubrick", do i have to say more?, but scorsese not only makes good loking films, his film are abut things that matters, that says something, that is the real power of art and filmaking...
LukeLovesRose...look the cameron movies... are about sequels or clishe ideas( for not saying copys) THE ABYSS! come on! is just CLOSE ENCOUNTERS underwater!!!...AVATAR is pocahontas in space, dances with wolve,etc, even the hunting sequence in the extended version of avatar make my point( you dont see the hunt sequence of the buffalos in dances with wolves???) is the same thing!!!, and the plot is, may god...if you see the trailer of AVATAR you get the all plot!..THAT IS GREAT FILMAKING???
LukeLovesRose... but in "story" for me is the real power of filmaking, because is all about the characters study, the things that are in "real life" that shows a message or at least a reflection of life. Like the case of Raging bull, taxi driver, the last themptation of crhist, the age of innocence, the king of omedy, the aviator(FILMS OF MR SCORSESE) and you compare J.CAMERON to him? i said to you many times that cameron is great for his technical knwolodge but you can compare him to kubrick...
LukeLovesRose.. i try to explan to an idiot like "lukeloves" what is the true power of cinema... for ex the films of Mr Scorsese are about story, not plot, you dont get the diference, for ex plot it will be like (memento) story (Raging bulll) the diference is that in "plot" the characters arent the main thing, the characters in "plot" are just "plot devices" they arent great(the characters)im not saying they are bad...
LukeLovesRose the idiot returns!!!!, why you keep coming back and writing about me? i think you learned the lesson in the other page (of hugo) where me and other people make the point you are just ridiculous, how someone like you can said "j. cameron is the modern S.kubrick", "his characters from the 80s(ripley, sarah connor) are aging better than the ones in the godfather and taxi driver", or "casablanca and citizen kane are overrated", "Raging bull goes to ponti a to point b"....
My point is that The Wizard of Oz is not just a kid's story. It's a family film with a lot of adult themes in it.
You don't seem to wanna look for those themes. And, that's where you're going wrong when you look at Cameron's films. You need the themes to be spoken in great detail or something. Like everything Liotta says in his voice over during Goodfellas is all the message of the film, basically.
@LukeLovesRose jesus....i keep reading the things you wrote to other people and it seems you are the only who doesnt understand the point that everyone here try to make!....TELLME what is the deep, the meaming, the narrative intelligence, the subject of films like ALIENS, TERMInATOR, THE ABYYS, TRUE LIES, AVATAR???????....they are all great entertaining but compare anyone of those films to GOODFELLAS is just, unbelievable! the only great film in his carrer is TITANIC i give you that!
@LukeLovesRose .....AGAIN a will askyou SIMPLE QUESTIONS...WHAT IS A STORYTELLER FOR YOU, YOU COMPARE THE WORK OF SCORSESE WITH CAMERONS???... HAVE YOU EVER IN YOUR LIFE WATCHTED "THE AGE OF INNOCENCE"....thats is a narrator at his best...a story so sutil, fine, a director who knows how to bring the best of his actors(daniel day lewis, michelle pfiefer and wynona rider are amazing)a REAL HUMAN STORY ABOUT RELATIONSHIPS!!!if you say "LIOTTA NARRATIVE IS ALL THE MESSAGE IN GOODFELLAS" say no more!
So, it's not the effects or the art direction or the cinematography that solely drives The Wizard of Oz. There are themes about trying to find happiness in the worst of times. This is a universal theme for anyone at any time. Judy Garland is magnificent as Dorothy Gale. She really does cloud the line between reality and fake. I mean, I believed she was a little girl at one point... even though, she's actually 16.
Hamilton is wonderful. She still gives me chills at times.
Unless you can see The Wizard of Oz as more than a wonderful showcase for art direction, cinematography and effects, then, you will never understand Cameron's films. He even mentioned recently that his favorite film is The Wizard of Oz.
Those effects in The Wizard of Oz are showing their age, especially on the big screen. I can tell that's a matte painting a mile away. I can tell those dark monsters with beady red eyes in the dark forest are Halloween props for Christ's sake. So...
I don't know how to describe what Cameron is doing. I know that he's using a lot of new and risky techniques. He's walking a fine line, between creating an Ed Wood Jr film or Citizen Kane visually. He uses continuity errors as art. As far as I can tell, not one filmmaker has had the balls to do that and do it so well.
Um, I don't know why you have a problem with the emotional resonance of "There's no place like home." It's in the script. Just listen to everything Dorothy says.
bring the life of crime we see in Goodfellas to life. Not only is it beautiful to look at. Not only is it telling this crime saga well. But, Scorsese is also capturing a genuine sense of dread at times and he's barely moving the camera. That's art to me. That's when its hard work. When the filmmaker can erase the line between fake and real without showing a lot of effort.
Whether you believe it or not, Cameron is making fake feel more like reality for audiences than any documentary.
No, no, no. You generalized wrong. You sound ignorant when you generalize wrong.
I said that I think that artsy films like City of God are crap. Movies like City of God. Dramas that are trying to make themselves out to be documentaries are fucking painful for me to watch. As far as I'm concerned, that fad was introduced and died with Blair Witch. It's cheap and lazy film-making to me.
Take Scorsese's best films for example. It takes a lot of genius as a cinematographer and art director to
Btw, PT, I didn't call all "artsy" films, "CRAP." I said that City of God was crap. Do some reading the next time you wanna attack me. I hated City of God. It is pretentious and not impressive at all... from a filmmaker's POV. I can hate an art film if I choose. lol. You can hate a Cameron film. But, don't insult me, because I'm praising Cameron's work higher than you.
@LukeLovesRose I would be much more receptive to your view of Cameron’s films if you were to give legitimate, specific evidence in favor of the artistry in his work. For instance, I will say that the Art Direction in Avatar was quite good. They did a good job of making Pandora and the animals at once foreign and accessible and also contrasting the gray-blue monotone sets of the corporate humans with the greens reds and blues of the jungle.
@LukeLovesRose Your arguments never seem to go farther than “you can’t see what I see”. You argue only with assertions, but give no evidence to support your claims. The Wizard of Oz’ value of a film does not lie in people crying when she says “there’s no place like home”, which I personally have never seen. The value of Wizard of Oz as a film lies in it’s Art Direction, creating Oz as a place that is both fantastical and scary using all those colorful cartoonish sets and then
@LukeLovesRose Taking you to the woods with sharp lines and shades of black and the witch’s castle with similar sets. The cinematography is also very good, but mostly because it was one of the first movies to use color deliberately and not simply to have color. In addition the script was great. It had fantastic “dream logic”, where stuff that shouldn’t make sense at all seems to make perfect sense, such as the witch wanting the magical shoes for no apparent reason
@LukeLovesRose or a talking lion, tin man, and scare crow. The special effects were also fantastic for 1939. With Scorsese at his prime, the films’ value lies in their direction, acting, scripts, editing and cinematography. His art direction is fairly straightforward and he doesn’t use amazing sound or special effects however.
@LukeLovesRose What you said was “throw ‘artsy’ crap like City of God”. That sentence implies a generality that “artsy” stuff is crap and gives an example of such crap in City of God. What you said did not specifically say was “throw City of God, which is ‘artsy’ crap” or something of the like, which would support your last claim. And please explain why you thought it was pretentious and unimpressive from a filmmaker’s view as I am a filmmaker and have actually used some techniques from
@LukeLovesRose And what you said about watching Malick, Scorsese, etc and how they were not all that impressive to you suggests that you do think all "artsy" films are crap.
Btw, PT and Gaston, do you have any idea why certain movies of the Golden Age haven't aged one bit? Do you know why people still cry when Dorothy says, "There's no place like home"? People, adults at least, know full well what that line means and represents to them. But, they still cry when they hear that line... from a movie that is over 70 years old.
If you think people will be having the same responses to Scorsese's films in another 30 years, you're sorely mistaken. Cameron's films though
Pt, Gaston, you're the two stubborn asses that refuse to see the art in Cameron's films and you're telling me that I can't comment on art. You're fucking nuts.
I did see those "artsy" films as I called them. I figured out everything about them while watching the film, from the acting, the writing to the sets and lighting and what it all could mean. Quite frankly, those art films by Malick and Scorsese, etc were not all that impressive to me. Not after seeing Cameron's skill.
@LukeLovesRose hey ...you still around here???.....Yes cameron is very skillfull....he has improve the technical aspect of films, that is not enough compliment? But i ask you, what is a real filmaker?....Scorsese is a actors director, a better narrator...Cameron films are base only in formulas and ridiculous love storys for teenagers....that is impresive?.the look is not everything...the real deal is the STORY, what a filmaker has to tell....Thats the diference btween Scorsese and Cameron!
@LukeLovesRose BESIDEs...you have ever watch THE AGE OF INNOCENCE georgius lookng movie . KUNDUN maybe is not his best but the visual aspect is breathtaking!....What about THE AVIATOR???...the use of colors, the lightening, the special effects...THE CRAsh OF THE XF-11 scene is spectacular!...none cameron movie can match that level of stetic achieve in terms of light and colors. The look of SHUTTER ISLAND is also outstanding!...What about the beautiful use of black and white in RAGING BULL???
Also, about Kundun, The Age of Innocence, Aviator, etc....
If you think those were great visual feats of genius, you've got a lot to learn. You need to see more movies. As boring as the film is at times, you really need to see Stanley Kubrick's Barry Lyndon if you want to see the inspiration for the visual beauty in Age of Innocence. It's not easy to sit through, but Kubrick basically put true paintings from a similar era on film.
But, you still don't understand what I'm talking about. A beautiful color template doesn't mean shit if it doesn't help improve or embellish the story AND the characters and their relationships. If those elements are ignored in the film, the film is almost worthless to me anymore. And, give me the names of characters in The Department or even better, Shutter Island. I bet anything you can hear the name, The Terminator and an image of Arnold immediately springs to mind.
@LukeLovesRose ...what about the look, the feel, the masive sets(not cgi crap) of GANGS OF NEW YORK....???...i think you only want to see that YES CAMERON IS A VISUAL MASTER, in special effects, but the real care of Stetic like Scorsese on those pictures or Kubrik in barry lyndon, are thingss that cameron is far way of them!...you can really aswerme this?? :....You can put at the same level of Coppola, Scorsese, polanski or kubirck for ex to cameron???...answer that simple question...if you can!
I don't really care if you ever agree with me on anything, frankly. You're stubborn. I'm stubborn. We both think we're right as rain. I just like arguing my case. It's that simple.
Shakespeare, Picasso... Scorsese?? Seriously?? I mean, how did Scorsese define a genre? Haven't there been gangster movies before Scorsese? The Godfather? Cagney? To name TWO. lol
@LukeLovesRose He is not the only one( Kubrick, Lumet,Welles, Hitchoock,etc are others in the area of cinema) but he define the genre of gangster movies like no other director, just like Hitchcock did with thrillers/suspense films.you never watch : MEAN STREETS, GOODFELLAS, CASINO, THE DEPARTED. The first two are masterpieces. Some of his best work has nothing to do with gangster: TAXI DRIVER,RAGING BULL,AFTER HOURS,THE LAST THEMPATION OF CHIRST,THE AGE OF INNOCENCE. That is filmaking!
Lumet? 12 Angry Man is the only film he's made that was close to perfection. But, come on. Shakespearean?? Really? I do agree with you about Hitch and Kubrick and Welles. You obviously have a different of what makes a master filmmaker versus a good or great filmmaker. Leo has made one film that was made by a master filmmaker and EVERYONE refuses to see it, because James Cameron's visual genius is THAT fucking subtle, dumbass.
@LukeLovesRose dumbass? why? because you cant stand other people have diferent ideas? And i now see what is a MAster for you...say that Cameron is master...say no more!!! about the lumet thing: dog day afternoon, the veredict, the hills, network,? that arent great movies? he is not a master? Shasperean is one way to say that artists like Scorsese an others, will be remeber like the shakespere of cinema. i can even think in compare cameron to Scorsese or coppola or kubrick! the real masters!
You don't seem to have any understanding of what art is. James Cameron went from making a low-budget shoot-em-up with unknown actors and an Austrian best known as Conan by then... to a 200 million dollar mega hit, earning 1.8 billion dollars. He has created legendary characters, images and stories with several masterpieces.
@LukeLovesRose you cant even compare the body of work of Cameron to Scorsese, Polansky, Spielberg, Choens, kubrick, coppola, Eastwood...and you think Cameron has made "several MAsterpieces"? NAME ONE. his best films are originals? Titanic=romeo/juliet in a ship, Avatar= dances with wolves, pochaontas, last samurai in space...,watch the trailer of Avatar and tell me if you dident see coming the storyline! what a dept story, guauuu....what a characters study! What a complex story, guauuu!
@LukeLovesRose ok man...wait until you grow up a few more years(i hope) and see the comments you are posting! there isent even a debate in wich Director is better: Cameron or Scorsese, go wach t2 and avatar, go watch that kind of movies with 100 films clishes,then wait a few more years until you understand "THE AGE OF INNOCENCE", "AFTER HOURS","THE LAST THEMPTATION OF CHRIST", "RAGING BULL" a debate is beetwen scorsese to Polanski or hitchcook or malick or welles,etc, those are real artist!
@LukeLovesRose James cameron makes movies for teenagers! that doenst mean they are bad but they arent great either!,FOR ME, real and complex, and more interesting and deep art, are the work of for ex. KUBRICK, LYNCH, SCORSESE, MALICK, to name a few!
@LukeLovesRose titanic or avatar you think are perfect? the guy spend $300 millions dolars and wait 10 years to tell a story so clishe tell before better, "dances with wolves" " the last samurai"etc, Avatar is original?mmmm, besides this guy(cameron) talks like if he where the inventor of CGI, 3D, and the motion capture, What Jackson did in LORTR with gollum,first) Still is a great visual spectacule(avatar) but the story is in 2-d and the images in 3-d. Dumbass!
Btw, I would have to say that yes, T2 and Titanic and maybe even Avatar are the modern equivalent to Citizen Kane-class films. You just have to understand the language of film. Kubrick got close to Kane with Strangelove, 2001 and Clockwork Orange. I personally don't think any other film has come that close, other than T2 and Titanic. You may not like the story or script, that's your prerogative. At times, I don't like watching Kane or The Godfather, but I respect them as art.
@LukeLovesRose if you dont like watch kane or the godfather or raging bull, like t2 or avatar, you make my point. And you are the one who tell me i dont get the art??? well "my friend" what are you on? Saying that cameron "has created" "LEGEND" CHARACTERS"??? MY GOD!!!!! He is a master in creting worlds and stuning visuals, but his characters are...in 2-d! T2 and Titanic are modern equivalent to KAne? and no other film match that achievemnt close to kane??? Come back to reality!
@Gaston088able cameRon himself has admit that he really isnt a good writer. i will name a few films and i going to be espectating your answer: APOCALYPSE NOW, RAGING BULL, CHINATOWN, THE PIANIST, MISTYC RIVER, LAWRENCE OF ARABIA, THE GODFATHER, VERTIGO, LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL(SAME YEAR TITANIC), CITY OF GOD, FARGO, TAXI DRIVER,....all these films, none are close to be the equivalent to Kane wich for what you say also none are the equivalent to T2, Titanic or Avatar? what a joke "you re a funny guy"
Only douchebags throw "artsy" crap like City of God at people in response. Jesus. Anyone can make a movie when the camera is balanced on someone's head or between someone's legs.
@LukeLovesRose The fact that you just said only "douchebags throw 'artsy" crap" out as a response completely throws out any credibility you have on saying that Gaston doesn't know about art. If you won't accept a film that is, quite frankly, a very good example of an artful film as a legitimate argument then you have no credibility in saying anything about art. And you have to be one of the only people living who claims to know art and think T2 and Titanic are at the level of Kane or Kubrick.
@LukeLovesRose avatar and titanic are childs play compare to RAGING BULL, TAXI DRIVER, AND GOODFELLAS. Even today filmakers like David fincher are already making better films that cameron or the cohen brothers or nolan, etc. go and see cartoons!
Well, you certainly expressed your point of view, didn't you?? LOL. You don't like to be called childish names, huh? Unlike myself, you can't let name-calling roll off your back, huh?? lol. Jesus. I argued my point. I wasn't just going out of my way to insult you. Grow up.
And, by the way, Cameron is not saying that he invented 3D or CGI. He did actually pioneer several ground-breaking techniques on how to use 3D and CGI. That is fucking fact, my friend.
I have to say that this tribute montage is decidedly well done. It's hard not to question how great these scenes and films are when they're edited together so well.
Leo is much better than people are giving him credit for. His name is just a little too big as a hero, a heartthrob and a powerful actor. Mel Gibson is Mel Gibson. Tom Hanks is Tom Hanks. Humphrey Bogart was Humphrey Bogart. John Wayne was John Wayne. Robert De Niro is Robert De Niro. Leonardo DiCaprio is Leonardo DiCaprio. There is NOTHING wrong with stardom. Just look past the bright lights.
@LukeLovesRose I think people give him too much credit actually. He's a good actor, better than most, but definitely not the best actor of his generation. And to be honest the only reason people compare him to DeNiro is because of Scorsese. In reality his style is closer to a James Stewart type. I never see anyone compare him to Pacino, Day-Lewis, Hoffman or Nicholson. DeNiro comes to mind cause of Scorsese and that's sad. He's a good actor though. He was great in Gilbert Grape and The Aviator.
martin scorsese is 1 of the GREATEST directors OF ALL time and probaly the greatest working to day. and he will always be. and robert deniro is 1 of the GREATEST actors OF ALL time an will always be. and dicaprio isnt the best actor ever but he is the best YOUNGEST actor working 2day. Dicaprio is a better actor than that DOUCHBAG ROBERT PATINSON who cant act AT ALL! and Dicaprio is better then ZAC EFRON who is the WORST ACTOR EVER!!
I LOVED that video montage, gives me goosebumps. There so many Scorsese movies I have not even seen yet!!! Greatest director in history in my opinion. I wonder how many Oscar winners and nominees he has worked with at this current time?
Scorsese is a god among men, and Raging Bull is in my opinion is his finest work! Everytime I watch it, it makes me cry, cringe, wonder, and make me want more! Actually, all of his movies I've watched made me feel that way! I hope he lives another 100 years making classics, and god bless him!
I read some of the comments published on this page and a lot of you do not think the Scorsese's pictures starring DiCaprio are great. Yes they're not as good as the ones with DeNiro: Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, Casino are true masterpieces, but R they bad ? Of Course NOT, a not so good Martin Scorsese film is still a GREAT film. Scorsese is A DIRECTOR, the images have a real meaning, his directing is still as amazing as in the old days. You just don't respond to the story the same way as you did.
I read some of the comments published on this page and a lot of you do not think the Scorsese's pictures starring DiCaprio are great. Yes they're not as good as the ones with DeNiro: Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, Casino are true masterpieces, but R they bad ? Of Course NOT, a not so good Martin Scorsese film is still a GREAT film. Scorsese is A DIRECTOR, the images have a real meaning, his directing is still as amazing as in the old days. You just don't respond to the story the same way as you did.
ok, all of the films with dicaprio involved have been mediocre compared to his de niro ones. Nothing truly great by scorsese's standards since Casino!
@dontleademsomuch totally agree. there isn't a single equivalent of a taxi driver, or raging bull among the scorsese-dicaprio collaborations. dicaprio is half the actor de niro was.
@suchmuch96 fuck off it was a glorified B movie. entertaining and everything but silly too, casino is actually about something. The oscar was a pity vote.
@dontleademsomuch the aviator was good. a tad boring but.... k, u know what: we can say what we want, but we both know that raging bull and taxi driver kicks both casino and the departed's ass
@dontleademsomuch MAYBE TRULY "GREAT" SINCE CASINO ISENT...BUT STILL VERY VERY GOOD FILMS BEAR GREAT FILMS MARY HAS DOBE AFTER CASINO: "KUNDUN", "GANGS OF NEW YORK", "THE AVIATOR" ," THE DEPARTED", "SHUTTER ISLAND".....and what iu sgreaat for you? GREAT ARE RAGING BULL, TAXI DRIVER, GOODFELLAS, CASINO, TEHA GE OF INNOCENCE....for ex. Spielberg hasent made a great one since schindlers list....and thats is "maybe GREAT"....
Schindler's List was "maybe great"? Your credibility is put into question every time you speak, jackass. And, what about Saving Private Ryan? I guess that's dogshit to you, for all you know about great filmmaking.
Btw, a real masterpiece is not easy to define right away. It may even take years to see the full extent of Cameron's genius. But, it is EXTREMELY FOOLISH of any filmmaker to just brush him off as easily as you.
@LukeLovesRose LIKE I SAID EARLIER...GREAT FILMAKING AND TRUE ART IS THE ONE THAT SHOWS A MESSAGE OR AT LEAST A REFLECTION OF REAL LIFE....not the great spectacle and pyrotechnics with empty characters,and 0 content!...if filmaking is just about nice s.effects and explotions...you LukeLovesRose ARE AN IDIOT! PERIOD!..and stop writing about me! are you serious? i think we finished whit this sh...!
@babykitty15 Nah. It truly was a funny moment. The funniest moment of the night. I began laughing myself. That is actor Brendan Frasier, BTW. I'm sure Mr. Scorsese wouldn't appreciate you calling a fellow artist of his an "idiot" either. So if you respect Mr. Scorsese like you do, I think you will find it in yourself to respect Mr. Frasier.
@hubb22buntos Okay, you are right. I am wrong. Sorry. You are always right, and you don't need any maturing to do. You are best as you are. You have no growing to do. Everyone should bow down to you. You are great.
@ShelterDogs I agree with everything in your last comment. But seriously you have a minnow of a mind if you think Brendan Fraiser should be respected solely on the fact he is in the movie biz.
@hubb22buntos Again, you are right. Everything you say is right. Everyone in the movie industry should be disrespected just becaues they are in the "movie biz." They should be singled out and treated unfairly than the rest.
those actors are all so fake, look at them all checking to monitors to see if they're on camera so that they can pretend to be smiling, fucking wankers.
Can anyone name the song at 5:53? I'm pounding my brains trying to think where he used it. For the record, this is one of the best damn montages I have ever seen, the man is a visionary.
howard hughes so does not belong in the intro montage of scorsese's classic characters/performances. Bill the Butcher should have taken its place instead.
Ray wasn't made by Scorsese, so it can't be considered 'one of his best films.' And The Aviator isn't good BECAUSE it's two and a half hours - but considering the meticulous and relentlessly insightful effort put into the study of Hughes, the length of the movie speaks highly towards the effort and ultimate accomplishment of the flick.
Gangs was amazing, and Day Lewis was fantastic in it, but The Aviator is on par with Scorsese's best. And that's saying a lot.
obviously ray wasn't a scorsese movie. i'm just saying that despite the meticulous and relentless effort, the character just....didn't work, ultimately. a GOOD effort, but simply not his best. Gangs, on the other hand, also a solid, not-his-best effort, but for Gangs you're welcome to rant about the rewards of revisiting meticulous historical detail and a performance by DDL that never gets old. Just thinking about Dicaprio's performance gives me a headache.
day lewis in gangs of new york blows dicaprio's hughes away. that flag-draped monologue alone was better than anything that leo has done. A lot hinges on the actor's performance, and dicaprio somehow managed to make hughes seem bland as porridge.
im referring to the argument b/w u and ImNotThere, about how day-lewis should replace dicaprio in that shot @ 3:12 in order to *properly* honor their creator, Scorsese.
@Kiwinites But two entirely different characters. DiCaprio in Gangs Of New York was meant to be more down to earth. Day Lewis's character was wild, mean and over the top. Yes, it was a great peformance... and if you contrast both characters I guess DiCaprio character would look "bland." I don't look at it that way, I see two entirely different characters.
I just saw "The King of Comedy" most certainly Scorsese's more nerve-racking, uncomforting, disturbing, and underrated picture I've seen by him particularly. Robert De Niro delivers one of his best perormances as the eccentric, witty, sad, fragile and yet humorous Rupert Pupkin one of his most facinating yet dislikable characters. Sandra Bernhard also delivers an excellent performance as well.
@JesusCristo2002 I just saw The King of Comedy too and I must agree with you. It is so underappreciated that every Scorsese fan needs to see it. It is my third favorite Scorsese movie. In fact it is on youtube so go do yourself a favor and go watch The King of Comedy, an entertaining masterpiece.
Gaston088able, if you'd just stop responding to me, there wouldn't be a fight.
However, I wish you would at least entertain the notion that maybe you're wrong about Cameron. I think of Scorsese and the 2nd best filmmaker we have, after Cameron. That's not too shabby of placement for Marty. But, you seem to think of James Cameron as one of cheap filmmakers like Michael Bay, and for no good reason.
LukeLovesRose 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LukeLovesRose why are you keep insulting me? psychopath?...just yesterday i want to see this video again and for my surprise i found like 10 comments from you about me....i thoutgh we have finished our "fight" in the other page ...when i was reading this comments i have to write back to you. Thats what im saying to you, our "fight" was in other page like 3 months ago or more i dont remember...but your comments here were about 2 months ago, just yesterday i read them!
Gaston088able 4 days ago
Comment removed
Gaston088able 4 days ago
Gaston088able, the last time I wrote about you or wrote to you, was 6 fucking months ago, you psychopath.
Anyway, moving on to your ranting and raving, until you can actually see through Cameron's genius visual style, SHUT UP! And I'm not talking the sweeping grandeur shots or the effects. I'm talking about the way an actor is shot. How the shot is composed. What goes into the background or foreground, while Leo or Kate are talking.
LukeLovesRose 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I hope you "luke" understand my point, yes i like t2, titanic, i enjoy avatar in cinema becuase it was a great ride....but that isent what filmaking is all about! Art is more than just entertaining!
Gaston088able 5 days ago
one thing is to make something about story and characters with some technical use to enhance the story, like masters of the level of SCORSESE,KUBRICK,POLANSKY (to name a few) ...and other thing is just make a film that the CORE is about effects and technicals show-off, with 0 meaning in story and characters. There is a diference! ...finally if you "lukelovesrose" think that KUNDUN, THE AGE OF INNOCENCE,THE AVIATOR, are just good looking and nothing interesting(to you) you dont get those stories!
Gaston088able 5 days ago
i want to put on record that im not saying that cameron is a bad filmaker...but it isent his "thing" telling storys about characters and relantionships that have resonance in real life or make a reflection of life, (that is the main purpose of art, TO SAY SOMETHING)....he is a great craftman, a guy very wise in his technicals kwnolodge that improves the technical making of films,YES IT IS TRUE....but camerons cinema doenst show the real purpose of what the art of film is about!
Gaston088able 5 days ago
LukeLovesRose...its ok, not everyone gets TRULLY GRAT FILMAKING! Scorsese is also a very good in the technical aspects, look THE AGE OF INNOCENCE,THE AVIATOR, GANGS OF NEW YORK, KUNDUN, CASINO, SHUTTER ISLAND, HUGO...You think i never saw a kubrick film? yet you are the guy who said "cameron is the modern kubrick", do i have to say more?, but scorsese not only makes good loking films, his film are abut things that matters, that says something, that is the real power of art and filmaking...
Gaston088able 5 days ago
LukeLovesRose...look the cameron movies... are about sequels or clishe ideas( for not saying copys) THE ABYSS! come on! is just CLOSE ENCOUNTERS underwater!!!...AVATAR is pocahontas in space, dances with wolve,etc, even the hunting sequence in the extended version of avatar make my point( you dont see the hunt sequence of the buffalos in dances with wolves???) is the same thing!!!, and the plot is, may god...if you see the trailer of AVATAR you get the all plot!..THAT IS GREAT FILMAKING???
Gaston088able 5 days ago
LukeLovesRose... but in "story" for me is the real power of filmaking, because is all about the characters study, the things that are in "real life" that shows a message or at least a reflection of life. Like the case of Raging bull, taxi driver, the last themptation of crhist, the age of innocence, the king of omedy, the aviator(FILMS OF MR SCORSESE) and you compare J.CAMERON to him? i said to you many times that cameron is great for his technical knwolodge but you can compare him to kubrick...
Gaston088able 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
LukeLovesRose.. i try to explan to an idiot like "lukeloves" what is the true power of cinema... for ex the films of Mr Scorsese are about story, not plot, you dont get the diference, for ex plot it will be like (memento) story (Raging bulll) the diference is that in "plot" the characters arent the main thing, the characters in "plot" are just "plot devices" they arent great(the characters)im not saying they are bad...
Gaston088able 5 days ago
LukeLovesRose the idiot returns!!!!, why you keep coming back and writing about me? i think you learned the lesson in the other page (of hugo) where me and other people make the point you are just ridiculous, how someone like you can said "j. cameron is the modern S.kubrick", "his characters from the 80s(ripley, sarah connor) are aging better than the ones in the godfather and taxi driver", or "casablanca and citizen kane are overrated", "Raging bull goes to ponti a to point b"....
Gaston088able 5 days ago
Scorsese. I love you.
MrJoker95 1 month ago
1:15 wth!!! brendan fraser?
MariieeWasoski 2 months ago
which is the 1st song at the start of the tribute???
pheonixd2 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A Man, A Laugh, A Legend - Brenden Fraser.
MasterNacho94 2 months ago
1:15 such an idiot
ferreirainfante 5 months ago 6
@ferreirainfante He went Full Retard...
DonRMB 2 weeks ago
@ferreirainfante Hey...Brandon Fraser is the man!
chukkkles 5 days ago
Comment removed
Gaston088able 6 months ago
Comment removed
Gaston088able 6 months ago
ricky was smart not to joke about these three legends. love you bobby and marty!
chinadollz123 6 months ago
1:15 George of the Jungle had a lapse in brain activity from the wave of eroticism coming from Robert De Niro's voice.
epcproportions 6 months ago
I'd love to see Edward Norton in a Scorsese movie!
ghostwhisper666 7 months ago
Martin Scorsese sex tape?
You know if he wrote directed and stared in it,
it would be the greatest piece of pornography ever!
528491Inception 7 months ago 10
My point is that The Wizard of Oz is not just a kid's story. It's a family film with a lot of adult themes in it.
You don't seem to wanna look for those themes. And, that's where you're going wrong when you look at Cameron's films. You need the themes to be spoken in great detail or something. Like everything Liotta says in his voice over during Goodfellas is all the message of the film, basically.
LukeLovesRose 8 months ago
@LukeLovesRose jesus....i keep reading the things you wrote to other people and it seems you are the only who doesnt understand the point that everyone here try to make!....TELLME what is the deep, the meaming, the narrative intelligence, the subject of films like ALIENS, TERMInATOR, THE ABYYS, TRUE LIES, AVATAR???????....they are all great entertaining but compare anyone of those films to GOODFELLAS is just, unbelievable! the only great film in his carrer is TITANIC i give you that!
Gaston088able 6 months ago
@LukeLovesRose .....AGAIN a will askyou SIMPLE QUESTIONS...WHAT IS A STORYTELLER FOR YOU, YOU COMPARE THE WORK OF SCORSESE WITH CAMERONS???... HAVE YOU EVER IN YOUR LIFE WATCHTED "THE AGE OF INNOCENCE"....thats is a narrator at his best...a story so sutil, fine, a director who knows how to bring the best of his actors(daniel day lewis, michelle pfiefer and wynona rider are amazing)a REAL HUMAN STORY ABOUT RELATIONSHIPS!!!if you say "LIOTTA NARRATIVE IS ALL THE MESSAGE IN GOODFELLAS" say no more!
Gaston088able 6 months ago
So, it's not the effects or the art direction or the cinematography that solely drives The Wizard of Oz. There are themes about trying to find happiness in the worst of times. This is a universal theme for anyone at any time. Judy Garland is magnificent as Dorothy Gale. She really does cloud the line between reality and fake. I mean, I believed she was a little girl at one point... even though, she's actually 16.
Hamilton is wonderful. She still gives me chills at times.
LukeLovesRose 8 months ago
Unless you can see The Wizard of Oz as more than a wonderful showcase for art direction, cinematography and effects, then, you will never understand Cameron's films. He even mentioned recently that his favorite film is The Wizard of Oz.
Those effects in The Wizard of Oz are showing their age, especially on the big screen. I can tell that's a matte painting a mile away. I can tell those dark monsters with beady red eyes in the dark forest are Halloween props for Christ's sake. So...
LukeLovesRose 8 months ago
I don't know how to describe what Cameron is doing. I know that he's using a lot of new and risky techniques. He's walking a fine line, between creating an Ed Wood Jr film or Citizen Kane visually. He uses continuity errors as art. As far as I can tell, not one filmmaker has had the balls to do that and do it so well.
Um, I don't know why you have a problem with the emotional resonance of "There's no place like home." It's in the script. Just listen to everything Dorothy says.
LukeLovesRose 8 months ago
bring the life of crime we see in Goodfellas to life. Not only is it beautiful to look at. Not only is it telling this crime saga well. But, Scorsese is also capturing a genuine sense of dread at times and he's barely moving the camera. That's art to me. That's when its hard work. When the filmmaker can erase the line between fake and real without showing a lot of effort.
Whether you believe it or not, Cameron is making fake feel more like reality for audiences than any documentary.
LukeLovesRose 8 months ago
No, no, no. You generalized wrong. You sound ignorant when you generalize wrong.
I said that I think that artsy films like City of God are crap. Movies like City of God. Dramas that are trying to make themselves out to be documentaries are fucking painful for me to watch. As far as I'm concerned, that fad was introduced and died with Blair Witch. It's cheap and lazy film-making to me.
Take Scorsese's best films for example. It takes a lot of genius as a cinematographer and art director to
LukeLovesRose 8 months ago
Btw, PT, I didn't call all "artsy" films, "CRAP." I said that City of God was crap. Do some reading the next time you wanna attack me. I hated City of God. It is pretentious and not impressive at all... from a filmmaker's POV. I can hate an art film if I choose. lol. You can hate a Cameron film. But, don't insult me, because I'm praising Cameron's work higher than you.
LukeLovesRose 8 months ago
@LukeLovesRose I would be much more receptive to your view of Cameron’s films if you were to give legitimate, specific evidence in favor of the artistry in his work. For instance, I will say that the Art Direction in Avatar was quite good. They did a good job of making Pandora and the animals at once foreign and accessible and also contrasting the gray-blue monotone sets of the corporate humans with the greens reds and blues of the jungle.
PtBlnkProductions 8 months ago
@LukeLovesRose Your arguments never seem to go farther than “you can’t see what I see”. You argue only with assertions, but give no evidence to support your claims. The Wizard of Oz’ value of a film does not lie in people crying when she says “there’s no place like home”, which I personally have never seen. The value of Wizard of Oz as a film lies in it’s Art Direction, creating Oz as a place that is both fantastical and scary using all those colorful cartoonish sets and then
PtBlnkProductions 8 months ago
@LukeLovesRose Taking you to the woods with sharp lines and shades of black and the witch’s castle with similar sets. The cinematography is also very good, but mostly because it was one of the first movies to use color deliberately and not simply to have color. In addition the script was great. It had fantastic “dream logic”, where stuff that shouldn’t make sense at all seems to make perfect sense, such as the witch wanting the magical shoes for no apparent reason
PtBlnkProductions 8 months ago
@LukeLovesRose or a talking lion, tin man, and scare crow. The special effects were also fantastic for 1939. With Scorsese at his prime, the films’ value lies in their direction, acting, scripts, editing and cinematography. His art direction is fairly straightforward and he doesn’t use amazing sound or special effects however.
PtBlnkProductions 8 months ago
@LukeLovesRose What you said was “throw ‘artsy’ crap like City of God”. That sentence implies a generality that “artsy” stuff is crap and gives an example of such crap in City of God. What you said did not specifically say was “throw City of God, which is ‘artsy’ crap” or something of the like, which would support your last claim. And please explain why you thought it was pretentious and unimpressive from a filmmaker’s view as I am a filmmaker and have actually used some techniques from
PtBlnkProductions 8 months ago
@LukeLovesRose City of God to inform some of my work. Again I would be much more respectful of your opinion were you to back up your claims.
PtBlnkProductions 8 months ago
@LukeLovesRose And what you said about watching Malick, Scorsese, etc and how they were not all that impressive to you suggests that you do think all "artsy" films are crap.
PtBlnkProductions 8 months ago
Btw, PT and Gaston, do you have any idea why certain movies of the Golden Age haven't aged one bit? Do you know why people still cry when Dorothy says, "There's no place like home"? People, adults at least, know full well what that line means and represents to them. But, they still cry when they hear that line... from a movie that is over 70 years old.
If you think people will be having the same responses to Scorsese's films in another 30 years, you're sorely mistaken. Cameron's films though
LukeLovesRose 8 months ago
Pt, Gaston, you're the two stubborn asses that refuse to see the art in Cameron's films and you're telling me that I can't comment on art. You're fucking nuts.
I did see those "artsy" films as I called them. I figured out everything about them while watching the film, from the acting, the writing to the sets and lighting and what it all could mean. Quite frankly, those art films by Malick and Scorsese, etc were not all that impressive to me. Not after seeing Cameron's skill.
LukeLovesRose 8 months ago
@LukeLovesRose hey ...you still around here???.....Yes cameron is very skillfull....he has improve the technical aspect of films, that is not enough compliment? But i ask you, what is a real filmaker?....Scorsese is a actors director, a better narrator...Cameron films are base only in formulas and ridiculous love storys for teenagers....that is impresive?.the look is not everything...the real deal is the STORY, what a filmaker has to tell....Thats the diference btween Scorsese and Cameron!
Gaston088able 6 months ago
@LukeLovesRose BESIDEs...you have ever watch THE AGE OF INNOCENCE georgius lookng movie . KUNDUN maybe is not his best but the visual aspect is breathtaking!....What about THE AVIATOR???...the use of colors, the lightening, the special effects...THE CRAsh OF THE XF-11 scene is spectacular!...none cameron movie can match that level of stetic achieve in terms of light and colors. The look of SHUTTER ISLAND is also outstanding!...What about the beautiful use of black and white in RAGING BULL???
Gaston088able 6 months ago
@Gaston088able
Also, about Kundun, The Age of Innocence, Aviator, etc....
If you think those were great visual feats of genius, you've got a lot to learn. You need to see more movies. As boring as the film is at times, you really need to see Stanley Kubrick's Barry Lyndon if you want to see the inspiration for the visual beauty in Age of Innocence. It's not easy to sit through, but Kubrick basically put true paintings from a similar era on film.
Kundun has a wonderful color template, true.
LukeLovesRose 3 months ago
@Gaston088able
But, you still don't understand what I'm talking about. A beautiful color template doesn't mean shit if it doesn't help improve or embellish the story AND the characters and their relationships. If those elements are ignored in the film, the film is almost worthless to me anymore. And, give me the names of characters in The Department or even better, Shutter Island. I bet anything you can hear the name, The Terminator and an image of Arnold immediately springs to mind.
LukeLovesRose 3 months ago
@LukeLovesRose ...what about the look, the feel, the masive sets(not cgi crap) of GANGS OF NEW YORK....???...i think you only want to see that YES CAMERON IS A VISUAL MASTER, in special effects, but the real care of Stetic like Scorsese on those pictures or Kubrik in barry lyndon, are thingss that cameron is far way of them!...you can really aswerme this?? :....You can put at the same level of Coppola, Scorsese, polanski or kubirck for ex to cameron???...answer that simple question...if you can!
Gaston088able 6 months ago
@Gaston088able
I don't really care if you ever agree with me on anything, frankly. You're stubborn. I'm stubborn. We both think we're right as rain. I just like arguing my case. It's that simple.
LukeLovesRose 3 months ago
Titanic + t2 citzen kane equvilants ARE U MAD¿??????
18decman 8 months ago
@18decman
Um, YES, I'm a mad. lol. But, I know film. And, I stand by my "MAD" opinion.
LukeLovesRose 8 months ago
Scorsese is ONE of the best. In filmaking it's a really great thing to have more than just a few great directors, so there argument settled.
MaddlyMightt 8 months ago
Shakespeare, Picasso... Scorsese?? Seriously?? I mean, how did Scorsese define a genre? Haven't there been gangster movies before Scorsese? The Godfather? Cagney? To name TWO. lol
LukeLovesRose 10 months ago
@LukeLovesRose He is not the only one( Kubrick, Lumet,Welles, Hitchoock,etc are others in the area of cinema) but he define the genre of gangster movies like no other director, just like Hitchcock did with thrillers/suspense films.you never watch : MEAN STREETS, GOODFELLAS, CASINO, THE DEPARTED. The first two are masterpieces. Some of his best work has nothing to do with gangster: TAXI DRIVER,RAGING BULL,AFTER HOURS,THE LAST THEMPATION OF CHIRST,THE AGE OF INNOCENCE. That is filmaking!
Gaston088able 10 months ago
@Gaston088able
Lumet? 12 Angry Man is the only film he's made that was close to perfection. But, come on. Shakespearean?? Really? I do agree with you about Hitch and Kubrick and Welles. You obviously have a different of what makes a master filmmaker versus a good or great filmmaker. Leo has made one film that was made by a master filmmaker and EVERYONE refuses to see it, because James Cameron's visual genius is THAT fucking subtle, dumbass.
LukeLovesRose 9 months ago
@LukeLovesRose dumbass? why? because you cant stand other people have diferent ideas? And i now see what is a MAster for you...say that Cameron is master...say no more!!! about the lumet thing: dog day afternoon, the veredict, the hills, network,? that arent great movies? he is not a master? Shasperean is one way to say that artists like Scorsese an others, will be remeber like the shakespere of cinema. i can even think in compare cameron to Scorsese or coppola or kubrick! the real masters!
Gaston088able 9 months ago
@Gaston088able
You don't seem to have any understanding of what art is. James Cameron went from making a low-budget shoot-em-up with unknown actors and an Austrian best known as Conan by then... to a 200 million dollar mega hit, earning 1.8 billion dollars. He has created legendary characters, images and stories with several masterpieces.
LukeLovesRose 9 months ago
@LukeLovesRose you cant even compare the body of work of Cameron to Scorsese, Polansky, Spielberg, Choens, kubrick, coppola, Eastwood...and you think Cameron has made "several MAsterpieces"? NAME ONE. his best films are originals? Titanic=romeo/juliet in a ship, Avatar= dances with wolves, pochaontas, last samurai in space...,watch the trailer of Avatar and tell me if you dident see coming the storyline! what a dept story, guauuu....what a characters study! What a complex story, guauuu!
Gaston088able 9 months ago
@Gaston088able What about the Terminator films?
Hyman74Roth 8 months ago
@Gaston088able
LOL. You're not actually seeing what is there if you see Cameron's characters as "2-D."
And Cameron also admitted that he didn't know anything about poker on the set of Titanic when we've seen him reference poker in 3 films... at least.
LukeLovesRose 8 months ago
@LukeLovesRose ok man...wait until you grow up a few more years(i hope) and see the comments you are posting! there isent even a debate in wich Director is better: Cameron or Scorsese, go wach t2 and avatar, go watch that kind of movies with 100 films clishes,then wait a few more years until you understand "THE AGE OF INNOCENCE", "AFTER HOURS","THE LAST THEMPTATION OF CHRIST", "RAGING BULL" a debate is beetwen scorsese to Polanski or hitchcook or malick or welles,etc, those are real artist!
Gaston088able 8 months ago
@LukeLovesRose James cameron makes movies for teenagers! that doenst mean they are bad but they arent great either!,FOR ME, real and complex, and more interesting and deep art, are the work of for ex. KUBRICK, LYNCH, SCORSESE, MALICK, to name a few!
Gaston088able 8 months ago
@LukeLovesRose titanic or avatar you think are perfect? the guy spend $300 millions dolars and wait 10 years to tell a story so clishe tell before better, "dances with wolves" " the last samurai"etc, Avatar is original?mmmm, besides this guy(cameron) talks like if he where the inventor of CGI, 3D, and the motion capture, What Jackson did in LORTR with gollum,first) Still is a great visual spectacule(avatar) but the story is in 2-d and the images in 3-d. Dumbass!
Gaston088able 9 months ago
@Gaston088able
Btw, I would have to say that yes, T2 and Titanic and maybe even Avatar are the modern equivalent to Citizen Kane-class films. You just have to understand the language of film. Kubrick got close to Kane with Strangelove, 2001 and Clockwork Orange. I personally don't think any other film has come that close, other than T2 and Titanic. You may not like the story or script, that's your prerogative. At times, I don't like watching Kane or The Godfather, but I respect them as art.
LukeLovesRose 9 months ago
@LukeLovesRose if you dont like watch kane or the godfather or raging bull, like t2 or avatar, you make my point. And you are the one who tell me i dont get the art??? well "my friend" what are you on? Saying that cameron "has created" "LEGEND" CHARACTERS"??? MY GOD!!!!! He is a master in creting worlds and stuning visuals, but his characters are...in 2-d! T2 and Titanic are modern equivalent to KAne? and no other film match that achievemnt close to kane??? Come back to reality!
Gaston088able 9 months ago
@Gaston088able cameRon himself has admit that he really isnt a good writer. i will name a few films and i going to be espectating your answer: APOCALYPSE NOW, RAGING BULL, CHINATOWN, THE PIANIST, MISTYC RIVER, LAWRENCE OF ARABIA, THE GODFATHER, VERTIGO, LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL(SAME YEAR TITANIC), CITY OF GOD, FARGO, TAXI DRIVER,....all these films, none are close to be the equivalent to Kane wich for what you say also none are the equivalent to T2, Titanic or Avatar? what a joke "you re a funny guy"
Gaston088able 9 months ago
@Gaston088able
Only douchebags throw "artsy" crap like City of God at people in response. Jesus. Anyone can make a movie when the camera is balanced on someone's head or between someone's legs.
LukeLovesRose 8 months ago
@LukeLovesRose The fact that you just said only "douchebags throw 'artsy" crap" out as a response completely throws out any credibility you have on saying that Gaston doesn't know about art. If you won't accept a film that is, quite frankly, a very good example of an artful film as a legitimate argument then you have no credibility in saying anything about art. And you have to be one of the only people living who claims to know art and think T2 and Titanic are at the level of Kane or Kubrick.
PtBlnkProductions 8 months ago
Comment removed
Gaston088able 8 months ago
@PtBlnkProductions well say "ptblnk.." that idiot of "lukeloverose" is a teenager who think that cameron is the best! poor ignorant!
Gaston088able 8 months ago
Comment removed
Gaston088able 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LukeLovesRose "T2 and Titanic the modern equivalent to Citizen Kane-class films" yea and you are the modern equivalent to Mister bean!
Gaston088able 9 months ago
@LukeLovesRose avatar and titanic are childs play compare to RAGING BULL, TAXI DRIVER, AND GOODFELLAS. Even today filmakers like David fincher are already making better films that cameron or the cohen brothers or nolan, etc. go and see cartoons!
Gaston088able 9 months ago
@Gaston088able
Well, you certainly expressed your point of view, didn't you?? LOL. You don't like to be called childish names, huh? Unlike myself, you can't let name-calling roll off your back, huh?? lol. Jesus. I argued my point. I wasn't just going out of my way to insult you. Grow up.
And, by the way, Cameron is not saying that he invented 3D or CGI. He did actually pioneer several ground-breaking techniques on how to use 3D and CGI. That is fucking fact, my friend.
LukeLovesRose 9 months ago
I have to say that this tribute montage is decidedly well done. It's hard not to question how great these scenes and films are when they're edited together so well.
LukeLovesRose 11 months ago
Leo is much better than people are giving him credit for. His name is just a little too big as a hero, a heartthrob and a powerful actor. Mel Gibson is Mel Gibson. Tom Hanks is Tom Hanks. Humphrey Bogart was Humphrey Bogart. John Wayne was John Wayne. Robert De Niro is Robert De Niro. Leonardo DiCaprio is Leonardo DiCaprio. There is NOTHING wrong with stardom. Just look past the bright lights.
LukeLovesRose 11 months ago
@LukeLovesRose I think people give him too much credit actually. He's a good actor, better than most, but definitely not the best actor of his generation. And to be honest the only reason people compare him to DeNiro is because of Scorsese. In reality his style is closer to a James Stewart type. I never see anyone compare him to Pacino, Day-Lewis, Hoffman or Nicholson. DeNiro comes to mind cause of Scorsese and that's sad. He's a good actor though. He was great in Gilbert Grape and The Aviator.
spxeli 6 months ago
Comment removed
lakewood425 11 months ago
martin scorsese is 1 of the GREATEST directors OF ALL time and probaly the greatest working to day. and he will always be. and robert deniro is 1 of the GREATEST actors OF ALL time an will always be. and dicaprio isnt the best actor ever but he is the best YOUNGEST actor working 2day. Dicaprio is a better actor than that DOUCHBAG ROBERT PATINSON who cant act AT ALL! and Dicaprio is better then ZAC EFRON who is the WORST ACTOR EVER!!
lakewood425 11 months ago
I worship Scorsese. Every film he has made has been fantastic. Hell, even Kundun was very interesting to watch. His career is immortal.
thelupoistheman1 1 year ago
I LOVED that video montage, gives me goosebumps. There so many Scorsese movies I have not even seen yet!!! Greatest director in history in my opinion. I wonder how many Oscar winners and nominees he has worked with at this current time?
uncbb89 1 year ago
1:14 you're welcome
413djm 1 year ago
i hope bob fired his hair stylist after that hair cut
chariquacko 1 year ago
It's a little bit over-the-top to say that film and Martin Scorsese should be associated with each other.
LukeLovesRose 1 year ago
"its clean real clean....like my conscience"
MrTennislover69 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What is the song in the beginning of the montage?
Stoker42 1 year ago
Decrappio sucks please work with Deniro again. Please.
CelestialWoodway 1 year ago
@Idolsofwood Thank you very much
Callatis 1 year ago
Anyone knows what is the name of the song at 4:05 ?
Callatis 1 year ago
@Callatis Speedoo - The Cadillacs.
Idolsofwood 1 year ago
Comment removed
Callatis 1 year ago
5:53 LAYLA!!! My FAVOURITE scene in Goodfellas!!!! 'We would now have one of our own as a member...'
GEVMM 1 year ago
Scorsese is a god among men, and Raging Bull is in my opinion is his finest work! Everytime I watch it, it makes me cry, cringe, wonder, and make me want more! Actually, all of his movies I've watched made me feel that way! I hope he lives another 100 years making classics, and god bless him!
Shark tale on the other hand...well... it happens
drexelboi1991 1 year ago
Scorsese is a legend. I love him and i always cry, when i watching this movie.
MrJoker95 1 year ago
He should have won Oscars for Goodfellas and Taxi Driver, not The Departed
DCDancer14 1 year ago
I'm amazed that they made a 4 minute clip show of Scorsese's work without a single scene of profanity.
BleedingOne1 1 year ago
not every scorsese movie is a masterpiece, but his direction always is
razbigranicu 1 year ago
i heard martin scorsese is doing a film in 3d
93johnk 1 year ago
Taxi driver and good fellas....two of martiis best and two of the greatest ever made...
majesticmaniac 1 year ago
i hear there are videos of marty having sex with film
smotsliner 1 year ago
What happened to NEW YORK NEW YORK ?
HDFilmGeek 1 year ago
I read some of the comments published on this page and a lot of you do not think the Scorsese's pictures starring DiCaprio are great. Yes they're not as good as the ones with DeNiro: Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, Casino are true masterpieces, but R they bad ? Of Course NOT, a not so good Martin Scorsese film is still a GREAT film. Scorsese is A DIRECTOR, the images have a real meaning, his directing is still as amazing as in the old days. You just don't respond to the story the same way as you did.
HDFilmGeek 1 year ago
I read some of the comments published on this page and a lot of you do not think the Scorsese's pictures starring DiCaprio are great. Yes they're not as good as the ones with DeNiro: Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, Casino are true masterpieces, but R they bad ? Of Course NOT, a not so good Martin Scorsese film is still a GREAT film. Scorsese is A DIRECTOR, the images have a real meaning, his directing is still as amazing as in the old days. You just don't respond to the story the same way as you did.
HDFilmGeek 1 year ago
wow scorsy was really touched by Leo's part
Roachenator 1 year ago
These three need to make a movie together PRONTO.
cayloh 1 year ago 8
Martin Scorsese is the best director ever(in my opinion)
MrHenderFender 1 year ago
what is the song that is played from 3:03 to 4:02???
kodilover12 1 year ago
@kodilover12 "The Feeling Begins" by Peter Gabriel
oifnolykous 1 year ago
@oifnolykous thanks :)
kodilover12 1 year ago
ok, all of the films with dicaprio involved have been mediocre compared to his de niro ones. Nothing truly great by scorsese's standards since Casino!
dontleademsomuch 1 year ago
@dontleademsomuch totally agree. there isn't a single equivalent of a taxi driver, or raging bull among the scorsese-dicaprio collaborations. dicaprio is half the actor de niro was.
ImNotThere100 1 year ago
@dontleademsomuch Since Casino?
You obviously don't know what you're talking about.
AhmadAlony123 1 year ago
@AhmadAlony123 name a great scorsese movie since Casino. See, you can't!
dontleademsomuch 1 year ago
@dontleademsomuch Does The Departed ring a bell?
AhmadAlony123 1 year ago
@AhmadAlony123 it was okay but by scorsese's standard? very mediocre.
dontleademsomuch 1 year ago
@dontleademsomuch your a dink face
THE DEPARTED kicks casinos ass
suchmuch96 1 year ago
@suchmuch96 fuck off it was a glorified B movie. entertaining and everything but silly too, casino is actually about something. The oscar was a pity vote.
dontleademsomuch 1 year ago
@dontleademsomuch okay first off: thats just rude. and second, im pretty sure critics and fans everywhere will agree with me
suchmuch96 1 year ago
@suchmuch96 not REAL scorsese fans. you probably think the aviator is great too
dontleademsomuch 1 year ago
@dontleademsomuch the aviator was good. a tad boring but.... k, u know what: we can say what we want, but we both know that raging bull and taxi driver kicks both casino and the departed's ass
suchmuch96 1 year ago
@dontleademsomuch MAYBE TRULY "GREAT" SINCE CASINO ISENT...BUT STILL VERY VERY GOOD FILMS BEAR GREAT FILMS MARY HAS DOBE AFTER CASINO: "KUNDUN", "GANGS OF NEW YORK", "THE AVIATOR" ," THE DEPARTED", "SHUTTER ISLAND".....and what iu sgreaat for you? GREAT ARE RAGING BULL, TAXI DRIVER, GOODFELLAS, CASINO, TEHA GE OF INNOCENCE....for ex. Spielberg hasent made a great one since schindlers list....and thats is "maybe GREAT"....
Gaston088able 4 months ago
@Gaston088able
Schindler's List was "maybe great"? Your credibility is put into question every time you speak, jackass. And, what about Saving Private Ryan? I guess that's dogshit to you, for all you know about great filmmaking.
Btw, a real masterpiece is not easy to define right away. It may even take years to see the full extent of Cameron's genius. But, it is EXTREMELY FOOLISH of any filmmaker to just brush him off as easily as you.
And also, T2 is about the misuse of authority.
LukeLovesRose 3 months ago
@LukeLovesRose LIKE I SAID EARLIER...GREAT FILMAKING AND TRUE ART IS THE ONE THAT SHOWS A MESSAGE OR AT LEAST A REFLECTION OF REAL LIFE....not the great spectacle and pyrotechnics with empty characters,and 0 content!...if filmaking is just about nice s.effects and explotions...you LukeLovesRose ARE AN IDIOT! PERIOD!..and stop writing about me! are you serious? i think we finished whit this sh...!
Gaston088able 5 days ago
sex with film...dude...that was a lame joke,but still one of the greatest actors ever!!
mastermovies10000 1 year ago
@suchmuch96
3:14 = The Aviator
3:18 = The Last Temptation of Christ
mississippimississ12 1 year ago
does anyone know what movie 3:11 is and what movie 3:18 is?
suchmuch96 1 year ago
whats the song called at 5:17
TMTGeneralDeath 1 year ago
jumpin jack flash by the rolling stones
ebakalli 1 year ago
what a speech
albokk 1 year ago
scorsese is the best
RaulSoaresG1452 1 year ago 21
the guy at 1:14 is a fucking fake. He laughs when he see he´s on camera. What an idiot. XD
PS: I love u Marty
babykitty15 1 year ago
that guy is brenden frasier
albokk 1 year ago
@babykitty15 Nah. It truly was a funny moment. The funniest moment of the night. I began laughing myself. That is actor Brendan Frasier, BTW. I'm sure Mr. Scorsese wouldn't appreciate you calling a fellow artist of his an "idiot" either. So if you respect Mr. Scorsese like you do, I think you will find it in yourself to respect Mr. Frasier.
ShelterDogs 1 year ago
@ShelterDogs The Mummy is a hack of an actor, and most certainly is an idiot.
hubb22buntos 1 year ago
@hubb22buntos Okay, you are right. I am wrong. Sorry. You are always right, and you don't need any maturing to do. You are best as you are. You have no growing to do. Everyone should bow down to you. You are great.
ShelterDogs 1 year ago
@ShelterDogs I agree with everything in your last comment. But seriously you have a minnow of a mind if you think Brendan Fraiser should be respected solely on the fact he is in the movie biz.
hubb22buntos 1 year ago
@hubb22buntos Again, you are right. Everything you say is right. Everyone in the movie industry should be disrespected just becaues they are in the "movie biz." They should be singled out and treated unfairly than the rest.
ShelterDogs 1 year ago
@ShelterDogs you're nothing more than a bad troll
hubb22buntos 1 year ago
Anyone happen to know the song that starts at about 5:55?
stankjawl 2 years ago
Layla - Eric Clapton or Derrick in Dominoes.
WHARTFILMS 2 years ago
Got it. Thanks!
stankjawl 2 years ago
One of the best!
VanWitk 2 years ago
What is the song in the beginning of the montage?
Giantsbran1227 2 years ago
Comment removed
FilmReviewGuy123 2 years ago
MARTY ... LEGEND!!!!!!
ilbv5 2 years ago 2
those actors are all so fake, look at them all checking to monitors to see if they're on camera so that they can pretend to be smiling, fucking wankers.
Hughezy 2 years ago
Can anyone name the song at 5:53? I'm pounding my brains trying to think where he used it. For the record, this is one of the best damn montages I have ever seen, the man is a visionary.
myriadproductions 2 years ago
He used it in goodfellas
coripearson 2 years ago
Derek And The Dominos - Layla (Piano Exit) - Got it, I had a feeling it was Goodfellas! Thanks man.
myriadproductions 2 years ago
I want to eat ice cream
stevenmarty 2 years ago
howard hughes so does not belong in the intro montage of scorsese's classic characters/performances. Bill the Butcher should have taken its place instead.
ImNotThere100 2 years ago
@ImNotThere100
You kidding? The Aviator is 2 and a half hours of building Howard Hughes as a character. It's one of his best character studies.
JohnyJoe 2 years ago
just because it's two and a half hours doesn't make it any better than Ray. Bill the Butcher was a monumentally better (and better acted) character.
ImNotThere100 2 years ago
Ray wasn't made by Scorsese, so it can't be considered 'one of his best films.' And The Aviator isn't good BECAUSE it's two and a half hours - but considering the meticulous and relentlessly insightful effort put into the study of Hughes, the length of the movie speaks highly towards the effort and ultimate accomplishment of the flick.
Gangs was amazing, and Day Lewis was fantastic in it, but The Aviator is on par with Scorsese's best. And that's saying a lot.
JohnyJoe 2 years ago
obviously ray wasn't a scorsese movie. i'm just saying that despite the meticulous and relentless effort, the character just....didn't work, ultimately. a GOOD effort, but simply not his best. Gangs, on the other hand, also a solid, not-his-best effort, but for Gangs you're welcome to rant about the rewards of revisiting meticulous historical detail and a performance by DDL that never gets old. Just thinking about Dicaprio's performance gives me a headache.
ImNotThere100 2 years ago
day lewis in gangs of new york blows dicaprio's hughes away. that flag-draped monologue alone was better than anything that leo has done. A lot hinges on the actor's performance, and dicaprio somehow managed to make hughes seem bland as porridge.
Kiwinites 2 years ago
@Kiwinites
Too bad this is a tribute to Scorsese, not Day Lewis.
JohnyJoe 2 years ago
Comment removed
Kiwinites 2 years ago
im referring to the argument b/w u and ImNotThere, about how day-lewis should replace dicaprio in that shot @ 3:12 in order to *properly* honor their creator, Scorsese.
Kiwinites 2 years ago
@Kiwinites But two entirely different characters. DiCaprio in Gangs Of New York was meant to be more down to earth. Day Lewis's character was wild, mean and over the top. Yes, it was a great peformance... and if you contrast both characters I guess DiCaprio character would look "bland." I don't look at it that way, I see two entirely different characters.
ShelterDogs 1 year ago
Comment removed
FilmReviewGuy123 2 years ago
More like Goodfellas, Cape Fear, Raging Bull, and Casino.
prumott08 2 years ago
That was the best montage of any director or actor I've seen.
lumpyloks 2 years ago
I just saw "The King of Comedy" most certainly Scorsese's more nerve-racking, uncomforting, disturbing, and underrated picture I've seen by him particularly. Robert De Niro delivers one of his best perormances as the eccentric, witty, sad, fragile and yet humorous Rupert Pupkin one of his most facinating yet dislikable characters. Sandra Bernhard also delivers an excellent performance as well.
JesusCristo2002 2 years ago 11
@JesusCristo2002 I just saw The King of Comedy too and I must agree with you. It is so underappreciated that every Scorsese fan needs to see it. It is my third favorite Scorsese movie. In fact it is on youtube so go do yourself a favor and go watch The King of Comedy, an entertaining masterpiece.
cackm 1 year ago
Leonardo Dicaprio is so SEXY! Dayum!
iwantorlando05 2 years ago 2