Furthermore, Goodfellas has more flair and style but The Godfather is richer in content.
Godfather III was Al Pacino’s best performance on film bar none.
Congragultions, what brilliant analysis!….
JL, is that you?
The Godfather isn’t that horribly violent and considering the subject matter I think what is there is necessary.
Goodfellas and Casino are a bit more over-the-top.
The Godfather isn’t that horribly violent and considering the subject matter I think what is there is necessary.
Goodfellas and Casino are a bit more over-the-top.
They’re about gangsters, what did you expect, pillow fights?
Actually the scence where Pacino kills the two men in the restaraunt is one of the most scientifically accurate shootings scene I have ever seen. It is noteworthy to point out that the head doesn’t explode when hit with a bullet like it does in most Hollywood films.
They are violent yes, but within an understandable context of the story. They are much less gratuatitous than a lot of contemporary crime films.
Are we talking violence or gore?
Nobody did violence and gore like Scorsese. it was so gritty. He’s pretty terrible and proper/old now, but back in the 70’s and 90’s, he was on top of his game when it came to violence. The scene where Bickle shoots off the dudes finger in Taxi Driver has stayed with me all through adolescence. And then Casino, which may be one of the most violent movies I’ve ever seen. Seriously, how did this film get an R rating and a theatrical release. It’s violence is ridiculous, plus it’s steeped in reality, which makes it so much more terrifying. Scorsese was pretty boring and predictable through the 80’s, altho, King of Comedy is really, really great. I wish he would get back to that level. The I don’t give an eff level. He was a beast in that mode.
Spielberg can do violence extremely well when he’s not in businessman mode, too. Sometimes he goes back and teases us ala Munich, but for the most part, he just wants to make movies with stupid third acts and feel good endings.
Paul Thomas Anderson seems to have taken the Scorsese mantle these days. Little Bill blowing his brains out in Boogie Nights was very Scorsese-esque and there are some scenes in There Will Be Blood that are done very well like in the beginning when H.W.’s father meets his demise and later on when the other guy meets his end in the well.
Violence and gore when it’s done well and realistically can be so effective, at least for me as an audience member when I’m watching. Not many filmmakers can do it well, and some overdo it too much (Tarantino!) to the point where it’s just silly.
Goodfellas: Outrageous camera movements guy ritche stole essentially verbatim, “lock, stock/2 smoking barrels”, an ENTIRE steadicam shot through a restaurant with characters without much movement- the CHARACTERS should move, not the camera, not so extreme like that, just showing off, absurd 1950s music. Opening of Orson Welles’ “Touch of Evil”: smooth. Well, smoothER. Long steadicam shots are always kind of gratuitous.
And the bad films get praised, good films get ignored.
Welcome to the ‘American Dream’.
-CHARACTERS should move, not the camera-
because . . . character movement can’t be showy?
“an ENTIRE steadicam shot through a restaurant with characters without much movement- the CHARACTERS should move, not the camera” and why is that, where did this rule come from?
Alexander_Ghali
It is overkill.