Board 8 > Board 8 Watches and Ranks Organized Crime Films: Sign-Ups!

(+) Yeah! (+)

rockus posted...

Yeah, Election at least should be on it.

I mean I tried to do what I could as far as research to try and get some of the most essential and most acclaimed gangster movies onto that list, but even in that research I never came across or heard of Election or really much of anything out of Hong Kong. But ultimately I'm also just one guy and there will always be more movie lists down the line

I don't know I'd be rather surprised if Gangster No. 1 and Lucky Number Slevin are more popular than Infernal Affairs or Election.

Not a bad list overall, just a little variety in older films (more than 4 made before 1969 would be nice. Roaring Twenties is a classic for example) and some foreign films would make it more interesting.

Though I do love seeing Battles Without Honor and Humanity on there. That's a great pick.

rockus posted...

Though I do love seeing Battles Without Honor and Humanity on there. That's a great pick.

I can't even take credit for that one, when I first announced the planned list someone (I can't remember who offhand) mentioned it so I looked into it and thought it was absolutely necessary to include. Same likely would've happened with Election had I found out earlier, but there will always be more movie lists down the line

It was me, I thought there had to be at least one Yakuza film on the list

rockus posted...

more than 4 made before 1969 would be nice

also, you can mainly blame the Hays Code for that

Johnbobb posted...

also, you can mainly blame the Hays Code for that

Pretty sure there were organized crime films made in the 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s. White Heat was one of them. Roaring Twenties was also made 5 years after the Hays Code was implemented. There are tons of them in the 30s and 40s.

Man James Woods screaming in a woman's face to shut the fuck up really didn't age too well

Starting with The Public Enemy tonight

Ah yeah I don't know what's cooking on the other lists, I was just surprised nothing from the 50's made it here

Checked out The Public Enemy and Cagney lives up to the hype! Really dials in the template for so many gangsters of the genre, felt like there were hints of Liotta and DiCaprio in there. I'm guessing Scorsese was a fan

Seginustemple posted...

I'm guessing Scorsese was a fan

Yeah, definitely. He lists it in a short list of gangster films that sort of influenced how he thought about and approached crime in his own films

https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/martin-scorsese-15-favourite-classic-gangster-films/

Though he seems to be a big fan of gangster films of that era overall. I know I've seen or heard him talk about Angels with Dirty Faces before too, among others.

Not entirely on topic but I'm amazed Scorsese and Coppola disdain the MCU so much when it has basically done for superheroes what they did for crime fiction. Knowing that Scorsese deliberately took his name off of Joker makes it plainly obvious that it's simply the subject matter he doesn't care for, which is fine if it's his opinion but the idea he'd dismiss them as not 'real' cinema because they're not about 'realistic' things is kind of disgusting.

Absolute nonsense. The Godfather series and Scorsese's crime films are nothing like the focus tested and committee constructed MCU movies. Scorsese's comments about superhero movies when he was asked (he never really specified the MCU, headlines just framed it that way) described them as entertainment products likening to an amusement park, and he's perfectly right. I like a handful of superhero movies myself but that's what they are. Like a lot of summer movies and franchise blockbusters in the state of the modern studio system these aren't singular vision movies, they're algorithm approved, demographic tested, and board meeting consented products. Read Scorsese's entire statement and followup about it, he's 100 percent correct.

The other thing is that there's no comparison between them making what, 7 crime films over 50+ years and comic book films that have engulfed the entire industry allowing almost nothing else space to breathe in its wake. I think that's where the feeling comes from, that it's pushing out everything else. And Westerns in the 40s-60s aren't a good comparison because it's not like 5-7 of the top ten films at the box office in a given year were comic book movies like it is now, most of them were B-pictures made for a quick buck.

That frustration is understandable but still a bit misplaced given people will watch what they want to watch. I don't know where Scorsese draws the line: are stuff like Aliens and Terminator 'cinema' to him?

MCU movies are popcorn flicks, and there's nothing wrong with that. They exist to be entertaining with flashy spectacles, likable characters, and humor. I don't think anyone goes into them expecting Oscar-worthy material.

I get that but the beef those two seem to have with it is that the subject matter isn't 'realistic'. Or at least that's how it makes sense most to me.

Scorsese's quotes:

"I dont see them. I tried, you know? But thats not cinema, Scorsese told Empire. Honestly, the closest I can think of them, as well made as they are, with actors doing the best they can under the circumstances, is theme parks. It isnt the cinema of human beings trying to convey emotional, psychological experiences to another human being.

and

Many of the elements that define cinema as I know it are there in Marvel pictures. Whats not there is revelation, mystery or genuine emotional danger. Nothing is at risk. The pictures are made to satisfy a specific set of demands, and they are designed as variations on a finite number of themes.

They are sequels in name but they are remakes in spirit, and everything in them is officially sanctioned because it cant really be any other way. Thats the nature of modern film franchises: market-researched, audience-tested, vetted, modified, revetted and remodified until theyre ready for consumption.

Another way of putting it would be that they are everything that the films of Paul Thomas Anderson or Claire Denis or Spike Lee or Ari Aster or Kathryn Bigelow or Wes Anderson are not. When I watch a movie by any of those filmmakers, I know Im going to see something absolutely new and be taken to unexpected and maybe even unnameable areas of experience. My sense of what is possible in telling stories with moving images and sounds is going to be expanded.

So, you might ask, whats my problem? Why not just let superhero films and other franchise films be? The reason is simple. In many places around this country and around the world, franchise films are now your primary choice if you want to see something on the big screen.

And Coppola:

When Martin Scorsese says that the Marvel pictures are not cinema, hes right because we expect to learn something from cinema, we expect to gain something, some enlightenment, some knowledge, some inspiration.

I dont know that anyone gets anything out of seeing the same movie over and over again. Martin was kind when he said its not cinema. He didnt say its despicable, which I just say it is.

There is nothing here about realism in the way I think you're defining it, more it's about humanism and emotional risk

The Marvel movies very much have those.

It's like, why pick on them instead of stuff like Bayformers or the Disney Live-Action Remakes?

EDIT: Having read those more thoroughly, well I've seen a grand total of ONE movie from all of the filmmakers Scorsese mentioned. I loved There Will Be Blood, but it seems to be Anderson's most mainstream film perhaps by virtue of being a period piece about a bombastic man?

I still stand by what I said though. The Honest Trailer for Goodfellas hilariously compares Henry Hill's arc to Captain America's in the MCU. The only truth is that Marvel movies are not ABOUT the things Scorsese wants in cinema, but many of them do have those things. So it still seems like it's the subject matter they have problems with.

The only MCU flicks that I would label as cinema under Scorsese and Coppola's definitions are the Russo movies and Black Panther and even then they're super watered down.

I use to disagree with his take, but I've watched a lot of more unique movies since then and I totally understand where he's coming from with it.

LinkMarioSamus posted...

EDIT: Having read those more thoroughly, well I've seen a grand total of ONE movie from all of the filmmakers Scorsese mentioned. I loved There Will Be Blood, but it seems to be Anderson's most mainstream film perhaps by virtue of being a period piece about a bombastic man?

Wrong Anderson!!!

LinkMarioSamus posted...

The Marvel movies very much have those.

It's like, why pick on them instead of stuff like Bayformers or the Disney Live-Action Remakes?

Because the MCU is way more popular than both of those?

LinkMarioSamus posted...

EDIT: Having read those more thoroughly, well I've seen a grand total of ONE movie from all of the filmmakers Scorsese mentioned. I loved There Will Be Blood, but it seems to be Anderson's most mainstream film perhaps by virtue of being a period piece about a bombastic man?

What? Were you not paying attention to the movie? There's so much more going on there. The church scene alone is worth far more than the entire MCU alone.

LinkMarioSamus posted...

I still stand by what I said though. The Honest Trailer for Goodfellas hilariously compares Henry Hill's arc to Captain America's in the MCU. The only truth is that Marvel movies are not ABOUT the things Scorsese wants in cinema, but many of them do have those things. So it still seems like it's the subject matter they have problems with.

I haven't watched their honest trailer, but I imagine they compare the mob life to SHIELD? Honest Trailers very often just jokes about skin deep coincidences. Hill only betrayed the mob once he realized he was about to be taken out, he acted completely selfishly and did it to save his own ass. The Cap movies on the other hand focus on Cap having to reevalute his values. He's no longer just a soldier, he's living in the modern world and has to understand that you can't always trust your superiors.

LMS is going to crater this topic as long as people take him seriously

thesmark posted...

Wrong Anderson!!!

If Scorsese seriously meant Paul W.S. Anderson his point is even more nonsensical.

BetrayedTangy posted...

What? Were you not paying attention to the movie? There's so much more going on there. The church scene alone is worth far more than the entire MCU alone.

I didn't mean in reference to Scorsese's quote, more just trying to rationalize why it's the director's most successful film (only other one to double its budget was Boogie Nights). The point was precisely that I only scratched the surface.

And TBH half my worry is that Scorsese and Coppola would probably exclude all genre fiction from 'true cinema', not so much regarding the MCU in particular. Although that doesn't help, and I think I prefer the subject matter of the MCU over the films of those two. Goodfellas is one of my top 5 films BTW, so I'm not completely biased against them in any case.

I mean at the end of the day none of it matters. They're not going to stop the movies from being made and talking about it on here won't change their opinions (or anyone else's for that matter.)

Also if you want YouTubers that are actually good at talking about film you should check out StudioBinder and In Depth Cine. They actually focus on what makes it such a wonderful medium and encourage you to look for these things yourself when watching movies.

Heh thanks, both names sound familiar though.

forget about it

Bump

A litte over a month in, and a little over 2 months to go. How's everyone looking on progress?

Currently at 7/30 (not counting ones I've seen before) but this was a weird month due to moving stuff, so next month planning on stepping it up

I've got about an hour left of Irishman and I'll be at 15/30

3/30 (assuming I do rewatches, which I'd like to)

Just finished the 1930s trio this weekend.

10/30

5/30. I also had to move in July so I'm hoping to catch up in August.

16/30

That's only ones I've seen before though, haven't watched any new ones yet!

Alright, time to start watching the ones I haven't.

halfway done

5/30

Done with everything pre-Godfather

Today I learned that Al Pacino's legal name is Alfredo Pacino and his mother's family is apparently from Corleone, Sicily, most known for also being the hometown of the Corleone family in the Godfather and also the real-life Corleonesi

Also, editing around the next Crime list a little. Don't know what's actually planned for the next film list, but a couple of the "crime" films I took off were things like Die Hard and John Wick, which just don't feel like they fit with everything else.

I scribbled down some vague ideas of an "Action Hero" list where they might fit in a little better alongside stuff like Taken, The Expendables, Mission Impossible, etc.

for any new participants who see themselves someday wanting to run a list, make sure to check out the google sheet. A lot of the "planned lists" and "potential lists" are still up in the air, given that a good chunk of people who made them aren't still participating so those lists might be open, as well as there's always the option to make new lists of your own.

Yeah, when I think John Wick and Die Hard, I think action movies.

Steve Buscemi improves any thing he's in tenfold

I gotta be honest, I hate Buscemi with every fiber of my being. He makes me want to pour hot wax down my ear canals.

The only movie I liked him in was Ghost World. Awkward, toned-down Buscemi is where it's at.

plasmabeam posted...

He makes me want to pour hot wax down my ear canals.

No one's gonna stop you. Buscemi rules.

Fargo, Reservoir Dogs, Death of Stalin, Boardwalk Empire, Miller's Crossing, Trees Lounge, Big Lebowski, 30 Rock, Miracle Workers. The dude rocks.

It's not anything resembling a crime film but I highly highly recommend the miniseries Horace & Pete (as long as you're still ok watching Louis CK)

Steve Buscemi on the top of his game there in what may be one of his best and saddest roles

Yeah, I've never seen that but I heard it was really good when it first came out.

Count me as another Steve Buscemi fan. He's one of the few saving graces of Armageddon for one thing.

Basically if Buscemi isn't one of the best things about a movie it's because said movie is amazing, see Fargo and The Big Lebowski (and yes I have seen both).

Fargo and The Big Buscemi will both be in the next crisis list whenever that happens

The only other Coens movie I've seen aside from those two is No Country for Old Men, which I also thought was great. Kind of amusing how so much of their backlog is on Disney+ where I live.

It's a bold statement on my part but the Coens are to disorganized crime what Scorsese is to organize crime. Expect to see quite a few of them next list (in addition to Miller's Crossing in this list)

Oh I missed this topic, might have to give these a watch