Although the film force-fed the audience a happy ending, later films would not. And so just as we are sitting in our theater watching them stare at the screen at us , they are, perhaps, sitting in their theater watching us stare at our screen. Later, he managed to restore at least some of his footage, which didn't much help the clunky movie-within-a-movie extravaganza just added to the aimlessness. The trailer was excellent, the look and style of all the imagery on display was there for the lapping up. It does the same to this film, but the diversion was welcome,since it meant we could enjoy a nice break from De Niro. The movie grinds on for 163! DiNiro, wooing tiresomely, at least manages to establish his character: A controlling, self-absorbed saxophone player who's also in a strand that fizzles out a penny-ante impostor who blows off his lavish hotel bills. He'll take everything you accomplish as a personal affront to himself, he'll bully and cajole you into dating him, sleeping with him, even marrying him! Info sul file Nome New York New York.
Language: Italian English Subtitles Italian English An egotistical saxophone player and a young singer meet on V-J Day and embark upon a strained and rocky romance, even as their careers begin a long uphill climb. And that scene in the hospital is exceptional, and the only time where De Niro rises to the talent he normally displays. The film is over 2 hours and 43 minutes long. At the very least, he's going to beat you silly. Scorsese claims that it stands in tribute to the 1946 Ida Lupino vehicle The Man I Love, though there's only the faintest resemblance. De Niro is consistently one notein his performance, creating a character without a single redeemingfeature. But perhaps the passage of time has opened our eyes on the point.
I've seen nineteen Scorsese films, and this is by far the most cinematographically impressive of them all. In his early scenes, I think we're supposed to be charmed byhim, and by extension understand why Minelli's character would fall forhim in the first place -- unfortunately, he comes across more as acreepy sociopath than anything, Travis Bickle with some musical talent. I'm sorry, this film was so irritating it just makes me want to snipe at it. When the couple goes outside shortly thereafter to continue one of their constant tiffs, they're posed in front of a stagy stand of birches glowing in an amber sunset. But even when her stardom begins to eclipse his, and she climbs to the top of the heap, there's little flesh and bone under the performer.
Who would stay with this guy so long? I think DeNiro became confused between avoiding pandering and creating a character that we would root to see fail. I just didn'tlove them, and unfortunately, that kept me from loving the wholeproject. Scorsese not only repeats the basic stories and themes of these films,he also repeats the artificially heightened visual style typical ofHollywood films of the 1940s and 1950s--it is no accident that LizaMinnelli looks and sings remarkably like mother Judy Garland in thisfilm--but he does so to an entirely unexpected end. Maybe that wasn't the case in 1977. You have to laugh at some of De Niro's over-the-top stupidities the movie would be a real downer if you didn't , yet director Martin Scorsese doesn't provide enough relief from De Niro's outbursts. I'd definitely agree with that, but it is interesting. But over and over again I keptcoming back to this thought: does director Martin Scorsese a geniusstoryteller really love musicals, or is he, in fact, satirizing themhere? Well, Scorsese doesn't offer an outright answer, except to say it will be difficult — extremely difficult.
Although the film force-fed the audience ahappy ending, later films would not. Some of the sets are quite obviously fake but it actually works in this movie. Minelli's role is utterly thankless, but she's absolutely the onlything that kept me watching. If anyone ever says that DeNiro had irresistible charisma then this film proves them wrong. The best part of the movie is this dreary routine, the comforting tedium of the road, with its slapdash tourist courts and ritzy roadhouses and card games on the bus. There was some problems with the script. There are moments of heartbreak and passion, but just as many scenes with nothing but flailing about.
Minnelli's vocal talent is the only saving grace of this movie. At this time and age, 2000's , very few people can relate to the dysfunctional relationship between the two leading characters. Personally, I think he just wanted to do it and had no deeper reason. After that, however, it seemed to disappear. Minnelli searches in vain for a tighter direction, and she doesn't look comfortable with dramatic improvisation her song numbers were probably carefully planned out, and in these instances she shines. I mean, he is in Raging Bull, too, but you always know you aren't supposed to like Jake La Motta.
Their reality has become our fantasy, and, possibly, our reality has become their fantasy. Years later it was all there, reel 7 and the whole number, but the labor requited to just sit there all through it. Heavy-handed, heavy-going movie has the feeling of an expensive experiment, and Scorsese at times appears to be winging it with his leads. The second flaw is in the film's basic gimmick: the art design is artificial in a way that recalls the classic Hollywood musicals of the '40s and '50s, but the acting and level of realism is much more in line with the gritty films of the time. The only answer I can think of is that he was trying to criticize Hollywood in its Golden Age.
The finale is moving--almost in spite of itself--and the picture may actually have something to say about abusive relationships and letting go. It's like there's ahighly pitched voice of reason trying to remind the audience that inreal life, people aren't so happy as they always seem to be inmusicals. They considered it extremely grating. But there is no singing here, the umbrella is closed, and those feet aren't dancing. I know everyone doesn't love some of you proudly hate musicals, but usually one can find something redeeming in thecharacters who populate the stories. It's about clarinet player Jimmy Doyle Robert De Niro falling in love with Francine Evans Liza Minnelli. It makes for more than one boutof uphill viewing.
This misbegotten homage is more than mere bad taste; did nobody have the decency - or common sense - to spot it and stop it? The only sequel that would be befitting this movie would be if the child of the two characters would grow up to be like Jim Morrison or Kurt Colbain, self-destructive adolescents. Steven Spielberg managed to catch a gung-ho, going-to-war spirit in his maligned 1941, where the jitterbugging is infectious; here, in the emotional release of victory, it's just extras going through their over-rehearsed steps and cameras swooping. Martin Scorsese's deconstruction of the golden Hollywood musical is ameandering disaster. He just comes off as a baby, not as a pathetic schlub. I don't know why it wasn't awarded the Oscar for original song because it's one of the most played songs about New York since it debuted.
The acting is good--almost too good. Sì Totale tracce 3 Traccia n. But even so, what's the point of trying to improve on them by leeching out all the sincerity and most of the fun? But even more difficult is the character ofJimmy Doyle, the abusive husband of the piece. And then De Niro enters her life, from the other end of the spectrum, and emotionally shatters her to pieces. The other half is that this is very much a Scorsese film, despite many claims to the contrary. This explains why the plot was set at a time before psychiatric help is commonly available.