Lieberman's Marty mistake

email this story
read comments (74)
post a comment

A 12.14 "Page Six" item says L.A. Times/ "Envelope" writer Paul Lieberman couldn't get Martin Scorsese to talk to him for a Departed article, so he allegedly dug up nearly two-year-old quotes that Scorsese supplied for an Aviator interview and re-used them for a 12.13.06 "Envelope" piece, which ran yesterday.

Okay, not good at all...but at least the old Scorsese quotes that were used seem to actually apply to The Departed. Sample #1: "I did not want to do another gangster movie" but Scorsese read William Monahan's script to be polite, "as a matter of form." Sample #2: But by the time he got to page 26 and thought, "What the hell's going on here? [The characters] "are all duplicitous and all deceiving each other and ultimately all wind up in a kind of elegant, how shall I say it Gotterdammerung."

So to be in the clear, all Lieberman had to do was say Scorsese wasn't available but that he said the following back in '04, etc. What would have been so hard about that?

Sundance flop & file<< previous | next >>Scott on Hudson

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on December 14, 2006 at 2:03 PM

comment #1

JD says ...

Seriously, every Oscar voter should just cast their ballot for Scorsese now and stop paying attention to all this junk. The poor guy is clearly the greatest living film director and yet he keeps getting dragged into elaborate Oscar politics, even when he politely declines to participate. Don't let any of this other nonsense -- Is he doing interviews? Is he not doing interviews? -- sway you, voters. He's a genius and The Departed is one of his best. 'Nuff said.

Posted by JD at December 14, 2006 2:41 PM

comment #2

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Does anyone really believe Scorsese didn't see Internal Affairs, probably the most-respected HK action film of its year or a year or two in either direction, before reading the script?

That duplicity alone should deny him the Oscar, and give it to someone who really deserves it, like Mel Gibson.

Posted by Mgmax, le Corbeau at December 14, 2006 2:56 PM

comment #3

musealien says ...

To the last poster, Mgmax: you really think that a talented, profound director like Martin Scorsese should be denied an Oscar because of whether or not he's seen a particular film, while an anti-Semitic, homophobic, racist person like Mel Gibson "deserves" it? Mel Gibson deserves one thing and one thing alone: to be snubbed by the filmmaking community, by filmgoers, and by all decent-thinking people. And as for Martin Scorsese - he should tell the Academy where to stick their Oscar at this point anyway.

People get lost in this Oscar nonsense. It means nothing. Absolutely nothing.

Posted by musealien at December 14, 2006 3:18 PM

comment #4

hatchetface says ...

Not that it matters in regards to Scorcese and what he saw before or after agreeing to do THE DEPARTED, but I know plenty of people who consider themselves film buffs that haven't seen INFERNAL AFFAIRS.

Posted by hatchetface at December 14, 2006 3:18 PM

comment #5

JD says ...

Mgmax, it's called making a 3-hour, $100 million epic in only 2 years. If you think Scorsese was running from the set/editing room of The Aviator to catch up on his Asian crime cinema, something tells me you might be wrong.

Posted by JD at December 14, 2006 3:28 PM

comment #6

dre says ...

I remember reading in an interview that scorcese doesnt really watch that many modern films. he'll watch some older italian films, for example, that he hasnt seen

Posted by dre at December 14, 2006 3:40 PM

comment #7

T. S. Idiot says ...

As long as Uncle Ingmar's still breathing, little Marty is not the world's greatest living director.

Posted by T. S. Idiot at December 14, 2006 4:06 PM

comment #8

dobbsy says ...

A) Why doesn't anybody here know how to spell Scorsese?

B) I wish you Melbashers had been on the set of "Mean Streets" and heard the way Marty and his boys talked about minorities. I wonder if you would have disqualified him and the dah boys forever from being film artists.

C) Let's lose the Oscar-centric, America-centric, p.c.-centric nonsense and talk about movies. There's a whole world of movies out there this year that are better than 90% of these films in the "awards season" hubub. Or do you really not love films, just to bitch and whine about D.U.I.'s and largely meaningless trophies? Did Marcello Mastroianni ever win an Oscar? No, but Richard Dreyfus did. Was Charlotte Rampling Oscar-nominated for "Under the Sand?" No, but Renee Zellweger was for "Bridget Jones' Diary."

D) Hope conquers fear. That's the message of "Apocalypto." Tell me again the message of "The Departed?" Who's Mr. Warm & Fuzzy & Light of Wisdom of 2006? Mel or Marty?

Posted by dobbsy at December 14, 2006 4:12 PM

comment #9

JD says ...

Newsflash, dobbsy: if you can summarize a movie's entire thematic content in three words, it's not a complex or sophisticated movie, it's a bumper sticker. No offense to Apocalypto -- I intend to see it and I intend to like it -- but "hope conquers fear" is not a valid argument of the movie's merit. Newsflash #2: the characters in Mean Streets are just that, CHARACTERS. Unless, of course, you believe that every character in every movie should be soft and cuffly. Given your enthusiasm for Apocalypto, I'm assuming that's not the case.

And TS, just because Ingmar Bergman's heart still beats, doesn't mean he's alive. Exhibit A: Saraband, a wildy serious, lifeless, self-important movie with the cinematic pulse of a rotting corpse. If he has stayed retired after Fanny & Alexander, you might have a point... but he didn't.

Posted by JD at December 14, 2006 4:25 PM

comment #10

Devin Faraci says ...

What does "Hope conquers fear" have to do with smashing a guy in the skull with a club? Or running and jumping?

Posted by Devin Faraci at December 14, 2006 4:27 PM

comment #11

JD says ...

That should be "cuddly," not "cuffly," though they probably mean roughly the same thing.

Posted by JD at December 14, 2006 4:28 PM

comment #12

tholl-yung says ...

Part two of Mel's interview with Sean Hannity is on tonight. I guess the link has part one. I caught part of it, it was weird, but I can't comment until I watch it again. Not seeing APOC until January.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,236057,00.html

Posted by tholl-yung at December 14, 2006 4:31 PM

comment #13

jeffmcm says ...

"Hope conquers fear"? I don't see anywhere in that movie that hope beat anything. If the climax can be summed up briefly, it's 'distraction saves the day'. For the movie as a whole, 'civilization is overrated'.

Posted by jeffmcm at December 14, 2006 4:32 PM

comment #14

dobbsy says ...

A) I didn't mean the characters in Mean Streets, I meant the filmmakers....

B) Apologies for the typo

C) Didn't mean the whole movie could be explained in three words, but then "Mel is a bigot" is only four words and that seems to be the critical logic of half the contributors here who are against the movie (90% without seeing it)...

C) Still waiting for someone to tell me what "Departed" was about. It's a b-movie glossed up with snappy production values and first-class performances. But as to what's it all about Alfie, eh, someone help me here....

Posted by dobbsy at December 14, 2006 4:37 PM

comment #15

jeffmcm says ...

It can't be summed up in one sentence, but: The Departed is about the symbiosis between cops and criminals; the meaning of personal loyalty in an increasingly impersonal world; and most importantly, the compromises and sacrifices a person is willing to make for upward social mobility.

Posted by jeffmcm at December 14, 2006 4:42 PM

comment #16

Devin Faraci says ...

THE DEPARTED is also about the fluidity of good and evil, about doing evil for good and vice versa. It's about actions versus intentions (I find it fascinating how little violence Matt Damon, the bad guy, is involved with).

Posted by Devin Faraci at December 14, 2006 5:02 PM

comment #17

Dixon Steele says ...

Just saw APOCLYPTO...

Mad Mel needs to see a shrink. Seriously.

This guy is obsessed with pain, suffering and violence, and showing it all in extreme graphic detail. Again and again. The first half of this one is like the second half of Passion. It's relentless. Why doesn't he just make a horror movie and get it over with?

Sure, it may be an accurate view of the Mayan civilization and there's no question the guy has some genuine filmmaking gifts. No doubt.

But he has a real fetish for extreme, drawn-out, disgusting violence and it's obvious, he just loves it.

Mel, please, get some therapy.

Posted by Dixon Steele at December 14, 2006 5:21 PM

comment #18

Jeremy Smith says ...

Did hope conquer fear, Dixon?

Posted by Jeremy Smith at December 14, 2006 5:23 PM

comment #19

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

After reading the comments, I take back my ill-considered comment on Scorsese's qualifications for the Oscar.

I now think that his duplicity should deny him the Oscar, and give it to Emilio Estevez.

Posted by Mgmax, le Corbeau at December 14, 2006 5:42 PM

comment #20

JD says ...

Does the statement "hope conquers fear" even make sense? As far as I can tell, it's cyclical. Hope conquers fear until fear conquers hope until hope conquers fear, etc. Hope doesn't really conquer fear unless that particular dose of hope is greater than that particular dose of fear.

Posted by JD at December 14, 2006 5:44 PM

comment #21

jeffmcm says ...

What 'duplicity'? Do you have any knowledge that Scorsese is lying when he says he hadn't seen the movie? If not, you're just throwing around meaningless assumption for the purpose of defaming the man.

Posted by jeffmcm at December 14, 2006 5:44 PM

comment #22

tholl-yung says ...

Sorry I brought up the Fox News thing. Sean Hannity is a whore.

Posted by tholl-yung at December 14, 2006 6:02 PM

comment #23

CambridgeCat says ...

Scorsese also says he's never watched The Sopranos, which is stunning to me.

The Departed is also about a city, it's attitudes and the way it works which appealed to me and mine, because we're all from said city. I agree it's not a deep movie, or a great one, but it was fun. I liked it a LOT more than Infernal Afairs which I expected to love but ended up being bored by when I watched it earlier this year. (BTW, there's a ton of people who haven't seen IA.)

I'm fine with Scorsese getting a make-up Oscar in a year with no strong contenders, since he got famously jobbed on Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, and (to a lesser extent) Goodfellas. I also think Mean Streets, Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore, and The King of Comedy were great movies (The Color of Money was half a great movie and half a mediocre one). The man's certainly my favorite living director.

Posted by CambridgeCat at December 14, 2006 6:05 PM

comment #24

christian says ...

i think APOCALYPTO is about "head conquers spear."

i love scorsese as a film archivist and maker, but i'm somewhat cold to his gangsta films. too worshipful for me. so why should he watch SOPRANOS? he already created the template.

but KING OF COMEDY is a masterpiece. with nary a drop of blood.

Posted by christian at December 14, 2006 6:22 PM

comment #25

CambridgeCat says ...

Eh. Scorsese made a couple/few ganster movies but The Sopranos, by virtue of its format, goes WAY beyond just being a gangster show.

Posted by CambridgeCat at December 14, 2006 6:30 PM

comment #26

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Oh, Jeffmcm, I expected better of you.

I do think it unlikely he never saw Internal Affairs up to that point, but honestly, that was sarcasm from the get-go about Gibson and, later, Estevez.

I guess people are skiing topless while smoking dope here, and thus incapable of irony.

Posted by Mgmax, le Corbeau at December 14, 2006 6:46 PM

comment #27

JD says ...

Mgmax, that's not coherent sarcasm, as people are sincerely voicing similar sentiments about Apocalypto/Gibson. Unless it's common knowledge that you personally hate Gibson's work -- maybe it is, I don't know -- how are people supposed to read that as sarcasm? Are you saying that all enthusiasm for Gibson's work should be read as sarcasm?

Posted by JD at December 14, 2006 7:13 PM

comment #28

Arnzilla says ...

Mgmax, just a little fact-checking on your original post:

The trade papers announced Scorsese's involvement in The Departed in February of 2004 while Infernal Affairs came over to the US in September of 2004. Do the math. There was absolutely no need for him to seek out the film before then. Like dre said, Scorsese seeks out older films, not ones that have yet to be released.

Posted by Arnzilla at December 14, 2006 8:05 PM

comment #29

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

I know, JD, it's so hard to do satire at this point, because reality keeps passing it by. Down with Scorsese! Up with Glenn Gordon Caron!

Arnzilla, I'd seen Infernal Affairs 2 on DVD by the time Infernal Affairs (1) was released theatrically. Perhaps you are unaware of the substantial trade in Hong Kong films on DVD, well ahead of any official US theatrical release. I don't know where people are getting this idea that Scorsese ONLY sees older films-- that he's a connoisseur of same is no state secret, but this idea that he would NEVER have seen one of the two or three most admired HK movies of the early 2000s is quite a stretch and almost certainly untrue.

All directors, by the way, when they make remakes, claim they never saw the original. The only two people left on earth who never saw Manhunter are Jonathan Demme and Brett Ratner. Riiiight. (Actually I'm surprised at this coming from Scorsese because he's always been cleverer than the average chap at remaking his faves by disguising them as something else-- he did Hitchcock by remaking Cape Fear, he did The Magnificent Ambersons by adapting an Edith Wharton novel and Citizen Kane by adapting Howard Hughes' real life.)

Posted by Mgmax, le Corbeau at December 14, 2006 8:29 PM

comment #30

dobbsy says ...

jeffmcm: i think you just wrote a better movie than the one i saw. tell me where in departed there's any sign that leo is seeking "upward mobility?" he's in pain, confused, seeking some kind of justice for his old man, but "upward mobility?" and is that what damon is seeking? he's an amoral snake whose soul was killed decades earlier by his "father" jack. GREAT performances and excellent direction but light in the script dept, in my view. for a GREAT script, see lives of others. marty's never made a film with anything resembling the depth of this kid's first film. and i LOVE cambridge cat's take on things! most of all, everybody, be of good cheer. otherwise you'll grow up to be schickel or turan...

Posted by dobbsy at December 14, 2006 8:38 PM

comment #31

Jay T. says ...

"Does anyone really believe Scorsese didn't see Internal Affairs, probably the most-respected HK action film of its year or a year or two in either direction, before reading the script?"

Uhh.... yeah. I watch a lot of movies (foreign, indie and mainstream) but just never got around to seeing Infernal Affairs, although it is in my Netflix queue.

Posted by Jay T. at December 14, 2006 8:51 PM

comment #32

Arnzilla says ...

Mgmax, care to tell us why Scorsese would take a break from editing The Aviator to seek out a bootleg copy of IA? Why did he NEED to see it so early? Also, why would he NEED to lie about it? There's nothing visually similar in the remake that suggests either Scorsese or Monahan saw IA prior to making TD.

Posted by Arnzilla at December 14, 2006 8:59 PM

comment #33

hiviper says ...

hey dobbsy, so you were on the set of Mean Streets huh? So tell us, how did Scorcese and the boys talk about minorities?

Leo's family, with the sole exception of his father, where a bunch of low life crooks "infesting the Southie projects ticks". He, however, becomes a State Trooper. Still don't see any upward mobility there?

Posted by hiviper at December 14, 2006 9:11 PM

comment #34

hiviper says ...

correction above: "..*like* ticks". Dignam's line

Posted by hiviper at December 14, 2006 9:13 PM

comment #35

Arnzilla says ...

The quote that Costigan attributes to Hawthorne was about "upward mobility."

Posted by Arnzilla at December 14, 2006 9:19 PM

comment #36

Argen says ...

One of the main enticements for Leo to go undercover was the sizable financial arrangement- one that would make him better off than the life he grew up in. It's so much that it's not even debatable.

Posted by Argen at December 14, 2006 9:24 PM

comment #37

Arnzilla says ...

Actually, he didn't seem to care about the money. He doesn't even immediately look at the amount on the paper that Queenan gives him. A child of divorce, Costigan partially grew up in a privileged life, which he had foresaken when his mother died. He was chosen for the undercover assignment because of the shady side of his family: his father's side.

Posted by Arnzilla at December 14, 2006 9:32 PM

comment #38

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

"Mgmax, care to tell us why Scorsese would take a break from editing The Aviator to seek out a bootleg copy of IA? Why did he NEED to see it so early? Also, why would he NEED to lie about it?"

1) It's not bootleg, it's graymarket. There's a difference. I don't know, why would he take a break to have dinner? Do you think for a year he edited The Aviator and never watched anything? That he routinely steps out of the culture and becomes a monk, unaware of the outside world? The man has an employee whose job is to keep his massive home video collection neatly organized so if he suddenly decides to watch The Phenix City Story one night, it's there. The man is a brilliant synthesizer of influences from every direction. Still, if you want to find it unimaginable that Infernal Affairs ever crossed his retinas, go ahead. Obviously I think it extremely imaginable.

2) Gosh, when I rented it at the local artsy video store I had no idea I had a capital-letter NEED. I guess I'm a junkie. Unlike Martin Scorsese, who hardly ever watches anything.

3) I already covered the phenomenon of remakes only being made by people who've never seen the original, honest.

Posted by Mgmax, le Corbeau at December 14, 2006 9:42 PM

comment #39

Craig Kennedy says ...

Going back to the point of the original post, I don't see what all the fuss is over some recycled quotes. Lieberman never represents Scorsese's words as being fresh. In fact he continually refers to them in the past tense. The headline of the article is not "LA Times Scoop: Scorsese Speaks!"

I don't know how Apocalypto came up, but that film has many more problems than Gibson's alleged racism or his boner for ultra violence. For one thing it was boring as hell. The film itself did not appear to me to be advancing a racist agenda so I don't care what Mel personally thinks of Jews or anyone else as long as he's not breaking any laws. Fake movie violence rarely moves me one way or the other. If Mel gets off on it, I'd really rather just not know about it. I wish he'd stop making long, boring, overwrought movies, but other than that I don't think that much about him at all.

J Hoberman's review of Apocalypto is really funny. His obvious beef with Mel clouds his judgement of the film and I mostly don't agree with his specific points, but come on...."Sugar Tit tribe" is top shelf comedy.

The Departed was still one of the more entertaining evenings at the movies I've had this year. I don't think it's Scorsese's best, but if it wins him an Oscar and that makes him happy, then so be it. I don't care if he saw Infernal Affairs or if he lied about it. Considering how different the two films were, I wouldn't be surprised if he really didn't. I saw it after the fact and found it to be a slightly above average genre picture. Nothing wrong with that, but nothing really to get all worked up about either. The same could be said about The Departed I suppose, but I really liked it. Maybe because I saw it first.

Finally I'd like to repeat something T. Holly said earlier: Sean Hannity is a whore. I like the way it rolls off the tongue. Sean Hannity is a whore. There, I said it again.

Posted by Craig Kennedy at December 14, 2006 9:50 PM

comment #40

Arnzilla says ...

I'll ask you again in a different way... what evidence do you have that he saw the film before even reading Monahan's screenplay and why would he feel the need to deny it?

Posted by Arnzilla at December 14, 2006 9:51 PM

comment #41

CambridgeCat says ...

Personally I thought the Costigan character tended towards downward mobility, given he spent his weeks (read: five days a week, school, etc.) in a rich neighborhood where working for the Staties is akin to being a janitor. My read on it was his becoming a cop had a lot to do with living up to his weekend life (in the Southie projects with his tough guy family) while not actually being a criminal.

Mgmax, it sounds like you can't get past Scorsese not having the same veiwing tastes as you. I watch a lot of movie, go out of my way to see "hot" titles, etc. but I didn't see IA until I knew The Departed was coming out. Why you find it so hard to belive Scorsese didn't see it is beyond me. Do you think he's seen Hard Boiled or The Killers? I wouldn't assume that, and both of those movies are, IMO, ten times more impactfull and better than IA.

Posted by CambridgeCat at December 14, 2006 10:07 PM

comment #42

JD says ...

Mgmax, your argument is all over the place. On one hand, you're insisting, with complete authority, that Scorsese DEFINITELY DID SEE Infernal Affairs before signing on to the re-make. But when everyone else takes him at his word about not seeing it -- why would he lie about this, by the way? -- you change your argument and downgrade to, well, it's possible that he saw it. Of course it's possible, but he said he didn't see it and it makes perfect sense that he wouldn't have seen it. Why would the guy spend his entire career speaking openly about hundreds of influences and then lie just this one time? I don't get it. Sure, there are ways he could have seen it, but why are you so sure that he did?

Posted by JD at December 14, 2006 11:17 PM

comment #43

dobbsy says ...

cjkennedy, you've got the right groove...ain't no hangin' matter...nothing to get hung about...

lives of others....apocalypto....venus...pan's labyrinth...little children: found them all bracing, gripping, original, stimulating...lots of other decent movies like departed, but scorsese suffers from that terrible american indie film disease of the past 20 years...solipsism...but at least he's dropped the pretentious twaddle of gangs and aviator and made a sharp b-movie. what's wrong with that...as for full circle back to the la times piece: if mel gibson did this you'd all send a hanging party after the poor guy! and it wasn't even marty's fault!@?!?!?!??! uncle ken turan needs to talk to that writer about morality and maybe bring down uncle rick schickel with his almighty righteous hickory stick of godlike wisdom....glad to see all the passion for departed...hope something gets a full head of steam to ward off the REALLY bad movies competing for gold...(what starts with b and ends with l?)

Posted by dobbsy at December 14, 2006 11:24 PM

comment #44

jeffmcm says ...

Mgmax, I'm not sure what you're talking about re: Apocalypto or Bobby; I stand by everything I wrote.

In The Departed, Matt Damon's character is clearly seeking upward mobility; after growing up on the mean streets of Boston, he gets an apartment _because it has a view of the Massachusetts state house_. I thought that was pretty obvious. I thought that was pretty obvious; what wasn't so obvious was his homosexuality, and his need to keep himself closeted in order to achieve status. That's why he eventually turns his back on Nicholson, because he realizes he can move higher, faster, within the police.

I don't know all the factors involved in who should remake what, but if I had never seen a movie and was given a remake screenplay, I would probably actively avoid the original as well, until the new film was completed, so as to maintain objectivity and as much originality as possible. Sure, it's 'imaginable' that Scorsese saw the original, but until there's more reason than vague suspicion, it's not enough reason to call him 'duplicitous'.

Posted by jeffmcm at December 14, 2006 11:58 PM

comment #45

jeffmcm says ...

Sorry for some of the repetition above.

Posted by jeffmcm at December 15, 2006 12:02 AM

comment #46

JD says ...

"scorsese suffers from that terrible american indie film disease of the past 20 years...solipsism."

So what are you saying dobbsy, you don't like personal movies? How noble. Impersonal Hollywood product is where it's at.

Posted by JD at December 15, 2006 12:05 AM

comment #47

Arnzilla says ...

"if mel gibson did this you'd all send a hanging party after the poor guy!"

Ummmm... did what?

Posted by Arnzilla at December 15, 2006 12:24 AM

comment #48

dobbsy says ...

jd: try dictionary.com...

solipsistic isn't "personal" cinema, it's infantile navelgazing, the kind that got America into Iraq. That you can't imagine a personal cinema that is also worldly, well, welcome to America. Read Geoff Gilmore's comments about Sundance this year. Sundance finally grows up and out of its "navelgazing"....jeez, only took two decades. Ya gotta laugh...or visit Palenque....

Posted by dobbsy at December 15, 2006 12:27 AM

comment #49

jeffmcm says ...

And The Departed is 'infantile navelgazing' how? And whoa, how did the American indie movement get America into Iraq? Sounds like an interesting argument but it needs elaboration.

Posted by jeffmcm at December 15, 2006 12:38 AM

comment #50

dobbsy says ...

Self-absorbed, self-satisfied, adolescent, whiny, trivial, style over substance, egocentric, hip, edgy and attitude in place of wisdom, casual cynicism in place of compassion (anyone mention Altman this week?); certainly don't mean all indie cinema of the past 20 years suffers from these failings but so many of the leading lights of US indie cinema fall prey to far too many of these failings.

And they've been supported by the press/critics who fear the loss of readers/viewers by daring to point out there's a world of cinema (subtitled films rep one-half of one per cent of US boxoffice) out there with lots to offer but no stars and no dosh. That Tarantino is a God and Claude Miller virtually unknown...well, there's a good start for any serious discussion.

LOVE the note about how I only like soulless studio product. I'd just left a list of my favorite films of the year with no studio product. But don't confuse me with the facts....

How does this equate with US into Iraq? Believing we are the center of the universe is a bad place for art and a worse place for politics.

Posted by dobbsy at December 15, 2006 12:53 AM

comment #51

jeffmcm says ...

Fair enough, don't see how that connects to The Departed though, and I think the mindlessness of studio product is a greater offender than the solipsistic indie film, because at least those films have _something_ on their minds.

Posted by jeffmcm at December 15, 2006 12:58 AM

comment #52

YND says ...

You guys are funny. THE DEPARTED. Is it a B-movie? Yup, pure pulp storytelling. Is it better than most of the A-movies released this year? Yup. Where's the contradiction here? If KISS ME DEADLY, OUT OF THE PAST and THE LADY FROM SHANGHAI are great films, why not a modern-day B-movie?

I don't put THE DEPARTED in that rarefied company -- I think it's about 20 minutes too long and Nicholson could've used a little reigning in -- but I sure had a good time watching it and I look forward to seeing it again, which is more than I can say for most of the award contender films. Everybody, including Scorsese, seems to have had a ball sinking their teeth into it and that excitement shows in the film. I think it should be lauded if only for the sheer depth of the ensemble, where literally EVERYone from the headliners to Goon #3 gets good, juicy material.

I find the idea that only prestige pics should be up for awards to be pretty strange. If the awards groups are going to turn their heads from my personal favorite film of the year, CHILDREN OF MEN (which combines B-movie potboiler and prestige movie ambitions), I'm happy to see them stand behind a good, old-fashioned movie-movie -- one of the rare films whose entertainment value alone is justification enough for it to exist. (That's subjective, of course... Apparently a lot of people think LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE is hugely entertaining, too. For me, it's a remake of NATIONAL LAMPOON'S VACATION that doesn't quite live up to the original...)

And as to whether Scorsese saw INFERNAL AFFAIRS, the man has seen (and championed) more films than even the most rabid of us have seen. Is it possible that this one slipped through the cracks? Of course. (I just saw SCARFACE for the first time last year, and I've been consuming films like a mofo for twenty years.) But really... who the hell cares?

Posted by YND at December 15, 2006 1:04 AM

comment #53

Larry says ...

The Departed is a B-movie, and a bad one at that. Scorsese doesn't deserve a nomination much less an Oscar for this abortion.

(As for the political discussions on this website, they makes the people at Ain't It Cool News look smart.)

Posted by Larry at December 15, 2006 4:47 AM

comment #54

bipedalist says ...

The Departed is one of the best films of the year. However someone wrote, buried above:

but KING OF COMEDY is a masterpiece. with nary a drop of blood.

King of Comedy is one of the great underrated works of Scorsese's career, along with The Age of Innocence (which is also just...wonderful). De Niro as Rupert Pupkin is just the weirdest, most hilarious character he's ever played. What an actor to pull out of his hat Jake La Motta, Travis Bickle and Rupert Pupkin. Three comletely different, wholly realized characters. Jerry Lewis is also so magnificent, "You don't say 'here's the punchline.' You just do the punchline."

Anyway, great movie.

Posted by bipedalist at December 15, 2006 7:03 AM

comment #55

Craig Kennedy says ...

Larry, your insightful and well argued film commentary makes me yearn for AICN or repeated and forceful blows to the testicles until I'm rendered unconscious...I can't decide which.

Posted by Craig Kennedy at December 15, 2006 8:27 AM

comment #56

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Scorsese must be stopped!

His CRIME of lying to the press two years ago blots out everything else he has ever done as a filmmaker! If he saved a busload of orphans from Hitler that would be nothing compared to the duplicity-- the mendacity! Mendacity!-- of his filthy lies.

And no, I think he never saw The Killer or Hardboiled, because he's not as cool as a bunch of fan boys circa 1998. Nor do I think he ever saw Citizen Kane, The Godfather, The Leopard, or Raoul Walsh's The Man I Love.

Mendacity! I say.

Posted by Mgmax, le Corbeau at December 15, 2006 8:34 AM

comment #57

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

And Paul Schrader never saw Pickpocket before writing Raging Bull.

Posted by Mgmax, le Corbeau at December 15, 2006 8:35 AM

comment #58

CambridgeCat says ...

1998? Try 1994.

I like your hysterical arguing style, though, even if I find it unconvincing.

Have you seen the Set-Up recently ... because Scorsese showed it to the crew of The Aviator, and I know you MUST have seen it in the same period.

Posted by CambridgeCat at December 15, 2006 8:45 AM

comment #59

JD says ...

Dobbsy, I didn't say you liked "impersonal Hollywood product" -- though I'm not tracking your personal favorite movies list, dude -- but if you're gonna bash personal cinema, that's certainly one of the alternatives. Maybe the problem is your puzzling understanding of personal cinema in the first place. You seem to be arguing that personal cinema and worldy cinema (meaning what, movies from other countries?) are both markers of quality and it's a problem if people don't think they're the same thing. But there are a few things you're not taking into account: there's bad personal cinema, bad international cinema, good Hollywood product, etc. Just because a film is made in Europe doesn't automatically make it better than all American films. That assumption is its own form of shallowness.

I'm definitely a proponent of personal cinema, but I'm still not clear how you see solipsistic cinema and personal cinema as two radically different things. Couldn't you call John Cassavetes, Woody Allen, Henry Jaglom or any other personal filmmaker a navelgazer? I wouldn't use this term personally because I think it's an unflattering term for a good thing, but still...

Posted by JD at December 15, 2006 8:52 AM

comment #60

Argen says ...

Arguing whether any one particular person truly DESERVED the Oscar they won is a pointless argument because the award is not given solely on an objective basis of what is really the "best" of any given year. As soon as politics and personal feelings enter the process all arguments about "deserving" are pretty much moot. So, it becomes a matter of whether the prospective winner should win for the same reasons anyone else has ever won one.

That being said, THE DEPARTED may not be the very best movie of the year. It certainly isn't the best movie Scorsese has ever made. But it's better than ORDINARY PEOPLE, RAINMAN, DANCES WITH WOLVES, and MILLION DOLLAR BABY and any number of other films that got awards in years when he wasn't even nominated. On that score, he deserves this one and the nay-sayers can eat it.

It's not remarkable that he didn't see IA. The script clearly adapts several scenes directly. But Scorsese brought a lot more verve and visuals to a pretty blandly shot original. (For the record, I liked the original. I just think it gets way too much praise for what it is.) It's very possible he got the adaptation script and ran with it.

Oh, but even if he lied about it, who gives a shit? It means nothing. Much more of nothing than putting Malibu at risk by careening down the road drunk or any other things you can throw at him if you want to play the comparison game. But why play that game? Scorsese has easily made himself one of the all-time greats in the history of film. Everything after that is just icing.

Posted by Argen at December 15, 2006 9:08 AM

comment #61

CambridgeCat says ...

I thought Dances With Wolves was a beautiful movie. You ain't gotta lump it in with those movies, Argen! :)

I'll say this about The Departed, SOMEBODY read Black Sunday. I just hope it that element of the movie doesn't preclude the Whitey Bulger story from getting its own stage some day.

Posted by CambridgeCat at December 15, 2006 9:41 AM

comment #62

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Okay, since sarcasm, self-parody, irony etc. continues to be read straight, no matter how over the top I make it (didn't anyone recognize "Mendacity!"):

As you can find evidence for elsewhere on this site, I have been an early proponent of The Departed being good enough to win Best Picture and Best Director. Is it Scorsese's best? Was The Philadelphia Story Jimmy Stewart's best performance? No and no. Does he deserve one and this is as good an opportunity as any to give him one? As with The Color of Money and Paul Newman, yes and yes.

I was mildly bemused at Scorsese's following the SOP of remake directors when I would say the odds favor his cinematic polymath self having seen Internal Affairs before reading Monahan's script-- though I don't know that he did, and you don't know that he didn't. The hysteria with which I reacted to that fact was making fun of the breathless-revelation school of Oscar item, as seen in this item (Guy uses old quotes in Oscar fluff piece! Scandal!)

"Oh, ho, ho, irony! Oh, no, no, we don't get that here. See, uh, people ski topless here while smoking dope, so irony's not really a, a high priority. We haven't had any irony here since about, uh, '83, when I was the only practitioner of it. And I stopped because I was tired of being stared at."

Posted by Mgmax, le Corbeau at December 15, 2006 10:19 AM

comment #63

hatchetface says ...

dobbsy:
"A) Why doesn't anybody here know how to spell Scorsese?"

Actually, I was the only one that mis-spelled it. One person. Thanks for mentioning it. Prick.

Posted by hatchetface at December 15, 2006 10:22 AM

comment #64

Craig Kennedy says ...

I've said it before, the internet needs an irony/sarcasm font.

I'm suddenly reminded of the "Sarcastic Guy" sketch on Kids in the Hall with Dave Foley. Good times.

Posted by Craig Kennedy at December 15, 2006 10:39 AM

comment #65

CambridgeCat says ...

"I was mildly bemused at Scorsese's following the SOP of remake directors when I would say the odds favor his cinematic polymath self having seen Internal Affairs before reading Monahan's script-- though I don't know that he did, and you don't know that he didn't."

What we do KNOW is Scorsese said he didn't see it and there's no good reason to think he's lying, except maybe he isn't a Richard Gere fan.

I kid. I actually thought it was called InTernal Affairs for two years straight despite having read the title dozens of times.

Posted by CambridgeCat at December 15, 2006 10:43 AM

comment #66

christian says ...

i know soderbegh watched OCEAN's 11 before the remake.

ditto SOALARIS.

and gus zant surely saw PSYCHO.

and peterson did see POSEDIEN ADVENTURE...

zack snyder saw DAWN OF THE DEAD...

the list endless.

i am shocked MS wouldn't bother to watch a movie he's remaking. the script was so great?

but damn, i fucking hated that COLOR OF MONEY where newman's character is morphed into a bottom line reaganite. gag.

Posted by christian at December 15, 2006 10:59 AM

comment #67

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

"What we do KNOW is Scorsese said he didn't see it"

Not in this piece he didn't.

Posted by Mgmax, le Corbeau at December 15, 2006 11:03 AM

comment #68

Argen says ...

Don't feel bad, CambridgeCat. For months after seeing the title, I read it correctly, but assumed it was a movie about cops working for Satan.

Posted by Argen at December 15, 2006 11:16 AM

comment #69

dobbsy says ...

jd: good point. hachet face: get some glasses. and some manners or go over to the good people at aicn. I love the choices for film discourse: fanboy slobbering or awards crystal ball gazing. That's ironic. Actually, I LOVE the sharp, intelligent passionate folks here talking about MOVIES and skipping the personal attacks and empty punditry. Jd: my only point is that the even the NY Times and LA Times spend way too much ink on overrated US hacks while no ink or little on brilliant stuff from outside the US. It's called commerce. Let's not let it cloud the facts: there's a big world of moviemaking and we'll all be enriched by looking past the hype and searching for the original voices, whether they be at studios or the student lounge at Tehran U......

Posted by dobbsy at December 15, 2006 11:31 AM

comment #70

Argen says ...

Okay. You watch things other than blockbusters. Point taken. Join the club.

Posted by Argen at December 15, 2006 12:22 PM

comment #71

hatchetface says ...

dobbsy, let me help you here:

Shut the hell up and continue the discussion.
It's your snide comment that drew fire, not mine. The patented AICN crack reveals a snide, elitist, know-nothing quality to your posts and brother.. it's ugly and unoriginal. Now run along and practice using capital letters and punctuation properly, for everyone's sake.

Posted by hatchetface at December 15, 2006 12:51 PM

comment #72

dobbsy says ...

hachetface: If you would like to self-diagnose, it would probably be more enlightening than your thoughts on film. For intstance, WHAT IS YOUR EFFING PROBLEM? Apologies for the caps.

Can we all return to film, as quickly as possible?

Posted by dobbsy at December 15, 2006 3:05 PM

comment #73

kimi98 says ...

Posted by kimi98 at December 20, 2006 5:05 PM

comment #74

flyboots says ...

Green tea?Casey tea?Casey Coach Purses Outlet tea?Casey Anthony Back in Florida Awaiting Fate of Probation AppealDefense Attorney Baez Tells Media Outlet That Anthony Returned to FloridaBy
HOPPER Aug. 22, 2011 — Casey Anthony, the Florida woman acquitted of murdering daughter Caylee, is back in her home home Thomas Sabo Bracelets home state of Florida, defense attorney Jose Baez told a media outlet.In an interview with Fox News, Baez confirmed his
client's whereabouts."She is back in Florida.

Posted by flyboots at March 31, 2012 10:37 PM