|
Post by TerryMontana on Jan 31, 2020 14:30:21 GMT
Supposedly it was heavily edited at the request of Harvey Weinstein, which ruined the movie. It had great potential and I liked it for that. The other thing I remember is how I was much more interested in the story between The Priest and Bill the Butcher, rather than the traditional revenge story of Amsterdam. It just felt boring and predictable, plus there was no way I could accept Leo as some sort of hardened street urchin. That's very common when we talk about GONY. As much as I like the film, the story between the Butcher and the Priest always seemed much more interesting and would have made a great movie!!
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Feb 18, 2020 0:26:10 GMT
Scorsese calls it his Western: It sounds like DiCaprio is playing the lead role and De Niro's is more supporting. I'd been wondering for a while if they'd be co-leads.
|
|
|
Post by Billy_Costigan on Feb 18, 2020 3:43:20 GMT
This makes it sound like there will only be two male leads. Is DiCaprio playing the FBI agent or Ernest?
A straight adaption would be difficult so I'm wondering how they will structure it. If he's is playing the nephew (Ernest) like they previously mentioned, he's barely in the book.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Feb 18, 2020 4:07:54 GMT
This makes it sound like there will only be two male leads. Is DiCaprio playing the FBI agent or Ernest? A straight adaption would be difficult so I'm wondering how they will structure it. If he's is playing the nephew (Ernest) like they previously mentioned, he's barely in the book. DiCaprio is playing Ernest Burkhart, whose role has been expanded in the script (going by an earlier interview from Scorsese).
|
|
|
Post by Billy_Costigan on Feb 18, 2020 21:20:40 GMT
This makes it sound like there will only be two male leads. Is DiCaprio playing the FBI agent or Ernest? A straight adaption would be difficult so I'm wondering how they will structure it. If he's is playing the nephew (Ernest) like they previously mentioned, he's barely in the book. DiCaprio is playing Ernest Burkhart, whose role has been expanded in the script (going by an earlier interview from Scorsese). Tom White is a big character in the book and seems it strange that we haven't heard anything if they start filming soon. Are they not focusing on the FBI investigation?
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Feb 18, 2020 21:25:27 GMT
The Film Stage, Collider, and IndieWire all basically copied (verbatim) my translation of Scorsese's interview for Cahiers du Cinéma. I did a Google Translate on the original article and made some very specific corrections and modifications, which are all there in each of those pieces. So I guess one or more of those guys frequent this forum? Because this is the only place I posted my translation (with the corrections). Tom White is a big character in the book and seems it strange that we haven't heard anything if they start filming soon. Are they not focusing on the FBI investigation? Yeah, they're switching the focus of the story. I think White will be a much smaller character in the movie. Here is an older interview where Scorsese talks about this: Q: You’re about to make Killers of the Flower Moon, the story of the Bureau of Investigation handling of the 1920s murders of members of the Osage tribe in Oklahoma, who had become immensely rich through their oil rights. The narrative, in the book it’s based on anyway, is more linear than it is in The Irishman, isn’t it? Scorsese: Yes, but again, I don’t know if I’d do it that way. I’ve been working with Eric Roth on the script for a few years now, and we’re – now, actually, yesterday, in this room, and last night – we’re knocking away at this script, and restructuring it, rethinking it. Because it’s convenient to do a sort of detective story, but we all know what it is. So I want to explore something else, and that is the nature of a whole way of thinking as being complicit in genocide. It’s dehumanising people. I was out in Oklahoma about six weeks ago, and ultimately, as the Osage told me, it’s about greed. And therefore you could think that these people don’t deserve any of it because they’re not human anyway. Not really human. That opens up a whole interesting situation, let’s say, with William Hale [the jovial, sinister white local patriarch] and his nephew Ernest, and [his Osage niece-by-marriage] Mollie, beyond even the Bureau of Investigation and [its agent] Tom White, who’s a good man, comes in – he couldn’t pin it on anybody, he couldn’t get evidence – they were all doing it. Or they’re all, at least, complicit in sins of omission. They were quiet about it. And ultimately that’s the story, the whole idea of the status quo being guilty. Q: De Niro is going to be in it? Scorsese: [Yes, as] Bill Hale. William Hale. Gotta get him in there. And Leo [DiCaprio], I think playing Ernest at this point, the husband. And we haven’t yet settled on Tom White, but… yeah, it’s shifting the story from – since we know what happens and we know certain characters. Then how do you tell the story from the inside rather than from the exterior in. It’s going to take a few more months to get that right. But I was in Oklahoma, met with the Osage, Chief Standing Bear and his family, and it’s quite remarkable. I was certainly – how shall I put it? – surprised by the landscape. This is very different. I’m more used to the South-west, California, New Mexico – I did a film there. The landscape here is something that I hadn’t anticipated. The space of it. And the isolation is interesting. I mean, we’re just beginning, but I hope to get there, I hope to start shooting it by March or April. But it’s exciting, and we’re just grappling now, getting the script together. I have to go around, do some travelling, for The Irishman, but these days it’s best just to get to work.
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Feb 18, 2020 21:38:25 GMT
The Film Stage, Collider, and IndieWire all basically copied (verbatim) my translation of Scorsese's interview for Cahiers du Cinéma. I did a Google Translate on the original article and made some very specific corrections and modifications, which are all there is each of those pieces. So I guess one or more of those guys frequent this forum? Because this is the only place I posted my translation (with the corrections). Tom White is a big character in the book and seems it strange that we haven't heard anything if they start filming soon. Are they not focusing on the FBI investigation? Yeah, they're switching the focus of the story. I think White will be a much smaller character in the movie. Here is an older interview where Scorsese talks about this: Q: You’re about to make Killers of the Flower Moon, the story of the Bureau of Investigation handling of the 1920s murders of members of the Osage tribe in Oklahoma, who had become immensely rich through their oil rights. The narrative, in the book it’s based on anyway, is more linear than it is in The Irishman, isn’t it? Scorsese: Yes, but again, I don’t know if I’d do it that way. I’ve been working with Eric Roth on the script for a few years now, and we’re – now, actually, yesterday, in this room, and last night – we’re knocking away at this script, and restructuring it, rethinking it. Because it’s convenient to do a sort of detective story, but we all know what it is. So I want to explore something else, and that is the nature of a whole way of thinking as being complicit in genocide. It’s dehumanising people. I was out in Oklahoma about six weeks ago, and ultimately, as the Osage told me, it’s about greed. And therefore you could think that these people don’t deserve any of it because they’re not human anyway. Not really human. That opens up a whole interesting situation, let’s say, with William Hale [the jovial, sinister white local patriarch] and his nephew Ernest, and [his Osage niece-by-marriage] Mollie, beyond even the Bureau of Investigation and [its agent] Tom White, who’s a good man, comes in – he couldn’t pin it on anybody, he couldn’t get evidence – they were all doing it. Or they’re all, at least, complicit in sins of omission. They were quiet about it. And ultimately that’s the story, the whole idea of the status quo being guilty. Q: De Niro is going to be in it? Scorsese: [Yes, as] Bill Hale. William Hale. Gotta get him in there. And Leo [DiCaprio], I think playing Ernest at this point, the husband. And we haven’t yet settled on Tom White, but… yeah, it’s shifting the story from – since we know what happens and we know certain characters. Then how do you tell the story from the inside rather than from the exterior in. It’s going to take a few more months to get that right. But I was in Oklahoma, met with the Osage, Chief Standing Bear and his family, and it’s quite remarkable. I was certainly – how shall I put it? – surprised by the landscape. This is very different. I’m more used to the South-west, California, New Mexico – I did a film there. The landscape here is something that I hadn’t anticipated. The space of it. And the isolation is interesting. I mean, we’re just beginning, but I hope to get there, I hope to start shooting it by March or April. But it’s exciting, and we’re just grappling now, getting the script together. I have to go around, do some travelling, for The Irishman, but these days it’s best just to get to work. Yeah, they do read the forums. I've seen stuff posted on AW, and two hours later some sites post the same info.
|
|
Lubezki
Based
the social distancing
Posts: 4,332
Likes: 6,554
|
Post by Lubezki on Feb 21, 2020 23:47:34 GMT
|
|
Savager
Junior Member
Posts: 430
Likes: 508
|
Post by Savager on Feb 21, 2020 23:50:57 GMT
What the hell?
Is Scorsese de-aging everyone again? How the hell did the budget soar that much?
|
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Feb 22, 2020 0:04:40 GMT
What the hell? Is Scorsese de-aging everyone again? How the hell did the budget soar that much? I'm scratching my head right now too trying to figure this out. Why is it so much?!? Even if Scorsese wants to make it authentic as possible that seems really high since presumably there won't be a lot of CGI like The Irishman had.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Feb 22, 2020 0:06:08 GMT
LOL, reads like BS to me. I don't think even DiCaprio can save this movie from flopping if the budget is $225M. It has no reason to cost that much anyway.
What source is that screenshot from?
|
|
|
Post by mattfincher on Feb 22, 2020 0:09:21 GMT
If it’s really that much, Paramount is definitely backing out. No way they’re paying for both this and Babylon when they’re appealing to same demo and being released around the same time.
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Feb 22, 2020 0:16:56 GMT
This makes very little sense. Scorsese would have to be shooting it in 10 different countries with loads of special effects for the budget to get that crazy. Tenet costs less than that...
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Feb 22, 2020 0:22:08 GMT
The only way any movie should cost that amount of money is if they build a time machine to go back to the 1910s and shoot it then.
|
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Feb 22, 2020 0:30:18 GMT
The only way any movie should cost that amount of money is if they build a time machine to go back to the 1910s and shoot it then. lol, Marty Scorsese about to pull a Marty McFly in the 1910s like this.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Feb 22, 2020 1:16:16 GMT
This could possibly be Martin "GOAT" Scorsese's final film. It unites him with his two muses for the first time ever, and what a pair of muses to have, with one of them being the most influential actor since Brando and the other being the premier actor of our time. On top of all that, this is Scorsese finally making his Western, which is perhaps the defining American film genre. I don't care if it flops, I now want the budget to be $225M because that would mean Scorsese is cooking up the epic of all epics to top off his legendary career, and what a way to go out. Bring it on!
|
|
Lubezki
Based
the social distancing
Posts: 4,332
Likes: 6,554
|
Post by Lubezki on Feb 22, 2020 1:42:00 GMT
This could possibly be Martin "GOAT" Scorsese's final film. It unites him with his two muses for the first time ever, and what a pair of muses to have, with one of them being the most influential actor since Brando and the other being the premier actor of our time. On top of all that, this is Scorsese finally making his Western, which is perhaps the defining American film genre. I don't care if it flops, I now want the budget to be $225M because that would mean Scorsese is cooking up the epic of all epics to top off his legendary career, and what a way to go out. Bring it on!
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Feb 22, 2020 2:29:54 GMT
This could possibly be Martin "GOAT" Scorsese's final film. It unites him with his two muses for the first time ever, and what a pair of muses to have, with one of them being the most influential actor since Brando and the other being the premier actor of our time. On top of all that, this is Scorsese finally making his Western, which is perhaps the defining American film genre. I don't care if it flops, I now want the budget to be $225M because that would mean Scorsese is cooking up the epic of all epics to top off his legendary career, and what a way to go out. Bring it on! Eh, while I can understand the appeal of letting a great director have every tool at his disposal when he makes a possible swan song, I still think that giving him the yearly GDP of a small nation is just asking for trouble. Even when adjusted for inflation, Gangs of New York (which had him building an entire city set from scratch!) is half of that, and this sort of film doesn't demand the sort of byzantine set design that Gangs necessitated. I can't think of any reason why Scorsese, or anyone really, would require that amount of money for a solo movie, even if it is a period piece. (But then, I don't really see where all that money went from The Irishman's budget.) You'd think, after Wolf of Wall Street, people would be paying close attention to the purse strings of a Scorsese movie.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Feb 22, 2020 2:41:23 GMT
Eh, while I can understand the appeal of letting a great director have every tool at his disposal when he makes a possible swan song, I still think that giving him the yearly GDP of a small nation is just asking for trouble. Trouble for who? Scorsese is too old to care if his movies flop. De Niro will likely go unaffected, too, for similar reasons. DiCaprio will take a hit, but he'll survive because he has no competition in this realm. A studio might sink, but this isn't 1979 when all the studios were taking chances on a director's vision and Heaven's Gate ended the party for everybody else. Even that might be a non-factor if this goes to Netflix, which clearly has money to burn (or this could potentially even work out for their business model if DiCaprio's presence and a possible Best Picture win make a million people sign up for Netflix). I share your sentiment that there is no earthly reason why this would need more than $150M. But then again, you and I aren't Scorsese and perhaps we just can't fathom his vision for this. Eh, TWoWS was independently financed. Whether this stays with Paramount or goes to Netflix, we know where the money is coming from.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Feb 22, 2020 2:49:42 GMT
Eh, while I can understand the appeal of letting a great director have every tool at his disposal when he makes a possible swan song, I still think that giving him the yearly GDP of a small nation is just asking for trouble. Trouble for who? Scorsese is too old to care if his movies flop. De Niro will likely go unaffected, too, for similar reasons. DiCaprio will take a hit, but he'll survive because he has no competition in this realm. A studio might sink, but this isn't 1979 when all the studios were taking chances on a director's vision and Heaven's Gate ended the party for everybody else. Even that might be a non-factor if this goes to Netflix, which clearly has money to burn (or this could potentially even work out for their business model if DiCaprio's presence and a possible Best Picture win make a million people sign up for Netflix). I share your sentiment that there is no earthly reason why this would need more than $150M. But then again, you and I aren't Scorsese and perhaps we just can't fathom his vision for this. Eh, TWoWS was independently financed. Whether this stays with Paramount or goes to Netflix, we know where the money is coming from. Call me a pessimist, but I'm just thinking of the last time a visionary's epic Western was given an unholy budget (for the time), and it became the shorthand for "colossal cinematic disaster." Scorsese may not be Cimino, and while he may not care if his movie makes money, you have to ask yourself: what the hell could he be doing on a budget of $225 million with the subject matter he's working with? Look at a film like There Will Be Blood, which is set in a similar period, location, and bears similar subject matter to Killers of the Flower Moon. PTA made There Will Be Blood on a budget of $25 million. Dominik made The Assassination of Jesse James for $30 million. Even if you account for the ballooning salary someone like DiCaprio or De Niro command, I have absolutely no idea what the money would be spent on. And that concerns me. Because any movie coming with that sort of price-tag is just courting controversy right out of the gate. Sure, it's got Hollywood's most bankable star attached to it, but even you're showing some doubt at it recouping its budget (to say nothing of whatever money Netflix sinks into its presumed Oscar campaign). I think the biggest problem lies with Netflix. It's not a sustainable model to spend half a billion dollars on two movies. Of course, if you're going to dangle it in front of Scorsese, he's gonna take it -- he'd be crazy not to. Doesn't mean it's gonna be put to good use, or that you could've gotten the same result with half the budget.
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Feb 22, 2020 2:53:28 GMT
Trouble for who? Scorsese is too old to care if his movies flop. De Niro will likely go unaffected, too, for similar reasons. DiCaprio will take a hit, but he'll survive because he has no competition in this realm. A studio might sink, but this isn't 1979 when all the studios were taking chances on a director's vision and Heaven's Gate ended the party for everybody else. Even that might be a non-factor if this goes to Netflix, which clearly has money to burn (or this could potentially even work out for their business model if DiCaprio's presence and a possible Best Picture win make a million people sign up for Netflix). I share your sentiment that there is no earthly reason why this would need more than $150M. But then again, you and I aren't Scorsese and perhaps we just can't fathom his vision for this. Eh, TWoWS was independently financed. Whether this stays with Paramount or goes to Netflix, we know where the money is coming from. Call me a pessimist, but I'm just thinking of the last time a visionary's epic Western was given an unholy budget (for the time), and it became the shorthand for "colossal cinematic disaster." Scorsese may not be Cimino, and while he may not care if his movie makes money, you have to ask yourself: what the hell could he be doing on a budget of $225 million with the subject matter he's working with? Look at a film like There Will Be Blood, which is set in a similar period, location, and bears similar subject matter to Killers of the Flower Moon. PTA made There Will Be Blood on a budget of $25 million. Dominik made The Assassination of Jesse James for $30 million. Even if you account for the ballooning salary someone like DiCaprio or De Niro command, I have absolutely no idea what the money would be spent on. And that concerns me. Because any movie coming with that sort of price-tag is just courting controversy right out of the gate. Sure, it's got Hollywood's most bankable star attached to it, but even you're showing some doubt at it recouping its budget (to say nothing of whatever money Netflix sinks into its presumed Oscar campaign). I think the biggest problem lies with Netflix. It's not a sustainable model to spend half a billion dollars on two movies. Of course, if you're going to dangle it in front of Scorsese, he's gonna take it -- he'd be crazy not to. Doesn't mean it's gonna be put to good use, or that you could've gotten the same result with half the budget. Netflix will be broke in ten years if they continue to sign off on projects like this.
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Feb 22, 2020 2:55:08 GMT
Im hoping this is not true cause if it is then Marty has lost his mind. Leo can get people to the theater so if Paramount passes on this then something is wrong.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Feb 22, 2020 3:04:17 GMT
Call me a pessimist, but I'm just thinking of the last time a visionary's epic Western was given an unholy budget (for the time), and it became the shorthand for "colossal cinematic disaster." Scorsese may not be Cimino, and while he may not care if his movie makes money, you have to ask yourself: what the hell could he be doing on a budget of $225 million with the subject matter he's working with? Look at a film like There Will Be Blood, which is set in a similar period, location, and bears similar subject matter to Killers of the Flower Moon. PTA made There Will Be Blood on a budget of $25 million. Dominik made The Assassination of Jesse James for $30 million. Even if you account for the ballooning salary someone like DiCaprio or De Niro command, I have absolutely no idea what the money would be spent on. And that concerns me. Because any movie coming with that sort of price-tag is just courting controversy right out of the gate. I agree with most of this, which is why I don't actually believe that Scorsese wants $225M for this. I'm just exploring the possibility that he has a grander-than-imagined vision, in which case I'm all for it. If the budget is $225M (which, I repeat, I very much doubt) this is very likely flopping. I don't think it's reasonable to expect DiCaprio to pull off another Revenant when he's already won his Oscar. But I think he's going to at least prevent it from being another Heaven's Gate (which made $3.5M on a budget of $44M). At worst, it's going to be a Dolittle (2020) kind of flop, which should be survivable for Paramount.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Feb 22, 2020 3:11:48 GMT
Call me a pessimist, but I'm just thinking of the last time a visionary's epic Western was given an unholy budget (for the time), and it became the shorthand for "colossal cinematic disaster." Scorsese may not be Cimino, and while he may not care if his movie makes money, you have to ask yourself: what the hell could he be doing on a budget of $225 million with the subject matter he's working with? Look at a film like There Will Be Blood, which is set in a similar period, location, and bears similar subject matter to Killers of the Flower Moon. PTA made There Will Be Blood on a budget of $25 million. Dominik made The Assassination of Jesse James for $30 million. Even if you account for the ballooning salary someone like DiCaprio or De Niro command, I have absolutely no idea what the money would be spent on. And that concerns me. Because any movie coming with that sort of price-tag is just courting controversy right out of the gate. I agree with most of this, which is why I don't actually believe that Scorsese wants $225M for this. I'm just exploring the possibility that he has a grander-than-imagined vision, in which case I'm all for it. If the budget is $225M (which, I repeat, I very much doubt) this is very likely flopping. I don't think it's reasonable to expect DiCaprio to pull off another Revenant when he's already won his Oscar. But I think he's going to at least prevent it from being another Heaven's Gate (which made $3.5M on a budget of $44M). At worst, it's going to be a Dolittle (2020) kind of flop, which should be survivable for Paramount. I'm all for Scorsese having a grand vision, but this novel just doesn't really lend itself to that. It would be one thing if it were a heavily urban setting with multiple sets (something like Devil in the White City would be more appropriate for that level of production design -- but again, nowhere near $225 million), but this isn't that. Much of this story takes place on Oklahoma prairie expanses. I hope it is just a rumor, and an unfounded one at that.
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Feb 22, 2020 3:30:09 GMT
I can brainstorm possibilities if Scorsese thinks is one of his last 2 or 3 movies and just wants to go crazy with it, like Apocalypse Now. But I don't see how this sort of milieu would allow for the kind of filmmaking wildness that could even use such a budget. I hope this means the narrative is absolutely jam-packed, unlike every other Western I've seen.
|
|