goodfellas

These two comments contradict themselves.

So I said how much I liked GoodFellas, pointing out different scenes and ways of ediiting and direction. You said that you don't like it because you're supposed to like it and you hate how frat boys don't do Joe Pesci impressions right, and it's too loooong. No offense, Nick, but you're not making much of an argument here.

And yes, I took more from After Hours than him being covered in paint at the end. It still featured Griffin Dunne and Tommy Chong in it, still had a basic "guy-gets-into-wild-wacky-situations" plot, and still had plain obvious metaphors like guys chasing twenty-dollar bills around and getting into trouble because of it. It's not the worst movie in the world, but Alex is the first person I've ever met who had such a hard-on for this movie. You're right, maybe if I was PP in NYC, I'd dig it more, but for me now, I can see why GoodFellas gets the DVD box treatment and After Hours is only played at eight in the morning on Cinemax.

all I ever wanted to be...was a catholic priest...

plus John Candy! YER AS CRAZY AS YO MAMA! GOES TO SHOW ITS IN THE GENES!

Joe Queenan has an essay where he talks about how the proof that Kevin Costner was on the wrong track was Joe Pesci's wig. Any conspiracy that was able to bump off a prez and get away with it would have stopped him and made him where a more believable fro.

Oh, a two-disc set with commentary from the cast, documentaries, and the like? I must've missed that, just like I missed it being nominated for Best Film of that year.

Haha where's the Kundun love???

Fans of Donald Sutherland's ass should rent Don't Look Now first.

"Goodfellas" is a great movie about food...the mob stuff always seemed somewhat seconday. Paulie shaves the garlic with a razor blade, they had to cook the steaks in a pan, he used too much garlic in the sauce but it was still a good sauce. But yeah, as noted above, the problem with "Goodfellas" is Henry Hill. I think Liotta does a fine job--it's the basic idea. HH's supposed to be a kind of innocent here?

I also like "After Hours" fine, not a great Scorcese film but a good New York movie (which of course all Scorcese films are). Still, Scorcese has never topped "Mean Streets." "Raging Bull" is to me wayyyy overrated. "Gangs of New York" really sucked except for Day-Lewis, bad film of great book. "Taxi Driver" seems somewhat dated '70s film to me...I like the music, though, and it's certainly got its merits. The rest of Scorcese I pretty much dismiss. To me it's all about "Mean Streets," "GFs" and "Casino."

And I love Sutherland and the remake of "Invasion of Body Snatchers." One of the great yuppie-fear movies ever.

?

No, he's supposed to be a criminal. He is, in fact, someone who's very passionate about being a criminal. You can have as much sympathy for that as you choose, but either way, his punishment is poetic.

Depends on who by.

Once again....."Goodfellas" is a great, great movie, but it's the genre itself (mob/gangster movies) that's so damn tired.

I'm breaking your rule just by asking this, but what do you mean? Seems like it'll stand up to scrutiny as well as anything.