I can't say I enjoyed the trailer. I did find it amusing that ET (an insightful show
) called it "a DiCaprio movie." That being said, I am excited for this film. It's been a while since Scorcese has helmed a film. It's been a while since Leonardo and Daniel have been in anything. I think it'll be pretty darn good.
"Is (Jerry) any good?"
"He's only, like, the next Martin Scor-ceese."
I should be excited, but I'm not. Maybe it's the lame trailer. Maybe I'm just tired of Scorsese and this subject matter. I don't know... I have a general feeling of "meh" when it comes to this movie.
------------------ "Only one is a wanderer; two together are always going somewhere."
Seconds after hearing Mary Hart say "YOUR FIRST LOOK AT LEO'S NEW MOVIE!" my wife had to tell me to watch my language.
I'm very excited about MARTY's new film. I haven't seen the trailer yet, but I'm hoping this will be one of Scorsese's greatest films.
Brett, maybe he meant the "Yams of New York." [Edited last by Coressel on August 23, 2001 at 10:03 AM]
Any new Scorsese film is a cause for celebration. This particular one has been brewing in his head for three decades.
Also, considering the names on the screenplay (Scorsese, Jay Cocks, Steven Zaillian, Kenneth Lonergan), it's simply got to be a well-written film.
I haven't seen the trailer yet, though I understand many were underwhelmed. This doesn't particularly concern me. After all, without mentioning any titles, how many times have we been burned by great trailers for not-so-great movies?
Any word on rating or running time? I heard rumors Scorsese's rough cut was clocking in at 4 hours.
This trailer absolutely stinks. Is it just me, or do almost all trailers play exactly the same now? "In a world where...." "A man must...." Followed by quick cuts of all the exciting moments. Finished off with one last funny line or "money" shot.
I really have a feeling that this movie is going to bomb. General audiences don't "get" Scorsese films. And I don't think that Leonardo is a Box Office draw. I don't understand that whole Hollywood mentality where because a certain actor was in a major blockbuster, than it must have been because that actor was in it. Titanic was not a giant hit because of Leo, it was because it was a great film. The Matrix was not a hit because of Keanu. But these guys get the big money afterwards, and Hollywood expects them to be able to carry any big budget film afterwards.
I expect the only reason that Scorsese got his near $100 million budget for this film was because of Leo being in it. That's great for Scorsese, but it's gonna be a while before the studio makes it's money back on this one.
Wes, how can you say you love Scorsese, but not want to see this film? Any of my favorite directors, I immediately rush out to see their new films. I don't care if the trailer sucks, the reviews or bad, or if my friends tell me it's horrible. I have to see for myself. They are not my favorite directors for no reason, there's a very good chance that I'm going to love the film despite all those reasons. Every once and I while I do get burned though, Raimi almost lost a fan with For Love of the Game.
On a side note: It's great to see Daniel Day-Lewis in something again. It's been 4 long years since he's been in a film.
Oh yeah... and I am really looking forward to this film. I think it's gonna be great.
"You know, there's a million fine looking women in the world, dude. But they
don't all bring you lasagna at work. Most of 'em just cheat on you." - Silent Bob
"No matter where you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai Optimus Prime Films