What is it that makes people think of Raging Bull as one of the best films of all time? Please help me understand.
It's basically just a jealous dude who was a good boxer, got divorced, served a little bit of time, then continued working in his night clubs as a stand-up comedian.
I liked how the fights looked, but other than that it was very bland visually.
>>66871007
yeah I actually thought the film was too long and overall pretty shitty
>>66871007
>>66872451
Scorsese's obsession with low class males reaches its artistic zenith with Raging Bull, the biographical drama of 1940s Bronx boxer Jake LaMotta. The film took me in from the onset when I saw it years ago: 1942 Jake LaMotta in his prime shadowboxing in the ring as the flashbulbs pop behind him in woozy slow-motion is as iconic an opening image as you can ask for. When it cuts directly from that to 1964 Jake LaMotta, an obese has-been, wheezily reciting Shakespeare to himself, that's when the purpose of the movie is made abundantly clear. I had to know what happened in those twenty years to produce such a fall from grace.
Jake LaMotta is a terrible person, but a god in the ring. He has below-average intelligence, poor impulse control, exhibits violent outbursts, is extremely paranoid, and above all else: Lacks integrity. He is the direct cause of all of his misfortunes and manages to alienate everyone in his life by the time he gets to the 1950s.
First he cheats on his wife with a 15 year old vixen Vickie. Then he becomes paranoid by her friendship with the Mafia, the same organization that pays him to take a dive midway through the movie. It is this quagmire that no doubt causes Jake to lash out at everyone around him, even his brother Joey, the only guy who has Jake's best interests at heart. The scene that rips my heart out every time I see it is after Jake takes the dive and is crying uncontrollably in the locker room, where the real Jake LaMotta is watching from afar, and telling DeNiro's Jake to "Get a real job! Don't fight no more!" with tears in his eyes. It is this raw naked emotion that makes Raging Bull a timeless classic, and undoubtedly the most important project for the director, screenwriter, and actor.
1/2
>>66872511
2/2
Production-wise, Scorsese was already very established so he was given a huge budget to work with (25x that of Taxi Driver), and he leaves it all there: The photography is vicious and beautiful. You can fill a thesis paper on the ugliness of Jake's world juxtaposed with the beauty of Jake's gift. The iconic music will haunt your memory with its connection to the imagery. Schrader is in top-form here, having his bastard macho males delivering verbal jabs to each other more naturally than any of his other pictures with Scrosese. Marty's best friend Thelma Schoonmaker already carves out her legacy with the best editing to a sports movie, period.
Every single actor measures up to the insurmountable task of making the story compelling. Robert DeNiro somehow makes the terrible Jake LaMotta a legitimate tragic figure, rather than a cheap caricature. His dedication to delivering the truthful portrayal of Jake's rise and fall is rightfully one of the greatest performances of all time. Joe Pesci is the closest thing to a moral center in the film, and gives a more subdued performance compared to what he would later be known for. Cathy Moriarty's complex portrayal of a street smart teenaged girl who nevertheless gets swept away by dangerous men is another highlight.
Taxi Driver definitely put Martin Scorsese on the radar, but Raging Bull proved that he was no fluke, and that his undying love for violent American blue-collar lowlives could actually be transcendentally beautiful.
>>66871007
Rocky was better.
>>66872511
>>66872540
Did you write that?
>>66873662
Was it good?I didn't read it
>>66873662
No, he did.
https://letterboxd com/donniebravo/
>>66871007
BEEP BEEP BEEEEEEP
PLEB ALERT
PLEB ALERT
>>66873662
I did a long time ago
>>66871007
>>66872451
>>66872546
Fucking plebs.
>>66873694
I disagree with his opinion on the film, but he writes really well. He should start a blog or something.
>>66873739
>>66873767
Nice discussion, guys.
This isn't Reddit. You can't joke around like that here.
![rope_ragingbull[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/E0wCqv1.png "rope_ragingbull[1].png")
G O A T
O
A
T
Creed > Rocky > Bull
>>66873716
>gave Tiny Furniture 0.5/5
Based.
>>66873936
You got that backwards.
>when he starts punching his prison cell wall
>>66873851
>Discussion
Oh yea like I'm gonna go to the special olympics and expect intelligent discussion
>>66872546
>>66873936
Comparing them is stupid, Raging Bull has more in common with Goodfellas than Rocky. Rocky is the tale of a lovable underdog, Raging Bull is the tale of an asshole who destroys himself.
>>66873782
Thanks.I'm lazy
>>66873782
>>66874143
Honestly my writing isn't that good in my opinion, but thanks for your kind words.
If you thought the original was good just wait until you see the reboot starring Idris Elba.
The fighting scenes were some of the most beautiful peace of film I've ever seen. Scorsese is an artist.
obviously the fight scenes were more than enough to make it a masterpiece in its own way, i wish jake had more psychology and wasnt so simple-minded because that made him feel more like an object then an actual character at times, plus some scenes were very bland, but overall it's great, i doubt it would have the acclaim it does if Scorsese didnt make half a dozen other great films
>>66874238
I normally get annoyed when people post their blog. But I enjoyed that post. Made me see the film a little differently tbhfamily
>>66871007
Not having seen enough films yet.
>>66874238
Your Prince of Darkness review is solid. What are your top 5 favorite John Carpenter films? Will you review more of his work?
>is arguing that a film isnt good
>proceeds to give a plot synopsis as evidence
My plen detectors are off the fucking charts
When you're a teenage boy, it seems like the greatest movie, or one of them. Then you see it as a adult and learn something about yourself back then when you wonder why you never noticed that it's a celebration of idiocy and self-pity. We can only care what happens to Jake La Motta when we're still at the age where you blame people for reacting badly to your own shitty treatment of them. That adult film critics praised it reveals the kind of inadequates that that job attracts, I'm afraid.
>>66877082
how the fuck is it a celebration of any of those things?
the entire movie is about an absolute abomination of a human being. the movie is trying to see if it can find even a glimmer of humanity in an absolutely reprehensible wretch.
the movie is not on La Motta's side. if you think it is then you've missed the point.
>>66876369
I'm not opposed to it. I go through periods where I suddenly want to start reviewing things again. When I worked a graveyard shift at my job for about a year all I would do on downtime was watch movies which made me want to review more. I like seeing if my writing improves so I'll get back into it.
My top 5 Carpenters are In the Mouth of Madness, The Thing, Escape from New York, Assault on Precinct 13, and Big Trouble in Little China
>>66873936
You need to learn the difference between > and <
>>66873890
YOU NEVER GOT ME DOWN RAY!
YOU NEVER GOT ME DOWN!
>>66877082
>Then you see it as a adult and learn something about yourself back then when you wonder why you never noticed that it's a celebration of idiocy and self-pity
I'm not sure you could be more wrong.
>>66877082
>Ie adult
>>66877148
It's about making a boorish thug's failure to understand the world some kind of tragedy. But it isn't, it's just a sad, squalid, ordinary story, and the movie only works if you never put yourself in anyone else's place. Watch one scene and ask yourself how Vickie feels, for instance, and the whole thing falls apart like a clown car. La Motta worked on and authorised the movie - he trained De Niro himself.
>>66877331
That's because you're a not-especially-bright adolescent, but if you live, you'll find out.
>>66877647
I'm 30. Raging Bull doesn't celebrate anything about La Motta. We see a man achieve greateness in his sport in spite of his horrendous flaws but without the one area in which he could excels he destroys everything good in his life and is left with virtually nothing in his life. It's an examination and self destruction.
>>66877619
you are so amazing
you assume that because a character is the main character that we're meant to relate to him and view his struggles as pitiable.
I mean that is definitely the case with most of Scorsese's trajectory right? who could forget the deeply sympathetic lead characters of Taxi Driver, The King of Comedy, and Wolf of Wall Street?
>>66877891
Then you're developmentally arrested.
> doesn't celebrate anything
> achieve greatness
It's the offcial biopic of an dumbshit egotist, licenced, supported and endorsed by that egotist. I'd say it's a celebration of self-destruction, and of self-pity. La Motta doesn't mind being pitied as a great fuckup as long as he's a great SOMETHING. But again, imagine identifying with any other character. You can't - they exist solely to be abused by Jake.
>>66877891
>We see a man achieve greateness in his sport
Which is itself self destructive.
>>66877958
I don't assume, I observe it. Only Jake La Motta could seriously think Jake La Motta's story worth telling - you have to identify with him on some level to give a fuck at all.
That's the case with all his films with very few exceptions. Taxi Driver and Wolf of Wall Street are not among them, The King of Comedy is. Travis Bickle's victims were originally all going to be black. That was changed to make him a less risky... IDENTIFICATION FIGURE. Wolf of Wall Street is a paean to hedonism.
ITT people miss the point and get mad because the main character isn't a mary sue
>>66878020
>But again, imagine identifying with any other character. You can't - they exist solely to be abused by Jake.
Then why do they abandon him?
>>66871007
>but other than that it was very bland visually.
I don't get how you can take a movie like Raging Bull and say "other than the amazing parts it was boring to look at."
Look up neorealism. The point is to contrast his bland domestic existence with the larger than life fights in the ring
>>66878192
So he can feel all alone, and you can feel pity for him.
>>66878299
Strength of the film in making you feel sorry for such a cockroach. Clockwork Orange does the same thing.
>>66878248
> The point is to contrast his bland domestic existence with the larger than life fights in the ring
Which has nothing to do with neorealism.
>>66878333
But I don't. I grew out of it.
>>66878020
I haven't seen the film, but I'd like to add that your argument seems very thought out. I can't say whether I agree or not, but, as someone with know context, you have me convinced.
>>66878392
Glad to hear it, thank you for letting me know.
>>66877619
>falls apart like a clown car.
What?
>>66871007
It tells a story well, he's a tragic figure it's like On the Waterfront
>well it's basically this
You can break any story down like that and say that
>>66871007
i can never see him the same after Doug Stanhope's bit about him and his wife
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJf-20q8Xxg
>>66878712
Stanhope is the best
>>66878350
The shooting style and naturalism of the home scenes does though. He said it was "bland", I'm saying it was intended
It's ok OP, a woman could never understand.
>>66880288
No it doesn't. You're saying his domestic life is bland, which it isn't, it's unusually unpleasant. He was saying the style was. The point is, Scorsese loses interest as soon as you have to have a conversation, which is why he can't stay married and why the diner scene in Goodfellas has that bullshit dolly zoom.
>bring it over, you overcook it its no good, bring it over! its like a piece of charcoal over there!
i always laugh at the charcoal part its such a silly little thing but it just works
