Scarface that one is a clasic

To me, even Scarface is a little bit overrated. But let's say you're right, still Scorsese is just on another level.

@@spaceman_sz Lmao scarface is best

Spaceman Sir. Agreed! I think the only good thing about Scarface is Al Pacino.

Blow Out.

George Massey x4!

Well, in the 1970s - Marty was doing a lot of cocaine! So, that explains things.

LMAO

I legit just checked my playback speed after hearing Marty talk

@@alphabetaxenonzzzcat he talks like this now lol

One of the few 'modern' directors that continued the idea of visual storytelling that made Hitchcock so great. I certainly don't like all of De Palma's films but I respect the fact even when making something like Mission: Impossible he stripped it down to the basics of what makes a good scene on a visual level.

I feel like directors like Tarantino and Paul Thomas Anderson borrowed a lot from DePalma’s style

@@jonnybirchyboy1560 Tarantino yes I would say so but for Paul in his early years I would say Scorsese mixed with Altman more so Altman because he was huge fan but starting with there will be blood he definitely became more Kubrick with his movies

I think Carlito's Way is actually based on a real life criminal(s)

how so

He looks like Carlito.

He’s starting to get the recognition. Scarface and body double are masterpieces and thief, blow out, and the untouchables are amazing.

@@jonisafreak3 dressed to kill was my favorite

​@@jonisafreak3 thief is Michael man not De Palma

and Blowout and Mission Impossible

He’s made much better Movies too

@@thevindranrames it's my fault for not watching his other films aside from Carrie

Do you Know who lives here ?

this is what's missing with interviews today. everything or every interview seems like something PR folks prep the celebs for. This is why podcast thrive soo much, just because early on it seemed like away from sponsors and patreon.. podcast were a brief glimpse of real conversations... sadly even those things are just being used for agenda driving purposes.

What bout oprah winfrey??

Cavett was a clown who often showed disrespect to guests

These damn clowns

@@danielnichols5632 Oh, I like him even more now then

@@Vismay_K Her show focused on great themes but she's a bad interviewer.

30s is still young dw

@@TheBirdieView Yeah totally, but as someone who is currently 30, who watched a lot of my colleagues and classmates drop out around 23-25 years old, people don't know this. Just want to inspire them and instead of holding yourself to some insane standard like Spielberg, aim for your 40's! Work on stuff every year, build up experience and a portfolio and you'll get there. Make at least one thing a year.

Thank you that made me feel better about myself

But you should use your 20’s too get there.. if you started in the 30/40’s it’s too late..just saying not saying it’s impossible but started young and then moved up ..

Great It started off nice Then you reminded me that I’m 51

Despite creating one huge masterpiece.

@@h.a.4600 which is Blow Out

@@fmellish71 I actually meant Scarface. Its has been over 35 years and its still relevant today. And makes new movies look weak.

@@fmellish71 Blow Out well i haven't seen that Movie, i met a friend that loves Scordece and De Palma movies and im trying to catch up.

@@fmellish71 Far from a masterpiece... it's good though and worth seeing. Falls apart ridiculously in the final act, but maybe I need to see it again. I thought the same of Scarface when I first saw it and now that's one of my favourite films.

Blow Out is my favorite but I like a lot of his films

I’m a sucker for Raising Cain it’s just so crazy I love it

I have seen another interview from the same year and he had a beard. A few months it was back as well. So this seems to be some sort of short beard-less period.

Its so backwards!

*used to

when great directors and filmmakers are actually appreciated for their work

without Pacino, that movie would have failed. It really got elevated because of him

And he also did carlito's way, some years later, which still is a character driven movie compared to the rest of his oeuvre

Catherine Scorsese was awesome. I enjoyed her in everything she was in.

Did they ever say this?

@@victorkong82 God bless her soul

Lol

Elena Sos YES

He stole Scorsese's beard.

Looks weird seeing Martin Scorsese with a beard.

No such thing as overrated. If someone's work is good then it deserves to be liked as much as it is

Gall ery This cinemasins acolyte deserves a ding.

That's more of a question for screenwriter and novelist John Farris who wrote the book and screenplay

It’s one of the rare DePalma flicks I don’t dig all that much though it has its moments and I love Carrie

Funny, we actually have some smoke shops in my city called Carlito's Way....lol

I just spent about 45 minutes putting together some great stuff for you in a reply (in the form of links to interviews with actors and directors) about your comment, because it raises a topic I've been passionately interested in for a number of years. But I guess I accidentally hit 'refresh' on this page or something, because all of it's gone. Gonna start again now and will edit my comment as I get my shit together. Pardon my French. But I remember how I started my original comment. Here's how it went: My short answer to your first question is this: having a vision. The answer to your second question is more complicated, because different directors have different visions, different styles, different personalities, etc. and hence different ways of working with actors. And the same goes for actors: they all have different personalities, aspirations, styles, etc. and so have different preferences when it comes to being directed. So it's not just a question of what makes a great director vis-à-vis actors, but what makes a _certain_ director get the best out of _certain_ actors (and the other way around). You'll learn the most from simply watching interviews with actors on what it as like to work with a certain director, or vice versa, or watching them being interviewed together on their collaboration. But there's some true wisdom to start with from the old masters himself, Orson Welles, who really made it clear what a director may bring to a picture - or may not. Take that in while I collect my shit. Pardon my French. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/iKyaZbJptrqtf2w.html

@@furtherback6131 Thank you for your reply, your thoughts and the link. I found it interesting but got the idea it was Welles interviewing Welles.

Different directors have different strengths. Some are great at composition, some are great at editing, some are great at eliiciting great performances, etc, etc. I would be put Scorcese in the group of directors who can/could ellicit great performances. A lot of them can't. And especially nowadays when the focus is so much on technology & special effects.

I see a young David Warner in there too, the photographer from the original Omen.

How about any Honeymooners actors that were part of the main cast? These are rarities much like the other videos.

Lanooski This was his lowest point, he was a coke addict.

Baghuul gah OOF! I forgot. :/

He should bring that beard back. Save for “Mean Streets”, his best films were made while he wore it.

spb 78 he was also on a lot of drugs and drinking a lot at this time (but he doesn’t seem that different a person)

his parents were still alive during this interview

Nick Toss indeed, and I think (naturally) their deaths had a major affect on him.

👏

Love it.

Is it a book?

"Ooo. What a wit." - Brian DePalma

@@ineverswag I'm not sure where he said it; pretty sure it's really Vidal, though. Thing is, start reading him at random: it doesn't matter if you never find the quote; he's one of the best writers of fiction or nonfiction out there. If you want one novel to read, I say either Burr, Lincoln, or Creation.

Goodfellas not even a competition

@@BilboB I'd pick Goodfellas too overall but the end sequence of Scarface is legendary

@@SiLoMixMaster + true but long time since i have seen Scarface but i remember it being a little bit too cartoony and over the top plus i feel like Goddfellas was also just more my style of movie in terms of cinematography

That’s like comparing McDonald’s to filet mignon. The only people who like Scarface are teenagers and rappers, it’s a terrible movie. Goodfellas is one of the greatest films ever made.

@@mikeydubbz1 It's a terrible movie with an incredible performance by Pacino.

But don't forget his more sublime and seminal works such as Blow out, dressed to kill, sisters, the untouchables, casualties of war, and carrie. Carlito's way isn't a favourite of mine, but it is good. He was a versatile filmmaker who was different than many of his colleagues in art of films.

@@avanishdutta2658 Blow out is one of Tarantino's Favourite movie

@@perfiction7521 Yeah, i know. It is one of the best de palma films. He was a very visual filmmaker, employing many of alfred hitchcock's techniques in his films.

I think what De Palma referred to the fact that Scorsese simply builds more visceral and morally engaging human dramas, while De Palma's films are more about visual transgression and themes related to desire and voyeurism, and ultimately slightly more about cinema itself than about the human condition. Scorsese would be 40-60 in how his films respectively deal with the human condition and cinema itself, while De Palma would be the reverse, 60-40. De Palma's films are (generally) about the beholder's perspective, while Scorsese's films are (generally) about active protagonists's perspective.

I reserve almost exclusively the deification I have for mortals on behalf of Martin Scorsese. To me the guy is like a lighting bolt, or an eight ball filled with pure cinema. When he dies it's entirely possible that I will cry, and I have never done that. I know he's a religious man, so probably would feel uncomfortable at being idolized in such a way, so I'll just say: if there's a God Martin Scorsese will live to make movies well past 100. I would say "forever" but I'll respect the biological time limit. All this to say I couldn't abide a breakdown of his filmmaking style in such a way. Like a pie chart. I don't see where his stylization ends and his character work begins. It's seamless to me.

@@futurestoryteller I understand your qualm, and obviously I recognize that there is some level of artificiality in putting theoretical limits or bounds or separation into what truly is a seamless work. What I would say is that De Palma, because he is that much interested in the beholder's perspective and the idea to turn us into voyeurs through a protagonist, and getting us to think of the unthinkable, of the transgressive, rather than maybe building a visualization of a strong main character proactive's journey into the realm of good and evil (like Scorsese would), because De Palma is that much keen to explore the connection between the passivity of a look and the transgressiveness of a thought, he is quite naturally attracted to elements of storytelling that are metatextual or metacinematic, if you like, to visual motifs that convey a discourse on the power of cinema itself. Of cinema as a means to think the unthinkable, and more specifically to explore the tension between the fact that the sacred gives transgressiveness its value, and the fact that transgressiveness is all about violating the sacred. I think Scorsese's work is less metacinematic than De Palma is. I think Scorsese has ocasionnally a moral discourse, a moral stance on the industry, on cinema and entertainment in general, in some of his films, but that he's not overly interested in explicit references to cinema as a medium in his work. I think Scorsese trusts he is passionate enough about the medium to create strong cinematic experiences that reflect his obsessions (with New York, with tribalism, with God, etc etc), and thus, that he trusts that his works will not only reflect his obsessions about life, but also reflect his thoughts on how these obsessions have been explored by the medium so far. I hope it is clearer now and I am sorry if it seems pedantic. English is not my language and I learnt it in a rather classical, broomstick-in-arsehole kind of way. x)

@@julienperonne2347 very interesting. Who do you prefer? And who do you think is better?

@@lampad4549 Growing up, my affection for transgressive filmmakers increases, so prefer De Palma's kind of films, because I think he has a broader repertoire in terms of narrative canvassing, while Scorsese more or less sticks to realistic drama. But Scorsese made more good movies than De Palma, that's for sure.

I like to see Jake Johnson tackle the Scorsese persona in a skit or short.

Charlie Aguilar I agree and wholeheartedly second your motion. Unfortunately, this could just as well never happen. Merely a pipe dream. Just like a Liam Neeson castro movie.

I thought snake eyes was fire

Or Scarface...or Dressed to Kill.

@@cbl1984 Here, I looked this up for you: www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sarcasm

I love that movie