i saw once upon a time...

i saw once upon a time in america, and though it had its moments.....overall not that impressed. that was so long and drawn out it was ridiculous. the movie was so unnessarily slow. i could have made a movie out of that plot in about one and a half hours. i hadn't heard about this movie until i got on this message board....but completely unimpressed. i'm sure lots of you disagree....but it's no godfather/goodfellas/casino by any stretch.

you're right Jay. i'm one of them who will disagree. Once Upon a Time in America is one of my favorite movies and find it great. the story is deep and has lots of twist. but, to each his own paisan . . .

GoodFella

I love Once Upon a Time in America. Certainly no Godfather (and it isn't as good as Goodfellas), but this movie is still really damned good in my book. I think its length was the only way the whole story could've been told properly, after all Sergio Leone's U.S. cut sucked and ruined the movie in the Statesbecause it took some key story elements out.

untrue, there was a reason for the slowless of the film. Without spoiling it, I suggest you listen to the audio commentary by Richard Schickel (sp?) on the OUATIA-DVD, and you will understand why it is so slow and how it adds to the greatness of this magnificent movie.

please don't

I agree with u jay. I didnt find it that great at all. true it did have its moments, but I dont think it should be listed among the greats.

a lot of crappy movies had their moments. one really good scene in the movie was the end when he meets max again; i liked that, very depressing though. i actually liked the style of the film, it was unlike most i have seen. the big problem was that it was overly slow, too many closeups and moments when people were just doing mundane things, such as walking across a street for seemingly thirty seconds.
it was an average movie, and though it tried to be very deep, it was not entertaining enough. and the scenes shot when diniro was old were excruciatingly boring.
an average movie, worth seeing once maybe. the fact it is dragged out and boring would make it hard for me to watch anymore than once, though, unlike the godfather. if a movie is really long, bit better be really good. it was an average movie in an amazing movies body.
enough of my bitching, though. if you guys know of any other good movies, please feel free to let me know.

I love this movie. The movie is highly underrated because of it's length, but as said, listen to the commentary. In my opinion, it equals the Godfather. Basically, Pacino had The Godfather Part 1 and DeNiro had Once Upon a Time in America.

I hope you are not implying that Once Upon... is a "Crappy" movie. It isn't. Fair enough, if you don't like it, nobody is going to make you, but you cannot say it is a crap movie. It only shows your severe lack of knowledge for film.
Hence the title... ; :p

Mick

I ptty you.

You couldnt experience this art work.

It had to be long and I never found it slow.


Why does it not live up to the Godfather's leval?

I think it does!

i have to defend myself a bit here. i never said it was crappy, i only said that crappy movies have their moments. i didn't think it was as good as any of you, though i do believe i have a knowledge of film. if i had no appreciation for great movies, i would have said the movie was garbage (and i do hate it when my friends can't appreciate a great movie).
that being said, it had a lot more to offer than goodfellas or casino though i found those more enjoyable. the acting was far better in this for one. but i was asked why doesn't it stack up to the godfather. to begin with, i found the godfather's story more engrossing. i can't really argue if someone says OUATIM's story line was better, because that is purely opinion. I found the characters in the godfather more engaging. Besides Diniro and James Woods, there was really no one else that made any impact on me. The acting was good in both, but I'm going to give my nod to the Godfather. The music in the Godfather, in my opinion, is better....though once again that is probably pretty debatable. They are both long movies, but I notice the length less in the Godfather because there is less wasted space. Dramatic effect existed in the Godfather without necessary making it so obvious. This issue is very subjective, and though I think Once Upon a Time in America is an average film, well maybe I was being harsh because i had just finished watching it and was a bit pessimistic....okay I'll say it was above average. Once Upon a Time in America's directing, I will say, is amazing. I really liked the style, but it is no Godfather in my opinion. That's just my take on it.

It depends, the music in QUATIA is better if it is the violin version.

Well defended! I for one will agree that this movie isn't as appealing to most because of its length. Scenes are slow, the acting is slow, everything is so goddamed slow. But I appreciate that it has a purpose, and I would love to listen to the commentary sometime to appreciate it even more.

I don't think it can be compared to The Godfather, as they have different themes altogether, IMO. Ther acting isn;t as good, nor is the music, or plot, or just about anything else. The Godfather is unsurpassed in almost every department, IMO. OUATIA isn't one of my faves, but I've only seen it once. I have no intention of watching it again in the near future, but I agree that it is a great film, though I don't necessarily think it's a personal fave.

Mick

thanks capo de la cosa nostra. i liked the way you said there was a difference between great movies and personal favorites. the slowness can really get to you, because at times (and please everybody don't bit my head off), the slowness is unwarranted. there are parts that need to be slow (all great movies have these), and there are parts that don't necessitate it. i would find it hard to believe that many people believe the plot of OUATIA's was more engrossing or entertaining.

Once Upon A Time in America is allright. There are times is the movie where it gets kinda boring or I don't understand what is going on, but overall it's okay.

Disaffected i must slightly agree with you on that one. Yeh there are some good scenes undoubtedly, however the whole movie doesnt suck u in for the entire plot and it goes a bit hazy at numerous points. A decent film, but not one of the all time greats though.

You know I actually sat down and watched this movie for the second time. And wow! I like this movie a whole lot more than the first time I watched it! It seems to make more sense this time around. Except for the ending. Noodles sees the truck go by and then he sees a bunch of old cars drive by. ( I am assuming that is some type of flashback) But what confuses me is that the movie ends years earlier to him smoking opium again. Does this suggest that his whole return as an older man was nothing but a hallucination? Still never figured this part out.

YES

It's open to interpretation. I think that the suggestion you said is the only real way of explaining it convincingly. I believe there is an excellent book telling of Sergio Leone's intentions in making this movie. I forget its name though.

Mick

please don't [/quote]It was actually shortened for the original release and was considered AWFUL. The original cut by Leone, is much better.

Thug

wait.. so all the events taking place after the chinese theatre he was hallucinating?

[spoiler warning]


that's the most likely interpretation, but there are three ways you can look at it:


1_everything of the 1960's is a hallucination from Noodles when he's on opium, a drug which was rumored to have this effect you had visions of the future

this is the most likely one because of the opium-den scenes, the 'dreamy' cinematography of the 1968 part and comments of the screenwriters and director themselves.

2_the 1968-part DID happen and Max DID betray Noodles, 'stealing' his life his girl his money everything.

this would not explain the opium scenes, however it would make more sense of the accuracy of the 1968-settings (Beatles music, television, cars etc.)

3_Baily really exists, but old Noodles' sees Max's face as if old wounds had not yet healed.

this is the least logical explanation, however it is quite common to the movie you have been watching the 3 hours before; Max is really dead, and no hallucinations


with all fairness, the first is by far the best explanation. the reason for Noodle's opium-hallucination would be his guilt for letting Max get killed, and the life/lives that were destroyed because of that.

Absoulutely incredible, haunting, rich and multi-layered film. Sergio Leone's last film and argubably his best along with Once Upon A Time In The West.

Look, I hate to bring an old thread up like this, but Jay.... You are completely wrong. I appriciate that you didnt like it, but they did origanally come out with a shorter version (about 120 mins.) and it was horrible. Sad to even be called film almost. But this new re-edited, revamped version came out not so long ago and deserves attention. It's wonderful. The only reason it is long is to tell the story with out ruining it, and to tell it properly. I understand you didn't like it and I have nothing wrong with that, just get the background story next time before you choose reasons to flame it.

I love Once Upon A Time In America. It`s so intense and deep, which makes this movie special. It`s definately in my TOP 5 Best Gangster movies.

Fantastic film. I watched the full version yesterday again; the first segment of the phone ringing, the end of Prohibition and the guys looking for Noodles, is possibly the best editing in film ever. Top marks.

9/10
****
#20

Mick