Martin Scorsese is one of the last representatives of classical Hollywood. Or rather, the cohort of directors who know how to put big crime films with elements of chronicles, which tells the events of several decades. And his methods of work are inherited from Francis Ford Copella, who filmed the cornerstone of the genre – “The Godfather”. And I want to start getting acquainted with the director with the movie Casino. A new acquaintance took place, which means wait for the next batch of impressions from what you saw and some considerations on this occasion.
A narrative criterion or narrative. If you read the synopsis, you may get the impression that we have a production drama about the fact that a former gangster is trying to build a legal business and shows what problems he may face. That's partly true. Most of the criminal elements of the story work on how Rotstin handles the rooftop problem. And how his friend is dealing with debt. The gangster part of the film is one of the strongest, the matchmaking of the gambling industry is studied along and across. Much attention is paid to this. But the script focuses more on the interpersonal relationship aspect of the main characters. Friendship, love, hate and secrets. All this also found a place in the tape. The writers managed to develop both aspects well and combine them in the right proportions. This movie should be watched carefully, so as not to miss the thread of the narrative, or an important detail that affects the understanding of the plot. The third act is magnificent.
Visual criterion or technical support of the tape. Scorsese films perfectly recreate the atmosphere of the era and time of action. A particularly fertile ground for such experiments is naturalism in staging dramatic or meaningful scenes. Especially this is the sin of massacres and murders - the eternal companions of every self-respecting gangster. There was a place even bright explosions and flying car parts. A nice bonus to the beauty of the frame and a leisurely pace. Operator Robert Richardson alternates plans well, the camera is often static, but it helps to capture the emotion of the moment and the setting of the place. Views of the city and review plans like entertainment in the casino itself are worth visiting the wallpaper of your work interfaces. The composer created music that fits perfectly into the atmosphere and emphasizes the emotional mood of the scene. This sound is worth having separately from the tape. Worth a visit to your music collection.
Acting is amazing. Robert de Niro as always great in the role of the head of a criminal organization, perfectly works with facial expressions in clashes with the heroine Sharon Stone, it is difficult for him to tolerate the antics of his companion, but out of love for her he tries to keep himself in control. Joe Pesci is a great master of temper and trunk, heart over mind, and therefore prefers to shoot first, and then think. The chemistry between him and De Niro is indescribable. It's better to see. Sharon Stone can not only be charming and sexy, but also give out a strong emotional intensity. In each scene of the scandal, she feels passionate and impulsive, contrasting with De Niro's character in this film, more calm. But so close to Joe Pesci's character. And so it's interesting to watch her throw before choosing. These three actors made this movie. Everyone else is not important.
As a conclusion. A magnificent film, which is not only a piercing psychological drama in the entourage of a criminal action movie, but also a cast of its time, due to the accuracy of the details of the environment, which is no less important for Scorsese. I recommend the tape to acquaintance connoisseurs of the genre and creative genius of the director. All health, peace and good cinema.
Psychological thriller and criminal drama in one bottle
Martin Scorsese is one of the last representatives of classical Hollywood. Or rather, the cohort of directors who know how to put big crime films with elements of chronicles, which tells the events of several decades. And his methods of work are inherited from Francis Ford Copella, who filmed the cornerstone of the genre - The Godfather. And I want to start getting acquainted with the director with the movie Casino. A new acquaintance took place, which means wait for the next batch of impressions from what you saw and thoughts on this matter.
A narrative criterion or narrative. If you read the synopsis, you may get the impression that we have a production drama about the fact that a former gangster is trying to build a legal business and shows what problems he may face. That's partly true. Most of the criminal elements of the story work on how Rotstin handles the rooftop problem. And how his friend is dealing with debt. The gangster part of the film is one of the strongest, the matchmaking of the gambling industry is studied along and across. Much attention is paid to this. But the script focuses more on the interpersonal relationship aspect of the main characters. Friendship, love, hate and secrets. All this also found a place in the tape. The writers managed to develop both aspects well and combine them in the right proportions. This movie should be watched carefully, so as not to miss the thread of the narrative, or an important detail that affects the understanding of the plot. The third act is magnificent.
Visual criterion or technical support of the tape. Scorsese films perfectly recreate the atmosphere of the era and time of action. A particularly fertile ground for such experiments is naturalism in staging dramatic or meaningful scenes. Especially this is the sin of massacres and murders - the eternal companions of any self-respecting gangster. There was a place even bright explosions and flying car parts. A nice bonus to the beauty of the frame and a leisurely pace. The camera is often static, but it helps to catch the emotion of the moment and the situation of the place. Views of the city and review plans like entertainment in the casino itself are worth visiting the wallpaper of your work interfaces. The composer wrote music that perfectly fits into the atmosphere and emphasizes the emotional mood of the scene. This sound is worth having separately from the tape.
Acting is amazing. Robert de Niro as always great in the role of the head of a criminal organization, perfectly works with facial expressions in clashes with the heroine Sharon Stone, it is difficult for him to tolerate the antics of his companion, but out of love for her he tries to keep himself in control. Joe Pesci is a great master of temper and trunk, heart over mind, and therefore prefers to shoot first, and then think. The chemistry between him and De Niro is indescribable. It's better to see. Sharon Stone can not only be charming and sexy, but also give out a strong emotional intensity. In each scene of the scandal, she feels passionate and impulsive, contrasting with De Niro's character in this film, more calm. But so close to Joe Pesci's character. And so it's interesting to watch her throw before choosing. These three actors made this movie. Everyone else is not important.
As a verdict. A magnificent film, which is not only a piercing psychological drama in the entourage of a criminal action movie, but also a cast of its time, due to the accuracy of the details of the environment, which is no less important for Scorsese. I recommend the tape to acquaintance connoisseurs of the genre and creative genius of the director. Good and good movie for everyone!
This film is not like all other Scorzese films. It's another two specific things: it looks like a specific Soundgarden Black Hole Sun clip (or that same Smash Mouth clip or whatever you'd see on MTV in the late nineties-early zeros) and listens like any other clip at all - because it's musical and dynamic.
Seriously, 75% of the film was shot as a robbery in Ocean's 11 Friends. 90% of the film is accompanied by a soundtrack of very expensive songs. A third of the film is a voiceover, which, despite the accusations of snobs in “anti-kinoness”, gives the plot even more acceleration. Namely, speed and parallels with star-studded box office cabbages (sorry for that ugly word) are not to be expected from Scorsese. Because Martin is "old school" and he doesn't like box office movies (just read what he writes about Marvel movies).
This film, like a good journalistic text, should be understood by anyone who touches it. Moreover, it should appeal to everyone who has never trembled before the directorial style of Scorsese. Because there's not much of "Scorsezovsky" here. Except the mafia and the Italians.
The gambling brainchild of Martin Scorsese, which still leads to crime, raises the theme of “Good Guys” and reduces power and influence with dangerous risks, betrayals and bloody reprisals. If in the cult “Good Guys” the director emphasized the rise of gangsters, then “Casino” adds the actual policy of the casino. The film leads the story from different faces, telling the story by the characters of both Robert De Niro and Joe Pesci. The classic fairy tale about a romanticized casino causes terrible interest and excitement, in principle, as befits casino activities.
Gambling business, "laundering" money, a major owner to reveal to the viewer the inner world. The film sharply holds the bar of discipline and power, so that any risks are justified, influential people are bribed, and the scheme of exporting money is simple and easy. The excitement from the screen transformation of scammers, secret signals, collusion – that’s what a casino is! The outer layer, which is seen by all guests of the gambling establishment, has already flashed into the movies, but the viewer is used to being on the side of the players, and Martin Scorsese presents the matter in such a way that he puts the most accurate, attentive and punctual, hardworking and strong director in the person of Robert De Niro at the head of the institution.
Robert's friend, his right-hand man, mafia assistant bosses and defender of the honor of the entire criminal world, the most recognizable robber at Christmas in the McCallister house - Joe Pesci. The authors have already introduced two dangerous people into the field of corruption, strength and power to say in person that this is not just a gangster movie, it is a movie about risks and excitement. Raising authority, resolving issues with the authorities are moving to a common plan in order to demonstrate the coordinated system of the criminal world in the main key.
Until a girl comes out. Here's the stumbling block, here's the Achilles heel, here's Sharon Stone. The tape acquires dangerous obstacles, because a strong and prudent entrepreneur is taken into ticks by the female force of seduction. The film gradually changes the course of affairs, so that after the exposure and even display of life under the cover of the casino, put its nuances. Timekeeping in almost three hours allows you to assess this scale of Scorsese, so that the viewer feels the constancy of monetary transactions, gradually inserting sticks into the wheels, adding new links to the well-functioning system.
After the appearance of Sharon Stone, Robert De Niro awakens his basic instinct... and a simple settling down for a normal romantic life, but the problem is that if you are a Mafia man and generate income, you just can not get out, and therefore you need to spin as you can. At the same time, Joe Pesci surprises with his transformation. The harmony of Joe’s actions with his external parameters is created – such a gangster entertainment center that is serious and determined.
The dynamics are amplified, showing the viewer cruel games against the law, against the family, against the bosses, in order to perfectly juxtapose the bloody reprisals with snitching, deception and games on the side. The film shows that every hero wants to grab a bigger piece. Greed and lies are wedged into a well-developed system to beautifully and bloodyly show the unrest, anxiety and tantrums that ultimately lead only one path.
This tape impresses with its measured narrative and internal mechanism of making money. For such a movie, you need to grow to appreciate the scale of dangerous situations and angry gangsters, understand the rules of mutual respect and give an account to greedy, calculating sycophants and rats.
Robert De Niro is a nice character. Joe Pesci is a chain dog who breaks into the criminal world with an extra clip behind his sinus. Sharon Stone is a cunning lioness who uses her natural arguments to satisfy all her needs. Frank Vincent, even in real life, looks like a gangster, an innate role. Excellent crime film master of his craft!
Either the director is incompetent, or he took an order for bandits!
I was surprised that the film has a high rating, that out of 100 reviews 99 positive, and on YouTube comments something like “what magic is in this film, watch it again and again” and 7 million views! This is a phenomenon that needs research. I decided to look, at first normally, then turned on the speed of 1.5x, and at 1h30m this same type of mud got tired. Let's get closer.
Professional analysis.
Directing. 2 out of 10. Just behind the scenes, a person reads a novel (which is filmed), and in the frame clip scenes are cut for illustration. The psychology of the characters is not disclosed, it is clear that they were shot in a hurry, the actors in different parts of the film are the same, because this or that episode was shot on the same day and the director simply did not give himself the trouble to work with the actor. On the other hand, what's playing here? Revenge and pride, pontiffs, fingering and lust? Therefore, the very fact of taking such a work with the permission to say "material", the director has already left himself in the history of cinema as an unintelligent illustrator.
Operator. 2 out of 10. The light does not reveal the dramaturgy of the scenes. Either a serial picture, or blue illuminated glasses - that's all the "working out" of the material. What's the casino like? Volcano vent, Brazilian lights, black hole or what? Nothing like TV. So with the actors and in all the scenes. It's just mediocre. Why two, you ask? Because a 1-point score is filtered out as "botism."
Dramaturgy. 1 in 10. If you order a freshman: “write about your brother” – this will be the result. It is told and shown through the eyes of criminals. The Soviet film master G. Frank once said: “You have the right to sink to the bottom only if you have an understanding of how to get out of there.” If you show dirt, and then an hour and a half (sorry, someone watched all three, probably) to try to evoke sympathy for the degenerate - just because "the wife took money" and "for justice suffered" (the one who killed in the frame and betrayed) - then this, of course, is funny. As a professional, it’s fun to watch. In principle, this “cinema” is not worth 5 minutes, which was spent to write a review. Just small notes here are not accepted by the site. Well, you want the details. No collisions, no intrigue, at every moment of the film nothing (!) is solved. This film is trying to show us that the world is like this. Yeah, that's what you got. For those who see it and believe it, he is. We make the world the way we want it to be! Remember that.
Music. 1 in 10. She was not here for the first hour and a half.
Actors. 3 out of 10. The text is said, curved, make-up is imposed - in principle, standard for the series.
Edit. 3 out of 10. It's just a list of people.
Color correction. 2 out of 10. The stamps, which were supposedly shown at different times, but shot on the same day, did not even try to display light and color at different time intervals.
Dialogue. 1 in 10. Not witty. They don't reveal the characters.
Intrigue. 1 in 10. Who will betray whom there and who will sleep with whom. “This is powerful, I will go to check.”
Human evaluation.
In fact, the film is a simple advertisement for thieves, murderers, prostitutes, oppressed sadists who worship the golden calf. In the film there will be no insight, no attempt at understanding. We are told in detail how the fallen suffer, how “important” their “reflections” about life are, and how “deep” they are. Each frame means only what it means. There is no soul in people, only bandits, egocentrists, thinking about their comfort and nothing else! In the film there is no deep, with subtexts, dialogue - not a single. No empathy. The bet is made on showing promiscuity and murder as commonplace - for the average viewer in a curiosity, "sucks". In order not to be so stupid and unambiguous, they added a “love line”, the whole “development” of which is that he bought a wife for himself, and then beats the one she once wanted to marry. Also, an attempt is made to show the “principality” of the thief – OkaAats, it is important for him that the same amount of raisins is in the buns. Oh, how deep is it? He, OkaAatsa, is fair - let's empathize with him! Fired a thief, and he gets revenge for it - that's what it is, Petrovich! Let's feel for him. Or not. Of course not. Such primitive script hooks do not work, but people are led to the marketing of the film, advertising and bought all sorts of reviews in the press at the time of release. Probably, this illustration for the reading of the novel voice, just filmed at the expense of people who have fallen and lost their human appearance, well, or the director is not talented - a third is not given. How weak the movie is that I don’t even want to watch it. In advance, I foresee a buildup of blood, and then formally some shown “tragedy” of the character’s life, formally (in the last scenes) “punished evil” and so on, because in Hollywood it is so necessary. Technically. 99% of the film is an advertisement for the bottom of life and ways to emulate the mentality of criminals. Do not look, better read a good book.
1 in 10
I'll try to sum up. The film, of course, is overrated, artistically creative and objectively primitive. Where's the praise? Many people want to be a “cool guy” – and in the cinema “there’s how dashing each other”, i.e. this is the principle of moral decay (remember the film “The Man from the Boulevard of Capuchins” and the arrival of a new movie). For those of you who care about marketing, take a look. It is not necessary to imagine a controlled creature that will praise everything that he was filmed as an advertisement for decomposed pontivists. It is clear: they need to justify themselves before themselves, they say, we are not alone – “this is life.” But we, as viewers, I believe, should act with feedback and not allow us to pour into our consciousness any stupid nonsense.
With respect to those who read it all and to the end. So you're a little closer to understanding the nature of human consciousness!
Another good picture on the theme of the mafia with De Niro in the title role. Such films are like an old closet inherited from your grandmother – you watch and you want to say, “Yes, they don’t make them anymore.”
Martin Scorsese has been working long and hard to create good crime epics that focus on running a business with two or more partners. This is Scorsese's third best film in which he shows a craving for big forms. I haven’t seen any old-school movies in a long time, so I’ll try to tell you everything I can get from this picture. I will share my impressions of dating and some thoughts on this.
A narrative criterion or narrative. No one can compare to Sam Rothstin. No one knows how to make money like him. No one knows how to work so selflessly and carefully as Sam. For his undeniable merits, Rotstin received the nickname Ace. And that is why the mafia bosses decided to instruct Asa to run a huge luxury casino in Las Vegas. And so that no one interfered with Sam’s work, the mafiosi sent Rotstin’s childhood friend Nikki Santoro, a revved bandit and ruthless thug, after As. This is a psychological drama about a marriage of convenience, when one loves the other, but the gentle half always wants to go to the left, and in a divorce - to grab money in addition. There is a place and the mechanism of the casino, the system of weeding out winnings, the identification of regular cheaters that interfere with the turnover of profits. But this is almost glimpses, since Scorsese is more interested in disagreements between friends, gang violence, and other Sicilian feuds. But how did Las Vegas begin is also interesting.
Visual criteria, or technical equipment. Scorsese traditionally shoots his paintings in a very tough and realistic manner, and this was no exception - some scenes of all sorts of massacres and murders will make even accustomed viewers shudder. But realism is realism. Without these scenes, no mood would have been created. Nor would they have been without the musical accompaniment perfectly fit into each scene. The pace of the unfolding of the narrative is leisurely, the emphasis is on dialogue, a variety of plans and a well-developed environment. The atmosphere of the gangster militant is almost completely observed. Not least because of the music scene. Each melody corresponds not only to the historical era, but also to the mood of individual episodes. Some themes could decorate your playlist. There are no questions about this.
Acting jobs. Robert De Niro is a stern Ace whose face begins to express some emotions only when this obscene woman, Ginger, throws out another trout. You can see from his face that he still loves this lady. Pesci is a hot-tempered Italian who lives not by reason but by pure emotions. He's small, but deadly. Like a bulldog, who in any case rushes at the enemy and will torment him until the enemy dies, even if there is an elephant in front of him. Pesha is very good at playing this role. Somehow involuntarily believe that it is better not to approach this guy. This is especially evident in the scene when Nikki calls Sam to talk in the desert, and Sam utters an interesting phrase before the meeting: ' Usually, the chance of going out alive after meeting Nikki was somewhere around 99 percent. But now I would give myself no more than fifty.' This is such a lovely meeting of friends from childhood. Sweet and touching. I also liked Sharon Stone as Madame McKenna-Roststeen. All stages of Ginger’s life are played very accurately: a luxurious aunt who easily imbues rich clients; a chic lady introduced by her husband to the so-called high society of Las Vegas; an unhappy woman who does not love her husband, but still in love with the complete insignificance of Lester; a drug addict and an alcoholic, driven to complete despair ... the supporting actors slightly pale in their background, but also fit perfectly into the environment.
As a verdict. An excellent psychological drama, an excellent crime thriller, and at the same time a magnificent slice of its era, a representative of the time when cinema was still art, caused emotions and made people talk about themselves. I advise you to meet connoisseurs of the genre and director. All health, good and good movie!
10 out of 10
... So I decided to make my life harder. Always relying on a sure win, I first bet on a questionable card.
Exactly 25 years ago, the eighth joint work of Martin Scorsese and Robert De Niro was released in rental - the brisk crime drama Casino.
The picture about the underground gangster vicissitudes of the life of the gambling capital of America for the second time brought together on the set a bright acting tandem of De Niro and Pesci, director Scorsese and writer Nicholas Pileggi, whose eponymous novel formed the basis of the film. And who would doubt that such a powerful creative union will show the world another genre masterpiece, after the cult "Good Guys" another and did not expect!
Indeed, “Casino” is not only another appeal of the Mater to the corporate gangster theme, but also the quintessence of the creative methods of the director, which he honed in his previous work, and in the new picture brought to the absolute. It is a dizzying, incessantly rumbling, visually mesmerizing and musically intoxicating narrative fusion, catchy and visually demonstrating the hero’s slow fall into hell: from the burlesque credits of graphic designer Saul Bas (so that’s what the authors of the opening “Mad Men” were inspired by), to the screaming kitschyness of the final frame.
In “Casino” Scorsese successfully does the same trick as in “Good Guys”: the director not only masterfully visualizes the madness of the criminal odyssey of Sam Rotstins, designing a super-speed three-hour timekeeping from long frames smoothly shot by a stedicam, quick panning, crazy angles, rapids, stop frames, from the active use of zonal lenses, visual allusions, from skillful play of light and shadow, but also resorts to his favorite voice-picture. And this is not just a classic monologue, but a real duet of two contradictory characters - a restrained, calculating tycoon and a super-emotional gangster, who alternately present their subjective versions of events throughout the narrative. Despite the fact that the script of "Casino" was rewritten by Scorsese and Pilagedie 16 times, improvisations were often allowed on the set, which led to the film being one of the most boorish films in history. Only the word “fuck” is used in it 422 times, that is, 2.4 times per minute (the director will beat his record by “The Wolf of Wall Street” – 687 times).
And this narrative locomotive is generously seasoned with a musical component - in the three-hour tape almost without interruptions, more than sixty compositions replace each other. Some sound several times in different variations, with dizzying rapidity alternating genres, styles, directions: from hard rock to immortal classics.
Costumes alone cost more than $1 million: the filming involved about 7,000 actors, for each of whom a costume cost at least $150, costume designers Rita Ryek and John Dunn specially sewed or found seventy old-fashioned costumes for Robert De Niro and forty for Sharon Stone. Actors almost do not appear in the same clothes in different scenes, and the legendary gold dress Stone weighed as much as 20 kg.
Released in December 1995, Scorsese’s creation with a budget of $52 million raised $116 in the world. But some critics met the picture more restrained, accusing the director of self-repeat, and at the upcoming “Oscar” the picture was lit up, unfortunately, in only one nomination. Best Actress (Sharon Stone) The next time the trio De Niro-Peschi-Scorsese reunited only at the site of the “Irishman” 23 years later.
Kulik is delighted with this criminal swamp and, according to tradition, strongly recommends celebrating the anniversary of this beautiful picture with a revision or the opportunity to get acquainted for the first time!
The movie is crumpled. This is a strong story where actors, costumers, cameramen, all work 100 percent, but even 3 hours of timekeeping is not enough. A large layer of the plot is served to the viewer through a voiceover, why you seem to listen to a radio play, rather than watching a film. At the same time, the story itself is terribly interesting, affecting both mafia showdowns, and family problems of the main character, and behind the scenes of the gambling business. But every aspect lacks time. The wife of the main character for a couple of scenes turns into a bitch, the friend of the main character for several dialogues is ready to kill a person with whom he has been friends since childhood. Mafia bosses appear and disappear. About the backstage casino, which devotes the whole beginning of the film, at some point just forget. The story jumps from one to the other, not allowing you to enjoy, savor any element of the film. And at the same time, it is unlikely that Scorsese can be blamed for anything, because if he told these stories in full, the project would hardly have enough season.
8 out of 10
Perhaps the first one who comes to mind when mentioning the modern popular directors of the “gang wave” is remembered exclusively Scorsese. This director is distinguished primarily by the fact that, unlike such young reformers as some Tarantino or Richie, he will inherit the spirit of the "bad guys" who bequeathed both Coppola and Leone. And this is its weighty plus - those "bad" guys, in fact guys are nice, elegant, they have their own rules, following which everything will be fine and you will not be found in the desert Kansas steppe.
So the hero De Niro, a regular participant in Martin’s filmography, tried on the “skin” of the casino owner. A person just does his own thing (of course not very legal) and talks about it beautifully. In fact, this is what the picture will be about. About the “dear” girls, blackjack, diamonds, cocaine and endlessly mating Joe Pesci. And in this conservatism, in keeping with tradition, the picture does not cease to be interesting, no. Just after the same "Good Guys", where you can trace the dynamics of the formation of criminal elements, all the gloss shown by Scorsese Las Vegas becomes a somewhat monotonous retelling of all existing films of the genre.
And the Oscar-winning “Pulp Fiction” released a year earlier showed that now these gangsters in pink jackets and with cigars need something more than banal shootings, denunciation of corruption and all sorts of other Italian affairs. All this in the picture is present in excellent quality and with the same presentation, but honestly - weary.
What a daring start... Usually, when you catch monologues in the form of dating, you are preparing for the fact that they will last at least 5 minutes. However, it was not even 5 seconds after he broke off, and it was damn tempting.
I’ve been watching for 20 minutes and nothing has changed. The voiceover returned and continued as before. I’m not going to say it’s boring, but if the whole movie goes on like this, it’s not worth it.
However, I have just stopped at the highlight that catches my eyes - this is Sharon Stone. She has the most ordinary (of course, beautiful) appearance, but her game is attractive.
Another interesting person is Joe Pesci. And bite me a bee if it's Harry, one of the robbers in ' Home Alone'! Here he has a completely different role, but because of his funny voice, he can not seem serious.
The main difference between this film and all the others is the monologue dialogue. This means that the script provides behind-the-scenes voices of the two main characters, which are logically intertwined and smoothly replace each other. These are the voices of the aforementioned Joe and Robert de Niro, who were unfortunately duplicated in Russian by the same translator.
And when the monologues stop, the dialogue begins. Investigation of problems in business, clarification of relations with his wife, fraud, banditry ... They even more reveal their characters due to lively color.
The plot gets intrigued when the heroes have problems. And since the timekeeping is large, there are several heroes, and problems appear periodically as they arrive.
But, for example, the landing of a corner and their funny code is that rare kind of humor in a serious picture that makes you keep its gloss on the front line.
I left a paragraph on acting for a snack. I know Robert De Niro in descending order of years. Therefore, for me, this man was initially associated with the genre of comedy and gradually turned into a more and more serious man. And this film seems to be the peak of his calmness and charisma. On the screen, he is confident and measured. For his character, that's what matters. Sharon Stone managed to visit here tender, desirable, seductive, angry, crazy, sad and pathetic. She deserved a Golden Globe for her role. And now that sticky, wet thug Joe Pesci. It's been 5 years since he tried to rob Kevin's house. During this time, he managed to get hairy, submerge, get angry, become brutal and, most frighteningly, bloodthirsty. You don't know him, he's a real talent!
So, do not be afraid of the timekeeping at 3:00. It has enough material to be broken into two or even three separate parts! And since all this managed to fit in just one movie, it will definitely not let you get bored.
For a long time I postponed watching this tape, I have heard enough about it. But somehow there was no interest. But the desire came and the meeting took place. Impressions remained good, because I do not always devote much time to gangster cinema.
The picture turned out to be original in its kind, with its bright features. The plot is clearly built, clearly reflecting the gambling business in all its glory, because it is involved in big money, excitement, and of course the mafia itself, behind this business. Although in general, the mafia here is in the background. The key figure is the Casino itself, which attracts many people. The atmosphere of Las Vegas of the 80s is perfectly conveyed. A city that strongly influences people, with special force. It is very interesting to watch unsuccessful attempts to cheat the casino. Close surveillance and control of all, as well as stripping customers to zero, for the benefit of the treasury of the institution, covering their tracks from the police - done perfectly.
Robert De Niro, Sharon Stone, Joe Pesci played at the highest level, without any mistakes. Head hero, casino owner Sam Rotstin is good, but the images of elite Ginger and gangster Nikki, for me, turned out to be more colorful, showing strong characters respectively.
Casino is a beautiful gangster movie from Martin Scorsese. It carries a mark of quality. The game empire in the criminal world is built as it should be. The main characters are natural, the march of developing events, reveal even more, because the casino itself acts on them with all its power.
8 out of 10
I'm not trying to be "nidagimgagfse." I just didn’t like the movie and I just want to tell you why.
I decided to watch this audiobook with a chic video sequence after recommending a friend and watching the corresponding videos on YouTube. Wherever you spit - everywhere positive reviews, recommendations for viewing, high-profile titles "Best film of 1995", "Best film Scorsese", "One of the best gangster films", etc. So I looked at this masterpiece. The film has many advantages: famous actors with their favorite patterns of behavior in the frame, beautiful camera work, a lot of luxury, Scorsese’s favorite uncompromising in terms of cruel scenes and good music. That's all.
I will say right away, I have not watched most of the cult gangster films, because the genre itself I consider extremely dull, and its representatives - quite monotonous. I liked The Godfather as well as its sequel (I got a good night’s sleep while watching the triquel). Plus, I had a little jigsaw on old black and white movies. Then I was fascinated by the films of James Cagney (then Al Pacino), especially Angels with Dirty Faces. But that's it. So far, I haven’t watched Carlito’s Way, Scarface, Nice Guys, or Gangster.
However, it seems that even such a meager intelligence was enough that when watching the movie “Casino” I was not presented anything new or interesting. The plot just went from point A to point B, showing all the possible clichés from the category of “if you do this, you will suffer.” Cinema is the art of showing characters through their behavior and dialogue; the art of making the viewer understand the twists and turns of the plot by showing them individual scenes from which to put together a big picture of what is happening and understand why Uncle A did this and Aunt B did this. It also prompts the film to reconsider to make sure it's right, looking for new guns on the walls. All of the above in the Casino is replaced by a voiceover. A lot of voiceover. A lot of voiceover. The film never goes silent for a minute, as if the director is afraid that people will not understand what is happening. Example: a man in a suit walks into a place where money is counted (a place clearly important, where no one is allowed), takes the money, puts it in a suitcase and carries it to other people in suits. The viewer thinks, "Aha." That first man is an important and trusted man, and all these people manage and probably distribute the money. The money was not taken to the bank... Yeah. The money must be hidden.” And the voiceover tells us the names of all these people and voices their every action. I was hurt. Like Scorsese reading me a picture book before bed.
I didn’t see anything special in the characters either. Although I enjoyed playing the contrasts between De Niro and Pesci. That was curious. I didn’t really care about Sharon Stone’s character. And the secondary characters here are so secondary that I do not even remember their faces.
“The whole point is in demonstrating violence and lawlessness!” Thank you, I’d rather read the news online, it’s much worse. "The way the actors play!" We're not in a theater where everything exists to showcase acting. "Music is gorgeous!" I'm sure I'll download my phone.
I’ve already seen it somewhere... A No, it was a mistake.
From the first frames of the film, you can see with the naked eye the similarity of this film with the picture of the same Scorsese “Good Guys”. Same theme, same main actors playing the main characters. Joe Pesci plays in the film Nicky Santoro: a bouncer who does not know how to restrain himself, knows no boundaries, arrogant and not very impressive to the viewer. It was like a piggyback shot with Tommy DeVito of the Nice Guys. Roert De Niro plays Sam Rothstein: a more restrained, intelligent character, a gambling genius. The image is also similar to the character of the same De Niro Jimmy Conway from the same Nice Guys. These two are first bosom friends, dance to the tune of the bosses, and then their friendship turns into a feud. And there's an incredible resemblance to the Nice Guys. But none of this is bad. After all, if you upgrade an already very good movie, you will get something great. And the movie "Casino" really turned out great. Most of the flaws of the Nice Guys have been corrected, there have been no moments that I would frankly miss. The actors did not fail, the script was very intriguing, held until the last second. Each of the characters wanted to empathize. All actions and motives of these actions did not raise any questions.
Perhaps the main difference from the Nice Guys is the presence of an expressive female character. Sharon Stone's heroine is Ginger. How well Scorsese managed to build her image, show all the changes. The fall from the most beautiful, desirable girl to an ordinary prostitute, ready to blackmail her husband with her own daughter for drugs. Mercantileness and lack of foresight led it to an inglorious end.
I also want to mention a rather interesting style of narration. The story is conducted from two persons at once, so that the viewer can view the same situation from different sides, feel the emotions and experiences of both main characters.
In general, a very strong work of a great director who is perfectly able to make films about the mafia.
9 out of 10
- The golden rule of casinos is to play as long as possible. Let them come back and play again! The longer the game, the greater the loss. In the end, we get everything!
I expected something incredible and exciting from this film, but my expectations were not met. This is absolutely typical crime drama with Robert De Niro, with only one cast difference. The rest of the film is no different from similar projects, which appear on screens every year.
In my opinion, the film is a bit monotonous and boring. The main idea of the picture conveyed before the end of the second hour. A few more minor stories are written, some are not clear why they are needed. They fit into the main story with difficulty, and as a distraction of the viewer from the monotony of what is happening - an unnecessary waste of time.
My assessment is neutral, although probably leaning more towards the negative. I saw too much in this movie. Many events do not affect the main storyline, and they can be easily cut - the meaning of the film will not change. The same can be attributed to long monotonous dialogues.
In general, the film is not bad, but rather boring as an entertaining movie. For lovers of wrapping themselves in a blanket with a cup of coffee and staring at such a drama, this film is perfect. If, after reading the synopsis like me, you expect something fascinating, then alas, this is not here.
4 out of 10
The first thing I want to mention is a great timekeeping. The movie runs 3 hours. And that can scare a lot of people away. I've been watching for a long time, too. But I didn't. This is a very epic picture Martin Scorsese captures attention and keeps intrigue to the end.
The story is based on the novel by Nicolas Pileggi and tells the story of the manager of the casino in Las Vegas Sam Rothstein, a brilliant strategist and master of his craft. The casino belongs to the mob. And the film itself tells about Sam’s affairs, his family life, his relationship with his friend the gangster Niki Santoro assigned to him for security. It covers many other topics.
Martin Scorsese managed to fully reveal the characters and show the whole behind-the-scenes life of Las Vegas and mafia structures. This story has a real basis. All the main characters have real prototypes. In the role "Sam Rothstein" is the favorite ScorceseRobert De Niro and his game as always at the top. Joe Pesci in the role of a gangster Niki created the image of not quite inadequate criminal who is gradually destroyed by the thirst for money and power. Sheron Stone plays the wife of the main character Ginger McKenna and for this role earned an Oscar nomination and received a Golden Globe. This role is considered one of the best in her career.
The atmosphere of the desert world of Las Vegas is conveyed with great accuracy and elaboration. We plunge into a vicious world of gambling, underground intrigue and greed.
I want to mention the very good camera work of Robert Richardson. Visually, the picture perfectly conveys the mood of the film. This is the music I honestly don’t remember.
There are downsides to the film. To many, it may seem boring. There are some drawn-out scenes. But for me this was not a disadvantage. I watched the movie with great interest and was pleased.
It's a good movie. And the connoisseurs will certainly like it.
In the world of cinema there are really good films for all time. That's what we're looking at. In general, Scorsese is a very talented director and master of his craft. What kind of movie do not take: it always turns out to be a real candy. His work in cinema is especially valuable and worthy of close attention. Martin Scorsese has established himself as one of the most respected directors of his generation.
Now we have his famous film called "Casino". At one time, this movie was a real explosion and a hit. She was loved by both viewers and critics. The movie was warmly received, and now it looks also interesting and dizzying. I always like how Scorsese put stories in the movies puts everything on the shelves and it turns out something very cool. He is a genius and his films are my favorite.
This movie is an adaptation of the novel by Nicolas Pileggi and Larry Shandling. Casino" the story of a criminal man named Sam. The mafia gave him the nickname “Ace” and entrusted him with the management of one of the largest and most respectable casinos in Las Vegas. The money was pouring in and Sam succeeded. He helped him in his business a good friend - a ruthless gangster. Sam had the most beautiful woman, he was rich, business flourished, everything was fine until one day something happened and a real massacre took place.
The crime film is almost three hours long. The story is rich and long. The whole film looks tense and with great interest. That's the director. It was as if he had looked deep into the characters themselves. He was able to show what he was up to brilliantly. His film about power and cruelty, the world of mafia and adventure, risk, temptation turned out to be something powerful and amazing. This movie has some charm and something else that makes it so special.
The trio from this story was performed by such American actors as regular Robert De Niro, sexual Sharon Stone and Joe Pesci. As for "Pesha", this actor was chosen perfectly for the role of a cruel gangster. His negative character was the most complex and vile, and the actor played it chicly. De Niro has always played well in his golden time, so there is no point in praising him again, but I want to highlight Stone. In this picture, she played one of her best roles, which was noted separately by film critics.
Casino is a 1995 biographical crime drama. This film from the collection of stunning films Scorsese I especially appreciate and highlight. The cinematic value of the film undoubtedly has and deserves attention to this day. Thank you and enjoy watching!
The golden rule of casinos is to play as long as possible. Let them come back and play again! The longer the game, the greater the loss. In the end, we get everything! (Sam)
8.5 out of 10
Top 250 marathon. N159: "When you've got someone, you've got to trust them"
I don’t know how I could miss the gangster classic, because this is one of my favorite genres – I can watch The Godfather every day, and Bronx Story is my favorite film, one of the best I’ve ever seen, not only in the gangster genre, but in general.
From the first seconds I felt the hand of the master, the master Martin Scorsese. Only he can shoot so thoroughly, in detail, realistically, but at the same time speak in metaphors, allowing us, far from gangsters, to learn lessons from such a seemingly remote story. The most important topic in this film for me is the question of trust. My opinion is that in spite of everything, trusting is worth . Yes, people have a tendency to betray, yes, you can lose very much because of trust, but if you do not trust, then how to live? I believe that the people you love should be trusted anyway, otherwise what love is. Another question is to fall in love consciously, and applicants for friends first check, and only then choose. But if you have already chosen, that is all.
It was very interesting to plunge into the world of casinos, into this dirty business, to learn and try to understand their hierarchy, orders. I believe that any big business is built on about the same principles.
The most striking actor is Joe Pesci. I think he was born to play gangsters and beat people with landline phones. No wonder he won an Oscar for a similar role in “Good Guys”. By the way, I forgot to mention the "good guys" above. This is also one of those films that should be watched primarily in this genre.
Sharon Stone wasn’t that surprised: I knew she was a great actress. But she played hard. Such hysterics as her heroine, the light has not seen!
The least I remember is Robert De Niro. I don’t think that’s his best role. As an actor, I think he has come out in later roles. Here he plays a restrained person, and everything seems to be as it should, but he does not cause special emotions, although he is the main character.
I am very glad that I watched this story based on real events, I love biographies, I love gangster films, but still I will take 1 point for protractedness (timeing could definitely be reduced due to moments that do not play a significant role in the development of the story):
7 out of 10
Scorcese’s films make a strange and contradictory impression on the audience. Some admire the creations of, of course, a talented director, while others furiously tear and wriggle, saying what is good in his films?
I'm more like the former. Scorcese is considered a master of gangster cinema. Many of his films are based on real events, which cannot but attract the viewer. And despite the fact that I do not in any way belong to the gangster party - to watch the action of most of the works of Scorsese, I was very interested.
Casino is no exception. The film looked easy and relaxed. Throughout the film, there was no desire to distract or pause. Quite a useful plot, directing, music and of course acting. The actors were very believable. All. No exception. Personally, I would like to highlight Sharon Stone and Joe Pesci. And if for the latter, a great performance in such films is quite familiar, then Sharon surprised me very much. I watched the scenes with her participation with great delight and trepidation, then empathizing with her character, then laughing with him, then angry, then admiring. At first, her character, Ginger, seemed pragmatic, dry, uninteresting. But in the course of the film of all the characters, you have the greatest interest in it. She seems strong and independent, with nerves of steel woman. But you cannot understand why, with all these qualities, she cannot get rid of her pimp, why she gives her money, why she returns to him.
But anyway, the main thing in the film is not that, not the relationship between a prostitute and a pimp, not a luxurious life, not drugs, not family values and not even the mafia. It's all about the Casino. This is where the movie differs from “Good Guys.” In the “Casino” comes to the background what is emphasized in the “Good Guys”, namely the Mafia. Here it is interesting to observe another, the atmosphere of Las Vegas of the 70s, the luxurious interior that reigns inside buildings, the naive attempts to cheat the casino, the work of the croupier and many other trifles. It was thanks to such little things that Casino pleased me more than Nice Guys.
In any, even the most high-quality film, you can find some comments, nuances, claims. But why focus on this if after watching the film you were satisfied, received a lot of pleasure and joy?
8 out of 10
The film is notable for the fact that the viewer is given the opportunity to see the development of the gambling universe called Vegas. The entire interior kitchen is displayed in detail, but remotely. Casinos are not a test of your luck or ability to gamble, no skill is able to rob this system. Mutual control, caused by the total distrust of human nature, does not give a chance to enrich yourself, whoever you are, in this amusing ripping, all are equal, all are losers.
To my shame, I didn’t watch Good Guys, so I won’t talk about the secondary roles. The acting pitch is at a height, so much so that you forget completely about any cinema, everything you see is absorbed immediately, without extraneous thoughts. And it is not only De Niro, who was at the peak of his career and was as always magnificent, more surprised by the same Pesha, stupidly cruel man, frightening his actions, or rather, how easily he crosses the barrier of humanity. He has trampled humanism in the bud, it is a monster in the flesh. Also shone Stone, who had a very complex character, dependent, vicious, but at the same time hungry for warmth and peace. It was this inner struggle, the inconsistency of passions that made it as interesting as possible for the viewer.
The film will be recommended for viewing, it is a good drama of human relationships, and then a gangster tape that can shake these endless, unpunished murders. Vegas is surrounded by desert. Sandy cemetery.
20 years ago, Martin Scorsese shot perhaps the pinnacle of his work. Then there will be “Kundun”, “Rising the Dead”, “Gangs of New York”, “Aviator” and many other equally masterpiece films, but “Casino” still stands alone. Here played perhaps the best roles of Robert de Niro and Joe Pesci, another revealed Sharon Stone, many secondary roles that can be distinguished, for example, the role of a pimp played by James Woods. But still, how would it seem that a film with a not particularly remarkable plot about the mafia, drugs and broken fates of most heroes, became a masterpiece of crime cinema, on a scale similar to the “Godfather”?
I think if the film was all about deaths and shootings, without some lyrical line, it wouldn’t have become iconic and it wouldn’t have been compared to The Godfather. On the other hand, we’ve all heard about Las Vegas, casinos, luxury, billions of dollars in profits, so we’ve only seen the front side of the coin. But what is hidden behind the reverse side of the medal? Here's the movie about the back of the medal.
Where there is huge money and huge fortunes, there is always crime. Las Vegas was no exception. When the project of the world capital of gambling business appeared, a lot of people were interested in it. Politicians of high and low rank, bankers, investors and of course the mafia. The Casino, as we can see, does not focus on the Sicilian or Neapolitan mafia, but on the multinational mafia. Italian, Jewish, Irish — in a word, one of the nationalities that the United States and inhabit. Scorsese made a movie with an anti-state message. In his opinion (and not only him), without corrupt officials and politicians of all stripes, the eighth wonder of the world like Las Vegas could not be. The mafia is not the one that robs and kills, the mafia that crushes and coerces sits in all sorts of departments and committees. Note that when there were problems, began, in the language of the economist, the complete liquidation of core assets, that is, all participants in the project. Saturn ate his children.
The main characters have their real prototypes. That's why heroes are so well written. Sam "Ace" Rothstein performed by the brilliant Robert De Niro was an excellent manager, smart and tough. But at the same time, patient. He managed to win, even losing a lot, while his other comrades went to their forefathers. It can be assumed that Scorsese did not accidentally make the main character a Jew, what is his last name? But that explains a lot.
Joe Pesci played a role similar to his role in Nice Guys. Impulsive, angry, unbalanced killer. I think he played the best role in his career. This is exactly what his prototype was.
Ginger performed by Sharon Stone created a magnificent image of a very, very bad wife. As the hero of one cult film said, to paraphrase his words, I do not want happiness, luxury, I want to eat shit.
I may say it again, but all empires are built on blood. The Greeks, the Romans, the Franks, the Turks, the Russians, the Germans, and others built their empires on the blood and bones of others. How many people, for example, did Peter the Great put into the land, in the construction of St. Petersburg and wars, even dear to my heart? That's it. The casino empire was so bloody and dirty that even Caligula, Nero and Hitler and Stalin would have been envious. Scorsese makes no judgment, but makes it clear and ask questions: How in the most democratic country in the world did the events shown in three hours of screen time take place? How can people with both money and almost unlimited power fall low? How did the state find a puddle of mud on the seemingly golden sand and try not to notice it?
Later this idea will be continued in Gangs of New York and The Aviator. Thus, this film is not a banal crime drama, but a very well-thought-out work that makes us empathize with the main characters and understand that even in the most democratic country in the world, there are cogs that should be replaced when broken.
In the desert around Vegas at night is very dark. Most of the city’s problems were solved there. There is a pit at every step, and there is a problem in each of them.
The movie “Casino” has already become a classic among the films about gangsters. Scorsese’s works are recognized and loved by millions. And Robert De Niro became no less iconic than the characters he played. We're used to all of this. But despite this, the picture leaves us with a couple more cards.
Sharon Stone played perhaps her best role in her career. Not just a fatal beauty, but a heavy multifaceted character, a woman with a difficult life full of secrets. She was so successful in this role that by the end of the film I literally hated her character.
Joe Pesci is a guarantee of quality. Like no one else, he plays the bad guys. His character is really frightening and keeps in fear.
I think you have the wrong idea about me. Now I will explain to you in detail what I will do. Tomorrow morning I'll get up, go to the bank, come to your office, and if you don't make my money, I'll open your head. Just in time for me to get out of prison, you might be out of a coma. What happens next? I'll open your head again. Because I'm fantastically stupid! I don't care about jail! It's my business. I have been doing it all my life.
In addition, the atmosphere of Las Vegas is unique.
I suggest you watch the movie. There's a lot to see.
I like a lot of Martin Scorsese’s films, of course I couldn’t miss this one either. Yes, there is another plus to this, the main roles are played by Robert De Niro, Sharon Stone and Joe Pesci, who pleased me very much in the film “Good Guys”. I still managed to watch and appreciate this film, and I will immediately say that the film is good, but personally I was less impressed by it than the previously created “Good Guys”. But everything in order:
The first thing I would like to mention is acting. She is simply gorgeous, all the actors coped with their roles perfectly, but from the entire cast I will single out three:
1. Robert De Niro. I have always admired his acting skills. Whoever he plays, he's going to play great. In this film, he got the role of not a gangster, but a professional betting player who successfully guesses all the results of matches and competitions. He played that role well enough and I still admire him.
2. Sharon Stone. As an actress, I respect this woman too, but this film is no exception. In this film, she got the role of a prostitute, which the main character takes as his wife, but she thinks only about money and actually manipulates the main character. This role is the best in Stone’s career, because she played just fine.
3. Joe Pesci. I also admire this actor, especially his role in Nice Guys, but in Casino, for me, he played worse, but overall he did well. The roles of gangsters suit him very well, more he would star in such films.
The next thing I want to mention is the atmosphere. It keeps the viewer from start to finish. All the gangster movies had a beautiful atmosphere of the 1970s and this film is no exception. I have nothing more to say.
I also want to celebrate the story. The plot is worked out very well, all the characters are revealed, the plot even develops. Surely someone will be interested in the story, the player guessing the results, which is also based on real events.
In general, the advantages of the film can be listed for a long time, but I do not want to do this. Of the minuses, I can only note that in the end we were not revealed the fate of Jennifer Santoro - the wife of Nicky Santoro and his son, maybe because of this, I was less impressed with this film "Good Guys".
In the end, I can say that Casino is a great movie. Anyone who loves gangster dramas, as well as Scorsese films, I strongly recommend watching this film, but I still like “Good Guys” more.
9 out of 10
The golden age of good crime. Part II: The Fall of a Great Empire
What is new about the famous movie legend? Everyone seems to know about the amazing visual style, incredibly tasty, spectacular shots and exemplary acting in the Casino. But we must understand that the film is completely unique not only in form, but also in content.
So, Scorsese paints an amazing picture of the dream of the “golden age” of gambling, at its peak. There he is! A special, exceptional world of chic, luxury, pleasure, wealth and permissiveness. Money, cars, chic outfits, luxurious weddings for several thousand people, almost unlimited power over people, their innermost desires and lives. Each scene is literally licked, cleaned to shine like the shoes of the main character, imbued with some unprecedented scope, thirst for life and mysterious eroticism, the height of risk, excitement! BUT. And danger, violence, death ...
It is on the last and holds the whole world. Scorsese in all its glory shows not only the facade, dazzling with the unprecedented shine of gold and neon lights, but also the basement, in which a tangle of slimy, cunning poisonous snakes (the mafia) and a pack of dull-headed, mad dogs (the state) can hardly coexist. And so, all this magnificent building at once turns into ruins. However, the final cause of the collapse of such a powerful structure remains unclear. Did the state tighten the screws? Or maybe it's fate itself, revenge for trying to mock her? Or has the last remnants of individuality disappeared in the public consciousness and the whole society has fatally passed into the stage of pure consumption? Scorsese makes it clear that all the answers are correct. But especially the last - the excitement itself is disappearing in the world! (A crucial part of life. Therefore, the chic gangsters (good guys) look much more attractive in the film than officials and judges. They just give people what they really need.
The casino is not just one of the best gangster tapes in history. This is not only a monumental mural about total changes in society. It is also a deep analysis of the decay of the human soul.
What are the main actors? The protagonist is a “smart” named As (de Niro). He rose to the top of the structure because of his rational, mental abilities. His closest friend is Nikki, in the permanent face of Joe Pesci (Good Guys). A notorious thug. Nikki’s peculiarity is his uncontrollable anger, a thirst for violence, which is always ready and only waiting for the opportunity to shoot someone’s dignity. Asa's wife is an elite prostitute Ginger, performed by the most fatal and deadly sexy woman in Hollywood Sharon Stone. The true embodiment of Passion, which is always associated with risk, danger, complete collapse and death. The only person she loves at least a little is a pimp (the non-random James Woods is de Niro’s “fatal” friend, based on Once Upon a Time in America!). Everything else in it is only appearance, play and deception. All in all, everything we value in femme fatale. But both in their character (Mind, Anger, Passion) and in their interaction (Coitus of Nikki and Ginger, the cold loneliness of Asa), these characters are nothing more than the embodiment of the ancient Platonic myth of the trinity of the soul! As soon as the “reasonable” (Ac) ceases to control the situation, the entire structure (Casino) collapses. Which is what happens when Nikki gets conceited and Ginger files for divorce.
As we can see, the film is working out "to the fullest" at all levels - global-political, collective-unconscious and even individual-psychological, mixing all this and, ultimately, issuing a film product of such high quality that we will have to wait for something like this for another decade.
P.S. The novel by N. Pillagi, in which the film is directed, bears the symbolic title “Casino: Love and Honor in Las Vegas”, clearly referring to Hunter S. Thompson’s acclaimed bestseller “Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas”. Indeed, like the latter, “Casino” is to some extent a nostalgic memory of a time of freedom, crime and beauty, passion, excitement and love of life, which today look something like a fairy tale. Unbelievable. Magical. But death.
A very interesting film based on real facts, acquainting us with the internal structure of the casino in Las Vegas, with its features.
Timekeeping should not be frightening, the film is quite dynamic, with several storylines combined into one.
I will not retell the plot, so as not to 'spoiler'. I will say that the film is based on real events, there is a prototype of the main character. Actors are very similar even outwardly to the real heroes of this story from life.
The central themes of this film, in my opinion, are the perfectionism of the protagonist, his desire for success, his attitude to his work, and how he manages to maneuver between the criminal world and the law.
'In this place, everything is done in three ways: how to do it, how not to do it and how I do it.'
The themes of friendship-business, love-money are revealed.
It is a question of trust in the film.
39 When you love someone, you have to trust them. There's no other way. You have to give them the keys to everything you have. Otherwise, what's the point? And for a while, that's what I thought. ..'
What I want to say is that the film is real. A real life story, without beauty, everyone gets what they deserve.
10 out of 10
Once a former gangster - Sam Rothstin, nicknamed "As", crime bosses offer to become the owner of a casino, serving as a cover for the mafia. He agrees, and under his sensitive leadership, the casino instantly becomes the most successful casino in Las Vegas, and rapidly gaining reputation, Sam himself becomes a rich and influential man. But happiness didn't last long. On the one hand, there are competitors who want to get Sam out of their way and use their connections to eliminate him, on the other hand, Nikki’s best friend is a cruel bandit for whom Las Vegas was a real tidbit in the field of criminality. On the other hand, his own family.
Casino is a rather interesting, dark, cruel story about how hard it is to manage a seemingly promising casino. Thanks to Scorsese, the viewer is given the opportunity to look at the side of the vicious place and gambling, assuring that all the good things will end sooner or later. The whole film, his story tells about the rise and fall of the main character, who, thanks to his principles, in a matter of moments becomes the most successful person in Las Vegas, which causes delight among the criminal bosses who control the casino, and hatred among the “masters” of the money city.
But the most important thing is not only the story itself, but how it is presented. It is important to mention the main characters of the picture. Robert De Niro performed by Sam "Asa" Rotstin is an example of a man for whom his own principles and desire to get rich led to unpredictable and sad consequences. In fact, against the background of the rest of the characters, “Ace” is almost the most dramatic, because all he wanted was to become a “person” and be loved. Unfortunately, his wishes did not coincide with the cruel reality. His acquaintance with Nicky Santoro performed by no less excellent actor Joe Pesci is one of the reasons for his “fall”. Cruel, unpredictable man who in a matter of moments became one of the most dangerous people in Vegas, whom literally everyone begins to hunt – from the police to the FBI. His dangerous image becomes a cruel test for Sam.
Don’t forget about Sharon Stone. Her character came out one of the most disgusting and repulsive, because her image of a woman who lived for money and tried to “squeeze” all the juices from the hero “sweeps” through the entire film, symbolizing the true face of a spoiled Vegas resident. At the end of the film, her actions lead to unpredictable and sometimes cruel consequences and cause her disgust. And this suggests that Sharon successfully, and almost a hundred, coped with his role.
The timing of this film is quite cruel to the viewer. A leisurely three-hour narrative may seem to an inexperienced viewer a real test, especially since there are no shootings at all. But all this is nothing compared to the unpredictable and cruel story and atmosphere of the film.
"Casino" is a rather original and classic representation of Scorcese about Las Vegas, its order. Unfortunately, the numerous problems of the characters lead to quite brutal consequences, but at the same time you realize that otherwise could not have happened. It is worth seeing all and everyone to understand one simple truth - a rich life in a city of vice is not really happy.
“Casino” is a large-scale mafia epic without any romantic illusions. It is a chronicle of life at the height of power and falling from that peak. The film is based on the novel by Nicholas Pileggi, which traces the “milestones” of the development of gambling in Las Vegas from 1973 to 1983. Scorsese brings to the center of the narrative the story of the great player and hard worker Sam Rotstin, who received from the fathers of the mafia luxury casino “Tanger”. But while Sam was ordered to oversee the operation of the gambling house, he himself was controlled all this time by the ruthless gangster Nikki Santoro.
For this aggressive dwarf, violence became the main form of realization of pressing needs, and what is there to be modest – the essence of his nature. On behalf of each of them in turn, a story is conducted, which gives a kind of polyphony to the narrative. The second plan in it can be seen “the story of Lucifer, who was first an angel, and then decided that he could become superior to God, for which he was thrown into hell.” On the one hand, Sam is a person who is cool with his emotions, but at the same time unable and unwilling to give anything to anyone. He is a slave to his own pride, which for some time became his main problem.
“Casino” is the eighth collaboration between Martin Scorsese and Robert De Niro in 22 years of fruitful collaboration. This movie is more than just the story of a house in the gambling capital of America. This is an almost scientific study of a criminal community that has created its own laws, learned to make money out of nothing, and was very reluctant to part with them. Scorsese did not fail to use the most advanced stylistic techniques at that time in the Casino. So, for example, almost a quote from Pulp Fiction can be considered the murder of the main character in the very first scene of the film.
“Casino” became the most cumbersome, but by no means the most grandiose work of 53-year-old Scorsese, stubbornly faithful to the traditions of epic gangster sagas in the spirit of “The Godfather”. Despite the fact that the director, in general, has enough “breath” for all three hours, the film looks somewhat old-fashioned against the background of the innovative film by Tarantino, who told his story in a fundamentally different tone. The problem of all Coppola followers is that “The Godfather” not only opened a new genre form, but also at the same time, as it were, closed the topic. All further attempts to “outperform” the adaptation of Mario Puzo were already partly secondary. The correspondence competition in the quality and number of scenes of violence, in which Scorsese took part, turned out to be unpromising.
But this did not reduce the fervor of followers: for more than 40 years, “epigons” continue to challenge the long-standing masterpiece. So, after the “Casino” on the screens of the United States, Michael Mann’s “Fight” was released, where an attempt was also made to renew the blood in a decaying genre organism. And the abundance of cruelty, and almost in a record proportion, makes you remember “The Good Guys” (1990) – another gangster film by Scorsese based on the book of the same Pileggi. But unlike the previous film adaptation, this even with more impressive collections (global release – $110.5 million) has not had that success with the Academy, nominated for the Oscar only Sharon Stone, who played the role of Sam Rotstin’s wife here.
Master of crime film Martin Scorsese in this film surpassed himself, shooting a truly large-scale and epic gangster film.
The cast of the film is simply magnificent: Robert De Niro (this is their 8th film together with Scorsese), Joe Pesci, and Sharon Stone. Everyone played their part at the highest level.
De Niro and Pesci, in fact, reprised their own roles from another Scorsese gangster film, Good Fellas. In general, these 2 films have a lot in common.
De Niro plays a quite characteristic role of a reputable mafia who runs a casino in Las Vegas. De Niro's performance is beyond praise. Greatly honed role, masterfully played by a great actor.
Joe Pesci plays a particular scumbag who costs nothing to kill a person. He can kill anyone who gets in his way. Pesci plays such characters perfectly. Even in "Home Alone" he had a similar character, only, so to speak, in the children's field.
And, of course, the beautiful Sharon Stone also played a wonderful role. She plays a former prostitute who married Asa (De Niro's character). But all she needs from him is money and gold trinkets. Besides, she drinks a lot. Because of all this, their marriage, of course, is not destined to be happy.
Scorsese claimed that he showed Stone during the filming of Carl Theodore Dreyer’s masterpiece, The Passion of Joan of Arc, to bring her to the emotions necessary for the film. As a result, Stone simply masterfully embodied all the emotions of her heroine.
Bottom line: a masterfully shot criminal masterpiece from Martin Scorsese with excellent actors. It is recommended to watch.
Probably there is no person who would not be familiar with the work of the cult director Martin Scorsese, who has long been considered a real genius of cinema and it does not matter whether it is film critics, or ordinary ordinary ordinary viewers. One name of such a brilliant director is a real guarantor of the high quality of the work of art, which in fact promised us another masterpiece, which this film is.
Martin Scorsese once again explores the theme of the American dream, not only the Americans themselves, but also representatives of other nations and countries who are trying to find their place in this great country. Unless, unlike other films of the director and even his “Good Guys”, Scorsese does not try to create another gangster story and is quite an interesting answer to the topic “how to succeed in America” on the example of the birth of gambling in America on the example of the main “city of sin” of the country – Las Vegas.
Another unambiguous value of the picture is the fact that it is the last joint work of director Martin Scorsese and actor Robert De Niro, who will later be replaced by the eminent Leonardo DiCaprio as director. De Niro once again gives out just a masterful work that makes you once again see how unique and limitless the talent of such a brilliant actor is.
Contrary to the opinion of most, the game of Joe Pesci and Sharon Stone did not make the proper impression on me. It would seem that Peshi once again plays the typical image of an impulsive gangster for his career, and Stone the image of a fatal beauty. But in fact, both actors play some of the worst roles of actors in their careers, which deserves their attention from the appraisers of the “golden raspberry”.
9 out of 10
The casino is the last joint creation of the brilliant director Martin Scorsese and the brilliant actor Robert De Niro, which is another extremely strong, rich and insanely interesting story.
One of the legendary films of the equally legendary Martin Scorsese introduces us to the inner world of casinos, which really seems already quite familiar, judging by all previously watched movies about gambling. But here the key figure is the favorite of the public Robert De Niro - he is cool, rich, very smart and attractive. In a duet with the classicly evil Joe Pesci and the charming Sharon Stone, he encounters inevitable difficulties in this challenging game called money-police-taxes. As a result, we get a high-quality, gangster drama with a rather unremarkable plot, but a cool composition and in the corporate style of Scorsese. Therefore, for connoisseurs of the genre - the upper class, and the rest can be boring.