Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by AKA, Mar 8, 2018.
He is a kid in the 60s and a teen in the 70s.
Ok, then it seems to agree with the original series - very good.
Folks watching on HBO?
Not until October 1. Didn’t I say this already?
In theaters and on HBO Max October 1 in the U.S.
Not a deal breaking plot destroying spoiler, but yeah, it gets a run out in Many Saints too.
I'm not sure what you mean... everything in the movie happens prior to the events in the series (by about 30 years).
Continuity might have been the wrong word. I mean, it doesn't conflict with the ages of the characters as established in the original series? About two pages of this thread were worked up about that possibility - that's why I asked.
I'm not sure. I figured Tony for being born around 1959, or so, does that seem right? So a teen through the mid-late 70s.
Will be watching on HBO-Max.
I'm hoping for the best from David Chase.
That seems about right to me.
My wife does screenwriting. One of the first thing that a screenwriter does is write out bios of each character, in order to understand them better (to make them more realistic). This usually includes setting their exact age. I'm pretty sure Chase did that at the outset, and would have written the movie to be faithful to his original descriptions.
I did read some concern however that the actor who plays Paulie looked a bit too old, but I haven't seen it yet to judge for myself.
Weird that this seems to have got a UK release before appearing in the US. Anyway, I saw it yesterday, and though it was an entertaining enough way to spend a couple of hours, I ended up feeling a little underwhelmed overall, probably because I felt that didn't really add that much to my understanding of Tony Soprano in particular, and the Sopranos universe in general.
The objections upthread to the timeline seem to be based around the idea that the entire film takes place in 1967 and that a teenage TS would be too old for that period. That would be correct, but 1967 is only half of the film and the teenage Tony doesn't appear until four years later, but that is problematic too.
I looked up on a Sopranos wiki and Tony's DoB is given as August 1959, which would make him nearly eight years old at the time of the Newark riots in July 1967. So far, no problem, although the actor playing the child Tony did look maybe ten, eleven, I thought. Based on the spoiler below, my understanding is that the second half of the film takes place four years later which would be 1971, so Tony would be 11 or 12. But the Tony of 'four years later' is definitely no 11-year old, he seems more 15, 16, doing the things that kids of that age do... listening to heavy metal music, trying to score beer underage, pulling stupid pranks at school.
Tony's father is jailed in 1967, and when he's released there's a reference to his having been away for four years.
A few other observations, which I'll put in spoilers:
The beach scene...
...was very reminiscent of the scene in Gomorrah where Ciro di Marzio kills his wife. I'm pretty sure this is coincidental, but I think both of these scenes require a somewhat more willing suspension of disbelief than usual.
The loose ends...
Dickie Moltisanti's uncle seemed to have more than just an inkling of Dickie's involvement in the deaths of Dickie's father and goomah, but that never was developed. Lack of time I guess.
The little league baseball...
What was that? Was that a real thing? Or just Dickie's daydream of being a good person by training a blind junior baseball team? I suspect the latter.
The big twist...
It's revealed that it was Junior who was responsible for the hit on Dickie Moltisanti, and not the warring rival black gang or the policeman that Tony told Christopher was the shooter in the season 4 episode “For All Debts Public and Private”.
Saw this today - good not great, perhaps 'inessential' says it best. It's a decent gangster movie that I enjoyed watching but considering the heritage, I was a little disappointed.
I'm looking forward to streaming this on Friday. I loved the Sopranos.
I won't give away what there is of a plot, but I wouldn't spend money to see this. It's well made, and the cinemaphotography is pretty good, but it just isn't interesting at all. The soundtrack is also just so-so.
How could it be essential without Gandolfini?
I am not sure I would agree, for me it was exactly what I would expect considering the heritage. Half the episodes of the Sopranos were just mediocre and this was no different.
Well, there is a Gandolfini in it...
I will love it if it's as good as half the episodes of Sopranos, but I fear it will not be nearly that good.
Main protagonist Alessandro Nivola/Moltisanti just not good enough, charismatic.
I just watched it. It wasn't great, but not bad. I'll have to watch it again because I missed some dialogue.
The actors who played characters from the series, I thought, did a great job. Even Dickie had some of Christopher's mannerisms.
I was stunned at the end and think they definitely left room for another movie.
I didn't get the baseball scene or was that just another Sopranos-type dream/fantasy. I thought the scenes with Dickie's uncle were similar to Tony and Melfi.
I am going to rewatch it, but I didn't see or missed Jilly Rufalo. He is in the credits.
There was a possible inconsistency when Johnny shot Livia's hair. In Sopranos Home Movies, Janice said Uncle Junior was with him, but it was Dickie in the movie. Janice was also drunk in the scene, so that could explain it.
I also have to go back and watch the scene from the show when Tony hides in the trunk to go to the amusement park. I don't remember anyone getting shot or if it showed how he got home that day.
Pretty dull. Only good WB/HBOMax release this year was 'No Sudden Move.'
Yep - the shooting during Johnny's arrest was part of the original series...
Anybody else struck at how much younger Livia's mannerisms are like Carmella's and not JUST Livia's?
Separate names with a comma.