Thanks, lena :) It seems that all who've seen it can't help but mentioned it... even if they can't write a review just yet. What an impression it must have made.

___
WILLIt seems that all who've seen it can't help but mentioned it... even if they can't write a review just yet. What an impression it must have made. I like the way you think Will :)

The Los Angeles Daily News' Bob Strauss weighs in... http://www.insidesocal.com/reeldeal/2006/09/one_week_per_year.html Things took a definite turn for the better when I saw an ufinished print of Martin Scorsese's "The Departerd" (opening October 6). Perfectly crafted, down-and-dirty entertainment about rival undercover moles in the Massachusetts State Police and a Boston Irish crime gang, it puts recent efforts by fellow underworld auteurs Brian De Palma and Michael Mann to shame. And it marks the first sign of the old, vibrant life in Scorsese's work since, well, he started getting lost in ponderous Oscar bait like "The Aviator" and "Gangs of New York." But is it great Scorsese or just great, nasty fun? The debate is getting lively.Posted by Bob Strauss on September 22, 2006

Arnzilla, thanks for both bits. Strauss, I think, is of the opinion that it's "just great, nasty fun"...

"great nasty fun" sounds fine to me.....think it will still be huge, either way.

Here's another tease from a... Bollywood director, Kunal Kohli. 8) We hear you saw an exclusive screening of Martin Scorsese’s next film recently? "Well, I was just in New York recently on holiday and it so happened that the action director of my last film Fanaa, George Agular has done the action for Martin’s film so he said why not go and see a rough cut of Martin’s next film The Departed. I agreed at once. The star cast of the film too is phenomenal – Leonardo DiCaprio, Matt Damon, Martin Sheen, Alec Baldwin, Jack Nicholson – almost everybody is in the film. It’s a brilliant film." Did you get a chance to meet Martin Scorsese? "Yes, I actually met up with Martin Scorsese there. George told Scorsese that he would be getting a Bollywood director along and since I’m a huge fan of his, I was quite excited to meet him. The screening was in the Time Warner building. I must have been the only outsider there. The studio bosses were also there. And to think even Jack Nicholson had not seen the film as yet! This one’s even better than Gangs of New York ." found here

Just now 9/24 reading this thread and realizing there are things I have missed ! Arnz Thanks for L.A. Daily News/blog entry comments :) Will Sorry ..didn't realize you had posted Indian director's comments here.. :... Thanks for posting ...like your 'red' highlights :)

Mini-review from the UK: http://thedvdforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6752610&postcount=37 The guy is referring to Kris Tapley's review.

Reviews
So COOL to read so many RAVE reviews! LOVE that word "brilliant"! Grazie, will & Zill for the new ones here. From that little UK bit: Was very surprised to hear Gimme Shelter used again... the use of music in the film will spart some discussion I'm sure. Songs cut out very quickly, or fade into others and then come back... interesting, not sure how fond I was of it. Hmmm...The "Songs cut out very quickly, or fade into others and then come back..." That's got me thinking. :wink:

Positive review from the New York Observer by Andrew Sarris: http://www.observer.com/20061002/20061002_Andrew_Sarris_culture_sarrismovies.asp

Hey, Big thanks, stuckonlife. This is the first review for me that makes a difference to me. All the others review so far have come from critics that I don't either know about (Tarpley, Levy etc) or critics that say innane dumb things often (Poland, Wells) and also Sarris is a critic who I usually agree with so we have the same tastes. This is a good review. If aynone is interested some info about Sarris: http://www.filmlinc.com/fcm/5-6-2005/sarris.htm (he didn't like Million$ baby). This is a section from that Sarris piece about his style of criticism: This was a systematic destruction and reconstruction of the standard view of American cinema and, by extension, all of cinema, an insistence that cinematic beauty did not come from without (the right subject, actors, set designer, cinematographer, etc.) but from within, and that it was a matter of simple logic that it was the director rather than the writer or the performers from whom the final result was generated. Putting it another way, to fix your sights on the actors or the cinematography or the dialogue was akin to staring at someone's mouth, knees, and navel, whereas contemplating a film through the framework of direction was akin to looking at the whole person . Although, when I read the review again, what the hell does he man by "two action superstars" in talking about Leo and Matt. Matt, yeah, but Leo - he's not know as an action (movie) star.

Stuckonlife Thanks for New York Observer review :)

Thanks, stuckonlife. I think the Sarris review is the first to invoke the 9/11 parallels and to suggest the FBI/CIA antagonistic relationship is symbolized by Queenan/Dignam not sharing intelligence info w/Ellerby. It's certainly the first time anyone has mentioned the Costello/FBI connection in a review. I wonder how the patriot act sound clip fits into this.

seanflynn at the goldderby forums: Posted September 26, 2006 01:40 PM I'd rank this at or above Goodfellas, below After Hours as an initial reaction. I never have never liked Raging Bull, and fell out of love with Taxi Driver a decade ago, so I am not the best one to speak as a Scorsese devotee. I do think this is the best told narrative he has ever done, with the big scenes integrated with the overall structure, rather than drawing attention to themselves per se. It is a straightforward story, but with a lot of complicated nuances - the editing is first rate more for keeping the various twists and turns from getting confusing. I found it a bit overlong, and although it's a bit less than in some of his work, the use of classic rock a bit overdone - I don't think it is a perfect film by any means. I also thinking having Irish Boston characters rather than NY Italian really, really adds freshness to the whole enterprise. Bottom line - it is enough hard-core Scorsese to delight his fans, full of enough other assets to broaden its appeal. The violence is very strong - but I don't think it is fatal for the film's Oscar chances. He discusses it a bit more, focusing on the violence and its Oscar chances.