by Antiliar » Sun Nov 21, 2021 6:48 pm
PolackTony wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 5:21 pm
Antiliar wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 3:32 pm
Patrickgold wrote: ↑Sat Nov 20, 2021 5:44 pm
He’s full of shit. Deniro was in Chicago for preproduction when the film was canceled for financial issues. “the idle eye” was the name of it I think. That’s one of the reasons I stopped watching that YouTube blog. After Culotta died, Adam brought this dipshit on every week. The guy is a liar. He claims he was a Vietnam war vet but there are no records of him serving in Vietnam. Total bullshit artist
Red makes a lot of mistakes, but I don't think he was talking about
Idol's Eye if Louie Eboli was involved.
The Untouchables maybe? That was made before Eboli died and De Niro played Al Capone. No reports of De Niro being assaulted by anyone during the making of that film.
It's possible that he may have confused or conflated a couple of different stories or movies here. He could also just be making it up. Who knows. Red is an odd character, for sure. The more he puts out weird stories like this, the less seriously I take stuff that he's communicated to me in the past. This is unfortunate, as I do think he is able to provide some insight into the Grand Ave crew and some other figures like Catuara, who he knew personally. But how can one tell where an honest (even if mistaken or confused) account ends and BS begins with a guy like this.
I didn't hear the story about De Niro so I'm listening to his most recent podcast now. I'm about halfway through. He mentioned something about an incident that took place in the Northwest side (or something like that) that wasn't reported in the Tribune or Sun-Times, but Eboli wasn't mentioned. So I'll keep on listening.
In general, I give him the benefit of the doubt. It's easier to be charitable and say that he made a mistake or misremembered than to say he deliberately lied. He's in his 70s, overweight, and a heavy smoker trying to recall events from forty or so years ago, so I'll give him a little slack.
He does try to separate what he knew from first-hand experience versus what he learned second-hand. This obviously had to be second-hand. Maybe he even read something about it in one of the suburban papers. If someone can provide more details about what he actually said, I'll follow up and ask him.
[quote=PolackTony post_id=212990 time=1637540497 user_id=6658]
[quote=Antiliar post_id=212982 time=1637533923 user_id=77]
[quote=Patrickgold post_id=212925 time=1637455490 user_id=6577]
He’s full of shit. Deniro was in Chicago for preproduction when the film was canceled for financial issues. “the idle eye” was the name of it I think. That’s one of the reasons I stopped watching that YouTube blog. After Culotta died, Adam brought this dipshit on every week. The guy is a liar. He claims he was a Vietnam war vet but there are no records of him serving in Vietnam. Total bullshit artist
[/quote]
Red makes a lot of mistakes, but I don't think he was talking about [i]Idol's Eye[/i] if Louie Eboli was involved. [i]The Untouchables[/i] maybe? That was made before Eboli died and De Niro played Al Capone. No reports of De Niro being assaulted by anyone during the making of that film.
[/quote]
It's possible that he may have confused or conflated a couple of different stories or movies here. He could also just be making it up. Who knows. Red is an odd character, for sure. The more he puts out weird stories like this, the less seriously I take stuff that he's communicated to me in the past. This is unfortunate, as I do think he is able to provide some insight into the Grand Ave crew and some other figures like Catuara, who he knew personally. But how can one tell where an honest (even if mistaken or confused) account ends and BS begins with a guy like this.
[/quote]
I didn't hear the story about De Niro so I'm listening to his most recent podcast now. I'm about halfway through. He mentioned something about an incident that took place in the Northwest side (or something like that) that wasn't reported in the Tribune or Sun-Times, but Eboli wasn't mentioned. So I'll keep on listening.
In general, I give him the benefit of the doubt. It's easier to be charitable and say that he made a mistake or misremembered than to say he deliberately lied. He's in his 70s, overweight, and a heavy smoker trying to recall events from forty or so years ago, so I'll give him a little slack.
He does try to separate what he knew from first-hand experience versus what he learned second-hand. This obviously had to be second-hand. Maybe he even read something about it in one of the suburban papers. If someone can provide more details about what he actually said, I'll follow up and ask him.