by Camo » Sat May 10, 2025 12:51 pm
RushStreet wrote: ↑Fri May 09, 2025 8:35 am
Aunt+Baby wrote: ↑Fri May 09, 2025 8:26 am
funkster wrote: ↑Fri May 09, 2025 7:54 am
Coloboy wrote: ↑Fri May 09, 2025 7:39 am
funkster wrote: ↑Fri May 09, 2025 5:53 am
Aunt+Baby wrote: ↑Wed May 07, 2025 2:08 pm
Camo wrote: ↑Wed May 07, 2025 1:42 pm
Aunt+Baby wrote: ↑Wed May 07, 2025 1:29 pm
Camo wrote: ↑Wed May 07, 2025 12:59 pm
How accurate is Nicholas Pillegi's Casino? I'm aware it's not regarding Spilotro's murder but is his time in Vegas generally accurate or what? I've seen the movie obviously but i've never read the book and i'm considering doing so if it's at least somewhat accurate. Is Frank Cullota his source or is it purely newspaper articles or what?
That movie sucked. It featured all east coast actors and not one Chicagoan such as Farina, Madsen, Montagna etc. the only one who even attempted a Chicago accent was pesci, and even that was half assed
As far as accuracy goes,no it wasn’t accurate. They couldn’t even mention Chicago outright, and that LV story in general isn’t all that interesting. The real meat on the bone & intrigue was occurring in Chicago obviously.
Also we know now that Phil Ponto was perhaps the most important straightened out guy in LV for the outfit
I'm asking about the book which i believe used the real names and mentioned Chicago. Again i haven't read it but i'm under the impression it's very different to the movie, Scoresese says his movies were "inspired by" Pileggi's books rather than based on which is why he changed the names and elements of the story.
Unless your second and third paragraphs are referring to the book and i've misinterpreted you in which case thanks for the information?
My apologies. I haven’t read the book either. However, with only having the film to go off of, I can only assume that the book was as trash as the film, considering one was based upon the other.
On board filled with terrible opinions, this is one of the worst.
LOL. agreed.
I actually like Casino more than goodfellas personally. Both are all time greats, but I think the story in Casino is a little more exciting. And yes, Martin Scorsese, one the century's most respected filmmakers, isn't trying to stay steadfast to the exact true history, because that's not his goal. He's making art, and it's fucking great.
FWIW they couldn't mention Chicago in the movie because Universal Studios lawyers were up Scorsese's ass about lawsuits, presumably from living people that were actually involved... same reason they say "adapted from a true story" instead of "based on a true story".
This is what I always come back to when people whine about this, it’s a fucking movie! It’s not a documentary. You know why he used those east coast actors? Lmao because they’re better than the three Chicago people he mentioned.
No, they aren’t. Farina & montagna are spectacular & would’ve been perfect in that film. The movie sucked. East coast people trying to portray outfit guys was a complete joke. It wasn’t art, it was a cheap cop out, to go with known names rather than authenticity
If they would have chosen Farina and Montagna over Pesci and Deniro it would have been a made for TV Friday night special. You don't get any bigger than Pesci and Deniro portraying mobsters during that era in Hollywood. Sorry to break it to you but it is what it is. Deniro and Pesci made that movie a blockbuster. Along with Sharon Stone. Now, do I believe they should have casted some Chicago actors in the film? Yes indeed. Farina and Montagna would have been excellent choices for supporting roles and would have made the movie even better. They had the budget to make that possible so I'm not sure why it never happened.
Farina could've been Culotta or whatever he's called in the movie. Could see him being great in the murder scene. In hindsight it's difficult to not see Phil Leotardo in that scene.
Agreed though, this is a regional complaint that the vast majority of viewers aren't going to have. I assure you i wasn't complaining about their Chicago accents from my house in Scotland as a child lol. My issue with the acting is Pesci's role is too similar to Goodfellas (he does try to change it up somewhat though). However i agree DeNiro and Pesci are far better actors than Farina and Mantegna especially in carrying a major movie i couldn't see it from either of them and neither could Marty since he never had them as major actors in any of his films.
[quote=RushStreet post_id=293519 time=1746804948 user_id=8773]
[quote=Aunt+Baby post_id=293517 time=1746804395 user_id=8231]
[quote=funkster post_id=293515 time=1746802499 user_id=161]
[quote=Coloboy post_id=293514 time=1746801590 user_id=6473]
[quote=funkster post_id=293508 time=1746795221 user_id=161]
[quote=Aunt+Baby post_id=293422 time=1746652080 user_id=8231]
[quote=Camo post_id=293420 time=1746650544 user_id=398]
[quote=Aunt+Baby post_id=293418 time=1746649793 user_id=8231]
[quote=Camo post_id=293413 time=1746647984 user_id=398]
How accurate is Nicholas Pillegi's Casino? I'm aware it's not regarding Spilotro's murder but is his time in Vegas generally accurate or what? I've seen the movie obviously but i've never read the book and i'm considering doing so if it's at least somewhat accurate. Is Frank Cullota his source or is it purely newspaper articles or what?
[/quote]
That movie sucked. It featured all east coast actors and not one Chicagoan such as Farina, Madsen, Montagna etc. the only one who even attempted a Chicago accent was pesci, and even that was half assed
As far as accuracy goes,no it wasn’t accurate. They couldn’t even mention Chicago outright, and that LV story in general isn’t all that interesting. The real meat on the bone & intrigue was occurring in Chicago obviously.
Also we know now that Phil Ponto was perhaps the most important straightened out guy in LV for the outfit
[/quote]
I'm asking about the book which i believe used the real names and mentioned Chicago. Again i haven't read it but i'm under the impression it's very different to the movie, Scoresese says his movies were "inspired by" Pileggi's books rather than based on which is why he changed the names and elements of the story.
Unless your second and third paragraphs are referring to the book and i've misinterpreted you in which case thanks for the information?
[/quote]
My apologies. I haven’t read the book either. However, with only having the film to go off of, I can only assume that the book was as trash as the film, considering one was based upon the other.
[/quote]
On board filled with terrible opinions, this is one of the worst.
[/quote]
LOL. agreed.
I actually like Casino more than goodfellas personally. Both are all time greats, but I think the story in Casino is a little more exciting. And yes, Martin Scorsese, one the century's most respected filmmakers, isn't trying to stay steadfast to the exact true history, because that's not his goal. He's making art, and it's fucking great.
FWIW they couldn't mention Chicago in the movie because Universal Studios lawyers were up Scorsese's ass about lawsuits, presumably from living people that were actually involved... same reason they say "adapted from a true story" instead of "based on a true story".
[/quote]
This is what I always come back to when people whine about this, it’s a fucking movie! It’s not a documentary. You know why he used those east coast actors? Lmao because they’re better than the three Chicago people he mentioned.
[/quote]
No, they aren’t. Farina & montagna are spectacular & would’ve been perfect in that film. The movie sucked. East coast people trying to portray outfit guys was a complete joke. It wasn’t art, it was a cheap cop out, to go with known names rather than authenticity
[/quote]
If they would have chosen Farina and Montagna over Pesci and Deniro it would have been a made for TV Friday night special. You don't get any bigger than Pesci and Deniro portraying mobsters during that era in Hollywood. Sorry to break it to you but it is what it is. Deniro and Pesci made that movie a blockbuster. Along with Sharon Stone. Now, do I believe they should have casted some Chicago actors in the film? Yes indeed. Farina and Montagna would have been excellent choices for supporting roles and would have made the movie even better. They had the budget to make that possible so I'm not sure why it never happened.
[/quote]
Farina could've been Culotta or whatever he's called in the movie. Could see him being great in the murder scene. In hindsight it's difficult to not see Phil Leotardo in that scene.
Agreed though, this is a regional complaint that the vast majority of viewers aren't going to have. I assure you i wasn't complaining about their Chicago accents from my house in Scotland as a child lol. My issue with the acting is Pesci's role is too similar to Goodfellas (he does try to change it up somewhat though). However i agree DeNiro and Pesci are far better actors than Farina and Mantegna especially in carrying a major movie i couldn't see it from either of them and neither could Marty since he never had them as major actors in any of his films.