The movie's biggest flaws/your pet peeves?

[noodles_leone]

Yep! It could have hurt the film if it was a thriller or a whodunit. But it's not an Agatha Christie adaptation. The effect it's trying to achieve is emotions, not a rational "OOOOW! IT WAS MAX ALL ALONG!!! IT MAKES SO MUCH SENSE NOW! OWNED!!!".

[drinkanddestroy]

(as an aside: if you consider the scenes that Leone wanted in the film and arre being added back in now - like the one in the cemetery and the one with Bailey's limo, etc. - then the movie does seem more of a literal mystery - still is symbolic, but more of a literal mystery as well, than it is in the 229MV. But that's just an aside. Anyway, point is that...) I am willing to accept a lot - perhaps even the idea that the cemetery would actually be sold and dug up (a Jewish cemetery would never be allowed to be dug up in a million years) but keeping their life's savings in a locker in a public place like that in which any two-bit thief could get to it, that's just ridiculous. That could have easily been written differently without affecting the story. They could have kept it hidden anywhere else - maybe behind a wall in Fat Moe's restaurant - and the story would work just the same, without that implausibility that IMO goes way beyond the usual suspension of disbelief. RE: the cemetery - though a Jewish cemetery would never be dug up, and while it's true that another reason could have been used for calling Noodles back in 1968 (and then the phony memorial plaque could have been erected somewhere other than a mausoleum, e.g. in a synagogue, which often have memorial  plaques) I can live with the cemetery angle, cuz it works for the symbolism of the past being dug up. For some reason, that never bothered me as much as the part about the suitcase.... What if it was the Mona Lisa being stashed in the railway locker? Would you accept that? Well, to these guys, the million bucks is all they have "worked" (and stolen and killed) for all their lives, they would guard that as you would guard the Mona Lisa. Maybe not behind a bomb-proof safe, but a railway locker? No adult would keep ten bucks there, let alone your life's savings

[noodles_leone]

Thanks Chris.

I was already pretty smart back in 2007.

D&D: as a matter of fact, the case was stolen, so yeah, it was a stupid idea, but they did it anyway (because people are stupid) and got what they deserved. This is plain realism.  

[drinkanddestroy]

I think there are lots of examples in history where this has happened.  A search on Google for 'relocation jewish cemetery' produces 338,000 results.

Just picking 3 examples from the 338,000:

http://www.rookwoodjewishcemetery.com.au/page/our-history

http://www.zegk.uni-heidelberg.de/hist/ausstellungen/harbin/cemetery.html

http://digitalassets.ushmm.org/photoarchives/detail.aspx?id=1173810

 

getting a Google hit doesn't mean anything.

Judaism has very strict laws about the treatment of a corpse.

There are in fact times when - with very complicated laws and specifications – the corpse of a jew may be moved, but there are lots of circumstances and laws that have to be kept. E.g. I once heard an Orthodox Jewish soldier in WWII speak (he passed away very recently), his brother was killed in the war, buried in France; after the war, this soldier wanted to move the body from the military cemetery in France to Israel, but there were lots of difficulties, it was a very complicated procedure to fulfill all the religious laws about moving a body, and he ultimately decided to leave the body in the cemetery in France.

When someone buys a plot in a cemetery, they own that piece of land, and it can't be taken away from them.

There is absolutely no way that a synagogue that owns a cemetery can say, "We wanna sell the land, all you people that have relatives buried there, you gotta move them." That would not only be  a violation of Jewish law, but it would be a violation of a contract – buying a cemetery plot means you own that piece of land, period. Not just Jewish law - I doubt that would be allowed in America at all. I do know that in some countries like France that don't believe that a corpse needs to be treated respectfully, there are laws that they can basically dig up any body after 100 years.

I'm telling you there is absolutely no way in the world that a synagogue would tell its congregants, "we're selling the cemetery, you gotta move your relatives." No way.

However, as I said, this implausibility doesn't bother me terribly, because having the cemetery dug up adds to the symbolism of Noodles's return, having his past dug up.

But the railway locker is the biggest bullshit in any Leone movie ever. Heck, it may be the biggest bullshit in any movie ever. Yes, n_l, if anyone is so stupid to do that, then they deserve to lose the money. Absolutely. But there is also absolutely no way anyone who isn't retarded would do that.

And, as I said, the script could have so easily been changed so that this would make sense. It could have been hidden ANYWHERE else. That's another reason this bothers me so much - because having it in the railway locker isn't necessary for the story. In the case of the cemetery, I can live with that sort of bullshit since it adds to the symbolism, it adds to the story (and besides, most people don't know Jewish law and wouldn't pick up on it; there are other mistakes about Judaism in the movie that most people wouldn't pick up on [e.g. Fat Moe's father would never ever have his daughter watch the store on Passover; no religious Jew would ever enter their place of business on Passover] but most people don't know about that stuff, and therefore, [as in the case of a courtroom movie that has mistakes in the law] that stuff doesn't bother me. But the suitcase in the railway locker is utterly ridiculous, and could so easily have been changed, so IMO it is a major flaw.

[noodles_leone]

And, as I said, the script could have so easily been changed so that this would make sense. It could have been hidden ANYWHERE else. That's another reason this bothers me so much - because having it in the railway locker isn't necessary for the story.

Yes it is. It's strong and beautiful. And it has something to do with childhood, dreams and cinema. Just like the key that Fat Moe left in the clock for 35 years. Who would do that? It's just fucking awesome. I'm willing to sacrifice any realism to get the scenes Leone got with that locker.

I know you won't agree and I don't want you to feel you've wasted your time. So here's a picture of Lenny Kravitz wearing a gigantic scarf:

[drinkanddestroy]

Yes it is. It's strong and beautiful. And it has something to do with childhood, dreams and cinema. Just like the key that Fat Moe left in the clock for 35 years. Who would do that? It's just fucking awesome. I'm willing to sacrifice any realism to get the scenes Leone got with that locker.

But that is precisely my point - none of the strength, beauty, childhood, dreams, cinema, key in the clock, etc. has to be sacrificed for the realism (btw, it's not actual realism I'm looking for, but movie realism, within the realm of usual suspension of disbelief, etc.); That key could have been to a locker or safe anywhere else - somewhere secure. It didn't have to be at the train station. So, you can keep all these beautiful themes and everything you love about the movie, like "I brought back the key to your clock."


Anyway, I'd love for you to tell me what themes, beauty, strength, etc. etc. would be lost by having the money kept somewhere that made sense?

---------------

btw, once we're discussing the subject of the locker - I once listened to the Richard Schickel dvd commentary; I remember that when we see the scene with Noodles finding the key at the cemetery – in addition to the one that he brought back to Fat Moe – Schickel pointed out that it was important to note, see , there has been a second key.
Of  course, I'm not doubting how it was possible for Max to get into the locket on his own - as I said previously, that would have been easy for anyone to do. I am just wondering - when Noodles returns in 1968 and finds all that money in the locker, is it the same locker as the one he found empty in 1933? It's a minor point, but I was never sure if it's actually the same locker or one nearby. Can you tell if it's the same one?

[noodles_leone]

But that is precisely my point - none of the strength, beauty, childhood, dreams, cinema, key in the clock, etc. has to be sacrificed for the realism (btw, it's not actual realism I'm looking for, but movie realism, within the realm of usual suspension of disbelief, etc.); That key could have been to a locker or safe anywhere else - somewhere secure.

A railway locker is cool. It's like burying a chest in a desert island. It's not actually safe, but it's cool and cinematic. What would be anti-cinematic would be a scene where the gang come together to the railway locker and say:

"Now we're adults, let's change the location of the briefcase to a pointless place that has nothing to do with our childhood"
"Oh yeah that's a great idea Max, that's much safer."

I'm curious to see if that scene would have made it to the 229min cut. Then of course in the introduction of the movie we would have seen Noodles go to that other place where absolutely nothing interesting nor moving ever happened, find an empty case and leave. That wouldn't change at all the intensity of the film as it is. I'm really wondering why Leone didn't think of it.

Here is a picture of Christopher Walken and Al Pacino hanging out.



You didn't even aknowledge the Lenny pic, but nobody can look at this one without smiling. If it doesn't work, just imagine the face of Danny DeVito when he'll notice that Pacino stole his tuxedo.

[drinkanddestroy]

chris,

I am not doubting that Jewish cemeteries have been moved over the years. I am just saying Jewish law wouldn't allow it for this reason  - just to sell the land and tell the families to move the bodies. The way the movie has it, the synagogue sent letters to the families - we're moving the cemetery, move the bodies. That would never have happened. Never ever ever. Ever. I even just called a rabbi on the phone now and confirmed with him to be 100% sure - even though I already was 100% sure  

Sure, Jewish cemeteries have been moved. There are untold numbers of ancient cemeteries in Europe which, after the Holocaust, (whatever was left of) the Jewish communities left the cities, and the cemeteries were desecrated, paved over to make way for shopping centers, apartments, stadiums, etc. and in order to preserve what was remaining and prevent further desecration, Jews moved the bodies elsewhere, so that they could remain in a proper Jewish burial. That was extenuating circumstances - moving the bodies to a safe place so that wouldn't be desecrated. Technically, it's allowable - under very specific circumstances and with very strict specifications – If you want to know how complicated the laws are, just remember that the Jewish soldier I met left his brother in a military cemetery in France rather than move him to a Jewish cemetery in Israel, because of all the complex conditions and laws incolved in moving a buried body – But not simply for a synagogue in America to say, "hey, we wanna sell the land, move the bodies." Sure, by the time Noodles gets back, the neighborhood has changed quite a bit, there are much less Jews and looks to be mostly Hispanic, but we're certainly not at a point where the cemetery is in danger of desecration and it's being moved for that reason... RE: your links that would explain the moving of cemeteries in places where there are no longer thriving Jewish communities. RE: the other links, I'd have to know the specific situations. (I can only speak for what those who follow the Jewish traditions i.e. the Orthodox, would do. I can't speak for Reform or Conservative Jews would do - they don't follow Jewish traditions, they just made up something in the past 300 years that can be summarized with, "The Torah doesn't apply in these modern times, so do whatever you want.... However, the community Noodles grew up in is clearly Orthodox – even though he and his gang certainly do not follow the religion, the cemetery they were buried in was administered by their Orthodox families' synagogue, Fat Moe's father, who certainly was ultra-orthodox, was buried in the same cemetery... Bottom line is that while under extenuating circumstances, bodies can be moved with very strict guidelines, the chance that an Orthodox synagogue in New York would one day just decide to just sell the cemetery and have all the bodies be moved is ZERO.

I just wanted to set the record straight about that   although, as I said, this part of the movie does not bother me because A) most viewers wouldn't be aware of this; and B) having the cemetery aspect adds to the symbolism of the movie.

[drinkanddestroy]

A railway locker is cool. It's like burying a chest in a desert island. It's not actually safe, but it's cool and cinematic. What would be anti-cinematic would be a scene where the gang come together to the railway locker and say:

"Now we're adults, let's change the location of the briefcase to a pointless place that has nothing to do with our childhood"
"Oh yeah that's a great idea Max, that's much safer."

I'm curious to see if that scene would have made it to the 229min cut. Then of course in the introduction of the movie we would have seen Noodles go to that other place where absolutely nothing interesting nor moving ever happened, find an empty case and leave. That wouldn't change at all the intensity of the film as it is. I'm really wondering why Leone didn't think of it.

Here is a picture of Christopher Walken and Al Pacino hanging out.

----

You didn't even aknowledge the Lenny pic, but nobody can look at this one without smiling. If it doesn't work, just imagine the face of Danny DeVito when he'll notice that Pacino stole his tuxedo.

you're right, there is no place as cool and interesting as a railway locker     


Does the Lenny Kravitz picture come up because we are having a conversation about Judaism?  You know his mother (and therefore he) is not Jewish 

[drinkanddestroy]

on this subject, n_l, what the hell is with this French law that allows any body to be removed from a grave after 99 years?



http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/jewish-world-news/1.555363

this story is very brief, it doesn't go into the details (they are pretty crazy).... I can get a longer story if you are interested. But how the hell can gov't decide to remove any body from a grave after a century?

[noodles_leone]

you're right, there is no place as cool and interesting as a railway locker      

Not a single one. Remember OUATITW? Where does Elam lock the railway agent? Is there anything cooler than this scene with Elam and the old guy (apart from the scene with Elam and the fly, but a briefcase doesn't fit in the barrel of a gun)?

on this subject, n_l, what the hell is with this Franch law that allows any body to be removed from a grave after 99 years?



http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/jewish-world-news/1.555363

this story is very brief, it doesn't go into the details (they are pretty crazy).... I can get a longer story if you are interested. But how the hell can gov't decide to remove any body from a grave after a century?

Haha! It's easy to say when living in the USA where you still have room! We're in old Europe. There are people and stuff all over the place. I'm not concerned because I'll be buried under OUATITW's arch near Monument Valley.

[drinkanddestroy]

Good.  I get the feeling we'll never agree on this.  I'm not sure if you told the Rabbi that the cemetery had fallen into disrepair, the area was to be renovated and everything was being relocated to a larger modern cemetery in a different area.  But as you say it's not a particularly important point.

  

There's no indication that the cemetery was in danger of being desecrated, and it's not true that everything was being relocated to a larger modern cemetery in a different area - the bodies of Noodles's 3 friends happened to have been moved to the fancy cemetery in Riverdale by some unknown person, but generally, it was up to the family of each dead person to move each body to wherever they wanted to buy a plot. The synagogue was selling the cemetery and telling all the families that had bought plots and buried loves ones there, "time to move." That would never happen.

Thanks for posting the pics of the locker 

[drinkanddestroy]

Haha! It's easy to say when living in the USA where you still have room! We're in old Europe. There are people and stuff all over the place. I'm not concerned because I'll be buried under OUATITW's arch near Monument Valley.

whether or not you'r concerned about where your corpse winds up doesn't matter. what matters is that there are people who do, people who bought plots, and the gov't shouldn't be allowed to say, "there's not enough room for people who paid money for plots to keep them, we're moving them all." There's always room for whatever you want it for, whatever you respect. France doesn't have much respect for private property or bodies of the deceased.

If the issue is room, why don't they really clear out ALL bodies of everyone dead more than 99 years? I mean, including all the kings and presidents et al? Something tells me they're not really clearing out ALL graves. Just the people that they think no one cares about.

The full story in this case is crazy. Just one example of the craziness: the French gov't demanded that in order to have the body moved, they'd need consent of all living descendants of the deceased, and proof of death of the other descendants. That's right, birth and death certificates for all descendants of someone who died in 1870, and whom a genealogist the family enlisted figured had over a thousand descendants. Eventually, the gov't relented on that particular demand.

The result may be that anyone who cares, for religious or other reasons, about the fate of their corpse of that of their loved ones, may simply decide not to be buried in France. Which, after all, may be the gov't's goal.

[noodles_leone]

whether or not you'r concerned about where your corpse winds up doesn't matter. what matters is that there are people who do, people who bought plots, and the gov't shouldn't be allowed to say, "there's not enough room for people who paid money for plots to keep them, we're moving them all." There's always room for whatever you want it for, whatever you respect. France doesn't have much respect for private property or bodies of the deceased.

If the issue is room, why don't they really clear out ALL bodies of everyone dead more than 99 years? I mean, including all the kings and presidents et al? Something tells me they're not really clearing out ALL graves. Just the people that they think no one cares about.

The full story in this case is crazy. Just one example of the craziness: the French gov't demanded that in order to have the body moved, they'd need consent of all living descendants of the deceased, and proof of death of the other descendants. That's right, birth and death certificates for all descendants of someone who died in 1870, and whom a genealogist the family enlisted figured had over a thousand descendants. Eventually, the gov't relented on that particular demand.

The result may be that anyone that cares, for religious or other reasons, about the fate of their corpse of that of their loved ones, may simply decide not to be buried in France. Which, after all, may be the gov't's goal.

You convinced me. I'll be offline for a while, building a cemetery in my garden. I won't accept dead kings in it though, because like you said, they already have their own spot.

[drinkanddestroy]

You convinced me. I'll be offline for a while, building a cemetery in my garden. I won't accept dead kings in it though, because like you said, they already have their own spot.

If I've convinced you, then I'm starting to doubt myself.