THE SOPRANOS was a TV show. So is this.
It’s also very familiar.
People get shot, they eat a lot of Italian food, they get loud and swear, and there’s the obligatory turf war. Young Tony Soprano witnesses these events, which we’re supposed to believe is ultimately what led him into the family “business.” And that’s fine except you could do all that in one brief montage or have a narrator quickly walk you through it.
Alan Taylor did a nice job of directing the script by David Chase and Lawrence Konner (who my partner and I rewrote on JEWEL OF THE NILE).
There’s one story turn (I won’t spoil it) that is so ridiculous it takes you out of the movie. Suffice to say a character does something they never would because the writers needed the story to go in a specific direction. Hint: The scene takes place on a beach.
The acting was good. The real stars are Alessandro Nivola and Leslie Odom, Jr. James Gandolfini’s actual son plays his dad as a teenager. Michael Gandolfini acquitted himself very well. For my money though, Ray Liotta stole the movie.
But here’s the thing, and I know it’s intangible — It just didn’t feel like a SOPRANOS episode. You meet a lot of future characters, and Chase’s writing is always first-class, but the rhythm, the situations, and even the dialogue just didn’t live up to the series. The original was very fresh. They had great characters, a real suspense, memorable scenes and moments. This new version feels like GOOD FELLAS meets THE MUPPET BABIES. But again, if you’re a diehard SOPRANOS fan you may get a lot more out of it. Wait. I am a diehard SOPRANOS fan. So why didn’t I love it? I was sure hoping to. Maybe it's because the whole point of the movie (how the environment turned Tony into Tony) is something I and every SOPRANOS fan already knows.
See for yourself. It’s on HBO Max.
25 comments :
Ken, would you be able to explain why prequels are so successful? I can live with prequels because a good story is a good story. One major disadvantage of a prequel over a sequel though: You usually know the end - because you know the beginning of the original. It takes a lot of suspense out of the story right from the start. At least sequels can go anywhere. So why prequels?
I was just about to ask your thoughts about prequels, but Dominik beat me to the punch.
Yes! The beach scene. WTF? They found the shark there and jumped it.
Friday Question: Were you named for someone in your family or did your parents just like the name?
Dominik: My take on this, from zero years in the industry:
Prequel=Pre-sold
The audience knows the characters and the network/studio have already made money with them, so it is a safe bet that people will watch at least the first couple of weeks based on a yearning for more stories about people they like. I gather that show business is perfectly happy making fairly safe bets. Boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl back is a very old formula, but WOW does it work. That is why you have Young Sheldon from "The Big Bang Theory", and to go back farther *spoiler alert*
The Third Man was a wildly successful movie, but the character that was most intriguing dies at the end, so every show of the subsequent radio series addressed the death and then went on to say, "This is what happened before..."
Prequels can do a lot. I rather liked the novelization of the movie, "The Harder They Come". The movie starts out with Jimmy in Kingston, Michael Thelwell's book starts off in the country, just before his grandmother dies and even adds a better ending.
"If it works, beat it to death" - Ernie Kovacs
Eventually everything people have ever loved will get its own Solo: A Star Wars Story. Next I'm predicting either a Jurassic Park prequel with no dinosaurs exploring John Hammonds origins, or maybe some exec gets it in their head it's time to bring back MASH in the form of Young Radar.
Either way, the future is bleak.
Ken, does Ray Liotta AMUSE you?? Like he's some kinda CLOWN??
I read that the prequel has done really well on HBO Max, and that it has boosted the viewership of The Sopranos in a big way. I expect that there will be a follow-up at some point. I enjoyed ‘The Many Saints of Newark,' personally, while a *lot* of other people did not. Whatta ya' gonna do ...
There are rare examples of good prequels: Jean Rhys' novel "Wide Sargasso Sea", a prequel to "Jane Eyre", is really good, and about half of "The Godfather Part II" was backstory, and marvelous. I feel for producers and publishers. It costs so much more to promote a story than to produce it that it's inevitable that we should see unnecessary sequels and prequels and musicalizations of everything that has ever had past buzz. The minute "The Great Gatsby" went into the public domain, a prequel was published, which I refuse to read; it's reported to be well-written but it's utterly pointless, because the original is so beautiful that not one of the adaptations has been able to touch it. Jane Austen would be astonished to find that her characters have been turned into comparatively wit-free detectives and monster-slayers and, for all I know, space aliens by now. I get burned a lot by seeking out authors and moviemakers I've never before heard of, but not as often as I'm disappointed in backstories and "universes."
There's one prequel that dominates all others in quality: BETTER CALL SAUL.
There are rare examples of good prequels:
I'll add Better Call Saul, from the backstory of Slippin' Jimmy to the evolution of Saul, and Michael McKean should've got an Emmy
I heard Chase on Marc Maron's podcast, and it's clear that being the guy who pretty much invented prestige television isn't enough for him, he wanted to be a director of Feature Films. Funny thing is, I was thinking about what I liked and disliked about this prequel and it came down to: This was at least a season of episodes packed into two hours. Everything was too condensed.
That thing on the beach: I bought the character doing that, I didn't by that there were no consequences
I liked Vera Farmiga, and John Bernthal, and would've liked to see more of their backstory (again, too condensed).
I thought the use of Michael Imperioli, and how his feelings about Tony have evolved, was great.
To say without spoiling: I liked how Liotta's performance evolved, the first part was too cartoonish.
again, to say without spoiling: The reveal on how Dickie Moltosanti met his fate (not a spoiler if you've seen The Sopranos) was brilliant, a surprising twist on the situation, and yet it fit so well for the character involved.
I couldn't decide if Young Silvio was a brilliantly done tribute or and over-the-top parody, but I think it's only my Superfan's love of the Soprano universe that keeps me from picking the latter.
Paul McCartney recently referred to The Rolling Stones as a ‘Blues cover band’. Which side of The Beatles/Stones debate do you come down on? During your time in radio what Stones songs were most popular, did you like playing them?
I would be down for a "Young Radar" series. Maybe show him in basic training or high school. Ken and David should pitch the idea to CBS next week. If they don't take it, FOX will.
OK, HATING "Maid." Netflix. Apparently now the highest rated show over "The Queen's Gambit," which is a BRILLIANT SHOW. "Maid" is annoying as hell. The lead, comes across as some Gen Z IDIOT. It's a hot mess. Welcome to "streaming," 2021...
{I thought that I’d included my name on the previous post.} Paul McCartney recently referred to The Rolling Stones as a ‘Blues cover band’. On which side of The Beatles/The Rolling Stones debate do you fall on? During your time on radio did you have a favorite Stones song that you played?
I agree with most of what you said, and absolutely agree with you our hint about the ridiculous scene on the beach. What failed to draw me in was the backstory of Dickie, whom we only heard about through the series but we were now expected to care deeply about for two hours. And while they gave us hints of Tony as a future gangster I still did not feel they gave us enough of him becoming the genesis of the mob boss we will all come to love and hate.
I’d actually like to see a second movie that focuses more on Tony’s rise to the top. It would also be fun to see the actors whom they got to play younger Silvio and Paulie and others because they were fantastic. Completely believable as the younger versions. They were great fun.
I was disappointed in the movie. I watched all The Sopranos episodes prior to watching it. The movie left me wanting, much like the last season of the show, which seemed directionless and randomly knocking off people to wrap up storylines. The murder in the garage and then driving the car to another spot, after being seen by young Tony, seemed implausible.
Ken, a Friday question for you:
As a collector of memorabilia and autographs, I’m sure you’ve had opportunities to get a souvenir or two from shows along the way. Anything you’re particularly proud of latching onto for reasons that aren't necessarily monetary? Anything you've had an opportunity to pick up and sorry you didn’t? Anything you’ve had personally signed that means the most to you?
OMG. I now seriously want to watch "Young Radar". Growing up during the Depression and WW2 in Iowa. Good heavens that's got potential.
I loved The Sopranos.
We got half way thru this "movie", looked at each other and asked: Who the hell are these people and why should I care? We turned it off and I doubt we will ever see the second half.
I preferred "Cleaver" to MSON
I would say the MASH character I would most like to see in prequel is junior cavalry officer Sherman T Potter, either before, during or after the Great War. it could be like The Crown, different actors portraying him at different phases of his life, ending the series when he tells Mildred in 1946, "It's time to hang up that sign: "Ole Doc Potter" on one side, 'Gone fishin'" on the other.
Better Call Saul feels like lost episodes of "Breaking Bad". It very much has kept the style and pacing of the original. It has also refrained from overly gratuitous cameos. Jimmy doesn't get his car washed at Walt's future cash laundromat. He does have an office at a beauty parlor because he mentions a fondness of one in Breaking Bad. It would be an enjoyable show even if you never saw Breaking Bad.
Then we have Young Sheldon. It's a comedy but instead of being a multi-camera it is single camera. It has a more subtle comedy than the joke every 30 seconds of it predecessor. Yet the have managed to capture the essence of Sheldon Cooper, keep the back story mostly intact, and an enjoyable show even if you haven't seen an episode of Big Bang Theory.
Maybe that is the key. These two prequels do not solely rely on the antecedent's story, it just overlaps the world. I spent a lot of time trying to figure out who the characters were in Many Saints. A victim of being a movie rather than a limited run series.
I watched it last night (holding your review until I had seen it) on a nice TV with my parents and some of their friends - the same people with whom I watched most of the original series 20 years ago. That's what felt right to me.
Part of me wanted to see the local geography (several scenes in the original series were filmed in my town). We would play "spot the landmarks" in both the original series and in the movie. It's always more fun when it's local. The people I watched with remember the race riots in Newark and were not that far away at the time.
Part of me wanted to see the original characters, but younger, and see how well the characterizations were. Some I thought were really good. The analogy I thought of was FLINTSTONE KIDS more than MUPPET BABIES. True to the original series, I didn't quite get who the people were and what their connection was (oh, THAT's Paulie Walnuts? okay, I think I get it), whether it was mob associates or Tony's young friends. I'll try to watch it a second time with Cliff's Notes to understand it better. I was really hoping to see a younger version of Steve Buscemi's character. I am glad they didn't try to have hidden cameos of the original stars.
There were plenty of laughs and a lot of the predictable (yet needed) violence. It was certainly good for watching at home on someone else's TV subscription (and later on my own) for something I last watched almost 15 years ago. But it definitely didn't have the same tone as a Sopranos episode that (as I remember) would sometimes leave me thinking "wow!".
I think the real thing is this doesn't have the humor of the original. The core of THE SOPRANOS was the dissonance between Tony's life as a mobster and his psychological damage/therapy and the lives his children were growing into: Tony dropping briefly out of his daughter's college visits to go kill a traitor, for example.
Without that, meh. It's just another gangster movie.
wg
Post a Comment