Gangster Squad

JP Liz V1

Source

Nick Nolte is joining the cast of “Gangster Squad,” TheWrap has confirmed.
The Oscar-nominee will bring his gravelly voice to the period crime film as the Los Angeles chief of police.
The Warner Bros. film is shaping up to have a truly top-shelf cast. Sean Penn has been tapped to play the gangster Mickey Cohen and Ryan Gosling will co-star as his LAPD protagonist. Emma Stone, Josh Brolin and “The Killing”s’ Mireille Enos also star. Ruben Fleischer (“Zombieland”)directs.

The cast gets better and better

JP Liz V1

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2044967/Ryan-Gosling-thinks-hes-weird-looking-guy-films-Gangster-Squad-Los-Angeles.html

Some set pics mostly Ryan Gosling

Duggy747

New trailer released

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lK4rc2YvKo

Looking pretty good, I think. Seems full of one-liners.

Ape X

I'll keep an eye on this due to the great cast. Not sold on Fleischer yet though - I enjoyed Zombieland, but 30 Minutes or Less was poor.

krudler

Great cast, Gosling is becoming a real star, Brolin is always watchable, and Emma Stone as a gangsters moll, whats not to like.

paddy kerins

Robert Patrick? I was already excited for this but he just made it a must-see

Skerries

is this a movie in a series because we already had Monster Squad?

Ape X

"Wolfman's got nards!" :eek:

ricero

this will be our generations untouchables

Handsome Bob

I'm just going to throw it out there: I fcuking hate Ryan Gosling as an actor, I don't know what it is about him, I just can't put my finger on it.

Maybe it's his aloof but cool tough guy samesy performances.

Duggy747

Handsome Bob wrote: »

I'm just going to throw it out there: I fcuking hate Ryan Gosling as an actor, I don't know what it is about him, I just can't put my finger on it.

Maybe it's his aloof but cool tough guy samesy performances.

Well, the wimmen love him. I posted this on Facebook and I've had them liking it and commenting along the lines of: "MMMMmmmm, Gosling!" :pac:

Jimmy Iovine

Duggy747 wrote: »

Well, the wimmen love him. I posted this on Facebook and I've had them liking it and commenting along the lines of: "MMMMmmmm, Gosling!" :pac:

Well as can be seen with Bressie, women loving you and talent don't always go together.

He's alright as an actor. I've only seen him in Ides of March and he was good enough in it.

Looking forward to this film. As I do for any gangster film. Emma Stone has really progressed since being in Superbad.

It felt a bit weird hearing Jay Z in the background at the end of the trailer in a film set in the 40/50s. Is he tied in with this for any music? I know he wanted to be involved with American Gangster but they didn't want him.

kitty9

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

Well as can be seen with Bressie, women loving you and talent don't always go together.

He's alright as an actor. I've only seen him in Ides of March and he was good enough in it.

Looking forward to this film. As I do for any gangster film. Emma Stone has really progressed since being in Superbad.

It felt a bit weird hearing Jay Z in the background at the end of the trailer in a film set in the 40/50s. Is he tied in with this for any music? I know he wanted to be involved with American Gangster but they didn't want him.

oh dear god, you didnt just compare Ryan Gosling's situation with Bressie :P:P

ryan gosling already has 2 oscar nominations for Best Actor. he's quickly becoming the Marlon Brando of our era imo

Jimdagym

Handsome Bob wrote: »

I'm just going to throw it out there: I fcuking hate Ryan Gosling as an actor, I don't know what it is about him, I just can't put my finger on it.

Maybe it's his aloof but cool tough guy samesy performances.

I think you are just a hater. The only film he was a tough guy in (before this) was drive. His other big films Ides of March, blue Valentine, Lars and the real girl, crazy stupid love, half nelson, none of those could be called a tough guy performance.

WatchWolf

So I'm the only one who thinks this looks ****e?

Raekwon

Large Pic

Shrugging Atlas

Trailer out, doesn't look half bad!

Marty McFly

Looking forward to this been a while since there been any kind of decent gangster film.

Duggy747

So, according to Variety, a scene is being cut from the movie over the shootings last weekend.

And the studio moved swiftly Friday to pull from exhibs and online outlets the trailer for "Gangster Squad," a period drama that featured a scene in which agents spray machine-gun fire into a crowded movie theater from behind the screen. Given the eerie association created by the Aurora shootings, Warner Bros. has since decided to remove the scene from the film, which opens Sept. 7, and is putting reshoot plans into motion, a source with knowledge of the situation told Variety. Warner Bros. would not comment

Duggy747

Duggy747 wrote: »

So, according to Variety, a scene is being cut from the movie over the shootings last weekend.

Going to see the film being bumped back a few months as a result, would make more sense to simply reschedule the film rather than recut it. Personally I think it's an unnecessary move, by all means move the release date back but there is absolutely no need reedit the film. I doubt anyone but those looking for an excuse to be offended will take any offense from the cinema shootout scene in Gangster Squad. We saw the same knee jerk reaction after 9/11 when people were calling for all films to have the twin towers digitally removed from them and this is no different.

What I find most interesting about this decision is that people are not offended that dozens of people die in the film or that guns are used but rather it's the location of the shooting that hits a raw nerve. If someone opens fire in an Italian restaurant in the coming weeks will people want any upcoming showings of The Godfather edited so as not to cause offense? Should the cinema scenes in Inglorious Basterds be removed for any upcoming screening? Should people demand that God Bless America be redited to remove the cinema shotting scene as I'm sure it's far closer to the bone than Gangster Squad?

mikemac1

Happened with Phone Booth, got delayed over the Washington sniper

They shot the film in 10 days but took over six months to release it

Antar Bolaeisk

I personally was very offended last night when the Mafia shot that guy in Cinema Paradiso during the showing.....


It's completely daft but America seems to be in hysterics (apparently there's been a couple of arrests over what seems to me as jokes in extreme poor taste) over the whole thing and I guess the studio is looking at the potential revenue lost (or more cynically, to be gained through their move of solidarity).

Apparently the scene in question is quite pivotal and is based on historical events.

Ape X

An unnecessary, PC move. :rolleyes:

Da Shins Kelly

It looks a bit too glossy or something.

weemcd

kitty9 wrote: »

ryan gosling already has 2 oscar nominations for Best Actor. he's quickly becoming the Marlon Brando of our era imo

That is without a doubt, one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.

amacca

weemcd wrote: »

That is without a doubt, one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.

Really?........Joe Duffy is on at the moment :pac: :pac:

weemcd

Never listened to joe duffy, thank fúck

Sleepy

I think Gosling is certainly one of the more talented young actors out there at the moment. Any chance the hatred is stemming simply from the fact that women are utterly fawning over him atm?

I mean I can totally sign up to the "Yeah, yeah, we get it already girls, his abs look like they're photo-shopped and he can do the Dirty Dancing lift... but please just watch the fvcking movie in silence!" for the moronic amongst the female gender but I can't see any argument against the guy as a good actor?

Re-shooting the scene is daft. Shooting someone from behind a cinema screen is a real "stroke" move for a Gangster flick. Even if they didn't re-shoot it at this stage, they've spoilered a really nice idea for a scene.

JP Liz V1

weemcd wrote: »

That is without a doubt, one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.

Why

weemcd

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Why

Streetcar Named Desire > Drive

Brando is considered by many as the best of all time. There is absolutely no comparison between them at this stage, give it 20 years and come back to me.

JP Liz V1

Yay looks like we are getting this here the same time as the US release :cool:

Marty McFly

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Yay looks like we are getting this here the same time as the US release :cool:

Nice :cool: I missed so many films this year in the cinema and have had to make do till the blu ray came out with this one Im making sure to see it in the cinema . While im still itching for Dredd and Lawless to be released on Blu Ray in the next couple of weeks .

Roar

Seen the TV trailer for this a few times and can't help but think that it's Boardwalk Empire set in LA.

maximoose

There's something weird about Sean Penn in the trailers, he looks like a cartoon...

johnny_ultimate

Saw this earlier, it's really let down by its shamefully derivative script. Formula is there for a reason, but this offers no surprises whatsoever. Everything you assume is going to happen when characters are introduced or lines of dialogue are emphasised... well, its very likely going to happen. It's a shame, because the opening minutes - containing several acts of surprisingly brutal violence - suggests this is going to be hardboiled. In the end, its disappointingly soft, despite an absurdly high body count of random grunts. The script sometimes teases its going to probe the moral corruption of its protagonists, but it never really goes beyond the bare minimum of character development.

The inevitable and unconvincingly happy ending just reminds us how morally ambiguous film noir is best served by bittersweet or even outright depressing endings

.

Still, if you can get past its inherent familiarity its serviceable and diverting enough. The Oscar winning / nominated cast present non-Oscar winning / nominated performances, but most of 'em do a decently unremarkable job. The action setpieces are mostly enjoyable, although not all the attempts at stylisation work as well as others (

the prison escape was probably my favourite of the lot

). Cinematography is pretty unambitious, but 1949 LA is evoked reasonably well I guess.

The very definition of 'alright', then: there's worse films out there from Hollywoodland, but there's many better ones too. A film that's easy to shrug off and just get on with one's life.

Tusky

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Saw this earlier, it's really let down by its shamefully derivative script. Formula is there for a reason, but this offers no surprises whatsoever. Everything you assume is going to happen when characters are introduced or lines of dialogue are emphasised... well, its very likely going to happen. It's a shame, because the opening minutes - containing several acts of surprisingly brutal violence - suggests this is going to be hardboiled. In the end, its disappointingly soft, despite an absurdly high body count of random grunts. The script sometimes teases its going to probe the moral corruption of its protagonists, but it never really goes beyond the bare minimum of character development.

The inevitable and unconvincingly happy ending just reminds us how morally ambiguous film noir is best served by bittersweet or even outright depressing endings

.

Still, if you can get past its inherent familiarity its serviceable and diverting enough. The Oscar winning / nominated cast present non-Oscar winning / nominated performances, but most of 'em do a decently unremarkable job. The action setpieces are mostly enjoyable, although not all the attempts at stylisation work as well as others (

the prison escape was probably my favourite of the lot

). Cinematography is pretty unambitious, but 1949 LA is evoked reasonably well I guess.

The very definition of 'alright', then: there's worse films out there from Hollywoodland, but there's many better ones too. A film that's easy to shrug off and just get on with one's life.

I was at the screening earlier and would echo your sentiments. This is a pretty brainless action blockbuster. It's an entertaining popcorn muncher that is pretty to look at and boasts a great cast, but is badly let down by a paint-by-numbers story riddled with cliche and without any surprises or twists of note. It's a perfectly fine blockbuster, but when you think about it, it amounts to less than the sum of its parts. With a cast that strong, I was expecting more. 1940's LA looks great, and I enjoyed the hyper-violence, particularly the opening scene you mentioned and Sean Penn's character in general. However, the film doesn't live up to its early promise, particularly the final 20 minutes, which couldn't be more cliched.

Duggy747

Did they end up changing the cinema scene that they mentioned in light of the Aurora shootings?

johnny_ultimate

Ain't no cinema scene left. I'm guessing it fit in where now there's a Chinatown shootout? That or one of the earlier scenes where the squad are getting together. Hard to tell, but no doubt the reshoots were fairly substantial.

Edit: yeah, Chinatown it was! http://m.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/gangster-squad-reshoots-date-dark-knight-shooting-360444

One thing the film does well for a while is a 'concerned wife' who's actually a little more interesting and proactive than the cliche would suggest. Completely wasted after the first half or so, alas.

homerun_homer

This opened last night so I went to see it in Cineworld. It was entertaining in a "leave your brain at reception" kinda way but it's a pretty generic action flick and the fine ensemble cast they've got here amount to nothing more than cardboard cut outs. Not as big a waste of talent as Seven Psychopaths was but nonetheless, there could have been a great movie here had they worked a lot more on the script.

It is a great looking film, I'll give it that.

Also

Giovanni Ribisi; when not playing a sleazy hick with a Southern drawl he is typecast at what he does here. Playing a quiet nerdy type who is so obviously going to bite the dust.

Sinfonia

When I first saw the trailer I was so excited by what looked to be a (hopefully) LA Confidential-esque film with a great cast... Then the title came up and I was totally disheartened

Thefirestarter

Went to the cinema on opening night to see it with friends. Some of my expectations were slightly dulled by the awfulness of the title, which sounds like a script draft name, and the trailer with some very cliched scenes and dialogue I thought it the film in it's entirety could rescue itself and become a respectable gangster action/drama. Unfortunately, it did not rescue itself. Not a terrible film by any means, it had a lot going for it with the very talented cast, setting and the general affection people have for bygone fashion trends of that era.

However, it's dialogue is very cliched and due to this I felt no connection or sympathies with any of the characters. More than likely the dialogue was written this way purposely for a wider audience rather than more cynical and critical film fans. A friend commented that he noticed quite a few lines which were 'borrowed' from The Untouchables film from 1987 with Kevin Costner and Sean Connery, notably Ryan Goslings character when in Slapsy Maxies talking to a friend "You gotta die of something" and Sean Penns threat of wanting all of the Gangster Squad to be killed "I want them dead, I want their family dead, pets, friends etc etc". I noticed a plothole (I'm open to be corrections )

When Sean Penns character decides he's had enough of the terrorizing of his rackets, he figures it's cops, cue finding the hidden mic and then finding Giovanni Ribisi's character in the shack in the L.A hills? Shooting up Josh Brolins house? Where did all this come from? At no point was he aware of who was in the squad, knew it was cops, or bribed anyone with information as to who was in the squad. It just seemed to be a sudden epiphany for his character to become knowledgeable of the squads whereabouts. None of the other members of the squad were affected. Again, I'm open to somebody shedding light on this for me:)

A criminal (:P) waste of talent, but watchable.

Oh and the final scene

Throwing the badge into the sea had me and a friend almost crying with laughter in the cinema that was deathly silent:D I would love to see how many 'cop/gangster' dramas have that as a scene! There must be a skip load.

Jaafa

Thefirestarter wrote: »

Went to the cinema on opening night to see it with friends. Some of my expectations were slightly dulled by the awfulness of the title, which sounds like a script draft name, and the trailer with some very cliched scenes and dialogue I thought it the film in it's entirety could rescue itself and become a respectable gangster action/drama. Unfortunately, it did not rescue itself. Not a terrible film by any means, it had a lot going for it with the very talented cast, setting and the general affection people have for bygone fashion trends of that era.

However, it's dialogue is very cliched and due to this I felt no connection or sympathies with any of the characters. More than likely the dialogue was written this way purposely for a wider audience rather than more cynical and critical film fans. A friend commented that he noticed quite a few lines which were 'borrowed' from The Untouchables film from 1987 with Kevin Costner and Sean Connery, notably Ryan Goslings character when in Slapsy Maxies talking to a friend "You gotta die of something" and Sean Penns threat of wanting all of the Gangster Squad to be killed "I want them dead, I want their family dead, pets, friends etc etc". I noticed a plothole (I'm open to be corrections )

When Sean Penns character decides he's had enough of the terrorizing of his rackets, he figures it's cops, cue finding the hidden mic and then finding Giovanni Ribisi's character in the shack in the L.A hills? Shooting up Josh Brolins house? Where did all this come from? At no point was he aware of who was in the squad, knew it was cops, or bribed anyone with information as to who was in the squad. It just seemed to be a sudden epiphany for his character to become knowledgeable of the squads whereabouts. None of the other members of the squad were affected. Again, I'm open to somebody shedding light on this for me:)

A criminal (:P) waste of talent, but watchable.

Oh and the final scene

Throwing the badge into the sea had me and a friend almost crying with laughter in the cinema that was deathly silent:D I would love to see how many 'cop/gangster' dramas have that as a scene! There must be a skip load.

In regards to your spoiler question:

I'd imagine after killing ribisi they found some paperwork or something with the men's identity's at the shack. How they found ribisi in the first place, well the thug says as he's strangling him 'nice piece of equipment that recorder, short range though'.

ktulu123

Saw this on friday it was exactly as homerun_homer said it was a "leave your brain at reception" kind of film. I really enjoyed it.

The bit at the end on the beach was hilarious

nyarlothothep

Characters were 1 dimensional, the plot was absurd, full of cliches and not in a good way, it felt like I was watching Transformers in LA Confidential. I also think the cinematography/lighting was dull, they could've have gone for a more evocative noir style, not that they're obliged to however. It was better than the atrocity that was Jack Reacher though. 2 bad films in a row, hoping that Django will be good.

JP Liz V1

Thefirestarter wrote: »

Went to the cinema on opening night to see it with friends. Some of my expectations were slightly dulled by the awfulness of the title, which sounds like a script draft name, and the trailer with some very cliched scenes and dialogue I thought it the film in it's entirety could rescue itself and become a respectable gangster action/drama. Unfortunately, it did not rescue itself. Not a terrible film by any means, it had a lot going for it with the very talented cast, setting and the general affection people have for bygone fashion trends of that era.

However, it's dialogue is very cliched and due to this I felt no connection or sympathies with any of the characters. More than likely the dialogue was written this way purposely for a wider audience rather than more cynical and critical film fans. A friend commented that he noticed quite a few lines which were 'borrowed' from The Untouchables film from 1987 with Kevin Costner and Sean Connery, notably Ryan Goslings character when in Slapsy Maxies talking to a friend "You gotta die of something" and Sean Penns threat of wanting all of the Gangster Squad to be killed "I want them dead, I want their family dead, pets, friends etc etc". I noticed a plothole (I'm open to be corrections )

When Sean Penns character decides he's had enough of the terrorizing of his rackets, he figures it's cops, cue finding the hidden mic and then finding Giovanni Ribisi's character in the shack in the L.A hills? Shooting up Josh Brolins house? Where did all this come from? At no point was he aware of who was in the squad, knew it was cops, or bribed anyone with information as to who was in the squad. It just seemed to be a sudden epiphany for his character to become knowledgeable of the squads whereabouts. None of the other members of the squad were affected. Again, I'm open to somebody shedding light on this for me:)

A criminal (:P) waste of talent, but watchable.

Oh and the final scene

Throwing the badge into the sea had me and a friend almost crying with laughter in the cinema that was deathly silent:D I would love to see how many 'cop/gangster' dramas have that as a scene! There must be a skip load.

I thought maybe

one of the squad members was dirty mainly Ribisi's character until he got killed but yes it never showed how Cohen knew

Robert Patrick was great as usual as was Giovanni Ribisi

I think either

Gosling or Brolin's characters needed to die instead of having a happy ending

TiGeR KiNgS

my review


Unless you've seen everything in the cinema atm and your desperate to take a girl out then the movie is acceptable.

brolin's acting was phoned in (plus the character he played was one dimensional which didnt help)
gosling was miscast
xxx patrick is too old no, he looked tired and haggard.
emma stone was good

couple of good experiences overall average at best

6.5/10


not an engaging experience.

constitutionus

went to see this last night with the girl and i had a blast.

i feared its was gonna be a "L.A. confidential" as the ad kinda made it look like that but its just a good ol action film set in the 40s.

its cliched as hell. i knew the way the final showdown was going to go, heck HALF the "emotional" moments if im honest too, as theyre telegraphed in a MILE off.

but ya know what?

i didnt care cause i had a good time chomping down the popcorn. i WILL say its alot more graphic on the violence front. the girl im with is no shrinking violet but some of it had her squirming and wincing.

but besides that i found the film unoffensive fun and it looked like the cast had fun doing it.

6.5/10.

ya can do worse on a day off

While I've yet to see the film I'm surprised that people are surprised by how poor the film is. After all this is a film from the director of "30 Minutes or Less", which ranks as one of the worst films of the past decade.

Mickeroo

Deleted User wrote: »

While I've yet to see the film I'm surprised that people are surprised by how poor the film is. After all this is a film from the director of "30 Minutes or Less", which ranks as one of the worst films of the past decade.

Had no idea it was the same guy. Wouldn't rank it as one of the worst of the decade at all, but it still would have lessened my expectations i suppose, even if he did direct Zombieland.

maximoose

constitutionus wrote: »

i feared its was gonna be a "L.A. confidential"

:eek:

Why would anyone fear that?

Neutronale

Isnt it a funny thing that when a violent scene happens everyone falls around laughing...what is that?

The guy gets pulled apart...mua-ha-ha-ha-ha.

After the machine gunning and bombing action everyone looks around....chortling their heads off at the death and gore...strange.