To the Editor:
I am writing in regard to William Goldman's appalling diatribe ("Crashing the Party for Poor Marty,"
Variety, Feb. 3-9).
Since the release of Gangs of New York, and long before, Hollywood insiders have been bound and determined to pick on this film.
When the film is finally released and reveals itself to be a masterpiece, people like Mr. Goldman judge the film on its pre-release buzz and what appears to be a general dislike for Miramax Films and Mr. Scorsese. This is the first time I've ever seen Martin Scorsese referred to as a "giant ape" -- maybe it's his eyebrows.
Mr. Goldman finds Mr. Scorsese's Oscar bid unsavory and is sick of feeling sorry for him? Well, I am sick of Scorsese being picked on for doing what everyone else in Hollywood does all the time. Mr. Goldman has never pressed the flesh to advance his own career? Sure.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion of the film; if Goldman doesn't like it, fine. However, to refer to the final shot as disgraceful is to completely miss what the picture is about. It's not as if the film is called "Gangs of Ohio" and they tossed the Twin Towers in as Oscar bait. The film is about New York -- how it became the great city we know. The skyline represents that evolution, Sept 11 notwithstanding. No reasonable person who watches the film carefully would think that Scorsese is trying to get sentimental mileage out of that issue.
Oh, by the way, it's very easy to say 23 years on that Scorsese should have won for "Raging Bull." I have to wonder, though, did Mr. Goldman vote for "Ordinary People" like the rest of the morons? If so, isn't it possible that he and many others will see the error of their ways in the year 2026, when Gangs of New York is recognized as one of the great films of its era? Time, Mr. Goldman, is the only reliable judge of a film's quality -- and there are few Scorsese films that haven't aged brilliantly.
Stephanie Foster
Calgary, Canada
Contact the Variety newsroom at
news@variety.com