FIXING The Many Saints of Newark, a Sopranos Film

 

 

Sopranos is filet Mignon, medium rare, with a nice dry wine. Red wine, blood red. The prequel many Saints of Newark had a chance to be a great steak but that's just not on the menu tonight. Here's why.

The plot was all over the place.

This movie's plot should have been much simpler OR this should have been spread out as part of a mini series or even the first few episodes of a new show. They didn't have enough time to delve into why the events of the movie were happening, why were the riots going on. We could have had time to understand the black community portrayed in the show, with tensions between the rival gangs increasing until an ultimate standoff. Why didn't they make a new show? We don't need 7 seasons necessarily like the Sopranos, but I would have settled for one or two. It could have had SOME explanations of why Tony was the way he was and the events that were talked about in the Sopranos. Hopefully, the show could have stood on its own as well. Think Better Call Saul, which is a fantastic show even if you've never seen Breaking Bad of which it is a spinoff. The movie Many saints of newark does not stand on its own. It's not interesting enough for someone who has never seen it to be able to sit through all of this wondering why they should care about any of the plot or the characters which leads me to the next.

The characters and acting were terrible.

Michael Gandolfini is not a professional actor like his late father, so he gets a pass. He didn't do a bad job. Why on Earth this prequel was not about young Tony Soprano is beyond me. They should have cut out everything before Michael's appearance, and just started it there instead of giving us several different actors to play Tony. The main protagonist, I guess, was Dickie Moltisanti, Christopher Moltisanti's father, who somewhat takes a young Tony Soprano under his wing. Btw the deceased Christopher Moltisanti narrates the beginning and the end because... I forget. Anyway, Dickie kills his dad out of rage to protect the honor of his mother when his father insulted her, and seemed to do it to defend the honor of women, annnnd then he kills a woman he loved. Why are we supposed to like this guy? The same with Jonnhy Boy Soprano who is a racist and doesn't like that black families moved into his neighborhood. This guy supposedly ran North Jersey as Tony put it? What made any of the audience even get a hint of that? And this actor allegedly pretending to be Corrado Soprano? There was literally ONE time when this actor made me think of Uncle Junior from the show. And they made a joke of it, and he has trouble having sex so he kills Dickie Moltisanti for laughing at him. Really. That really happened. I know Uncle Junior and you sir are no Uncle Junior. It was great to see Ray Liota reprise his gangster type character. A little over the top as the main character's father, but I we were supposed to dislike him. He has a twin which wasn't mentioned because I guess the film makers just wanted Ray Liotta in the movie twice. They should have gone all in and made him a triplet and have THAT Ray Liotta show up at the end, that would have been great. But, no we sadly only have two Ray Liota characters and the the one in jail could have been cut out of the whole movie and it wouldn't have affected the plot one liota, sorry iota.

Most of the characters seemed to be doing high school talent show impressions of their characters. They should have focused on the best actors for the roles not who looked like the characters. You can even talk a little different, or at least get the accent right without making a parody. Think Season 2 of Fargo, the cop, who is playing a younger version of the cop's father from Season 1. He's got the right accent and a few mannerisms, but he's not trying for a slavish photocopy, so that HIS character can grow and be his own thing. That's how you do it right.

The Throwbacks were literally a joke

We didn't get the Feech la mana card game robbery or any of the other things the fans would have loved to see. Instead we got Paulie rob a TV store... for reasons?? Silvio's hairpiece was a gag. I get that they reference the hairpiece but the guy was bald already 30 years before the events of the show? They make fun of Big Pussy's name in front of a priest without even mentioning that pussy means cat as in cat burglar. Was Sal Bonpensiero even a cat burglar at this point? Why not at least let the audience know why he got that nickname instead of making it a throwaway joke about a priest being offended.

As I said, this show is not for non-Sopranos fans because they wouldn't get the inside jokes, the references to the show such as the baby Christopher crying around Tony and the woman saying he essentially knows the future and all the inside gags. It's not for Sopranos fans EITHER because of the unfunny joke they made of portraying beloved characters from one of the most popular TV shows of all time. You can get through it, for sure. I didn't hate it, and though it was all over the place, I was at least entertained for the most part.

The title of this video is Many Saint of Newark is a Bad Movie and that it is. However, I think it would make a decent show, or at least shows promise, potential. What we saw could have been a long series premiere of what could be a decent origin story, Tony's origin story.

Mr Chase, you've made some of the best filet mignon I've ever tasted and you're a bangup chef. But that was two decades ago. You've donned the apron again and had a go, but this time no amazing steak was served. You've opted to serve us some edible egg noodles and the best ketchup Heinz has to offer.

But you can be sure I'll be back for seconds.

How to fix the Many Saints of Newark? 

This movie is a prequel to the HBO hit TV show the Sopranos, focusing mainly on show character Christopher Moltisanti's father Dickie.

A quick word on critiquing a movie prequel of the most popular, critically acclaimed, and beloved TV shows. You're allowed to loved the Sopranos and be critical of Many Saints of Newark. I am not a superfan. A superfan is someone who loves everything about an entertainment media like a movie franchise, will watch everything new that comes out and will never utter a critical word about it.

I've read a few comments of people who were excited about this movie and really wanted to love it, but it slowly dawned on them that this is not a good movie, and it made them feel bad, even embarrassed. There is a little cognitive dissonance to watching a prequel to the Sopranos, The Sopranos! And realizing it sucks. How can this be?

And that's from Sopranos fans. As far as people who have never seen the show, how did they react to this movie? I have to wonder what the movie even was supposed to be for them. For fans of the show, they wanted to see their favorite characters on screen again, their young selves, their origin stories, and they didn't get it. For people who didn't know who Tony Soprano was, they got, this uncharismatic terribly acted character who kills his dad then his girlfriend and sees his uncle in jail. What is the story arc of this character? Why is the audience supposed to care what happens to him? Why is this even called a Sopranos film if the Sopranos aren't even the main characters?

But another problem, is when they ARE in the movie. Just look at Silvio's best Saturday Night Live impression. And when did Sal Bonpiensero have a smug punch-able face? And Uncle Junior's impression isn't even funny and it was SUPPOSED to be. Parts like there are a missed opportunity. Why not have Junior ask Tony if he made practice, and give his trademark smirk when Tony admits he skipped it. That way it's not a nostalgic line from the show hit over your head with a frying pan.

The scenes with Tony could have been cut from the movie if this is a movie about Dickie Moltisanti. Or if the movie is about the Soprano family as it says in the title, is it the scenes with Dickie Moltisanti could have been cut. The riot scenes and the unlikely partnership of the Italians with the black gangs and a war could have been cut. What is this movie trying to be about? Maybe that's one reason this movie flopped, bringing in only $5 million in its first weekend in over 3000 theaters on a budget of $50 million (not to mention getting only 59% of viewers to give it good ratings): it doesn't know what it wants to be, and it has no reason to even exist. If this movie didn't have the Sopranos name attached, and instead had characters all named something else, would anybody even want to see this movie? It was about the 60s and 70s riots and clashes between gangs where nobody learns anything, the audience doesn't walk away from it with anything of value, in other words who cares? But people did see it because of the Sopranos name, because they had hoped it would resemble in some way shape or form their favorite TV show, in style, spirit, anything that would even remind them of the show besides fan service: Remember Satriale's? Remember Holstens??

Look I know it's tough to compare a movie to something like Sopranos, but it's called a Sopranos story, and is supposed to be about that world. They wanted you to compare it to the show. Except it lacks what makes the show special. It has none of the depth, none of the psychoanalyzing, the dreams, the introspection after a near death experience or coma which gave the characters depth compared to the one dimensional SNL characters in this movie. In the end, it isn't the worst movie of the year, but it's boring and as so many others have observed, just ….disappointing. I wanted to see what contributed to Tony's panic attacks, causing him to seek psychiatric help, the premise on which the whole TV show is based. I wanted to see young Tony start his life of crime, starting his own Mickey Mouse crew with Silvio, Ralphie and Jackie Aprile by holding up Feech la Manna's card game and other shenanigans. We didn't get to see what made Johnny Boy and Junior's reign so legendary. We got a LOT more of that in the show's flashbacks.

Speaking of the flashback scenes, why didn't they get these actors, who all, every one of them, did a phenomenal job as the younger characters. None of that can be said of a single one of the actors in Many Saints. Michael Gandolfini isn't a professional actor, but he needs a lot of help if he's going to return. Vera Farmiga, who I loved in the Departed (I just can't help comparing other organized crime movies), did an okay job. I like Ray Liotta, but why cast him twice? Some people were saying it was all in Dickie's head, but they really don't imply that; that's really just struggling to find a reason for the character and for those scenes. Overall, I would have settled for any engaging story that made sense, a plot that wasn't all over the place, a movie that had a reason to exist that could provide something of value to the viewer, and likable characters sympathetic to the audience who you can root for.

Let's hope they do a full recast for the next movie. And when will that be? In an interview, show creator and movie producer David Chase seemed to hint that he wanted to do a sequel but there doesn't seem much interest in it. If the movie bombs and never recoups its budget, there is little chance of a sequel, which is a shame because we can only imagine that it would focus more on a young Tony, which is what this movie SHOULD have been. They should have had it entirely on young Tony in fact, with those who influenced him, of course, and his partners in crime, and his father's partners in crime. Casting James Gandolfini's son is a gimmick pure and simple. He wasn't ready to fill his father's shoes, and how can he be expected to? Plenty of actors could have though. But I doubt they're hear my concerns here and recast Michael if they do a sequel.

Despite Many saints disappointing box office, Chase was given a deal with HBO, which is where a large portion of Many saints viewers watched the movie. Whether that means a sequel to the prequel or even a sequel to the show, which of course would answer one of TV's largest mysteries of what happened to Tony Soprano that day at Holsten's restaurant where the viewers were forever left in the dark. I would certainly settle for a made for TV Sopranos movie, somewhere between a show and the big screen, which this Many Saints story just wasn't cut out for, ironically because they seemed reluctant to cut out most of it. Or, instead of trying to be 3 or 4 thing simultaneously, it could have been a mini-series with 3 or 4 hour long episodes each.

So a sequel to the prequel is not an impossibility. Of course the deal with HBO doesn't even necessarily have to involve the Sopranos at all. So we'll have to see. But if it is about the Sopranos, can we please have a movie about Tony Soprano, and not any of his distant cousins or uncles? Family is important, both mob family and regular family as we know all too well watching the show. But we have to care about the central character. At some point you have to give the audience what it really wants to see. Many Saints alienates fans and gives nothing of value to newcomers, nothing to entice them to the Sopranos world, and not even a good entertaining movies, despite the family names of the characters.

That movie might be something. Let's not hype it to death like Many Saints. In the end, if I was being honest I'd say fixing Many Saints is to leave it on the shelf, pretend it never happened and looking forward to the next Sopranos movie, or show, when we're not enjoying the real Sopranos. If I was being hopeful, I'd say the fixing could be done in the next movie, which of course I would look forward to and watch, and for that, I say to David Chase, with love, better luck next time.

Full video: https://youtu.be/gbDV951UF-s