[!@#$%!]

the manic in russell doesnt' come from plot and editing, but from performance and improvisation. his actors are "freer" than scorsese. except maybe for joe pesci ha ha ha ha. joe pesci in goodfellas, ha ha ha ha. so awesome.

this is why i called scorsese "tight" and the other one "chaotic." scorsese is a symphony director and russell is a saxophonist.

but anyway, i don't think russell wants to be manic or intense or anything. that's exactly my point. his roots i believe are in screwball. i think that's where to look for ancesty for him-- what he does with that genre, where he moves it to, and what he does around it. he's really not about gangsters. in AH they aren't even gangsters-- they're just a couple of petty swindlers really, forced into things. two-against-the-world, the mob thing is just an excuse for that plot. juuust like the fighter, and the fighter is not raging bull.

i agree with your assessment of PTA for possible Scorsese successor (serious business), but i don't believe Russell even wants to go there--that's really not his thing.

anyway, i'll stop talking before i get blue in the face from repeating myself. i insist he's not about scorsese at all, although it's been misread that way, and i'll leave it at that.