>
Martin Scorsese's technical virtuosity and Liza Minelli's magnetic presence are on full display in New York, New York, although this ambitious musical's blend of swooning style and hard-bitten realism makes for a queasy mixture. Read critic reviews
What to know
You might also like
See More
Les Girls
The Great Lie
Three Coins in the Fountain
Sunday in New York
Two for the Road
Rate And Review
-
What did you think of the movie? (optional)
You're almost there! Just confirm how you got your ticket.
You're almost there! Just confirm how you got your ticket.
What did you think of the movie? (optional)
How did you buy your ticket?
-
Fandango
-
AMCTheatres.com or AMC AppNew
-
Cinemark Coming Soon
We won’t be able to verify your ticket today, but it’s great to know for the future.
-
Regal Coming Soon
We won’t be able to verify your ticket today, but it’s great to know for the future.
-
Theater box office or somewhere else
New York, New York Photos
Movie Info
Jimmy Doyle (Robert De Niro), an aspiring saxophone player, meets established USO band singer Francine Evans (Liza Minnelli) during V-J Day celebrations at the end of World War II. The two become a musical double act and, more importantly, fall in love. They quickly get married and start a family, however, their volatile relationship disintegrates over time. Years later, when both of them have successful careers, Jimmy and Francine find their paths crossing once again.
-
Rating: PG
-
Genre: Musical
-
Original Language: English
-
Director: Martin Scorsese
-
Writer: Earl Mac Rauch
-
Release Date (Theaters): original
-
Release Date (Streaming):
-
Box Office (Gross USA): $91.9K
-
Runtime:
Cast & Crew
News & Interviews for New York, New York
Critic Reviews for New York, New York
Audience Reviews for New York, New York
-
Did you know that the song "New York, New York," which Frank Sinatra made so famous, was originally written for the 1977 Martin Scorsese film of the same name and first performed in that film? I can't believe it, but I didn't know that. I thought it was a song from the 1940s originally recorded by Sinatra. The song was written by the legendary Broadway team of John Kander and Fred Ebb specifically for Scorsese's film and first sung by Liza Minnelli, who starred in the film opposite Robert de Niro. It's good to get that history finally straight. Now for the movie. It's known as Scorsese's only bomb, with the famous theme song its only redeeming quality. I wouldn't go quite that far. There are things about the film that I find wonderful. But overall, it is a failure. I love what Scorsese tried to do. Fresh from his triumph with "Taxi Driver" (1975), Scorsese could easily have gone on auto-pilot, churning out another gritty, masculine, urban neo-noir. Instead he did the complete opposite. He follows "Taxi Driver" up with a musical! My God, that is gutsy. I admire the cojones but not the final product. Scorsese stumbled awkwardly through the whole film; almost every scene has a false tone. The editing is atrocious, with every scene twice as long as it should be. The sets are so cheap and fake that at one point Minnelli virtually rips a railing apart with her bare hands. And they didn't cut out that scene! Scorsese surely chose the cheesy sets intentionally. I think he was trying to pay homage to the movies of the 1940s, particularly the female-driven melodramas (so-called "women's pictures"), which were always filmed on cheap Hollywood backlots. I absolutely love this idea. But it just does not come off well. The only way this could have worked is if the melodrama had been so captivating that it transported you back to the first time you saw "Mildred Pierce." (I can still remember seeing it for the first time on television as a teenager. Unforgettable.) But Scorsese really fell down on the job when it comes to story development -- always a disaster when you're trying to do melodrama. I really never cared about either of the two main characters. So rather than getting swept up by emotion, I found myself limply watching actors pretend to have feelings. It's actually hard to get through this movie. Its running time is also particularly long. It was a courageously un-hip and un-masculine tribute to old movies, but it just doesn't come together. Save for the title song, which is an old-fashioned masterpiece, "New York, New York" is a misfire.
-
Great music and performances but the length is way to long. The story is quite silly at timed but the ambition is there
brendan n Super Reviewer -
This is a Scorsese film that typically gets overlooked, and, while I can see why (to a degree), I think it's actually pretty good, and probably one of his most underrated- and that last little bit is something that needs to change. The film was a departure and an experiment for Marty. It was his follow-up to Taxi Driver, and needless to say, this didn't make the impression left by that one. For this, Scorsese decided to abandon the gritty realism of his previous works and craft a loveletter to his city, big band (and some jazz) music, and the lavishly produced movie musicals of Old Hollywood. It was a noble effort, and no one can deny the fact that this is made with tons of love, care, and respect. The film follows a go-getter sax player named Jimmy Doyle who's got talent, but can also be overwhelmingly obnoxious, stubborn, and hard to deal with. He meets a low level club singer with big hopes and the two form a perfonal and professional relationship with one another. Over time though, the pressure of show biz see the fall of their love as their careers rise. In order to bring his vision to life, Scorsese and his director of photography Laszlo Kovacs and production designer Boris Levin used intentionally artificial looking sets and specific lighting to recall the old days of studio musicals, with a touch of film noirish qualities thrown in for good measure. The result is gorgeous and one of the best made homages out there. (I'd say it's up there with Ed Wood and Black Dynamite in this regard). Like most Scorsese efforts, it's more of a character driven piece than a plot driven one, and that's fine, but even then, I really noticed just how light this film is on substance, and, for that matter, characters who truly come to life that you can care about. All other aspects of the film help to cover this up, but there's no denying that most of the film feels like it's on auto pilot. Still though, I can't hate this one too much. The performances are absolutely terrific, and this made me actually be interested in Liza Minnelli and the talent she has. De Niro of course not surprisingly delivers another solid performance. In fact, the first oh, 40 mins or so, were absolutely 100% brilliant. I was beginning to think that this was a great overlooked true masterpiece. Seeing De Niro slink around trying to pick up women is simultaneously hilarious, awkward, and annoying, but totally excellent. If only the rest of the movie maintained that same level of energy, fun, and focus throughout its 163 minute run time instead of gradually falling back and becoming a rambling drawn out procedure could it be called a great piece of work. I didn't quite get bored, but I started to get antsy and wonder what the point was. All in all, this is a pretty good movie. It is flawed yes, but in the context of when it came out and what the intentions were, it's wrong to ignore this. Come to it with an open mind, and give it a chance.
-
Not just that the film is boring enough, but the fact that you've got to endure almost a smidge under 3 hrs. to finally get through to the ending, simply makes this one of the most painful movie experience I've ever had. Even De Niro's energy and his trademark manic intensity cant help to push the film forward any faster.
Verified