Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Curapedi I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

Hayleigh Joseph This is ultimately a movie about the very bad things that can happen when we don't address our unease, when we just try to brush it off, whether that's to fit in or to preserve our self-image.

Ezmae Chang This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

grantss OK, but not great. Surprisingly mediocre, at it is a Scorsese-De Niro collaboration.Decent enough story, and the direction is solid. You can see the Scorsese hand in the movie.However, the movie is overly long, at 2 1/2 hours and the plot drifts for long periods. The movie also often seems to be a vehicle to showcase Liza Minnell singing and stage talents, rather than a proper drama. If Scorsese had kept the plot tighter, and moved it along at a faster pace, plus cut down on the musical numbers he would have had a very good (approx) 1 3/4 hour movie.Robert De Niro puts in his usual excellent performance, showing his versatility in terms of the characters he takes on.

Dalbert Pringle I know that some people consider New York New York (NYNY, for short) extraordinary. OK. Fine. But, you can bet, Dalbert Pringle here ain't one of 'em. No way.When NYNY was first released, back in 1977, it was a super-staggering 4 1/2 hours in length. At present NYNY has a lengthy enough running time of 2 1/2 hours, which, to be sure, is unbearable enough as it is.Directed by Martin Scorsese (of all people), NYNY may, in fact, be a super-duper, splashy-dashy musical extravaganza alright, but, by the same token, I found its story to be so utterly insipid that it quickly put me off completely even before I realized what was happening.Set in 1945, during the "Big Band Era" - NYNY amounted to being nothing more than a total "rags-to-riches" story with lots'n'lots'n'lots of musical interludes thrown in for good measure.Insufferably arrogant Saxophonist, Jimmy Doyle (Robert De Niro), and infuriatingly naive VSO Singer, Francine Evans (Liza Minnelli), a couple of typical "nobodies", meet in (where else?) New York on V-J Day at the end of WW2. These 2 bozos end up loving a little, bickering a lot, but most of the time spending their lives apart, just clawing their own way to the top of the heap, as "wannabe" big-time celebrities.This relationship between Jimmy and Francine was so irritatingly strained and rocky at times that it all got real tiresome, real fast.And, how was I feeling after watching this gruellingly-long picture? Well, let me tell ya' - I was certainly not in any "New-York-State-Of-Mind" by the end of it, that's for sure - No way - I mean, it was more like a splitting head-ache state of mind, if you wanna know the truth about it.... Uh... Pass the aspirins, please!

Lee Eisenberg OK, so Martin Scorsese took a break from his gritty movies to make an homage to old-time musicals. The result has its strengths and weaknesses. I liked how the movie ended (the ending proves that Scorsese didn't throw his dignity out the window), but I would have liked the movie better had it focused on political issues affecting the world after WWII, like "The Way We Were" did. Otherwise, "New York, New York" is worth seeing, if far from Scorsese's best movie. Liza Minnelli's small-time singer comes across as sort of silly, but Robert DeNiro's sax player makes you feel as if you're walking on eggshells (it's basically Jake LaMotta with a sax).Obviously, a lot of the scenes are clearly filmed on sets. In an introduction on the special edition DVD, Scorsese notes that it's deliberate: he wanted the movie to have the look of an old-time musical, right down to the sets. All in all, it's not a bad movie. Also starring Lionel Stander, Barry Primus, Mary Kay Place, Dick Miller (a character actor known for appearances in Roger Corman's and Joe Dante's movies), Don Calfa and Jack Haley in an uncredited cameo.Oh, and if you're wondering about the title of my review, it's a reference to "Scooby-Doo", since Casey Kasem (the voice of Shaggy) appears in "New York, New York" as a DJ.

Terrell Howell (KnightsofNi11) Ah the infamous directorial dud. I can't seem to escape you lately. And this time you appear with one of the greatest directors of all time, Martin Scorsese. But I suppose it would make sense that you would appear in the form of a three hour musical romance. New York, New York chronicles the story of two lovers, Jimmy Doyle, a talented saxophone player, and Francine Evans, a very talented singer. The two meet on V-J day and continuously fall in and out of love as they try to elevate their careers to grand heights while trying to cope with the other. It is a story of two people so wildly talented that they almost cancel each other out and cannot contend with each other because of their own immense talent. The film is an epic love saga that I don't really think needed to be that at all.What I can say about this film, and what I will always say about a Scorsese film whether I like it or not, is that the visuals are great. The settings are immaculate and beautiful and all aspects of the production fit a thriving and grandiose time period excellently. The scenes are eloquent, the costumes dazzling, the overall atmosphere is vivacious and carefree. Plus, Scorsese directs with elegant precision, capturing a lively and spirited mood throughout the film. His huge dedication to filmmaking is very evident through the style which he imprinted this film with. Few directors can capture a time period in both a physical and mental aspect but Scorsese is one of them. There is a real hint of nostalgia in this film as we return to the glorious and romantic time of post-war America.These visuals can only keep one intrigued for so long, however. And that amount of time means nothing when your film is close to three hours long. There are certain films that demand three hour runtimes because of their depth and complexity. New York, New York is not one of those films. Too many scenes in this film just seem to be there to pad the film, making it longer so as to achieve the status of romantic epic. The film is bubbling over with scenes that could have been cut or shortened significantly and the film could have played out just the same. And so as the film neared the two hour mark I became terribly bored. The film opens with a bang that is a glorious explosion on the eyes and ears but its all downhill from there. The film gets slower and slower and drags more and more thing out way longer than they need to be. I'll admit that the ending is good and closes the painfully long story as best it could, but its an ending that shouldn't have taken three hours to arrive at.I wanted to like New York, New York because I adore Scorsese. However, I couldn't bring myself to fully enjoy this film simply because it is just too long and not interesting or deep enough to warrant this kind of runtime. Scorsese certainly created a visual spectacle, but that spectacle really starts to lose its shine about two hours into the film when you know you have almost an hour left. I can't say I hated this film because it tries to be very good and succeeds in some areas, but overall it misses the mark and falls short of being great.