न्यूयॉर्क शहर के दो सबसे कुख्यात संगठित अपराध सरगना शहर की सड़कों पर कब्ज़ा करने के लिए होड़ करते हैं. कभी सबसे अच्छे दोस्त रहे, छोटी-मोटी ईर्ष्या और विश्वासघात की एक श्रृंखला ने उन्हें घातक... सभी पढ़ेंन्यूयॉर्क शहर के दो सबसे कुख्यात संगठित अपराध सरगना शहर की सड़कों पर कब्ज़ा करने के लिए होड़ करते हैं. कभी सबसे अच्छे दोस्त रहे, छोटी-मोटी ईर्ष्या और विश्वासघात की एक श्रृंखला ने उन्हें घातक टकराव के रास्ते पर ला खड़ा किया.न्यूयॉर्क शहर के दो सबसे कुख्यात संगठित अपराध सरगना शहर की सड़कों पर कब्ज़ा करने के लिए होड़ करते हैं. कभी सबसे अच्छे दोस्त रहे, छोटी-मोटी ईर्ष्या और विश्वासघात की एक श्रृंखला ने उन्हें घातक टकराव के रास्ते पर ला खड़ा किया.
- पुरस्कार
- 1 जीत और कुल 1 नामांकन
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
It is a most grievous thing to witness a once-mighty prince reduced to a shadow of his former self, shuffling through the corridors of power like a weary sovereign clinging to a throne he no longer commands. Such is the state of Robert De Niro in The Alto Knights, a film that aspires to the grandeur of past crime epics but instead finds itself wandering aimlessly, much like its aging protagonist.
De Niro, once the lion of this genre, now moves with the sluggish gait of a ruler who refuses to acknowledge the rise of younger, sharper heirs. His presence, once commanding, now elicits pity rather than fear. The fire that once burned in Goodfellas and Casino has been reduced to embers, and no amount of nostalgic reverence can conceal the fact that his time as a cinematic warlord has passed.
The film itself is a relic-an artifact that would have found a comfortable home in the theaters of a bygone era but now serves only as a reminder that not all battles should be fought. Had the producers possessed true cunning, they would have sent this directly to streaming, where it might have at least avoided the indignity of public scrutiny in the coliseum of the box office. Instead, they have placed it before the masses, unarmored and unfit for the duel.
A wise ruler knows when to retreat, to consolidate power elsewhere, and to leave the battlefield before his once-loyal subjects begin whispering of his frailty. De Niro, and indeed this film, would have done well to heed such wisdom.
De Niro, once the lion of this genre, now moves with the sluggish gait of a ruler who refuses to acknowledge the rise of younger, sharper heirs. His presence, once commanding, now elicits pity rather than fear. The fire that once burned in Goodfellas and Casino has been reduced to embers, and no amount of nostalgic reverence can conceal the fact that his time as a cinematic warlord has passed.
The film itself is a relic-an artifact that would have found a comfortable home in the theaters of a bygone era but now serves only as a reminder that not all battles should be fought. Had the producers possessed true cunning, they would have sent this directly to streaming, where it might have at least avoided the indignity of public scrutiny in the coliseum of the box office. Instead, they have placed it before the masses, unarmored and unfit for the duel.
A wise ruler knows when to retreat, to consolidate power elsewhere, and to leave the battlefield before his once-loyal subjects begin whispering of his frailty. De Niro, and indeed this film, would have done well to heed such wisdom.
This film was a bit like all of the other Robert De Niro Italian Mafia films, so you know what you're going to get. It's enjoyable, and by no means a bad film, but a tad formulaic.
I am unclear why De Niro played both main characters - at times it felt a little confused and, to be honest, my mind wandered to the prosthesis that went in to differentiating his looks. Was the fact he played both, a metaphor on the nature of the individuals (because this was based on real people), a commentary on the nature of the type of people involved, just a bit of fun for the actor, or an attempt to save money? Whichever, whilst it didn't have much of an impact on the film, it was odd.
As I say above, even though formulaic, an Nobel film, but with no surprises.
I am unclear why De Niro played both main characters - at times it felt a little confused and, to be honest, my mind wandered to the prosthesis that went in to differentiating his looks. Was the fact he played both, a metaphor on the nature of the individuals (because this was based on real people), a commentary on the nature of the type of people involved, just a bit of fun for the actor, or an attempt to save money? Whichever, whilst it didn't have much of an impact on the film, it was odd.
As I say above, even though formulaic, an Nobel film, but with no surprises.
Barry Levinson directed this mediocre gangster movie, with writer Nick Pileggi turning a potentially dramatic story into a generally dull exercise in nostalgia, genre cliches and a showpiece for Robert DeNiro to show off his considerable acting skills.
First hour is uninvolving and hard to sit through, thanks to an awkward flashback structure and rat-a-tat-tat editing. It opens with De Niro has mobster Frank Costello surviving an assassination attempt in 1957, and then fills in the his story and that of his childhood friend, mobster Vito Genovese (also played by DeNiro), leading up to the second half where their troubled relationship comes to an end -and the picture gets interesting. Too late for me, after suffering through that first half.
Levinson is bogged down in nostalgia, all the vintage cars, lots of old footage of familiar real-life celebs ranging from Louis Prima and Louie Bellson to James Cagney and Little Richard, and hectic montages of still photos. After a while, I was wishing that this was a Ken Burns documentary titled "The Crime Families" instead.
The entire movie is told from Costello's point-of-view, with sort of a third DeNiro playing old age Costello and looking more like Martin Scorsese (my peculiar reaction only). DeNiro's acting plus the script sugarcoat the Costello character to such an extent that he comes off as the "good guy" of the story.
But it is DeNiro as hothead/nutcase Genovese that is the flamboyant role here, especially compared to the overly bland Costello presentation. Levinson would have been better off casting Joe Pesci as Genovese. The gimmick of DeNiro times two, playing both leading roles in a movie, comes off in a technical sense, but is distracting from the story.
Supporting cast is extremely weak, mostly making no impression at all. An exception is Kathrine Narducci as Genovese's fiery wife Anna -she's the best thing in the picture. Debra Messing as Costello's wife is stuck in a nothing part. Of all the subsidiary gangsters in a large cast, only Michael Rispoli as Albert Anastasia stands out of the crowd.
First hour is uninvolving and hard to sit through, thanks to an awkward flashback structure and rat-a-tat-tat editing. It opens with De Niro has mobster Frank Costello surviving an assassination attempt in 1957, and then fills in the his story and that of his childhood friend, mobster Vito Genovese (also played by DeNiro), leading up to the second half where their troubled relationship comes to an end -and the picture gets interesting. Too late for me, after suffering through that first half.
Levinson is bogged down in nostalgia, all the vintage cars, lots of old footage of familiar real-life celebs ranging from Louis Prima and Louie Bellson to James Cagney and Little Richard, and hectic montages of still photos. After a while, I was wishing that this was a Ken Burns documentary titled "The Crime Families" instead.
The entire movie is told from Costello's point-of-view, with sort of a third DeNiro playing old age Costello and looking more like Martin Scorsese (my peculiar reaction only). DeNiro's acting plus the script sugarcoat the Costello character to such an extent that he comes off as the "good guy" of the story.
But it is DeNiro as hothead/nutcase Genovese that is the flamboyant role here, especially compared to the overly bland Costello presentation. Levinson would have been better off casting Joe Pesci as Genovese. The gimmick of DeNiro times two, playing both leading roles in a movie, comes off in a technical sense, but is distracting from the story.
Supporting cast is extremely weak, mostly making no impression at all. An exception is Kathrine Narducci as Genovese's fiery wife Anna -she's the best thing in the picture. Debra Messing as Costello's wife is stuck in a nothing part. Of all the subsidiary gangsters in a large cast, only Michael Rispoli as Albert Anastasia stands out of the crowd.
Bobby shoulda only played Frank and it coulda been better had he woulda.
Fine lead actor and to some degree he can perform character actor but playing opposite himself was distracting for me. His voice inflections and tonality, mannerisms, and basic personality made scenes with both characters very monotone. That carried over to solo scenes as well. Makeup was good but not good enough to dispell.
Overall I enjoyed the movie, but would have appreciated it with Keitel, Pacino, Hoffman, or many other possible actors playing opposite in the Vito role.
Messing was great.
PS Joe Bonanno would slap you senseless had he seen where you made him old and frail before his time. I knew him in the 1970s and he still presented a formidable presence.
Fine lead actor and to some degree he can perform character actor but playing opposite himself was distracting for me. His voice inflections and tonality, mannerisms, and basic personality made scenes with both characters very monotone. That carried over to solo scenes as well. Makeup was good but not good enough to dispell.
Overall I enjoyed the movie, but would have appreciated it with Keitel, Pacino, Hoffman, or many other possible actors playing opposite in the Vito role.
Messing was great.
PS Joe Bonanno would slap you senseless had he seen where you made him old and frail before his time. I knew him in the 1970s and he still presented a formidable presence.
I saw the reviews of this and was surprised how negative they were.
I was always going to see it.
The critic in The Metro paper in the UK goes on about how old the film makers are,is this relevant?
I agree with her the film could be better but it is still a good watch.
I like this sort of film but am not an expert on the history of the story and viewers don't need to be.
Sending a reviewer who doesn't like gangster films to see a gangster film seems wrong.
I give no spoilers but the film reminded me of Once Upon A Time In America.
It is not as good as that film but this is still a quality production from a justly respected director.
The production design and costume design in this are excellent.
You believe you are in the 1950s.
I didn't notice any body using modern language either.
The soundtrack was great as well,I hope it is available on cd.
What about the script you ask? Well the script is fine,it tells a complicated story well.
The acting is great.
People playing older people look older.
I was not very familiar with all the cast but I was impressed with all the performances.
If anyone who likes this sort of film they should ignore the negative reviews and go and see it.
You believe.
I was always going to see it.
The critic in The Metro paper in the UK goes on about how old the film makers are,is this relevant?
I agree with her the film could be better but it is still a good watch.
I like this sort of film but am not an expert on the history of the story and viewers don't need to be.
Sending a reviewer who doesn't like gangster films to see a gangster film seems wrong.
I give no spoilers but the film reminded me of Once Upon A Time In America.
It is not as good as that film but this is still a quality production from a justly respected director.
The production design and costume design in this are excellent.
You believe you are in the 1950s.
I didn't notice any body using modern language either.
The soundtrack was great as well,I hope it is available on cd.
What about the script you ask? Well the script is fine,it tells a complicated story well.
The acting is great.
People playing older people look older.
I was not very familiar with all the cast but I was impressed with all the performances.
If anyone who likes this sort of film they should ignore the negative reviews and go and see it.
You believe.
Theatrical Releases You Can Stream or Rent
Theatrical Releases You Can Stream or Rent
These big screen releases can now be watched from the comfort of your couch.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाMarlon Brando had said he had based his raspy voice portrayal of Don Vito Corleone in The Godfather (1972) on Frank Costello's voice as heard from hearings aired on TV. Robert De Niro who also played a young Vito Corleone in The Godfather: Part II (1974) goes full circle and portrays Frank Costello. However, in this film they stayed away Costello's raspy voice imitation.
- गूफ़In the barber shop when a character is shot, there are two shooters firing at him. Even though both assassins use six-shooter revolvers and never reload, meaning max. 12 shots could be fired, more than 20 shots are heard.
- कनेक्शनFeatures White Heat (1949)
- साउंडट्रैकThat Old Black Magic
Written by Harold Arlen and Johnny Mercer
Performed by Louis Prima and Keely Smith
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is The Alto Knights?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइट
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- The Alto Knights: Mafia y poder
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $4,50,00,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $61,03,664
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $31,65,349
- 23 मार्च 2025
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $1,01,03,664
- चलने की अवधि
- 2 घं 3 मि(123 min)
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.39 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें