We know from much of cinematic history that movies can sometimes be lost to the world.  For the most part, these are movies that were made long ago that were forgotten by time and were too far gone to be salvaged by film preservation.  Then there are the movies that disappear out of neglect because their distributors have gone out of business and the movies stop being circulated in the marketplace.  Thanks to the creation of home entertainment it’s much harder now for a movie to disappear, though it can still happen.  But what is even worse than losing a movie through the passage of time is seeing a movie be destroyed even before it has had a chance to even live.  In the wake of the massive shift in Hollywood that has occurred due to the advancement of streaming as well as the disruptions of Covid and the strikes in the last decade, a different kind of way to destroy a film has occurred which is erasing it from the library altogether to collect a tax break.  After the major studios spent a ton of money building out their streaming catalogs in the early years of the boom and realizing very quickly that it all lead to slower than expected revenue growth, many of them decided to capitalize on a short window where they could collect tax breaks on write offs if they were to demonstrate that they would never profit off of these same films and shows again,  This meant that these movies and shows that the studios literally spent billions of dollars on would have to be permanently shelved, or otherwise they lose that tax break.  So, hundreds of hours worth of programming across all the streaming platforms were suddenly wiped out in a flash, so the studios could make a quick profit to satisfy weary shareholders.  But while executives and shareholders were happy, many people who were fans of these shows and films, or were interested in seeing them for the first time, were suddenly denied the choice.  At least for some time these programs had been seen by audiences, but in some cases the axing of projects went even further, where completely finished films were not even allowed to be seen at all.

Enter the main character of this story; a little film called Coyote vs. Acme.  The movie was first pitched to Warner Brothers executives by none other than future DCU creative director James Gunn.  He presented the team at Warner Brothers, which at the time was still under the ownership of Time Warner Inc., a satirical article from The New Yorker which speculated on an imagined scenario where the fictional Acme Corporation of the Looney Tunes cartoons was faced with a lawsuit from the character of Wile E. Coyote.  Gunn saw the potential in this being fleshed out into feature length story, and the executives agreed.  Unfortunately, the project languished in development hell for a number of years while Warner Brothers changed ownership not once but twice.  First AT&T came in, and pushed the project to the back of the line in favor of a Space Jam sequel starring LeBron James.  Then when AT&T was looking to sell their stake in the company, Discovery Networks swooped in and merged with the studio.  Under the leadership of new CEO David Zaslev, there seemed to finally be some momentum for the Coyote vs. Acme project, and cameras started to roll with the movie now being set up as a streaming exclusive for the struggling HBO Max platform.  But then came the day when things were completely halted.  The streaming boom seemed to be falling apart as subscribers were being torn between multiple different channels, all of which cannibalized off of each other and couldn’t continue to grow in the same way Netflix had done in the decade prior.  So, in order to justify the massive costs of operating and expanding these streaming platforms, the studios that launched them now had to begin consolidating and downsizing.  With Warner Brothers now joined with Discovery, this created a massive mound of debt that David Zaslev now had to find ways of paying off, and that meant cutting costs anywhere he could.  A lot of movies and shows were suddenly without warning completely wiped off of HBO Max, never to be seen again, including multi-season shows like Westworld.  But that wasn’t all, movies that were either finished but unreleased were also subject to cancellation, and unfortunately Coyote vs. Acme fell into this camp.

This boggled the minds of so many people in the industry, that a studio that spent tens of millions of dollars on these films could just so casually decide to not release them.  Those millions of dollars went into the hard work of hundreds of craftspeople who devoted several weeks of their time towards making a movie they hoped would be enjoyed by audiences anywhere.  And here it was, the head of the studio deciding that none of that mattered and it was better in the financial interest of the studio to collect a tax write off instead.  Sure, this made a lot of shareholders happy that they were getting paid instead of seeing the studio further lose money on the waning streaming market, but for the creatives that worked hard on the film, there was a sense of betrayal.  Coyote vs. Acme was complete at the time Zaslev decided it would never see the light of the day.  Not only that, but it had already screened for test audiences and performed very well.  But when a studio pulls the plug on a movie in the middle of production, it gives that movie the stigma of being a bad film.  All indications were saying that Coyote vs. Acme was not bad at all, and even great in some test reviews.  But according to Zaslev, the movie was in his words, “unreleasable.”  It was the same assertion that he gave to another movie that got the can that unfortunately suffered a worse fate than Coyote faced.  One of the last projects under the old DCEU franchise was a movie adaptation of Batgirl.  The movie had a nearly $100 million budget and was going to star Leslie Grace as the titular hero, as well as Michael Keaton returning as Batman and Oscar-winner Brendan Fraser playing the villainous Firefly.  The movie was said to be nearly complete, with principle photography already done and only the visual effects left to complete.  But not only did Zaslev and the other execs at Warners decide to cancel the completion of the film; they also ordered the destruction of the material they had already shot so that there was no chance at all of Warner Brothers ever resurrecting the movie again to make money off it, otherwise they lose the tax write off.  This was the sad fate of the film, as cast and crew attended one final screening on the lot to see the movie they worked on for the last time right before it was wiped away forever.

The same fate was likely in store for Coyote vs. Acme as well, but some clever individuals who worked on the movie managed to go behind Warner Brothers backs.  Not long after word got out that the movie was going to be shelved permanently and possibly lined up for destruction by Warners, behind the scenes footage from the set started to leak onto social media, showing people what the movie could have looked like.  Pretty soon, the mainstream press took notice of the leaked footage and were stating to share it on their platforms as well.  Audiences started to become interested in this film, wondering what exactly made it so expendable to the executives at Warner Brothers.  One of the things that really sparked interest in peoples minds was the heavy use of practical effects that were employed in the making of the movie.  It recalled the extensive visual effects work that  went into a classic film like Who Framed Roger Rabbit? (1988), which also magically and convincingly mixed animated characters into a real world setting.  While this renewed interest didn’t seem to avert Zaslev’s intentions of shelving the movie, it did stay the film’s execution for a little while longer.  It of course wouldn’t be a good look for the company if they were to destroy yet another completed film.  What filmmaker or actor would want to come work at Warner Brothers if the CEO in charge was so cavalier about their hard work that he would destroy it just for a tax credit?  In many ways, Coyote vs. Acme became the rallying point for all the complaints that creatives have had with the industry in this era of media consolidation.  More and more studio executives are not in the business of creating art but creating product, and they are giving audiences less of a say in what they are allowed to see.  By leaking the footage of Coyote vs. Acme to the public, those brave crew members managed to shine a spotlight on it, and it helped prevent the movie from being forgotten, which is the thing that Zaslev and the other Warner Brothers execs were hoping would happen.

But, at the same time, Warner Brothers had already collected their tax write-off, so having it be released under the Warner Brothers label was out of the question.  While the movie was temporarily saved from destruction, it was still in a permanent state of limbo, likely to never leave the Warner Brothers archives for eternity.  But, the outcry among fans began to grow.  Looney Tunes fans in particular, who had long been starved of new material starring their beloved characters, really wanted this movie to see the light of day.  But thankfully Warner Brothers, seeing the interest in this film grow over time, couldn’t ignore the fans’ outcry much longer.  So, they decided to put the movie up for sale.  They themselves were not able to  release the film themselves, but tax write off laws still allowed them to put the film out into the market, and have it be sold for either at the cost of production, or for a loss in value to them.  Unfortunately with a production budget at an estimated $70 million, the movie would have a steep price tag on it, even amongst deep pocketed rival studios.  Warner Brothers sought out interested parties like Netflix and Amazon, seeing if they would bite.  But alas, few studios were willing to take on the risk of spending nearly $70 million just to buy the film, and then pay the extra money to promote and distribute it afterwards.  So, the movie languished in this state of limbo for a few more years, with no one taking up the challenge of giving the movie a home.  But then there finally came the heroes of this story.  Independent distributor Ketchup Entertainment finally put in a bid to buy the rights to the movie.  Warner Brothers ended up selling the movie at a loss, letting Ketchup have it for $50 million.  But for Warner Brothers, $50 million was the best they could get out of it, and was a small loss for them in the grand scheme of things.  Meanwhile, Ketchup Entertainment was taking on a heavy risk accepting this price tag.  Their catalog of films are made up of very small, micro budget movies.  More recently they have been partnering up with other production companies on bigger films like Michael Mann’s Ferrari (2023) and Robert Rodriguez’s Hypnotic (2023).  But, they also seem to have had an interest in salvaging movies from Warner Brothers’ scrap heap, particularly when it came to the Looney Tunes.  Just a year before acquiring the rights to Coyote vs. Acme, Ketchup also saved another film that Warners had developed for HBO Max before shelving it, which was the animated comedy The Day the Earth Blew Up: A Looney Tunes Movie (2024).  They were even able to put the movie out in a limited theatrical run, and while the movie didn’t light up the box office, it still got a strong critical reception and has even developed a small cult following since it’s release.  This is one of the reasons why they seemed like the ideal new home for Coyote.

But it would only matter if audiences were still able to show up.  Because of Ketchup’s huge financial risk in taking this movie on, they needed to be careful how they marketed the movie.  Their marketing budget would be a small $10 million, which pales compared to what is spent on most other movies.  But, Ketchup carefully targeted their marketing, appealing to those who were most adamant about seeing the movie.  They knew that longtime fans of the Looney Tunes would support the movie, but who they were also hoping would show up for the film were people who were upset about what Warner Brothers had done in their short term quest for quick financial gain.  A lot of the marketing for the movie was very subtly aimed at conflating the film’s fictional Acme Corporation with Warner Brothers themselves.  The tag line for the movie in most of the marketing called it “The Movie Acme doesn’t want you to see.”  They smartly connected the film’s long and complicated road to getting released with the tale of fighting back against corporate greed that is actually at the heart of the film’s story; blurring the lines between fiction and reality.  The marketing team even pulled off some hilarious stunts, including having a performer dress in a Wile E. Coyote costume and having him protest outside the Warner Brothers lot in Burbank, complete with a picket sign saying “Acme Sucks.”  It may have come across as petty, but it was tapping into something that was really connecting with people.  Watching this movie would be making a statement, showing Warner Brothers that they were very much in the wrong for wanting to erase this movie from existence.  Ketchup continued to play up this David vs. Goliath aspect of the film, and it was indeed working.  They also got a major assist from people involved in the making of the movie, including it’s stars.  In particular, actor Will Forte who plays the lawyer representing Wile. E Coyote in court devoted much of his social media towards getting the word out about this movie, encouraging people to make their voices heard in demanding this movie get released.  Voice actor Eric Bauza, who is the current voice for almost all of the Looney Tunes characters these days, and who also led the voice cast in this movie, likewise spread the word about this movie, appearing on multiple podcasts over the last couple years pleading with fans to raise the heat on Warner Brothers to make them release the film.  And all that finally culminated in a big theatrical release at the tail end of this summer.  But did it all work?

The greatest outcome of all this is that the movie was more than just alright;  it actually turned out to be great.  The movie currently sits at a very impressive 96% on Rotten Tomatoes, which is even higher than Christopher Nolan’s The Odyssey (2026) by the way.  The film even outperformed expectations on its opening weekend, grossing a respectable $15 million.  Sure it’s got a long way to go before Ketchup Entertainment can make a profit on its investment, but it’s far from a flop either.  The conversation is now no longer if the movie can live up to the hype, but rather it has turned towards wondering what David Zaslev was thinking when he called the movie “unwatchable.”  It very clearly is not anything like he described, and in fact it’s one of the best crowd pleasers of the summer.  What has become clear is that Coyote vs. Acme was never cancelled on the basis of its quality.  It was shelved because the big wigs at Warner Brothers clearly have the wrong idea about what audiences actually want.  David Zaslev is not a creative person.  He is there to take Warner Brothers and turn it into a commodity that can be bought and sold to other investors at a profit to both him and the shareholders.  Sure enough, that’s what is currently happening with Warner Brothers as we speak with it’s planned merger with Paramount.  The only ones who are going to benefit from that merger are the executives and shareholders, while thousands of creatives at both studios are likely to lose their jobs through the process of consolidation.  Zaslev is going to come away from that merger nearly $100 million dollars richer, and in his wake, two legendary studios may end up being destroyed in the process, consumed into a single giant media conglomerate with a frighteningly agenda driven management team that’ll favor their own interests over the desires of the audiences they are supposed to cater to.  That’s what’s been appealing about Coyote vs. Acme to audiences; the fact that it’s a movie that actually speaks about these concerns about greedy corporations that are never held accountable, and end up cheapening the things that we love after they have taken control of them.  In every way shape and form, Coyote vs. Acme is a survivor and a movie that we need more than ever to remind us of what’s at stake when it comes to our collective culture.

One of the metaphors used in the movie is the Ancient Greek mythological story of Sisyphus; the man doomed forever to roll a bolder uphill, only to have all his progress undone each day.  It’s a struggle that mirrors that of Wile E. Coyote, which is something that his co-creator Chuck Jones very much emphasized in his discussion about how he defined the character.  The point of Wile E. Coyote is that he will never catch the Roadrunner, but it’s that struggle that gives him purpose to live.  The movie draws that distinction, and shows us why it’s important to take on seemingly impossible tasks, because it’s the only way that changes can happen.  Yes, we will all fail at something, but if we give up the fight, we ultimately lose everything that is important.  That is ultimately what evil corporations like Acme count on, that we give up after we fail and just settle for less.  That’s what makes the movie so poignant; it shows that failure is nothing to be afraid of, and that it’s better to keep pushing that boulder uphill than just letting it sit motionless where it is.  In a strange twist of fate, the movie Coyote vs. Acme became it’s own Sisyphisian struggle, with Warner Brothers coming across as the cruel Gods trying to wear us down to accept the inevitable.  But unlike the myth,  Coyote vs. Acme managed to crest that hill and come out on top.  Despite us having to wait nearly four years to see the actual film, it’s release actually marks something that we rarely see anymore in Hollywood, which is an actual underdog triumph story.  For one thing, it still shows that audiences still love the Looney Tunes characters, and that they are very much an under-appreciated and underutilized part of the Warner Brothers portfolio right now.  It’s also a movie that manages to give voice to a concern of many in the industry right now, which is the value of profits over people.  In the movie, the story actually involves showing how cartoons are treated as expendable pawns in Acme’s product testing phase, due to them being more durable to injury than humans.  Like most dubious corporations, they are valuing one set of customers over another.  You could point to the same thing happening in Hollywood, with shareholders needed being valued over those of the employees of the company or the long term fans who themselves feel ignored more and more.  Coyote vs. Acme gives voice to that, but even manages to be more.  It’s a movie with a lot of heart as well, turning Wile E. Coyote into something of an Everyman hero, and they even managed to give his contentious relationship with the Road Runner some surprising depth and heart too.  Hopefully this movie makes Ketchup Entertainment a lot of money in the long run and helps to convince them and many others that it’s worthwhile to save these movies that are being tossed aside by the major studios.  In the case of Coyote vs. Acme, we may have almost lost what could be a new classic of the genre, and the fact that it has survived is a story worth celebrating for many years to come.

Martin Scorsese’s status as one of the greatest filmmakers of all time is undeniable.  From his humble post-film school beginnings working with the likes of Roger Corman to becoming one of Hollywood’s most revered elder statesmen, Scorsese’s career in the business has been an undeniable success.  But for a long time, many people felt that he was still undervalued as a filmmaker, mainly for one major reason; because he hadn’t won an Oscar.  After you’ve made movies as iconic as Taxi Driver (1976), Raging Bull (1980) and Goodfellas (1990), you would think that the Academy would’ve shown their love to Marty for all that he had done over his career.  But, Scorsese continued to remain a consummate bridesmaid on Oscar night.  This especially began to become an issue for many fans of the director during the 2000’s.  Scorsese was reaching his 60’s and many worried that he would be overlooked while still in his prime, believing that as he reached his senior years that he would become as less productive and likely never get the chance to make that movie that would finally win him Oscar glory.  But it wasn’t for lack of trying though.  Martin Scorsese did manage to get a project he had long had in development finally across the finish line with his historical epic Gangs of New York (2002), starring heavy hitters like Daniel Day-Lewis and also marked his first collaboration with Leonardo DiCaprio.  This would surely be the movie that would finally win him an Oscar, because it had all the ingredients that Oscar voters valued.  But, despite quite a few nominations, Gangs of New York came up empty on Oscar night, with the Academy instead going for the musical Chicago (2002) that year, and Scorsese losing out Best Director to Roman “Statutory” Polanski for The Pianist (2002).  For a lot of people this started to make them worry that Scorsese may never get his due honors, because if he couldn’t win it with a passion project he had been working on for decades then it may never happen.  This only seemed to be reinforced when two years later he also struck out with the epic biopic The Aviator (2004).  What would it take for Martin Scorsese to finally win the gold in the end.  The answer would indeed be a bit surprising, and yet at the same time the most logical conclusion as well.

In the early 2000’s, Warner Brothers secured the rights to remake a Hong Kong action crime thriller called Infernal Affairs (2002).  The original film, starring Andy Lau and Tony Leung, was about two men who become moles on opposite sides of the law.  One is a police officer who has infiltrated a dangerous gang while the other is working within the police force to protect members of the Triad.  Both have to maintain their cover and more importantly make sure that neither is aware of the other’s existence.  Hollywood saw a lot of potential in this story, and were eager to bring it stateside as a action movie vehicle for some A-List stars.  The decision was to bring the story to Boston, given it’s culture of the Irish American community falling into both sides of the law; often sometimes within the same families.  One other reason for picking Boston as the setting was that the crime boss at the center would be largely based on real life Bostonian mafia leader James “Whitey” Bulger.  To work on the adaptation of Infernal Affairs into this Boston set crime story, Warner Brothers tapped journalist turned novelist William Monahan to write the screenplay.  Though Monahan was at the time a prolific writer, he was still fairly new to the art of screenwriting.  He first got the attention of Hollywood with his original script Tripoli, a historical epic that got optioned in a six figure deal with Scott Free Productions, with the potential of being directed by Ridley Scott himself.  Alas, Tripoli died quietly in development, but Ridley Scott wanted to keep Monahan around so the two of them worked together to create another epic movie set during the Crusades in the Holy Land.  This became the film Kingdom of Heaven (2005), which was unfortunately heavily cut down by the studio and released in theaters to disappointing box office.  Only in the years since has Kingdom of Heaven been reassessed by audiences thanks to a vastly superior 3 hour director’s cut released years later.  But, even despite the disappointment in Kingdom of Heaven’s box office, people saw a lot of potential in Monahan’s work, and that’s why he seemed like an ideal choice for this project.  For one thing, it would allow him to write closer to his own home given that he was a Boston boy himself.  But what was especially important about Monahan’s writing is that it caught the interest of Scorsese, who decided on this new movie, now called The Departed, as his next project.

A crime thriller set in the mafia world is nothing new to someone like Scorsese.  If anything, it’s a homecoming for him.  With movies like Goodfellas and Casino (1995), Martin cemented himself as the quintessential mafia movie king; even eclipsing Francis Ford Coppola in this category.  But a lot of those movies also tapped into his roots as an Italian American and as a New Yorker.  Boston was an entirely different kind of city with an entirely different kind of mafia.  The question would be whether or not Scorsese’s style would translate over into this new setting.  Marty certainly seemed to think so, and him being attached to this project suddenly gave it a lot more prestige than it otherwise would’ve likely had before.  With Scorsese now on board, the project was suddenly now glimpsed as an A-list production.  But who would bring their star power to the roles in the movie.  In particular, they needed to find the right actors to play the roles of the two moles, who in this film would be named William Costigan and Colin Sullivan.  For the longest time, Brad Pitt had eyed the role of Sullivan, the mole on the inside of the Boston PD, and at one time he was hoping to rope in his friend and fellow A-lister Tom Cruise to play the role of Costigan in the movie.  But, Cruise was less interested and passed on the part, and eventually Brad Pitt began to drift away from the project as well.  Pitt did stay involved as a producer however under his Plan B production company, though most of the producing credit would go to Graham King, whom Martin Scorsese brought over with him from The Aviator.  This producing credit would later lead to a bit of controversy later on.  The casting of Frank Costello, the Whitey Bulger stand-in, would also be an important choice as well.  Initially, Martin wanted to give the role to his long time collaborator Robert DeNiro, but DeNiro was too busy at the time working on his own directorial debut The Good Shepard (2006).  Scorsese also offered the role to Al Pacino, who he had yet to work with at the time, but unfortunately the two would wait another 13 years before finally making a movie together with The Irishman (2019).  While many of these actors would’ve certainly been interesting choices for this film, the movie would eventually benefit from the right actors getting the roles.

For one thing, Scorsese benefitted from there being Boston raised actors that were just right for the roles.  One, of course, was Matt Damon, who was cast as Colin Sullivan.  Damon of course made his mark alongside his longtime friend and fellow Bostonian Ben Affleck with their Oscar-winning Good Will Hunting (1997), which was a film steeped in the local flavor of the city.  He also perfectly played into the good old boy facade that was needed for the role, given that he had to play a cop who was secretly helping the mafia from within.  But, his role also had to have the perfect counterbalance on the opposite end.  With the casting of William Costigan, Scorsese once again went with the leading man of his last two films, Leonardo DiCaprio, to play the part.  DiCaprio of course neither has Irish ancestry nor is from anywhere close to Boston.  And yet the chameleon like actor managed to find his way into the role and perfectly channel a Bostonian identity into the character.  But, who would fill out the role of Frank Costello, the crime boss who looms large over everyone in the movie.  Turns out there was another legendary actor that had never worked with Scorsese before who would be absolutely perfect for the part.  Jack Nicholson had wanted to work with Marty for a long time, but things hadn’t aligned for both of them until now.  At this point, Jack was eager to sink his teeth into a juicy villainous role, and the part of Frank Costello, with all of his menacing swagger and twisted sense of humor seemed to be tailor made for the actor.  While DeNiro and Pacino would’ve certainly been solid choices too, it’s fortuitous that Nicholson ended up playing the part instead, because it allowed to Scorsese to differentiate this mafia movie from the ones he had made in the past.  Nicholson’s Frank Costello was very much a product of the city of Boston and defined it’s very brash and very Irish identity.  In addition to these actors, Scorsese round out his cast with some pretty heavy hitters, such as Alec Baldwin, Martin Sheen, Vera Farmiga, Ray Winstone, and Mark Wahlberg, who really tapped into his Bostonian roots with his scene stealing performance as Sergeant Dignam.

It’s undeniable that the city of Boston is a character in of itself within the movie.  New York may run through Scorsese’s blood, but he did justice to the identity of Boston; capturing the swagger of the community beautifully in all of it’s hard edges.  But even despite the change in scenery, the movie does feel in line with Scorsese’s Italian mafia epics of the past.  This is thanks to him working with some of his trusted longtime collaborators.  The Departed would sadly be the last time that Marty worked with his longtime cinematographer Michael Ballhaus, who had been working with Marty since 1985’s After Hours.  Ballhaus only shot one more movie after The Departed and passed away in 2017 at the age of 80, capping off a storied career of shooting some truly beautiful films such as The Last Temptation of Christ (1988), Goodfella, and Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1992).  Scorsese’s longtime friend and collaborator Thelma Schoonmaker also returned to edit this movie, fresh off an Oscar win for The Aviator.  While their work on the film is not the flashiest they had ever done working with Scorsese, given the other movies listed, they nevertheless delivered a solid, well crafted movie that serviced the story well.  There are some hauntingly beautiful moments that do bring out the best of their talents.  One is the breathtaking opening montage that serves as the prologue of the movie, set to the Rolling Stones’ “Gimmie Shelter.”  It’s an outstanding tone setter that primes you perfectly for the movie you are about to see, with Ballhaus’ striking camera work and Schoonmaker’s lyrical editing doing a great job setting up the city of Boston and the characters within in an almost mythical way.  And like many of Martin Scorsese’s movies, the needle drops in the movie are especially poignant.  Apart from “Gimmie Shelter,” there is also a haunting cover of Pink Floyd’s “Comfortably Numb,” sung by Irish R&B signer Van Morrison used halfway through the movie during a romantic moment.  But no song got more of a boost from appearing in this film more than Celtic punk band Dropkick Murphy’s “I’m Shipping Up to Boston” which has almost become an unofficial anthem for the city, played at sporting events for the Patriots and the Celtics to this day.

But, how was the world going to receive this new Scorsese film.  Despite the shift from New York to Boston, many thought this was just Scorsese falling back on old tricks by making yet another mafia movie.  But, audiences responded quite well to the film.  To this day, it is still Martin Scorsese’s highest grossing film at the box office, making $292 million worldwide, which is pretty good for an R-rated mafia movie.  But, the question remained, would the Academy finally take notice.  The film did receive nominations for Best Picture and Director, but it’s victory was not a guarantee as it only had 5 nominations total in a very competitive year.  Not only that, but it would be a rematch of 2004, where Scorsese’s The Aviator lost out to Clint Eastwood’s Million Dollar Baby (2004).  Eastwood, who’s clout with the Academy was undeniably strong, was nominated again for his WWII epic Letters from Iwo Jima (2006), and it was going to be a difficult choice between these two titans of the industry.  But, it became clear through the night that this may have finally been the movie to get Marty up to the podium.  Both William Monahan and Thelma Schoonmaker walked away with Oscar wins for their work on the film, giving the movie momentum.  And then came the award for Best Director.  Though the Academy didn’t know for certain given the secrecy of Pricewaterhouse Cooper’s ballot counting, they seemed to have a pretty good inkling about who was going to win given who they chose to present the Award.  Walking onstage to present Best Picture were directing legends Steven Spielberg, Francis Ford Coppola and George Lucas.  These weren’t just some of the biggest names in Hollywood, they were also longtime friends of Marty’s going all the way back to their early days in the 1970’s when they were just starting out in the business.  It was an indicator that the Academy knew the time had come and they wanted to make the moment special.  And sure enough, a great sigh of relief could be felt as Steven Spielberg read out the name of Martin Scorsese.  He was a bridesmaid no more, and would now forever have the title of Oscar winner on his resume.  And though deeply grateful, Scorsese also tried to keep it humble as well, joking to his friends, “can you check the envelope again, please?”  But it was undeniable to everyone; this was a long time coming and very well deserved.

But, despite the fears that this would be Scorsese’s last chance to win the coveted Award, finally winning it didn’t cause Scorsese to slow down either.  If anything, it rejuvenated his career.  Scorsese has honestly put out some of his best work since The Departed, with movies like Hugo (2011), The Wolf of Wall Street (2013), The Irishman (2019), and Killers of the Flower Moon (2023), all of which he has received more Oscar nominations for.  And this year, at the age of 83, he still has more movies in development with no indication yet that he’s ready to retire.  Given his whole body of work, it’s actually quite unusual to think that The Departed was the one that got him on the Oscar stage.  It’s not a particularly showy movie, with the movie most grounded in realism throughout.  It’s also a movie that despite being a mafia film also feels the least like any of the other characteristically Scorsese crime epics.  You would think that for Scorsese to get the attention of the Academy, he would’ve had to have made a film that showcased a lot more of his unique style, rather than just do a better than average competent action flick.  But, that’s underselling what Marty achieved with The Departed.  It is a brilliantly crafted character study about these two individuals who have to carefully maintain these facades within places they do not belong or else their lives will literally be destroyed.  It’s ultimately a parable about paranoia and mistrust, and thinking that there is a rat in every corner of society.  It’s no surprise that this movie existed in a post-9/11 world, where paranoia and distrust was rampant in American society.  With the Scorsese touch, he made this cops and robbers thriller feel more reflexive and introspective of where America was standing at the time.  In his hands, this story takes on a far greater mythical sense, showing how we as a society was starting to evolve, with the lines between good and bad, lawful and unlawful being increasingly blurred.  A lot of people have critiqued the film over the years with regards to the final shot.  In the closing moments, Scorsese holds on a window shot overlooking the Massachusetts State House, and in the foreground appears a literal rat.  People thought this was too much of a heavy handed metaphor, but honestly after the chaos of what preceded it in the shocking third act of the movie, heavy handed symbolism does seem right in the parting shot of the movie.

20 years later and The Departed still holds up as one of the best mafia movies ever made.  It may not be up to the epic level of The Godfather (1971), but it’s undoubtedly one of the best executed ones in the last quarter century and that’s thanks to the talents of Martin Scorsese.  He took what could have been just another standard action thriller which are a dime a dozen in Hollywood, and created an Oscar winning movie out of it.  Certainly a lot of that has to do with it’s absolutely perfect cast, with DiCaprio, Damon and Nicholson all delivering some of the best performances of their careers.  It may be a subdued, by the numbers film for Martin Scorsese, but even with those limitations he still managed to deliver an all time classic under his direction.  And as we’ve seen, he still is not done yet.  William Monahan, who also came away an Oscar winner, has continued to work as a screenwriter on several more movies, and has even directed a couple as well.  Leonardo DiCaprio has also continued to remain a favorite of Marty’s, and they have worked on many more films together since, including The Wolf of Wall Street and Killers of the Flower Moon.  Matt Damon has also continued to remain an A-lister in Hollywood, and though he has not worked with Scorsese again since The Departed, he still considers his work in the movie to be some of the best he’s ever done.  This also has marked one of the last great roles for Jack Nicholson.  Though as of this writing Jack Nicholson is still alive and well at the age of 89, but he has not made a new film in 16 years, retiring after a small part in James L. Brooks’ How Do You Know (2010). The Departed is looked at as the last true Nicholson star role, and it’s great that he and Marty’s paths managed to cross and result in this film before he called it quits.  One of the benefits of making The Departed the way he did is that it gives Scorsese a film with a bit of universal and timeless appeal.  You don’t have to be familiar with what Scorsese has done prior to enjoy the movie.  It stands apart from his other work in a good way.  That’s why it’s Oscar win for Best Picture hasn’t aged one bit since it happened, because the movie still works just as well today as it did 20 years ago.  Sure, Scorsese deserved the Oscar much more for many other movies prior, but I don’t hear too many complaints about this being the one that got him there.  Often a filmmaker will end up winning the top award for a movie that wasn’t quite representative of the filmmaker they really are.  Here, I think it works better for Scorsese that he won for this movie rather than a traditional Oscar bait flick like Gangs of New York or The Aviator.  The movie may have been outside of his comfort zone of the streets of New York, but it’s fitting that by going to Boston that Scorsese still won the award for a mafia movie; the kind of film that he did better than anyone else.

How many different choices are out there to experience Christopher Nolan’s new epic film, The Odyssey (2026).  There’s certainly the standard digital projection that most multiplexes around the world will make available to audiences.  But, for those looking for something more special, there are also plenty of premium movie experiences available for The Odyssey.  There’s the Dolby Cinema experience, with laser enhanced picture quality, and of course digital IMAX available in most major cinemas.  But for many true cinephiles, the best way to watch a movie like this is when it’s projected on film.  In certain cinemas around the world, the movie is also getting a release on 70mm film.  70mm, a film stock that has been in use since the 1950’s, is know for having incredible picture quality and has been used to film and exhibit some of cinema’s greatest epics such as Lawrence of Arabia (1962), The Sound of Music (1965), and 2001: The Space Odyssey (1968).  Any film that gets a brand new 70mm print is incredibly lucky given the limited infrastructure in place to manufacture and screen those kinds of films today.  And yet, even this is not the most exclusive way to screen a film.  The Odyssey is in a rare class of film that has been designed and filmed purposely for one particular format in mind, and that is the 15perf 70mm IMAX format.  This is Christopher Nolan’s preferred format of filmmaking, and he has utilized it more and more on every film he’s made since The Dark Knight (2008).  But what is 15perf 70mm IMAX and why is it such a big deal in cinema right now.  More than anything else, it is quite simply the biggest possible format that can capture images through a camera, given the captured image the highest amount of detail possible without the aid of digital enchancement.  To film with it is one thing, but to screen it, theaters not only need to have a massive amount of specialized equipment set up for it, but they also need to have a screen big enough to do justice to the image quality possible with IMAX 70mm (mainly in the 80 to 100ft height range).  It’s a specialized kind of film that can only play in a specialized kind of theater, and in The Odyssey’s case, only 25 theaters are playing the film this way in all of North America.  So, count yourself lucky if one of these is your theater.

Universal Pictures, the studio behind Christopher Nolan’s Odyssey, were so confident that screenings at these 25 theaters were going to sell out that they put tickets up for sale a full year in advance, and they did almost instantly.  Even while cameras we still rolling on set, there were sell out shows for this movie.  This is very much a testament to the selling power of not just Christopher Nolan as a name, but also 70mm IMAX as a format.  You can imagine people buying passes for a concert or a convention a year ahead of time, but for a movie?  This wasn’t entirely surprising either.  70mm IMAX has been steadily climbing in esteem, particularly in the last couple of years, and Hollywood is taking notice that these rare format screenings are becoming hot ticket events.  Watching a movie in 70mm IMAX is now being looked at as the peak of the movie going experience.  There are many other theaters out there in the country that advertise that they have IMAX, but in reality what they have is a digital IMAX projector that can play a IMAX quality image on a standard size screen.  Sure, it’s better than the average digital projector, but it’s not a “true” IMAX experience.  That’s why a lot of these types of IMAX theaters are referred to as LieMAX.  For a true IMAX experience, you need a screen taller than a mid-rise office building, the most start of the art sound system in all corners, and a steep slope of stadium seating that puts the audience as close to the screen as is comfortably possible.  What this gives you is an immersive experience, where it feels like the screen is enveloping you.  One thing to help spot a true IMAX theater in your area is to see a section of a multiplex that looks like it is jutting out from the rest of the building.  These screening rooms are so big that they often require their own footprints as to not take up the majority of the space inside the rest of the theater.  For myself, I fortunately live near one such theater; the Universal Cinemas at Universal Studios CityWalk in Hollywood, CA.  The architecture of this building is interesting, as it looks from the front like a standard multiplex, but when you step back, you’ll see a large blocky extension rising from the back of the building.  That’s the IMAX theater, which has been a part of the building since a 2000 remodel and expansion.  It’s been my go to IMAX theater since moving to the San Fernando Valley 15 years ago.  It’s also why I’m not reviewing The Odyssey this week, because I could only get a ticket for Sunday, past my Saturday deadline, and I don’t want to see it first in any other format.

So, instead of a review, I wanted to discuss exactly why seeing it in this format is such a big deal.  Christopher Nolan’s The Odyssey is the first film ever to be entirely shot in 15perf 70mm IMAX.  Up to this point, most films have had select scenes shot in the format, but never the entire film itself.  This is often because of the limitations of the equipment involved.  The film backs that hold the 70mm film in the camera can only hold enough stock for 5 minutes of screen time in a single spool.  Not only that, but the camera itself is also extremely loud and cumbersome given the size of the film that it has to shuffle through.  The noise factor alone makes 70mm IMAX unusable on set for quiet, dialogue scenes, because it would drown out the actors’ voices.  That’s why up to now, IMAX cameras have been more widely used for action scenes in movies, where the camera noise is less of a factor.  For the last couple of decades, 70mm IMAX films have typically been hybrid films, switching between different formats in various parts of the movie, with noticeable aspect ratio changes to indicate which format was used for what scene.   When a movie couldn’t use 70mm IMAX for a dialogue scene, the filmmakers would instead use a standard 70mm camera, or some other standard format.  In the early days, IMAX shots were often very rare, but over time, filmmakers would find more and more use for them, to the point where a sizable chunk of a film’s run time would be in the IMAX format.  Christopher Nolan is a filmmaker that has continually tried to push the format further with ever new film that he makes.  It started with using the format for aerial shots in The Dark Knight, but Nolan also managed to create two entire sequences of the movie using the 70mm IMAX format; the opening bank robbery scene with the Joker, and the Bat Pod chase sequence in the middle of the film.  He even put out the bank robbery scene in its entirety as a teaser trailer in IMAX theaters months before the film’s release.  While the movie got rave reviews across the board, many also took notice of the special experience that the IMAX showings provided.  For all his movies since, The Dark Knight Rises (2012), Interstellar (2014), Dunkirk (2017), Tenet (2020) and Oppenheimer (2023), more and more of the movie’s runtimes are shot with IMAX film.

To understand the significance of an all IMAX movie like The Odyssey, we have to know a bit about what led to here, because IMAX of course had been around a long time before Christopher Nolan.  70mm film stock dates all the way back to the turn of the century, but it wouldn’t be used for filmmaking purposes until the late 1920’s when Fox Films used it for what they called the Grandeur process.  It only resulted in one film, 1930’s The Big Trail starring a young John Wayne, before being abandoned due to the high cost.  Then in the 1950’s, 70mm film was seen as a viable format for creating widescreen films to compete with television.  While other formats like Cinerama and Cinemascope already existed, 70mm was celebrated for it’s incredibly sharp picture quality.  Producer Mike Todd combined his spherical camera lenses with 70mm to create a new process called Todd-AO, which first premiered with the movie musical Oklahoma (1955), and with it came a boom of big film projects all using 70mm film to create magnificent widescreen extravaganzas.  While the epic movie craze died over the years, the use of 70mm did not.  It would remain in use for many years after that on select projects, and also as the film stock of choice by special effects artists, such as the wizards at ILM who used 70mm to create the effects in the Star Wars movies.  At the same time 70mm was coming up in the 1950’s, another format was also being popularized using the more commonly used 35mm film stock.  For most movie cameras, film is shuffled through the aperture vertically, with the captured image size being about 4 perforations (sprocket holes on the edges) in height on 35mm, or 5 perforations on 70mm.  But a new format called Vistavision changed the way film was shuffled through the camera by having it move horizontally past the aperture as opposed to vertically.  What this resulted in was an image on 35mm stock that was 8 perforations wide, creating a much larger image overall that could contain a lot more detail.  This was a favorite format for Alfred Hitchcock in particular, who used it for some of his most popular films like Vertigo (1958) and North by Northwest (1959).  It was also used to create incredible vast epics like The Ten Commandments (1956) and The Searchers (1956) feel even grander.  But, it would also lead some filmmakers to wonder; could they do with 70mm film stock what Vistavision did with 35mm?

The first to experiment with that idea were Canadian filmmakers Graeme Ferguson and Roman Kroitor who formed what would eventually become the IMAX corporation in 1967.  They initially had develop a multiscreen large format that would create one large image out of multiple projections, but found difficulty in the synchronization.  They instead looked towards creating the same kind of large screen experience with a single camera and projector.  They took the idea of flipping 70mm film stock on it’s side like Vistavision did with 35 and designed a camera system that was capable of handling that a format that big.  Their results culminated in a camera that could capture an image a full whopping 15 perforations wide.  This 15/70 format was first used on a short film from Ferguson and Kroitor called Tiger Child, which was screened publicly at Expo ’70 in Osaka, Japan.  The 17 minute short would play on a loop for expo quests in a rotating theater, creating an immersive experience.  Little did the people who saw this exhibit know that they were looking at the future of cinema.  But, it wasn’t a future that would happen overnight.  IMAX was a very costly format to both manufacture and exhibit, so it was limited to just a couple of projects at a time; mainly documentaries.  Hollywood and multiplexes weren’t quite ready to go all in on IMAX, but Science and History museums were.  Through the 80’s and 90’s, the likeliest places you would find an IMAX theater was in one of these museum spaces, playing documentaries about nature, space, and even the Titanic, which had a 1992 film called Titanica about the exploration of the wreck which for many years was the highest grossing IMAX film, at a paltry $8 million.  This was also my own personal introduction to the format, as I saw it on a class field trip to a science museum in Portland, Oregon.  Still, narrative use of 15/70 IMAX film was thought to be unlikely as studios thought the format was too niche.  And then the Walt Disney Company decided to use IMAX as their format of choice for their new animated film Fantasia 2000 (2000).  This would mark the first ever studio made movie to premiere in IMAX cinemas, and they would get an exclusive 6 month run before the film would open everywhere else.  It was the kind of mainstream acceptance that IMAX finally needed, although it would be some time before Hollywood would actually fall all in with IMAX.

For a while, the studios were more interested in screening their movies in IMAX theaters, as the size of the screens offered a much more premium experience than a standard multiplex facility.  On the heels of Fantasia 2000, Disney would also re-release some of their animated classics in the format, such as Beauty and the Beast (1991) and The Lion King (1994).  Meanwhile, big action franchises like Star Wars, Harry Potter and Transformers would also use IMAX to screen some of their films.  But these movies weren’t shot in the 15/70 IMAX format, but rather received a blow-up as their standard format was printed onto an IMAX reel.  It would get the IMAX size, but not the image detail.  One big tell you were watching a blow-up movie in IMAX is that it still has the letterbox effect, creating black bars on the top and bottom of the image in order to make it fit within the 1.43:1 ratio dimensions of 15/70 IMAX film.  A true IMAX image wouldn’t have that letterbox effect, and instead would fill the entire screen from top to bottom.  That’s the thing that people noted whenever they watched a film shot with 15/70 IMAX in mind.  This was only true for the most part with the documentaries that screen the most often in these specialty cinemas, but that would change dramatically once Christopher Nolan began to arrive on the scene.  He saw the dramatic potential in the format, and he even went directly to IMAX themselves to discuss how it could be implemented.  On each film they have collaborated on, Nolan and IMAX have tried to find new ways to push the format to it’s limits.  On Dunkirk, they mounted IMAX cameras on the wings of WWII era fighter planes.  In Tenet, they experimented with running IMAX film backwards in the camera.  And with Oppenheimer, IMAX did something they never had before by inventing black and white IMAX film stock.  With The Odyssey, Nolan and IMAX wanted to finally solve that annoying noise problem, so they re-engineered the camera itself to be lighter and more insulated.  They even created a massive new sound blimp to house the camera in in order to cut the noise down even more.  The result allowed IMAX to finally have it’s dream become a reality; a full length studio made film shot entirely on their format.

While Christopher Nolan is certainly the filmmaker that has pushed the IMAX format the most into the mainstream, he’s also not the only one who has used the format in recent memory.  More and more filmmakers are now looking to 15/70 IMAX film as an ideal format to use for their event films.  In 2022, filmmaker Jordan Peele used IMAX for the biggest action moments in his sci-fi thriller Nope; even going as far as to hire Christopher Nolan’s go to cinematographer Hoyte van Hoytema, who has quickly gained the reputation of being the world’s best IMAX cameraman.  Denis Villeneuve has also turned to IMAX 15/70 for his series of Dune films, and like with Nolan’s Odyssey, his Dune: Part Three has already sold out screenings months in advance.  Last year, Ryan Coogler managed to make a big splash with his own use of the format in the Oscar-winning Sinners (2025).  The interesting thing about how the format was used in Sinners was in the way Coogler also mixed it in with another rarely used film format called Ultra Panavision 70.  Ultra Panavision has the widest aspect ratio of any format at 2.76:1, so there’s this incredible juxtaposition between extremes in the film, between the ultra wide Panavision in some scenes and the ultra tall 15/70 IMAX in others.  The night club scene in that film also accomplished a feat by creating a long tracking one shot, which is nearly impossible given the small amount of film that one camera can carry at a single time.  The way it came together in the final film even impressed Christopher Nolan who gave a Ryan Coogler and his cinematographer Autumn Durald Arkapaw massive amounts of praise for their work on the film.  And earlier this year, Christopher Miller and Phil Lord had a big hit with the space adventure Project Hail Mary (2026), which also made extensive use of the 15/70 IMAX format.  So, while Christopher Nolan has been the top standard bearer for the IMAX format for a long time, he now has a lot more company among his peers who now use the format regularly in their own film projects.  If anything, there is a renewed interest in all analog film formats recently among filmmakers, with long dormant formats like Ultra Panavision 70 and Vistavision making comebacks of their own thanks to movies like The Hateful Eight (2015), The Brutalist (2024) and One Battle After Another (2025). Because of all this, IMAX no longer is a niche format in cinematic filmmaking, but perhaps the future of cinema itself.

If anything, the fact that we can now produce an entire film in the 15/70 IMAX format tells you that the sky’s the limit with regards to IMAX’s future in Hollywood.  Not only will Nolan continue working with the format, but so many generations after him will also be making their films on the format.  IMAX has come a long way since it’s novelty as an attraction at museums and expos around the world.  Now it is the hottest ticket in town, with people scrambling for tickets even before the film is finished filming.  It wouldn’t surprise me if theater chains start looking at remodeling their buildings in order to fit screening rooms big enough for 15/70 IMAX projection.  And there are still more boundaries to break in this field as well.  Apparently the maximum amount of film that IMAX film projectors can hold for a single movie is just a little over three hours.  Nolan really pushed that limit with his exactly three hour long Oppenheimer, and The Odyssey comes close with it’s 2 hour 52 minute run time.  It might not be too long before we see IMAX innovate some more in order to break beyond that 3 hour limit.  It will also be interesting to see how different filmmakers use the  format in creative ways, like with Ryan Coogler’s Sinners.  But there’s no doubt that The Odyssey will be a historic achievement in how it showed that the format could be used for a full film; quiet parts and all.  As of writing this, I still have not seen it for myself and am eagerly waiting my turn.  I was lucky just to get the one ticket that I did; literally one of the last seats left.  I’m also lucky to be seeing this movie in what Christopher Nolan considers to be his personal favorite theater.  My introduction to the CityWalk IMAX actually coincided with Nolan, as I went there for the first time to see Mission: Impossible: Ghost Protocol (2011), which had the opening prologue of The Dark Knight Rises as a teaser.  I mainly went for that one teaser, but also ended up enjoying the main film itself, which also made use of 15/70 IMAX with the Burj Khalifa scenes.  Since then, all of my IMAX screenings have been there, including every Marvel move, every Dune movie, and of course every Nolan movie.  I hope The Odyssey is an event worthy of a year of waiting.  At least I’ll know one thing for sure, and that’s that I would never want to watch the movie in any other way.  With 15/70 IMAX, you really feel the closest to feeling immersed in the movie itself.