1) Relate what was discussed in class or the text to the screening.

As discussed in class, this film was Deniros finest acting. The long
cringe-worthy shots made for an interested yet uncomfortable viewing.
Rupert Pupkins delusions and distorted view of reality was confusing at
times, especially in the ending. We see that his crazy finally got him
stardom, exactly where he always wanted to be, but was it true or another
delusion? Also discussed in class was the fact that this film wasnt
received well by the critics. Although it is satire or black comedy there are
no really funny moments aside from the repetitive mispronunciation of his
last name. This film is very unique to say the least, almost awkward to
even sit through an entire viewing, yet thats the brilliance of it. Rupert
Pupkin is a delusional annoyingly persistent quasi psycho, but we still root
for him, deep down his behavior at times is admirable.
2) Find a related article and summarize the content. (on the film, director,
studio, actor/actress, artistic content, etc.) You can use the library or the
internet. Cite the article or copy the url to your journal entry. Summarize in
your own words the related article but do not plagiarize any content.
This article, by Scott Macaulay, was written after the 12 th Tribeca Film
Festival after the last showing of The King of Comedy. Basically it tells of
how the whole project to make the film started. Much like Raging Bull,
DeNiro was the one who wanted to make this film and took some
convincing to get Scorsese on board. In an interview with Scorsese,
DeNiro, Bernhard, and Lewis; Scorsese admitted that he initially didnt
understand the films script only after a few more reads was it that he
started to understand it. They acknowledge that they never imagine the

film would receive continued (if not more) success in later years of films
release.
http://filmmakermagazine.com/69894-scorsese-de-niro-lewis-and-bernhardrecall-king-of-comedy/#.VNrReilN0lI
3) Apply the article to the film screened in class. How did the article support
or change the way you thought about the film, director, content, etc.?
I was surprised to read that again DeNiro was really the genius behind this
film and Raging Bull. I also find it funny that in the article both Scorsese and
DeNiro took poked fun at classifying this film as a comedy
I dont know whether its a comedy or what, said DeNiro. To which Scorsese
replied it wasnt a comedy, was it?
This article supports what I think the film; that its plot is relevant then as it is
now (people going insane over celebrities) and that this film will stand the test
of time.
4) Write a critical analysis of the film, including your personal opinion, formed
as a result of the screening, class discussions, text material and the article. I
am less interested in whether you liked or disliked a film, (although that can
be part of this) than I am in your understanding of its place in film history or
the contributions of the director.
This film was undoubtedly ahead of its time; which is the reason that it took
years after the films release for people to acknowledge it as a great piece of
work. Perhaps the fact that DeNiro and Scorsese already had scored
success for other films together (Taxi cab, Raging Bull) that people were
taking aback by the films satire or dark comedy. The film really isnt HA-HA
funny, but its awkwardness makes you cringe, then laugh about it (sort of like
laughing after a big drop on a roller coaster). I believe if this film were

released in the late 90s or 2000s the critics would have better received it. It
was during this period that obsession over celebrities was really prevalent
(i.e. NSYNC, Spice Girls). But the most interesting part of the film, for me,
was the ending; did Pupkin finally get his stardom or was it another delusion?
The brilliance of it is that, does it even matter? Whether it was his fantasy
finally playing out or if he was, again, distorting reality with imagination to
him he has reached his dream.
Plagiarism Statement:
CHECKLIST FOR PLAGIARISM
1) ( x ) I have not handed in this assignment for any other class.
2) ( x ) If I reused any information from other papers I have written for other
classes, I clearly explain that in the paper.
3) (x ) If I used any passages word for word, I put quotations around those words,
or used indentation and citation within the text.
4) ( x ) I have not padded the bibliography. I have used all sources cited in the
bibliography in the text of the paper.
5) ( x ) I have cited in the bibliography only the pages I personally read.
6) ( x ) I have used direct quotations only in cases where it could not be stated in
another way. I cited the source within the paper and in the bibliography.
7) (x ) I did not so over-use direct quotations that the paper lacks interpretation or
originality.
8) (x ) I checked yes on steps 1-7 and therefore have been fully transparent
about the research and ideas used in my paper.
Name: Maria Soldi

Date: 2/10/15