The Irishman (Scorsese, De Niro, Pesci and Pacino)

El Duda

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Wolf of Wall st is possibly the worst movie of the past ten years , gangs of new york is the worst movie of the previous decade with The Departed a close second

You sound like you've only seen about 10 films.

tylercheribini

El Duda wrote: »

You sound like you've only seen about 10 films.

No doubt a Marvel-ite.

Mad_maxx

tylercheribini wrote: »

No doubt a Marvel-ite.

Definitely not

Kunkka

I had high expectations after the things I’d read about this movie, but it really was a let down. I was tired watching it which probably didn’t help, but Pesci was the only thing refreshing about it for me. I wanted to leave after about two hours.

De Niro was awkward and Pacino was annoying, which was a shock with them being two of my favourite actors. It all just felt very unauthentic and seemed like there were so many bad attempts at parts of previous movies from the genre. The ageing thing was a mess too, De Niro looked like he was going to fall over outside that grocery shop scene.

Thinking back I can’t think of one really compelling character in it, it all just felt very boring and drawn out.

tylercheribini

Kunkka wrote: »

I had high expectations after the things I’d read about this movie, but it really was a let down. I was tired watching it which probably didn’t help, but Pesci was the only thing refreshing about it for me. I wanted to leave after about two hours.

De Niro was awkward and Pacino was annoying, which was a shock with them being two of my favourite actors. It all just felt very unauthentic and seemed like there were so many bad attempts at parts of previous movies from the genre. The ageing thing was a mess too, De Niro looked like he was going to fall over outside that grocery shop scene.

Thinking back I can’t think of one really compelling character in it, it all just felt very boring and drawn out.

A career in film criticism awaits.

Mad_maxx

tylercheribini wrote: »

A career in film criticism awaits.

Two in a row

eddie73

This is not a good film. Quite simply long and dull. Had you never heard of the main actors before, or the director, or his other comparible movies, this film on its own merits, is a waste of an evening. I left it after 2 hours. Unless the final hour and a half improved beyond recognition, this is one to miss.

It's amazing how reviews can be so wrong or is it that people are afraid to say they don't like or like something anymore just because it deviates from the critics. A borefest.

Mad_maxx

eddie73 wrote: »

This is not a good film. Quite simply long and dull. Had you never heard of the main actors before, or the director, or his other comparible movies, this film on its own merits, is a waste of an evening. I left it after 2 hours. Unless the final hour and a half improved beyond recognition, this is one to miss.

It's amazing how reviews can be so wrong or is it that people are afraid to say they don't like or like something anymore just because it deviates from the critics. A borefest.

Scorcesses has long been a Hollywood sacred cow, i remember Gangs of New York being branded a classic back in 2002 upon release, it's dog sh1t

thomas 123

eddie73 wrote: »

This is not a good film. Quite simply long and dull. Had you never heard of the main actors before, or the director, or his other comparible movies, this film on its own merits, is a waste of an evening. I left it after 2 hours. Unless the final hour and a half improved beyond recognition, this is one to miss.

It's amazing how reviews can be so wrong or is it that people are afraid to say they don't like or like something anymore just because it deviates from the critics. A borefest.

How can you judge it if you didn’t stay for the last third?

And yes you missed the the ending, usually an important part of any story.

Arghus

I thought the last hour was the best part of the film. Gave it a depth and resonance that had been slightly lacking up until that point IMO.

tylercheribini

Its nothing short of a miracle this film got made in todays environment, many of the detractors here demonstrate this.

Arghus

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Wolf of Wall st is possibly the worst movie of the past ten years , gangs of new york is the worst movie of the previous decade with The Departed a close second

If you aren't deliberately trolling, you are talking complete nonsense.

Fair enough if you don't like those films - I'm not gone on Gangs of New York myself - but to claim they're among the worst of the last few decades? That's just laughable. You are so wrong it's hilarious. I'd absolutely love to hear your reasoning in relation to this.

Have you actually watched many films in your life, generally?

Beechwoodspark

I pity how some posters seem to have no appreciation of this film. “But thems the breaks”!

tylercheribini

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

I pity how some posters seem to have no appreciation of this film. “But thems the breaks”!

Not crash-bang-wallop enough for some, they were never the intended audience anyway.

johnny_ultimate

Mod note: Please note the forum charter re: personalised jibes and generalised insults.

Feel free to challenge posters’ perspectives, but please do so without the little digs please.

JoeA3

I saw it lastnight and I enjoyed it a lot. It was great to see the 3 screen legends on screen together again. Great to see DeNiro back doing what he does best and not phoning in another dreadful "comedy". I didn't feel the 3+ hours pass.

The de-age'ing was a bit ropey imo, there's no way any of them looked as young as they were supposed to be portraying in the early part of the film. The ageing effects worked much better in the latter part of the film. Still, I think I prefer they took this approach rather than casting younger actors and overall it didn't detract from the story.

eddie73

thomas 123 wrote: »

How can you judge it if you didn’t stay for the last third?

And yes you missed the the ending, usually an important part of any story.

It would have taken something remarkable for this film to redeem itself in the final hour imo. I could only judge the movie on what I had seen up to that point, and another hour and a half was too big a gamble to satisfy my forlorn curiosity whether it would turn out well or not. It reminded me a bit of his movie, silence, mixed up with a parody of other gangster movies that he directed. Silence was a much better movie imo as it was not trying to be anything other than itself. The Irishman on the other hand was trying very hard to be different, but falling back on the same exhausted and cliched gangster script. The documentary style narration was embarrassing. The only thing this movie had going for it was the cast and of course the director. Naturally, a person who has invested much of their time following favorite actors and directors is not going to give up on a show easily. I may watch the end of this film in the near future, but I really don't see the point as it would be leveraging off some pretty lame drama. And no, I don't get excited by the crash bang wallop shows either, although Dr Sleep was much more watchable than this at the same time.

Yamanoto

tylercheribini wrote: »

Not crash-bang-wallop enough for some, they were never the intended audience anyway.

Sorry now, but instead of repeatedly having a dig at others whose subjective opinions may run contrary to your own, you might take on board that on a discussion forum, you're unlikely to find the almost complete levels of consensus you appear to require.

El Duda

Not an accusation of anyone in this thread but...

Are butt-hurt Marvel fanboys going to see this just to prove some kind of point? Is that actually a thing?

The Nal

El Duda wrote: »

Not an accusation of anyone in this thread but...

Are butt-hurt Marvel fanboys going to see this just to prove some kind of point? Is that actually a thing?

Yup

tylercheribini

Yamanoto wrote: »

Sorry now, but instead of repeatedly having a dig at others whose subjective opinions may run contrary to your own, you might take on board that on a discussion forum, you're unlikely to find the almost complete levels of consensus you appear to require.

I havent taken aim at any indivuduals here so you should probably do the same, as forum charter states,opnions can be challenged.

Redhighking

eddie73 wrote: »

The documentary style narration was embarrassing.

It actually added alot of comedic value and depth to film, especially in the latter half of the film.

You literally can only claim half an opinion on the film which is not very useful to anybody! Watch it in its entirety when its released on Netflix later this month, will give you a fully informed opinion.

lawred2

El Duda wrote: »

Not an accusation of anyone in this thread but...

Are butt-hurt Marvel fanboys going to see this just to prove some kind of point? Is that actually a thing?

what's happening?

Seathrun66

branie2 wrote: »

That hasn't been done in a very long time!

The Hateful Eight had an intermission.

lawred2

Seathrun66 wrote: »

The Hateful Eight had an intermission.

I wonder how many people came back after the intermission?

tylercheribini

The Hateful Eight,now there is a self-indulgent,baaaaad movie.

eddie73

Redhighking wrote: »

It actually added alot of comedic value and depth to film, especially in the latter half of the film.

You literally can only claim half an opinion on the film which is not very useful to anybody! Watch it in its entirety when its released on Netflix later this month, will give you a fully informed opinion.

Fair enough, I will tune into the last 90 on Netflix. Reserving judgement.

Martin Tyler AgueroooOO

What date does it arrive on Netflix itself?

Pighead

Martin Tyler AgueroooOO wrote: »

What date does it arrive on Netflix itself?

27th of this month I think.

artvanderlay

Just saw it this evening. The first 60-90 minutes were very good; great to see De Niro and Pesci back together, and there were some familiar faces I was looking forward to seeing more of, but then it turned into the Jimmy Hoffa story, and that dragged on for ages. Scenes were stretched out far too long (at one stage I went to the loo, and when I came back De Niro and Pesci were still talking in code about

how Hoffa had to go

!). I was hoping for a lot more of Keitel too; I smiled when I saw him but he just didn't figure. De Niro's acting has waned; he just turns up these days, and goes through the motions. He's still De Niro, but he's old and not as dynamic as he once was. Pesci was outstanding; the best thing about the movie. Pacino gave a fairly standard Pacino performance. The de-aging was ok, but De Niro's looked the ropiest (like the conductor on the Polar Express!). I don't think there was any need for this movie to be longer than a couple of hours, to be honest; some decent editing could have really improved things. It was a nice movie experience on a cold winter's night, but it felt fairly minor overall; we have seen these characters and themes done a lot better in Sopranos and Goodfellas/Casino. This felt old hat in comparison to them. James Ellroy's books have also covered similar ground with a lot more dynamism. This just felt like a swansong for some old legends to work together one last time. 7/10 And I hope Pesci stays unretired - I missed him.