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

BaZmO* · 05-12-2019 10:33am

I really don't understand why Scorcese didn't go with younger actors for the earlier parts of their lives like he did in Goodfellas and the way DeNiro did in Godfather 2. It would've provided so much clarity.

Dots1982 · 05-12-2019 10:41am

BaZmO* wrote: »

I really don't understand why Scorcese didn't go with younger actors for the earlier parts of their lives like he did in Goodfellas and the way DeNiro did in Godfather 2. It would've provided so much clarity.

Because it’s far harder to find a 30 or 50 year old whose a good actor that will convince as someone who looks like a young Robert De Niro than a boyish Ray Liotta.

Although it’s sacrilegious to say it...I think Marty just cast too many old actors. The big studios probably passed because they could see this wouldn’t work and would be a hugely expensive failure.

pixelburp · 05-12-2019 10:51am

This film felt like a last hurrah for everyone involved, a chance to be totally in the limelight on last time, as opposed to share it with a younger generation; heck much of the talk about this film was simply down to the fact Joe Pesci had come out of retirement. It felt like it was a film FOR deNiro, Pacino and Pesci first and foremost.

Plus I had always wondered if perhaps Scorsese was taken in by the promises of the technology, without considering how the final result might look. That he was told of its wonders, and forgot to consider just how much the game would be given away by all that self-conscious movement of his older cast.

tylercheribini · 05-12-2019 2:04pm

blinding wrote: »

Watched it on Netflix .

A few old boys doing a movie as you would expect a few old boys to do it . Joe Pesci looked very old all the way through it . One or two scenes where I thought maybe they used somebody else's body that was too small for Pesci’s .

Too long, drawn out at the end . For most of the movie I saw only old men . Ok one bit when Sheeran was in the war looked like he was younger .

It doesn’t help that Sheeran was a big man and De Niro isn’t .

I think a movie about how Hoffa came from such humble beginnings to be one of the most powerful men in America may have made a better Movie .

How about ; The Long Rise of Jimmy Hoffa ; It really is a Great story in itself . Hoffa’s life story before his death and body disappearance is probably a Better Story . Hopefully some film maker will make that and do a better job than this film .

Hoffa has already been done with Jack Nicholson, not a bad film.

Kirby · 05-12-2019 2:16pm

pixelburp wrote: »

This film felt like a last hurrah for everyone involved, a chance to be totally in the limelight on last time, as opposed to share it with a younger generation; heck much of the talk about this film was simply down to the fact Joe Pesci had come out of retirement. It felt like it was a film FOR deNiro, Pacino and Pesci first and foremost.

Plus I had always wondered if perhaps Scorsese was taken in by the promises of the technology, without considering how the final result might look. That he was told of its wonders, and forgot to consider just how much the game would be given away by all that self-conscious movement of his older cast.

It's possible but even if the CGI had avoided the uncanny valley and been perfect.......it wouldn't have saved the film.

I generally like everything. Its tricky to find a film I really dislike. And to be fair I didnt hate this. But I don't think I've ever been more disappointed. I had expectations and this met none of them. This was so below par compared to Scorsese's other work I couldn't believe it. There are a couple of nice scenes here and there but as a whole, it was just so underwhelming.

tylercheribini · 05-12-2019 2:56pm

Dots1982 wrote: »

Because it’s far harder to find a 30 or 50 year old whose a good actor that will convince as someone who looks like a young Robert De Niro than a boyish Ray Liotta.

Although it’s sacrilegious to say it...I think Marty just cast too many old actors. The big studios probably passed because they could see this wouldn’t work and would be a hugely expensive failure.

Netflix are desperate for a major Oscar to legiitimise their place as a Hollywood player, this is probably their best hope yet so the seemingly high cost is a relatively small price to pay for this.

NIMAN · 05-12-2019 4:50pm

Anyone else thought that the younger GCI De Niro looked a lot like Robin Williams at times?

blinding · 05-12-2019 7:14pm

tylercheribini wrote: »

Hoffa has already been done with Jack Nicholson, not a bad film.

Maybe time for another go .

threeball · 05-12-2019 7:53pm

If they were going to use DeNiro, Pesci and Pacino, why didn't they do a movie with them as rival mob bosses. It would have been very believable and have great contrast to the characters. Instead they tried to turn back the clocks and it didn't work at all.

py2006 · 05-12-2019 10:02pm

A lot of nit picking in this thread. It's as if people like to go against the general consensus just for the sake of it. Oh let me pick out a scene I didn't like, therefore the movie is awful and I know better etc etc

Class acting, a joy to see these legends all together (sadly most likely the last time), and a welcome change from the crap we see of late.

blinding · 05-12-2019 10:23pm

py2006 wrote: »

A lot of nit picking in this thread. It's as if people like to go against the general consensus just for the sake of it. Oh let me pick out a scene I didn't like, therefore the movie is awful and I know better etc etc

Class acting, a joy to see these legends all together (sadly most likely the last time), and a welcome change from the crap we see of late.

So, we ‘have’ to say that a film we do not think is that good, is good .

This film will not stand the test of time that a ‘classic’ would/should .

Rayne Wooney · 05-12-2019 11:39pm

It was difficult for me to see this through to the end, it just didn’t do anything for me and I’ll probably never watch again.

Very surprised it’s got such a high rating across the board, had a look on rotten tomatoes, there must have been a lot of favours called in there? I was expecting mid 70s which is probably fair, but 97% is way way off the mark surely.

Padre_Pio · 06-12-2019 12:09am

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Nah, I just wanted a film where I felt invested in the characters. No rehash of past glories required for that.

Right from the off I was not liking the CGI. DeNiro looks at least 40 in the opening scenes, even if you're not watching his face, he moves like an old man.

It's weird watching people call him "kid", while he looks at least as old as them.

Other than that it was a very ponderous film. There's no climax. The story doesn't build to anything. It's an hour longer than Goodfellas, but does half as much.

It seems to jump around with a weird pace. Frank is some truck driver, then hitman mobster, then Hoffas bodyguard, then suddenly gets promoted to head of a union chapter, then has a huge party with the mayor. What did he do to earn this admiration and loyalty? He never seemed to do anything beyond take orders and kill people.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 06-12-2019 1:24am

py2006 wrote: »

A lot of nit picking in this thread. It's as if people like to go against the general consensus just for the sake of it. Oh let me pick out a scene I didn't like, therefore the movie is awful and I know better etc etc

Class acting, a joy to see these legends all together (sadly most likely the last time), and a welcome change from the crap we see of late.

Can you not fathom somebody not liking something that you do? It’s only possible for it to be a contrarian viewpoint? People have given good reasons for not liking the film. Of course they’re going to give examples from the film. That’s how it works.

“I know better” - yes, people do know better than you what they like and don’t like.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 06-12-2019 1:28am

Padre_Pio wrote: »

Right from the off I was not liking the CGI. DeNiro looks at least 40 in the opening scenes, even if you're not watching his face, he moves like an old man.

It's weird watching people call him "kid", while he looks at least as old as them.

Other than that it was a very ponderous film. There's no climax. The story doesn't build to anything. It's an hour longer than Goodfellas, but does half as much.

It seems to jump around with a weird pace. Frank is some truck driver, then hitman mobster, then Hoffas bodyguard, then suddenly gets promoted to head of a union chapter, then has a huge party with the mayor. What did he do to earn this admiration and loyalty? He never seemed to do anything beyond take orders and kill people.

Yeah, one thing about Goodfellas is that there is not one wasted moment.

I totally agree that the pacing was off. And that Frank as a person did not make a whole lot of sense. Basically, I’d doubt a lot of his story and it came through in the film.

Addle · 06-12-2019 8:01am

Anyone watch the ‘In Conversation’ documentary on Netflix yet?

MarkY91 · 06-12-2019 8:11am

Whqmat a bloody let down. What was it even about?

tylercheribini · 06-12-2019 4:40pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Yeah, one thing about Goodfellas is that there is not one wasted moment.

I totally agree that the pacing was off. And that Frank as a person did not make a whole lot of sense. Basically, I’d doubt a lot of his story and it came through in the film.

Scorsese stated he was experimenting with long form on this due to the Netflix medium. Yet another Goodfellas comparison seems to be the common them on this thread,it was never meant to be nor it could have been that film considering their ages. So you doubt Sheerans account but not Henry Hill or Jordan Belfort (a confirmed bull**** artist)? All primarily dependant on one persons testimony at the end of the day.

Dots1982 · 06-12-2019 4:45pm

tylercheribini wrote: »

Scorsese stated he was experimenting with long form on this due to the Netflix medium. Yet another Goodfellas comparison seems to be the common them on this thread,it was never meant to be nor it could have been that film considering their ages. So you doubt Sheerans account but not Henry Hill or Jordan Belfort, all primarily dependant on one persons testimony at the end of the day.

The two films are mob movies with a lot of the same cast and same director. They will obviously be compared.

tylercheribini · 06-12-2019 4:47pm

Dots1982 wrote: »

The two films are mob movies with a lot of the same cast and same director. They will obviously be compared.

Only 30 years has elapsed since the filming of Goodfellas, Jesus even John ****in Wayne ended up evolving somewhat in that time.

Dots1982 · 06-12-2019 4:52pm

tylercheribini wrote: »

Only 30 years has elapsed since the filming of Goodfellas, Jesus even John ****in Wayne ended up evolving somewhat in that time.

I don’t really get what the time between the movies has to do with it. They are pieces of art with the same people and theme. They will be compared.

tylercheribini · 06-12-2019 4:54pm

Dots1982 wrote: »

I don’t really get what the time between the movies has to do with it. They are pieces of art with the same people and theme. They will be compared.

So a 76 year old Pesci should have been beatin the lard out of everything that moved just like the good ol days.

Dots1982 · 06-12-2019 4:59pm

tylercheribini wrote: »

So a 76 year old Pesci should have been beatin the lard out of everything that moved just like the good ol days.

Nothing much to say but repeat that they are two pieces of art with the same people and same theme. They are going to be compared.

And Robert De Niro was “beating the lard” out of people in both movies. Sadly that was one problem with the Irishman.

J Mysterio · 06-12-2019 5:00pm

tylercheribini wrote: »

So a 76 year old Pesci should have been beatin the lard out of everything that moved just like the good ol days.

No, and - clearly - neither should De Niro have been. Even if they madd him look 'younger'. Awful.

Padre_Pio · 06-12-2019 5:07pm

tylercheribini wrote: »

So you doubt Sheerans account but not Henry Hill or Jordan Belfort (a confirmed bull**** artist)? All primarily dependant on one persons testimony at the end of the day.

I don't care whats factually correct. But Wolf of Wall Street and Goodfellas were masterfully written and directed and believable. Not so much for the Irishman.

It was a mistake IMO to cast DeNiro and Pesci as their younger selves. Maybe even to cast them at all.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 06-12-2019 5:07pm

tylercheribini wrote: »

Scorsese stated he was experimenting with long form on this due to the Netflix medium. Yet another Goodfellas comparison seems to be the common them on this thread,it was never meant to be nor it could have been that film considering their ages. So you doubt Sheerans account but not Henry Hill or Jordan Belfort (a confirmed bull**** artist)? All primarily dependant on one persons testimony at the end of the day.

Good for him. The thing with experiments is that they don’t always work.

I mentioned Goodfellas in response to somebody else making a point about it.

There may well be holes in Henry Hill’s and Jordan Belfort’s stories but they were more convincing. Whether because there was more truth in them or because Scorsese presented the thrust of the stories and the protoganists’ motivations in a more believable way, I don’t know. But their stories seemed more organic and made more sense. They added up more.

Part of Belfort’s story could well be embellished but a lot of what is portrayed in the film actually happened and is confirmed, albeit ramped up a bit. Same with Hill. With Sheeran, we’ve to take his word on most of what he says.

tylercheribini · 06-12-2019 5:35pm

J Mysterio wrote: »

No, and - clearly - neither should De Niro have been. Even if they madd him look 'younger'. Awful.

Admittedly that one brief scene was woefully misjudged but I didnt hang my whole opnion of the film on it.

endacl · 06-12-2019 5:38pm

MarkY91 wrote: »

Whqmat a bloody let down. What was it even about?

Exactly. The futility and ultimate emptiness of the lives depicted.

Well put. Excellent synopsis!

pixelburp · 06-12-2019 5:41pm

I don't think the age problem was limited to that one scene outside the grocers; throughout the movie, both Pacino and DeNiro just ... I dunno, held themselves like old people. That slightly hunched, wary demeanour of people a bit more careful of their relative frailty. Their gait, the way they composed themselves, it just kept giving the game away that these were old men.

Heck, DeNiro throwing the guns underarm into the river, or scenes where the actors could barely lift their arms above their shoulders, were also big giveaways.

tylercheribini · 06-12-2019 5:41pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Good for him. The thing with experiments is that they don’t always work.

I mentioned Goodfellas in response to somebody else making a point about it.

There may well be holes in Henry Hill’s and Jordan Belfort’s stories but they were more convincing. Whether because there was more truth in them or because Scorsese presented the thrust of the stories and the protoganists’ motivations in a more believable way, I don’t know. But their stories seemed more organic and made more sense. They added up more.

Part of Belfort’s story could well be embellished but a lot of what is portrayed in the film actually happened and is confirmed, albeit ramped up a bit. Same with Hill. With Sheeran, we’ve to take his word on most of what he says.

One of the pivotal scenes in Goodfellas, the Lufthansa heist, is entirely based on Hills word that his crew were responsible for it as nobody was ever brought ro justice for it. "Based on true events" is something I never bought into in a Hollywood production because it's a movie, you want facts read a book. you could pick holes in all of the these films all day, eg JFK is mainly bull**** but still one of my all time favourites.

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

Comments