What's new

The Irishman

Technics 1210

Technics 1210

Test Debutant
Joined
Feb 27, 2019
Runs
15,362
This movie deserves its own thread for obvious reasons; an absolute heavyweight of legends in one movie.

I watched it last night, and am going to watch it again shortly.

For me, this movie is not only the Godfather of this millennium, but one of the best movies I have seen in decades, and the best in 2019! They simply do not make movies like this anymore, and one can understand Scorsese resentment towards Comic book movies.

If this movie does not win awards, including Oscars, then we know the establishment is against Scorsese.

Absolute masterclass of a movie. 3.5 hours felt like 2.5 hours, that's how engaging and gripping the movie is.

So, who has seen this movie and what do you think of it?
 
I didn't realise it was nearly 3.5 hours long so will have to start it again when I have more time.

Pesci and De Niro look very old lol.

You say it's a great movie. Compared to Goodfellas and Casino?
 
KingKhanWC said:
I didn't realise it was nearly 3.5 hours long so will have to start it again when I have more time.

Pesci and De Niro look very old lol.

You say it's a great movie. Compared to Goodfellas and Casino?
Click to expand...

It is different to Goodfellas and Casino. The main difference being that Goodfellas/Casino movies were about excessive traits, such as stealing more load, earning more money, killing more people [from a story perspective]; but Irishman is complete opposite. It a slow pace movie about Gangstas getting old! FOr example, Pesci is not typecasted as the gangsta we come to love, he is the complete opposite, but equally menacing. In fact I think he edges it with his performance in The Irishman.

I would say Goodfellas and The Irishman are Scorsese's best pieces of work, at the opposite end of the Gangsta spectrum.
 
Technics 1210 said:
It is different to Goodfellas and Casino. The main difference being that Goodfellas/Casino movies were about excessive traits, such as stealing more load, earning more money, killing more people [from a story perspective]; but Irishman is complete opposite. It a slow pace movie about Gangstas getting old! FOr example, Pesci is not typecasted as the gangsta we come to love, he is the complete opposite, but equally menacing. In fact I think he edges it with his performance in The Irishman.

I would say Goodfellas and The Irishman are Scorsese's best pieces of work, at the opposite end of the Gangsta spectrum.
Click to expand...

Goodfellas is a masterpiece, a work of art! Thanks will give a review once I have watched it.
 
KingKhanWC said:
Goodfellas is a masterpiece, a work of art! Thanks will give a review once I have watched it.
Click to expand...

I have about 15 Steelbooks, and Goodfellas is one of them. The 4K UHD conversion makes Goodfellas even better! As you say, GF is a work of art!

The good thing about The Irishman is while the content is the opposite of Goodfellas, you can tell the movie is a Scorsese movie. He has not lost his touch!
 
For me it serves as a sort of epilogue to the crime genre in a similar way that Unforgiven did for the Western
 
KingKhanWC said:
I didn't realise it was nearly 3.5 hours long so will have to start it again when I have more time.

Pesci and De Niro look very old lol.

You say it's a great movie. Compared to Goodfellas and Casino?
Click to expand...

One thing I really don't like about this movie is that while the digital technology is not bad at taking away lines from the faces, all the big stars still have bodies of 70 yr olds. It just isn't convincing and it makes it look like a film about mob pensioners.

Will critique the film properly once I've finished watching it, only saw the first hour so far as I got interrupted after putting it on. Seems quite slow at this stage.
 
I had spare time last night and thought I should watch it. Turns out it's 3.5 hours long!!!


I have a looooong flight coming in Dec, I'll save it for then.
 
I watched it yesterday. It felt like a swansong for Pacino, Pesci and DeNiro, not least because it shows the latter two in wheelchairs.

They used some post-production digital trickery (instead of makeup) to transform them to their younger selves for the scenes set in the 50s, and those depictions are squarely in Uncanny Valley territory.
 
Cpt. Rishwat said:
One thing I really don't like about this movie is that while the digital technology is not bad at taking away lines from the faces, all the big stars still have bodies of 70 yr olds. It just isn't convincing and it makes it look like a film about mob pensioners.

Will critique the film properly once I've finished watching it, only saw the first hour so far as I got interrupted after putting it on. Seems quite slow at this stage.
Click to expand...

I agree. It's not easy but really should have been better. Reminds me of white chicks movie.
 
Cpt. Rishwat said:
One thing I really don't like about this movie is that while the digital technology is not bad at taking away lines from the faces, all the big stars still have bodies of 70 yr olds. It just isn't convincing and it makes it look like a film about mob pensioners.

Will critique the film properly once I've finished watching it, only saw the first hour so far as I got interrupted after putting it on. Seems quite slow at this stage.
Click to expand...

It's interesting you mention this, because Scorsese says when he shot the first scene of the movie [Pacino having a pop at Kennedy in his living room] the shot had to be taken a number of times because Pacino got up from his seat too slow for a 50 year old! The scene was re-shot with Pacino getting up faster. The funny part was Scorsese did not know how to tell Pacino as he didn't want to disrespect him given this was the first time Scorsese and Pacino worked together! [This info was in the extras on Netflix]

I never really noticed the slow movement, but will keep an eye out on it on my second viewing.
 
9/10

Loses a point for some dodgy de-aging fx. Yes they look younger but still move around like old men. That was distracting sometimes.
 
in_cutter said:
9/10

Loses a point for some dodgy de-aging fx. Yes they look younger but still move around like old men. That was distracting sometimes.
Click to expand...

I watched the movie on a 75" 4K QLED. I disabled all enhanced picture features on the TV which make images sharper and vibrant, and switched to movie mode. The anti-aging technology doesn't even register, yet the 4K detail is spot on.
 
Technics 1210 said:
It's interesting you mention this, because Scorsese says when he shot the first scene of the movie [Pacino having a pop at Kennedy in his living room] the shot had to be taken a number of times because Pacino got up from his seat too slow for a 50 year old! The scene was re-shot with Pacino getting up faster. The funny part was Scorsese did not know how to tell Pacino as he didn't want to disrespect him given this was the first time Scorsese and Pacino worked together! [This info was in the extras on Netflix]

I never really noticed the slow movement, but will keep an eye out on it on my second viewing.
Click to expand...

I watched the rest of the movie tonight, and there was a point when Pesci, DeNiro and Pacino were all on fire for about 90 minutes, when it was all about facial expressions and just pure acting. Just wasn't convincing when they were trying to stomp on fingers or punch out people physically with their 70yr old bodies. I think I preferred the old days when you had younger actors playing out the younger roles, it just gives the movie some more believable vitality.

Good film, not great for those flaws only. Might be a reason why it was released on Netflix rather than to cinema first.
 
Cpt. Rishwat said:
I watched the rest of the movie tonight, and there was a point when Pesci, DeNiro and Pacino were all on fire for about 90 minutes, when it was all about facial expressions and just pure acting. Just wasn't convincing when they were trying to stomp on fingers or punch out people physically with their 70yr old bodies. I think I preferred the old days when you had younger actors playing out the younger roles, it just gives the movie some more believable vitality.
Click to expand...

I think Pesci's character edged it.


Cpt. Rishwat said:
Good film, not great for those flaws only. Might be a reason why it was released on Netflix rather than to cinema first.
Click to expand...

The movie was released in a select few cinemas due to the movie's length.

Hollywood studios rejected the movie because comic-book movies were far more profitable and the studios didn't think there was a market for another epic Gansta movie. Netflix stepped in, bought the right for I think it was about $150M, and the rest is history.
 
Technics 1210 said:
This movie deserves its own thread for obvious reasons; an absolute heavyweight of legends in one movie.

I watched it last night, and am going to watch it again shortly.

For me, this movie is not only the Godfather of this millennium, but one of the best movies I have seen in decades, and the best in 2019! They simply do not make movies like this anymore, and one can understand Scorsese resentment towards Comic book movies.

If this movie does not win awards, including Oscars, then we know the establishment is against Scorsese.

Absolute masterclass of a movie. 3.5 hours felt like 2.5 hours, that's how engaging and gripping the movie is.

So, who has seen this movie and what do you think of it?
Click to expand...
Havent seen it, but sounds a little bit like the movie 'donnie brasco' , with an aging gangster played by al pacino. Obviously, the difference is johnny dep is playing an undercover cop.
 
Perhaps I don't have a good taste in movies, but I watched half of this movie last night and did not have the patience to continue watching it.
 
It was alright, prefer goodfellas, casino, and departed over this one.

It just felt recycled, we've already seen these type of scenes in the above mentioned film just with different names and players this time.

The ending was very powerful though, the fate of a gangster who manages to outlive all his friends.
 
CricFan2012 said:
It was alright, prefer goodfellas, casino, and departed over this one.

It just felt recycled, we've already seen these type of scenes in the above mentioned film just with different names and players this time.

The ending was very powerful though, the fate of a gangster who manages to outlive all his friends.
Click to expand...

Recycled? You do know this is based on a true story, correct?
 
Captain caveman said:
Havent seen it, but sounds a little bit like the movie 'donnie brasco' , with an aging gangster played by al pacino. Obviously, the difference is johnny dep is playing an undercover cop.
Click to expand...

Pacino was ageing in that film, but he was still pretty believable as a legitimate tough guy. Also that film had younger guys like Depp and Michael Mansfield who were playing the muscle so the film had a certain vitality that was missing from this one.
 
I never much liked Scorsese. I know he's supposed to be good, but I don't know why.
 
Scorsese nailed it again. The 3.5 hrs just flew by. Pacino and De Niro show that inspite of making crap for years, they can be back to their best if needed. Good to see Joe Pesci be the most sensible person in the room for once.
 
No spoilers please.

Is there a totally irritating narration track? Sometimes I feel that Scorsese relies way too much on narration, such as in Goodfellas and Casino. Narration in films tends to suggest to me that the director didn’t have the skill to tell the story without it.

I do really like The Departed and Shutter Island though, they are two brilliant films that he has done.

I will watch the Irishman, just looks very long!! lol
 
James said:
No spoilers please.

Is there a totally irritating narration track? Sometimes I feel that Scorsese relies way too much on narration, such as in Goodfellas and Casino. Narration in films tends to suggest to me that the director didn’t have the skill to tell the story without it.

I do really like The Departed and Shutter Island though, they are two brilliant films that he has done.

I will watch the Irishman, just looks very long!! lol
Click to expand...

Yes, there's narration, quite a lot of it by DeNiro.
 
As for the movie, on a scale of 1 to 10, it was a Meh..

The scene where Deniro "beats up" the diner guy was (unintentionally) hilarious though.
 
It's a very well acted and directed epic.

Story never drags, nor does it feel rushed. Director took his time to develop all characters.

A solid 8/10. It's good but Godfather (10/10) is in a different league.

Cloud Atlas and Avatar were better than The Irishman, as far as epics are concerned.
 
Following my first viewing of The Irishman, I decided to watch the greatest unofficial quadrilogy in order [I am on gardening leave! :) ]

Mean Streets - [showed the streets where gangsters came from]
Goodfellas - [showed them moving up and taking a city]
Casino - [showed them with real money and power]
The Irishman - [showed them how it all ends]

Masterpieces in the annals of cinema history.

[MENTION=110712]Captain[/MENTION] L I looked out for the slow movement and you are right, it is slightly noticeable in full body shots, but I also noticed the physique of the characters also changed in the flash backs i.e. the characters are slimmer!
 
It’s Scorsese doing what he knows best and it’s hugely watchable. A noteworthy accolade given the length of the film.

For me, Al Pacino, in his first film with the Director comes away with the stand out performance - though the acting by all is superb.

Just wish I hadn’t read about the digital gimmickry before watching it as certain aspects of the film are made more noticeable by the veteran actors trying to play their younger self’s.
 
Technics 1210 said:
Following my first viewing of The Irishman, I decided to watch the greatest unofficial quadrilogy in order [I am on gardening leave! :) ]

Mean Streets - [showed the streets where gangsters came from]
Goodfellas - [showed them moving up and taking a city]
Casino - [showed them with real money and power]
The Irishman - [showed them how it all ends]

Masterpieces in the annals of cinema history.

[MENTION=110712]Captain[/MENTION] L I looked out for the slow movement and you are right, it is slightly noticeable in full body shots, but I also noticed the physique of the characters also changed in the flash backs i.e. the characters are slimmer!
Click to expand...

The characters are slimmer, but the shape and movement is still that of old men. I mentioned the scene where Deniro beats up someone and stomps on their fingers, and bizarrely it looked like a pensioner doing it despite the CGI. I thought it maybe it was just me seeing it, but Deadball also picked up on it. Just hire younger actors to play younger parts, for me that works better than all the expensive computer animations.
 
Cpt. Rishwat said:
The characters are slimmer, but the shape and movement is still that of old men. I mentioned the scene where Deniro beats up someone and stomps on their fingers, and bizarrely it looked like a pensioner doing it despite the CGI. I thought it maybe it was just me seeing it, but Deadball also picked up on it. Just hire younger actors to play younger parts, for me that works better than all the expensive computer animations.
Click to expand...

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...h-reeled-him-back-into-the-mob-life-vxqk8lhlq

De Niro, Scorsese and his producers had a long talk about whether to use younger actors to play the young versions of Frank, Russell and Jimmy. Scorsese realised that the flashbacks, “which almost comprised, for Bob, half the picture, would have to be played by younger actors. What am I going to be doing? I’ve got to explain everything to them? It meant I would get to make only half the film with Bob. Why do it? That was the whole point of it. We wanted to work together and see if we could find anything new, to find the comfort area of our stage in life.”
Click to expand...
 
Cpt. Rishwat said:
I mentioned the scene where Deniro beats up someone and stomps on their fingers, and bizarrely it looked like a pensioner doing it despite the CGI.
Click to expand...

Yes, the scene where he stamps on the corner shop owner for abusing his daughter Peggy, appeared to be in slow motion.
That was probably the best example of the flawed digital experiment.
 
This film was better than 80% of what's been released in the last 10 years.

It does not however, come close to Scorcese's work in the 80s or 90s.

I would go into this movie with a fresh set of eye. If you watch it whilst comparing it to a Goodlfellas or Casino you will be disappointed.
 
Cpt. Rishwat said:
The characters are slimmer, but the shape and movement is still that of old men. I mentioned the scene where Deniro beats up someone and stomps on their fingers, and bizarrely it looked like a pensioner doing it despite the CGI. I thought it maybe it was just me seeing it, but Deadball also picked up on it. Just hire younger actors to play younger parts, for me that works better than all the expensive computer animations.
Click to expand...

Yes, this was immediately noticeable to me. And not only in the action scenes. They should have gotten body doubles for those action scenes or something, like Arnold in one of the more recent terminator films.

As far as the movie itself, it was just so-so. I won't be re-watching it anytime soon. It's not in the same ballpark as Goodfellas, Casino, Departed.
 
Any of you watch it in parts? I don't think I can do 3.5 hours in one sitting.
 
I don't advocate watching the movie in multiple parts, but if anyone does want to break the movie down in parts, then here's how to do it :

Capture.JPG
 
Watched it last weekend. Enjoyed it the most of his canon, as unlike other Scorsese films it had humour.

A bit long, but I suppose it was necessary to tell the tale of fifty years of a man’s life.

The Hoffa story was engrossing, and the JFK connection.
 
Last edited:
humzy said:
This film was better than 80% of what's been released in the last 10 years.

It does not however, come close to Scorcese's work in the 80s or 90s.

I would go into this movie with a fresh set of eye. If you watch it whilst comparing it to a Goodlfellas or Casino you will be disappointed.
Click to expand...

I much preferred it to The Godfather, which I found draggy and not very engaging.
 
DeadBall said:
And to think the Mullahs are making a fuss over that Khoosat movie. This is actual blasphemy.
Click to expand...

Rob has Irish ancestry, probably has some sort of weird ex-Catholic guilt trip going on there. The Italian mafia probably spoke to the likes of us a bit closer to home.

The idea of the Godfather being more draggy though. Dear me. Most people needed two sittings to get through the Irishman.
 
Looking forward to watching this soon. It seems like most feel it's a great film.
 
Robert said:
I much preferred it to The Godfather, which I found draggy and not very engaging.
Click to expand...

Each to their own but the Godfather 1 and 2 had me at the end of my seat so many times. Plus De Niro and Brando are so charismatic in it, I couldn't stop watching, even the draggy scenes.
 
humzy said:
Each to their own but the Godfather 1 and 2 had me at the end of my seat so many times. Plus De Niro and Brando are so charismatic in it, I couldn't stop watching, even the draggy scenes.
Click to expand...

Were they? I can appreciate GF1 in an intellectual way - if was the first dynastic film, and it had the moral ambiguity, there were no good guys or bad guys, the impact on The Sopranos which I loved. It’s more interesting to me to talk about than watch.

However I found GF2 borderline unwatchable. Three hours of nothing interesting happening. I finished it but I couldn’t tell you a thing that happened in it.

A lot of these classics do nothing for me - Citizen Kane, Casablanca, The Third Man.
 
Cpt. Rishwat said:
Rob has Irish ancestry, probably has some sort of weird ex-Catholic guilt trip going on there. The Italian mafia probably spoke to the likes of us a bit closer to home.

The idea of the Godfather being more draggy though. Dear me. Most people needed two sittings to get through the Irishman.
Click to expand...

I came from Scots-Irish Proddy stock, not Catholic.

I must admit I did like the bit where Michael renounces the Devil and all his works while simultaneously unleashing Hell on Earth.
 
Robert said:
Were they? I can appreciate GF1 in an intellectual way - if was the first dynastic film, and it had the moral ambiguity, there were no good guys or bad guys, the impact on The Sopranos which I loved. It’s more interesting to me to talk about than watch.

However I found GF2 borderline unwatchable. Three hours of nothing interesting happening. I finished it but I couldn’t tell you a thing that happened in it.

A lot of these classics do nothing for me - Citizen Kane, Casablanca, The Third Man.
Click to expand...

Oh I dont find a lot of those old movies interesting either, but Coppola films are really in their own league. The depth of character, themes and story telling that he brings are unrivalled. Have you seen Apocalypse Now?
 
humzy said:
Oh I dont find a lot of those old movies interesting either, but Coppola films are really in their own league. The depth of character, themes and story telling that he brings are unrivalled. Have you seen Apocalypse Now?
Click to expand...

I like Apocalypse Now and Patton. I have not see The Conversation. I hated Bram's Stoker's Dracula.

Mrs Robert says that in order to "get" The Godfather you have to hear what isn't being said. As I only hear what is said I probably miss a lot of meaning.
 
I watched this movie,great movie,actors were old I heard that they have done VFX so that they look younger,still it gets flopped due to gunshots they were firing and beating the shopkeeper 🤣🤣.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

FearlessRoar
"I chose not to be part of any film that could hurt the sentiments of either Pakistan or India”: Rajpal Yadav
Replies
23
Views
1K
Slim
Slim
Bhaijaan
Was the movie Khalnayak ahead of its time or Were we just too young to understand Balu Balram?
Replies
14
Views
666
Bhaag Viru Bhaag
Bhaag Viru Bhaag
Bhaijaan
Khuda Gawah - The Bollywood epic film which ran 10 weeks houseful in Kabul. Why it remains the greatest epic film ever made in Bollywood history
Replies
19
Views
2K
Major
Major
rickroll
Arab racism against fellow Muslims
2
Replies
158
Views
5K
Aang_The_last_airbender
Aang_The_last_airbender
MenInG
Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse banned in UAE and Saudi Arabia cinemas
Replies
68
Views
4K
MenInG
MenInG
Back
Top