Netflix: The Irishman - Robert De Niro, Martin Scorsese, Al Pacino, Joe Pesci & Harvey Keitel.

Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by Veech, Apr 29, 2017.

  1. Chazro

    Chazro Forum Resident

    Location:
    West Palm Bch, Fl.
    I'd hardly call the Irishman the 'top of his game'! I'd say it's cool to see that Scorcese's still IN the game, the fact he's playing the game at all is a revelation!;)
     
  2. GMfan87'

    GMfan87' Forum Resident

    Location:
    CT.
    I think those last two hours belong in some of the best of his work.
    It's certaintly some of his most emotional work in the mob cannon.
     
    Tom Campbell and This Heat like this.
  3. Squealy

    Squealy Forum Hall Of Fame

    Location:
    Vancouver
    Have you seen the movie?
     
  4. Purple Jim

    Purple Jim Senior Member

    Location:
    Bretagne
    Finally watched it last night and liked it a lot.
    The first 45 minutes or so were a bit draggy and the facial CG bothered me a little (sometimes creates a sort of glazed look in the eyes).
    Once Pachino comes into his own, with his interactions with De Niro, plus Peschi's role developping,... I was totally with it. Some hilarious dialogue too.
     
  5. brownie61

    brownie61 Forum Resident

    I finally got to see this yesterday at a friend’s house who has Netflix.

    I liked it, but didn’t love it. I definitely thought it was a little too long, and could probably have been cut down without losing much.

    I thought Robert DeNiro’s performance was spectacular and understated. Al Pacino was too over the top at times - I don’t know why I’m seeing him on supporting actor nomination lists. Joe Pesci was quietly understated and much more deserving of the nominations, where he is sharing the category with Pacino. I don’t think it’s even a contest. (Why am I not seeing any nominations for DeNiro, who IMHO was better than either of them?)

    The CGI didn’t bother me at all.

    I thought the film was surprisingly low in the graphic violence category - you know, the kind that makes you have to close your eyes. I was grateful for that, but surprised.

    Overall, I think it was a little sprawling. I did appreciate a lot of the humor and we laughed out loud a lot. I’m not sure what it would have needed for me to say it was great...maybe shorter length? I’m not sure. For the record, I loved Casino and Goodfellas and am a huge fan of all these actors.
     
  6. TheSeldomSeenKid

    TheSeldomSeenKid Forum Resident

    I made the same comment on Pacino, as he seems to have been Over the Top in a few other Movies like the one where he plays the Devil, "Look but don't Touch, Touch but don't Taste..........", although he was good in 'Heat'(that Chris Nolan ripped off a Scene when he made 'The Dark Knight', but that is a whole other issue). The only thing is, maybe Pacino was playing Hoffa like he was really like in life, as you sort of need to be Over the Top to give those inspiring speeches as a Union Leader.

    How do you know De Niro has not been nominated as were they made yet for the SAG and Academy Awards yet? Those are the 2 Big Ones, although personally I am not into Award Shows, as who is to say one Acting Performance is better than another or one Movie or Album is better, just based on a certain number of people voting on it and in several cases, worthy Acting Performances, Movies, Albums, etc, never even get nominated in the first place. Scorsese never won Best Director until he won for 'The Departed' that was far from his best work, ummm ok. Awards are just subjective opinions, and do not validate how good the Winner is over the other Nominees or those never nominated-IMO.

    Now, if I was betting, I think due to his advanced age, Pesci has a great chance to Win Best Supporting Actor at the SAG & Academy Awards, but he could split the vote with Pacino from the same Movie that would allow Brad Pitt, or another nominated Supporting Actor to win that Award. Not to infer that Pesci is not deserving, as he was excellent(as was De Niro and Keitel(spelling?) in 'The Irishman'.

    I do concur that 'The Irishman' was too long, and at least 30 minutes could have been trimmed. I just watched the FX Movie Remake of, 'A Christmas Carol' and thought it was good, but with Adverts, was 3 Hours & 15 Minutes, although every break was short, so think the Movie was still close to 3 Hours, and the first hour just dragged on-IMO. I do plan to rewatch it though.
     
  7. Richard--W

    Richard--W Forum Resident

    3 hours 29 minutes uninterrupted and I was absorbed by every second of it.

    I wouldn't have minded if it were longer.

    It has more intellect and craftsmanship than any film I've seen in a long time.
    Everyone involved in front of the camera and behind are at the peak of their
    expertise. The story is structured and sustained brilliantly. It's all character-
    interaction and the tensions that arise out of character-interaction. Each
    performance is wonderful. There are many memorable scenes.

    The Irishman is a drama in the traditional sense of drama. Not an action film,
    not a thrill ride, not pop culture, not juvenile, not childish, not agenda-driven.
    I don't miss these things, and I don't need them. It's gangster melodrama on
    an epic scale for mature grown-ups. That's why I like it.

    The aging and de-aging is what it is. That's right. It is what it is. I accept it and
    move on to enjoying the film as it unfolds.

    I was born and raised in a Sicilian household in the greater NYC area where
    some of this story takes place. I recognize these people and the culture they
    come out of. I followed reports of the Gallo killing, knew the neighborhood,
    have studied up on it some, and found the re-enactment in this film to be
    surprisingly accurate. The film is true to life on many levels.

    For me The Irishman isn't fiction, it's reality.

    The best film I've seen in a long time.
     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2019
    Dudley Morris, WJA, mikeyt and 14 others like this.
  8. hybrid_77

    hybrid_77 Forum Resident

    Location:
    New England
    Great review. Just read this little bit about Pacino's next project, which will be on Amazon


    "Al Pacino, who is currently doing his Al Pacino thing in Martin Scorsese’s “The Irishman,” will do his Al Pacino thing on a TV series. Pacino has been in a number of TV movies on HBO, including “Paterno,” “Phil Spector,” and “You Don’t Know Jack,” and he shined in each of them. But this will be his first foray into episodic TV.

    The show is called “Hunters,” and it sounds fascinating in a very dark and timely way, even though it’s set in 1977. It’s about a group of New York-based Nazi hunters who learn that hundreds of high-ranking Nazis are living in the United States under assumed identities. Worse, they are conspiring to create a Fourth Reich in this country. From executive producer Jordan Peele and creator David Weil, the first 10-episode season is due next year on Amazon.

    The cast around Pacino is led by Logan Lerman, the actor who starred in “The Perks of Being a Wallflower” and “The Three Musketeers” (in 2011).

    Also on the list: Jeannie Berlin, Dylan Baker, Carol Kane, Lena Olin, Saul Rubinek, Josh Radnor, Sam Daly, and James Le Gros."
     
    budwhite, alexpop and Instant Dharma like this.
  9. Wildest cat from montana

    Wildest cat from montana Humble Reader

    Location:
    ontario canada
    Sounds...promising.
     
  10. Richard--W

    Richard--W Forum Resident

    The studios turned down The Irishman.

    Unbelievable. They're out of their collective mind.
     
  11. TheSeldomSeenKid

    TheSeldomSeenKid Forum Resident

    Might have been due to the 3.5 Hours Length of the Movie, as that would limit each Theater Screen to 3 Time Slots per day, so maybe the Movie Studios figured it would limit Ticket Sales(and thus Total Revenue) at the Theaters even if showing in a few Rooms per Theater like at Regal.
     
  12. Richard--W

    Richard--W Forum Resident

    or four time slots per day.

    No Scorsese infers it was the age of the actors not appealing to the young
    audience who buy most of the tickets. I think the studios were wrong. The
    studios overthink and underthink these things. Plus their reason was
    probably an excuse to suppress a film that doesn't have female leads and
    a strictly feminist agenda both prerequisites to getting a finance and
    distribution deal. I've been in these meetings trying to negotiate for my
    own films and learned how these people think.
     
    Gumboo likes this.
  13. TheSeldomSeenKid

    TheSeldomSeenKid Forum Resident

    How do you figure 4 Times per Day?

    I see it as with typical 3o minutes break(includes about 10 Minutes of Trailers prior) between each Showing:

    11:00-2:30
    3:00-6:30
    7:00-10:30

    If you are aware of Theaters starting Movies earlier than 11:00am that might allow for a 10:00pm Showing, but being a 3.5 Hours Movie doubtful there would be a 10:00pm Showing(maybe for a 2 or 2.5 Hours Movie), then that would be news to me. The earliest time shown at the Theater I saw this Movie in was 11:00am.

    As far as the Age of the Actors(and this coming from someone, who loved the Movie and the Actors in it), it would have been better(IMO) to use other Actors(Younger and Age Appropriate) to play the Characters in their early 40s, as the one problem I had with the Movie was while, you can use technology to change the Faces, their bodies moved like people in their 70s. i.e.-De Niro going to beat up the guy in the Store.

    Even Pacino mentioned that when he filmed a scene getting out of a chair, Scorsese let him know that he needed another take reminding him that he was suppose get up from the chair like a 49 Year Old Person. Pacino agreed and was willing to do another take, then shouted out, "62", as in that is the best you are going to get out of me. Funny Story, but also demonstrates the flaw of using 75+ Year Old Actors to play themselves as in their 40s.
     
    Last edited: Dec 28, 2019
  14. Instant Dharma

    Instant Dharma Dude/man

    Location:
    CoCoCo, Ca
    Nice. Could be better than Boys From Brazil.
     
  15. Instant Dharma

    Instant Dharma Dude/man

    Location:
    CoCoCo, Ca
    I haven't seen it yet. Where are the spoiler tags?? ;)
     
  16. Wildest cat from montana

    Wildest cat from montana Humble Reader

    Location:
    ontario canada
    Oops.
     
  17. Richard--W

    Richard--W Forum Resident

    The theaters here started it at 10am. Four screenings per day
    overlapping on two different screens alternating with another,
    shorter film in between. It only played for a week, however.

    Your other points are neither here nor there. It was De Niro's project
    from the start. Just because the actors are over 50 doesn't mean they
    should stop working or be regulated to only grandparent roles. No one
    could have made this film better.

    Pacino puts his heart and soul into the film. A lot of passion was called
    for. He plays Hoffa as Hoffa should be played. You don't like his style,
    or the size of his projection, that's too bad. What he does is true to life
    and great acting.
     
    alexpop likes this.
  18. Richard--W

    Richard--W Forum Resident

    All right, I just looked up the stars of The Irishman.

    Al Pacino - 79
    Robert De Niro - 76
    Joe Pesci - 76
    Harvey Keitel - 80

    I concede there is an age issue in terms of box-office attraction. If De Niro
    had made the film ten years ago, when he acquired the property, there
    would still have been an age issue.

    However, they were de-aged convincingly through digital technology. I'm
    fine with their appearance and the physicality of their performances. The
    discernment in their older eyes -- the eyes were not youthend -- adds a
    kind of pathos to their performances.
     
    alexpop likes this.
  19. Chazro

    Chazro Forum Resident

    Location:
    West Palm Bch, Fl.
    Not sure how clear-cut the age issue is. Eastwood, Stallone, Schwarzenegger, and perhaps a dozen more old-timers are regularly enjoying box office success. The Irishman's problems have been discussed. The studios decision is simply further recognition that the problems exist.
     
  20. alexpop

    alexpop Power pop + other bad habits....

  21. Kevin j

    Kevin j The 5th 99

    Location:
    Seattle Area
    relax, he didn't say what type of salad.
     
  22. GMfan87'

    GMfan87' Forum Resident

    Location:
    CT.
    About Pacino, no one else thought he didn't resemble Hoffa in look or voice ?
    I thought he was not convincing overall and sadly he's been over the top for decades now. His work in the 70's is some of the best ever done, stands out for it's subtlety.
     
  23. robertawillisjr

    robertawillisjr Music Lover

    Location:
    Hampton, VA
    Other than trying to get old out of shape men to portray much younger active men, I really enjoyed this movie. The age disparity didn't really bother me except in a few scenes where DiNiro tried to move gracefully :D (I know a lot about this since he and I are almost the same age).

    The entire cast is stellar and the story (while it may not be true) was riveting. :righton::righton:
     
  24. GregM

    GregM The expanding man

    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    But what about finding and fostering younger talent? It was De Niro who made a name for himself by played a much younger Vito Corleone. Now that De Niro is old, he is unable to share in his success or shake up the formula by introducing new actors? It's just the height of selfishness and antithetic to what theater should be all about. Acting and theater, even among movie stars, should be a sort of communal trade, where the older masters pass down their learnings to younger generations by working together.

    The effects in Irishman are more akin to augmental reality than traditional CGI. Frankly, this was De Niro's project from the start and I don't blame Scorsese for the choices, but he probably shouldn't be criticizing other franchises. After many decades enjoying his and De Niro's work and being curious about this project from the first whispers, I am admit I have not seen The Irishman and have no desire to see it.
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2019
  25. Richard--W

    Richard--W Forum Resident

    Is it okay with you if these older actors find work for themselves?
    You wouldn't want them to sit at home all day long with nothing
    to do, would you?

    The Irishman gives work to all the other actors and crew people
    who are in it. They get to work with maestros and learn from them.
    They get paid, too. You don't mind, do you?
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2019

Share This Page

molar-endocrine