Order by:

Add your comment

Do you want to let us know what you think? Just login, after which you will be redirected back here and you can leave your comments.

Comments 1 - 15 of 18

badblokebob's avatar

badblokebob

The best bit of its long three-and-a-half hours comes when it doesn’t force you onto Netflix’s “WATCH SOMETHING ELSE NOW” screen until the credits have actually finished.

Innovative.
8 months 2 weeks ago
Cherif Fadaly's avatar

Cherif Fadaly

“Do me a favour, don't shut the door all the way, I don't like that. Just leave it open a little bit."

God damn! that was soul crushing...
8 months 1 week ago
chunkylefunga's avatar

chunkylefunga

I think at this point in his career, critics are too scared to criticise Scorsese.

This movies is too long, slow and just a mistake to de-age the characters as it's weird to see them with youngish faces when they still move like old men :D
8 months 1 week ago
tweet_tweet's avatar

tweet_tweet

I found it to be an overlong, average movie. I can't understand all the rave reviews.
8 months 1 week ago
frankqb's avatar

frankqb

If Goodfellas was a classic modern recipe, The Irishman is the microwave dinner version. Scorsese ends up trying to make the same film and proves he may in fact be past his prime. The film rambles on in great detail for 2.5 hours as a dry, historical narrative with little to no purpose set to an occasional baby boomer tune, and then attempts to spurt out a platitude or two at the end of the film. It feels flat, boring and generally undercooked - like a microwave dinner. De Niro and Pacino are fine, but generally nothing special. Pesci on the other hand has moments of brilliance.

Overall, The Irishman may as well have been called “Oldfellas”.

3 stars out of 5
8 months 1 week ago
Withnail33's avatar

Withnail33

Slow and subtle is how I would describe this one. The first act is Scorcese's signature "how-I-came-to-be" montage/plot but it turns into a very personal and almost intimate look into the protagonist's life in the third act, which surprised me. Themes of human mortality and loneliness are explored and it's something you don't see in a lot of crime-mob films. Violence isn't too over-the-top (which is something you normally see in mob movies) but I wish Scorcese went the traditional route and used squibs, blood bags, etc. The 3-D blood was very obvious and really took me out of the moment.

Overall, I liked this one. Hits all the marks you would expect in a Scorcese film while adding a few themes that make this movie unique among films of the genre.
8 months 2 weeks ago
baraka92's avatar

baraka92

A fun and violent but ultimately sad ride that ends on a soul crushing note. Time comes for everything and everyone.

And people complaining about Anna Paquin's lack of dialogue missed the point.
8 months 3 weeks ago
jmarasco's avatar

jmarasco

I’ve read reviews that complain that The Irishman is too long and too slow compared to the gangster films of Scorsese’s prime. Where were the operatic character introductions, the sudden explosions of violence? But I think that was the point. This is Scorsese putting the gangster film to rest, dramatizing not the violence and glory of the gangster life, but the slow decay of all meaning that life provided. It’s framed as the reminiscences of an old man, and last half hour puts the whole film in perspective: eventually everyone is incarcerated, loses their teeth, is forgotten and dies. By using Deniro, Pesci and Pacino throughout the whole film Scorsese couldn’t have said it any louder - for that reason the de-aging effects are justified, as distracting and flawed as they are. This is a meditation on aging and death. Scorsese and his old guard of collaborators are nearing their end, and I think that scares him. Deniro’s character ends up alone and scared. He didn’t want to be buried in the ground, didn’t want the door closed in the nursing home. Scorsese is staring down the same destination. Devastating.
6 months 4 weeks ago
karic's avatar

karic

It was already 1/4 of the movie when i realized i had been smiling like an idiot the whole time. It definitely is a special one, we might never see the gang back at it again in another movie. After some questionable roles i'm happy to see my man Deniro is in one where he can show his true potential again.
8 months 2 weeks ago
LiquidSplitter's avatar

LiquidSplitter

If Scorsese had heavily condensed the first couple of acts this could've been a much more powerful piece. I found it a little droll until Frank Sheeran becomes friends with Hoffa. That's when the story finds its focus. That's when I became invested emotionally & couldn't take my eyes off the narrative before me. And then there's the final acf; which I must say was nearly worth the long wait. The futility of a life; especially a life wasted on wrongdoing, wherein everyone who you placed so much importance upon are now gone; & all you're left with is alienation & a heavy conscience as you await your end. A telling powerful shot & De Niro's final line are lasting.

It's not perfect, that's indisputable. And if this were a much younger Scorsese someone would've had him cut out the unnecessary fat that is the first half of this film; but I can forgive it strictly on the basis of that last sequence. At the very least it's not the Wolf of Wall Street hedonist extravaganza that really said nothing substantial at all. This film has a heart, though a heavy one, in spite of all its technical & structural flaws, & it'll stick with me.[/spoiler]
2 months ago
Siskoid's avatar

Siskoid

Impeccable and deceptively simple film making from Martin Scorsese in The Irishman ensures that despite its length, the film is never tedious (except perhaps in the epilogue) and if each scene isn't strictly necessary to the plot, it does help inform the three main characters played by Robert DeNiro, Joe Pesci and Al Pacino (this is his FIRST collaboration with Scorsese, do I have that right?!) and their relationships. And make no mistake, this is portrait more than narrative, and an actor's showcase more than it is a director's (again, that's because it's deceptively simple). As a disputed version of what happened to union leader Jimmy Hoffa through the eyes of his friend, mobbed up Frank Sheeran, it's engrossing, but only really because of those performances, and the texture we get from them through the novelistic approach. A few words on the "CG as make-up" used to track the characters through various ages in this. While I thought young DeNiro looked a little strange (but not in the way these things usually do, because I thought it MIGHT be make-up), generally the aging was pretty amazing. I had to look at pictures of Pesci afterwards to find out how old he actually looked. In other words, it's pretty seamless. Because all gangster films are kind of the same to me, and these particular guys are certainly not on their first go, I was not as wowed as some, I admit, but I do respect the film more than I love it.
6 months 2 weeks ago
C-3PO's avatar

C-3PO

I ended up watching this movie in 4 parts but I still thoroughly enjoyed it. It's really good and hits all the marks you would expect for a Scorsese film.
I'm still not completely sold on the de-aging technology. I mean, it is really well made... but you can sorta tell the actors' age by the way they move and walk... but, then again, that's just me being super picky. =P
7 months 1 week ago
Earring72's avatar

Earring72

Slow, adult crime drama. Great cast, engrossing family, trust and friendship story and direction. The effects are good but I was never fooled, these are old man playing younger guys. Still masterclass in storytelling and acting. Pacino, DeNiro and Pesci….just wow.
8 months ago
Adrian B AWESOME's avatar

Adrian B AWESOME

One of the best of the year, easily. It's definitely built to be Scorsese's final word on mob stories, and boy does he ever load the film up. It does feel about twenty minutes too long but I'm not sure what you cut out of it. Pesci is a revelation.
8 months 2 weeks ago
dajmasta94's avatar

dajmasta94

Stick with this one! The first half can at times feel a bit too much like Scorsese’s other films in this same category but the back half is a real heartbreaker. I do wonder if the material might have been served even better if this was a 5 part miniseries. I think what this is missing is a little more of a look into his relationships with his family and also perhaps the luxuries of the lifestyle. I understand why these things aren’t in a movie version when there’s so much else going on but as is it’s still a great watch. Pesci kills it, so good and so glad his role is unique and not too much like the other roles he has with Scorsese. De Niro is wonderful as well and I even thought Al Pacino was good! It’s been too long! But the CG is still in my opinion distracting a lot of the time, it doesn’t ruin anything but I definitely was less engaged during the scenes with CG than not. If I know it’s a CG fave my mind immediately begins analyzing it and very rarely is it that I don’t find it to feel odd looking and then I realize I haven’t been paying attention to dialogue as much. Maybe this isn’t a problem for most people which I totally understand, it doesn’t look terrible but I bet you in 5 years it’ll look dates to a lot of eyes. I am very glad I was able to see this on the big screen, I don’t think I would have had the same amount of commitment level. Pausing would have been apart of my watch and I like that a theater forces you to commit and pay attention. A story like this requires that in order for it to hit hardest which is a plus for the decision to make a movie and not a miniseries.
8 months 3 weeks ago

Showing items 1 – 15 of 18

View comments