Maulbert wrote:Finally saw The Irishman. Definitely not Scorsese's best. The de-aging was terrible, as their body language was obviously that of 70 year olds. It was easily an hour longer than it needed to be, and to anyone who thinks it isn't, I'll point out Goodfellas was an HOUR shorter, even while the story was more naturally sprawling. The Irishman was WAY too interested in details that didn't matter, such as characters like Sally Bugs, Joey Gallo, and Chukie O'Brien. Those characters matter very little in the grand scheme of the story, but Scorsese spends WAY too long on their introductions that don't lead anywhere meaningful. Also, why did we spend so much time with Frank just driving silently? Just wasted runtime. Underneath everything, there's a decent story worth telling, but with a younger cast and more liberal editing. You're better off watching Goodfellas or Casino again. This movie reeks of a director who's been reading his own press clippings. 5/10.
I enjoyed the Irishman more than you.
This was Scorsese getting the band back together for one more Swan Song, so I appreciated Frank's story and the heart and nostalgia (and eventually remorse) Scorsese tried to inject into an aging mobster.
Of course it's not going to look great when you're asking 70 something actors to look and act 40, I mean the scene with DeNiro beating up the grocery store owner in front of his kid was downright laugh out loud ridiculous and funny.
IMO where Scorsese went wrong was trying to cram the Irishman into a feature length film, it would have been a much better mini-series or one off long form Netflix series.
But as a huge Scorsese fan, I thoroughly enjoyed seeing everyone back together for another mob story, and Scorsese's earned a little leeway with me if he wants to get nostalgic.