web analytics

The Irishman- Mini-Movie Review

By Mahons On December 4th, 2019

Martin Scorsese’s body of work in film is as good as anyone’s. His particular specialty of gangster films (Mean Streets, Goodfellas, Casino, The Departed) are the exemplars of that genre. Style. Script. Ensemble. And Comedy.
His latest, the Irishman is a good film,but alas not a great one (he may still win the Oscar). The cast is mostly great but he failed to reign in Al Pacino’s who-ha attitude that has plagued the second half of his career. Harvey Keitel is underused. Jack Nicholson made a far better Hoffa. DeNiro is still the best straight man in comic situations among living actors. His character however despite many misdeeds ultimately invokes a who cares response. Joe Pesci’s return to the screen after a long absence is welcome. But he is misused here. And the film’s embrace of conspiracy theories would shame Oliver Stone.
Should you see it, yes. Scorcese at his B game is better than almost everyone else’s A game. But it is long, slow and ultimately kind of pointless.

11 Responses to “The Irishman- Mini-Movie Review”

  1. A very accurate review.

    and you’re right it will still win Oscars.

  2. Hmmmmmmmmm

    Despite being slow in places I thought it held the attention well for such a long filum.

    I agree that the magnificent Keitel was underused but thought the performance by Pesci was absolutely stunning. I also agree that it bended the knee a bit to conspiracy theories but ultimately it’s a veichle for entertainment as opposed to a historical doc.

    It’s classic Scorsese as only Scorsese can do, doo wop rock n roll, big classic gas guzzler cars and a heavy emphasis on food. A bit rough in places but generally well rounded.

  3. Yes.

    It was really slow. Could have been 30-45 minutes shorter.

    I don’t understand at all the praise that it has received in some quarters.

    The aging/deaging of Pacino/Deniro didn’t work for me.

    Great director plus great actors doesn’t always mean great movie.

    As Michael Savage said, how many Italian gangster movies do we need to have, with the same actors? The Italian mafia in the US is a shadow of itself these days. There’s a new set of Latin gangsters now, and they’re not eating at Umberto’s or New Corner.

  4. The best part of this film is that I learn that some scenes were filmed in the New Corner ( Italian ) restaurant in Bay Ridge.

    It is an old school traditional southern Italian place that dates to 1936. Waiters wear jackets.

    Many famous people have dined there, including Mickey Mantle and Joe Pepitone of the Yankees back in the day.


  5. Joe Pesci is the John Cazale of the Scorsese canon. Mesmerizing in Raging Bull, Casino and Goodfellas. I’m told he was a middle aged waiter when discovered by Scorsese or Deniro. Even if it isn’t true I love the story. If the movie was created solely to get him back in film it was worth it.

  6. The length of this movie put me off watching it in the cinema last month. I will watch it on Netflix this month but I’m aware that it really deserves a big screen, not a tv screen or even worse a laptop screen. And of course the temptation to stop and start it will also be a factor, further weakening the impact.

  7. nah Peter big screen doesn’t matter in this film.

  8. They are already giving it awards.


  9. I can’t imagine this being anyone’s best film

    Come on

  10. It’ll never be a cult movie, more a period piece by Scorcese and great actors at the end of their carers. De Niro really held it all together , and i don’t think Pacino was too OTT.
    Probably won’t watch it again; but I’m glad i did the first time . here’s a good one re: the film: “Worth seeing, but not worth going to see” .. home movie then !

  11. “Worth seeing, but not worth going to see”

    Good catch Kurt, I assume you are aware of the origin of that phrase as in who said it and about what?