The Irishman | Netflix /// Coming up

[NorthStar]

I see ...

When I first saw that poster (after seeing the film in one session) I thought Netflix was making more publicity to attract more viewers. They sure were. @ 1:40 you watched two episodes, then the last two the next day.

The series that I like the most, even with 6 to 8 episodes (5 to 7 hours roughly), I watched it all in one long stretch. Others that are lesser captivating for my personal taste, but still good, I divide it in two or three sessions (3 to 4 hours long each sessions) ... series with say ten episodes.

When 'The Irishman' first came up in one of my local theaters I didn't go.
When it first came up on Netflix @ midnight, I watched it all in one session.
I couldn't stop it and watch the rest the next day; that was automatic with what was happening onscreen. When the film ended, I instantly knew that I just witnessed a grandiose film by a master storyteller and filmmaker...Martin Scorsese.
I don't decide the films and the artists I like, they decide the viewer/listener in me.

I like Opera music best, I don't try to motivate others (family and friends) in the art; it's a personal journey that only each person can take on their own ...
It's exactly the same thing putting together a state-of-the-art hi-fi stereo sound reproduction system. When you are @ the top of your game you know best where you stand; it's infallible.

My view of course, from way down deep there below ...

* Typo

 

[Steve Williams]

We watched it in one sitting. It’s a well told story just very slow.

 

[NorthStar]

True, it is slower if we compare it to Goodfellas (2h 28m), Casino, (2h 58m), The Departed (2h 31m).
The Wolf of Wall Street (3 hours), Gangs of New York (2h 48m).

The Irishman is 30 mins to one hour longer than those I just mentioned above.
I cannot imagine myself watching any of Martin Scorsese's films (including The Irishman - 3h 30m) with an interlude, like in two episodes or more.

Less is sometimes more ... more or (is) less.

 

[assessor43]

other than the digital makeovers, i really did not like the movie.

 

[NorthStar]

other than the digital makeovers, i really did not like the movie.

Which parts?

 

[Steve Williams]

other than the digital makeovers, i really did not like the movie.

Which parts?[/QUOTE
/QUOTE]

He said...."other than the digital makeovers he didn't like the movie. It seems obvious he didn't like "the" movie

 

[NorthStar]

We like some movies and we don't like other movies; it is permissable to be curious and ask what makes it so. That's all I was asking...what in particular he doesn't like about the movie.

I thought that was also obvious.
_____

* I'm going to give an example of how my mind works ...
Let say that I saw a movie recently and I said that other than the great CGI effects I didn't like the movie.

Someone replied to it and asked me what is it that I didn't like.
That's a fair question because the person has zero idea why I didn't like the movie.
Of course there's no need to elaborate further, I just didn't like the movie, period end of the story. The person asking me what is it more precisely is curious obviously, and I would be delighted to enlighten his curiosity. This is a forum, where people discuss, ask, learn, share, about films, music, audio, cars, etc. to a higher knowledge, discoveries, knowing each other better, understanding deeper causes and effects you might say, what makes us tick in one direction or another and/or between.

That is all what I'm saying; it's permissable to ask further than the simple surface of liking or not really liking a movie.

 

[Steve Williams]

Let say that I saw a movie recently and I said that other than the great CGI effects I didn't like the movie.

It would tell e a lot as I know what kind of movies you like so I probably would not see it based on your review


CGI for me becomes bothersome if it is overdone

 

[NorthStar]

I gave CGI as an example because he used "digital makeovers".
I don't know assessor43's film's preference, what he likes and not, reason more for me to ask.

But here's a thing; with films and music each person has his/her own evolution in time.
A film/music album we didn't particularly like say twenty years ago could have a rediscovered impact today...our experience with time has developed to a newer level of positive criticism...some aspects we appreciate more now that we understand better with newer ears/eyes...like appreciating much more what it's like to be being the director/artist's vision.
There's a full psychology behind.
For me example; Operas are much more powerful today in striking emotional chords than they were say a half century ago. It's my favorite music genre along with Classical.
I always loved Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, John Coltrane, John Lee Hooker, Flamenco, Gypsy, Tango, Cuban, International, Folk, Soul, Motown, etc. but today Operas, Chamber Classical, Orchestral, ...speak deeper to my artistic soul. ...In general. But I like many music genres overall.

With films too there's an evolution. I always loved Sergio Leone, Federico Fellini, David Lean, Alfred Hitchcock, Stanley Kubrick, Steven Spielberg, etc.
So today I like Quentin Tarantino, Martin Scorsese (still), Alfonso Cuarón, Pedro Almodóvar, Denis Villeneuve, Alejandro González Iñárritu, Guillermo del Toro, Ridley Scott (still), etc.
But I like many film genres overall, even some comedies, Marvel flicks, Joker, DC flicks, all movie genres from silent black&white Charlie Chaplin to colorful neon lights John Wick.

The scores reflect many aspects...from simple popcorn entertainment where your brain are outside in the rain to deeply intellectual and emotional and modern and from actuality...brain activity.

Music, films, television, theaters, live music, jazz bands, audio gear, cameras, ... technology over the years are all part of the art culture. ...Audiophiles and videophiles, newsphiles.

So, yes I'm curious about other's opinions on films and music they like or not. I'm curious about their own evolution. It's a natural human instinct, like analog, digital, EV, ICE, objective, subjective, black, white, gray, rainbow, ... art is the development of the intellect.

 

[NorthStar]

Jump straight to 3:52

 

[Steve Williams]

I think the fact that he says there isn’t an element of truth in the movie goes without saying. It’s all conjecture. I’m sure this guy doesnt have a clue either as to what happened

 

[NorthStar]

Who truly knows the truth Steve? ...Someone preferably alive today, well connected to the mafia (mob), someone who isn't afraid, someone who can speak up with a straight face ...

Us here we just enjoy films like The Irishman; we don't really care who killed Jimmy Hoffa.
He said the film wasn't epic like The Godfather, like Goodfellas; that's his view as someone very well connected to the mob. I am not and for me The Irishman is epic storytelling by a master film director and top first class actors. It is Quentin Tarantino's favorite (#1) film this year (Quentin also liked 'Crawl' (#2) and 'Doctor Sleep' (#3)).

It's very interesting to have a Drama/Crime/Epic/Netflix storytelling flick and a Comedy/Drama storytelling flick, both based on historic events but narrated/twisted for our entertainment pleasure as the two top contender films this year...the race is certainly between these two.

For my money (personal preference) The Irishman is the superior one, by roughly 15%.

 

[NorthStar]

Michael Franzese in that interview which contents several parts (this is only a short clip) said that Hoffa's body is in a place with lots of water around ...

He's a well connected ex-mobster with zero interest/benefit to tell lies or say more than he should. To me he sounds like a wise guy, a straight guy, an honest guy, a rich guy, articulate, one of a kind.
__________

A short article (recent, from yesterday) ... • https://www.cjr.org/analysis/jimmy-hoffa-the-irishman.php

 

[marty]

Loved. loved, loved it. Best movie of the year for me and by a considerable margin. A masterpiece character study unlike any I've seen.
The depth of the character of a man who is both conflicted and unconflicted, who is remorseful but has no remorse is a dichotomy that very few people can pull off and leave you thinking about it long after the movie. You think you've seen mob movies before, but not like this. A beautiful, disturbing, poignant and moving film, especially as DiNiro contemplates his own end of life. Wow. How the hell could Scorsese possibly make you feel wistful about the life of a mobster? That's high art in my book. Hard to know who had the best performance as DiNiro, Pesci and Pacino were all at the very top of their game. All deserve awards for seamless acting, as does Scorsese.

 

[NorthStar]

Wow ..

 

[bonzo75]

Loved. loved, loved it. Best movie of the year for me and by a considerable margin. A masterpiece character study unlike any I've seen.
The depth of the character of a man who is both conflicted and unconflicted, who is remorseful but has no remorse is a dichotomy that very few people can pull off and leave you thinking about it long after the movie. You think you've seen mob movies before, but not like this. A beautiful, disturbing, poignant and moving film, especially as DiNiro contemplates his own end of life. Wow. How the hell could Scorsese possibly make you feel wistful about the life of a mobster? That's high art in my book. Hard to know who had the best performance as DiNiro, Pesci and Pacino were all at the very top of their game. All deserve awards for seamless acting, as does Scorsese.

Fantastic movie. Great detailed storytelling, with Pesci and Deniro at their best. Amazing how after a series of poor movies Deniro came up with such a good performance so late in his career. Must have got galvanized into acting again.
Pacino was really poor imo especially given how well Jack did as Hoffa. I thought the last 30 minutes or so dragged on, but otherwise this is one of his better ones. Dunno how crap like Heat was brought up in the same thread.

 

[spiritofmusic]

You putting heat on Heat again, Ked?
Hoping to see this soon.
Fascinating story that Scorcese could not get the green light in the traditional way.
Sign of the times.

 

[Zero000]

The more I think about it the more I think De Niro is pretty poor in it. I just didn't think his persona was that convincing and the stuttering just didn't come across as a natural.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Justin, wasn't De Niro just great in Heat. Now THAT is a great film. Lol in case Ked looks in.

De Niro was absolutely blessed to be prominent in the greatest era bar none for movies. If not for Scorcese and Coppola, and acting a decade later, we wouldn't even be talking about him now.

And his constant anti-Trump invective is totally embarrassing and demeaning. The fact he put so much into his Mueller gig will always give me a lot of personal pleasure. All hard on and no release.

 

[spiritofmusic]

So, about to take out our 30 days free trial of Netflix. Looking at cramming in this film, The Crown current series, and the Breaking Bad movie.