Neighbor News
Movie Review - The Irishman
Scorsese's sprawling mobster epic offers terrific acting and production values, but runs far too long for the material
The Irishman ** or ****½ (out of 5), depending on your patience level (R) By now, you’ve probably heard the full spectrum of opinions about Martin Scorsese’s epic drama about life in The Mob, mostly during the 1950s - 60s. Here’s one that gives you both sides of that coin. For about three and a half hours, we get a Goodfellas-style memoir of an older gangster’s younger days, narrated by Robert DeNiro, rather than Ray Liotta. One upgrade for the new film. Both featured Joe Pesci, with Scorsese directing, so that’s a wash. Both included DeNiro; this one has more of him. That’s a plus. Goodfellas was a full hour shorter, giving it a huuuuge edge over The Irishman on a vital component of the viewer's experience.
This film ambitiously offers possible explanations for key events in JFK’s presidency, from the election to his assassination, as well as the rise and disappearance of Teamster Union superstar Jimmy Hoffa. The story is reasonably balanced, presenting the violence, personal relationships, ambitions and politics underlying so much of that era No one in the large cast is reduced to stereotype, as each significant player is fleshed out as a whole person. ( Actually, the preceding sentence only applies to the men; every woman is brushed aside as a relatively insignificant slice of the pie. Even if true for those years, it will certainly ruffle feathers now.)
The most remarkable aspect of this film is its new level of computer imaging, allowing old dudes like DeNiro and Pesci to play their parts throughout decades of aging without makeup!!! Those guys really look like their younger selves for each depicted period of their lives. That technology, which I won’t even pretend to understand, could revolutionize the industry.
Find out what's happening in Clayton-Richmond Heightsfor free with the latest updates from Patch.
The bottom line is that Scorsese crafted a brilliant 130-150 minute masterpiece, but buried it in 210. The tedium of more stories and scenes than needed severely dilutes the product like ice cubes in a glass of merlot. This film will surely garner a ton of awards and nominations for direction, performances and production elements of both sight and sound, but you’d better prepare yourself for something of an ordeal in the looong time you’ll be spending before the screen; preferably a large one for maximum appreciation. (Opened briefly in theaters; now on Netflix)