-
-
Before the awards season started, The Irishman was already projected to win Best Picture and a ton of awards at the Oscars: Scorsese winning directing, Schoonmaker winning editing, Zaillan winning writing, Pacino and De Niro winning in their own fields, and much more.
But as days passed, The Irishman lost traction due to some issues such as Netflix, the long screentime, the mafia stereotype, and maybe even the Scorsese-Marvel and De Niro-Trump feuds.
Anyways, The Irishman is still the number two best picture of 2019 for me, just behind Ford v Ferrari. Why do you think this happened?
ReplyPersonally my pick would be The Irishman and I still think it has a good shot at BP because all of the award shows are splitting between 1917, Hollywood and Parasite, The Irishman could be second or third at these events and could rise up in the oscars where the other films split the voting group.
But since 1917 released very late it was what was on people’s minds. Joker stays in people’s head because there’s so much controversy behind it. People are loving Brad Pitt’s comedic speeches so the 2 supporting irish actors are losing steam. DeNiro wasn’t nominated for actor. yeah….
ReplyCopy URL-The Irishman was meant to be a theatre film especially being 3 and half hour long.Marty intended it to be a theatre epic where people actually commit and attend this film.When you see film this long and slow available on your Netflix,you never commit to it hence the overall value is lost.The prestige isn’t the same.This is same thing Tom O Neil said in the latest expert panel.
-Much like Silence in fact even more this one is a slow burner,very slow burner in fact.It’s cold and dark and unlike any previous Scorsese Gangster film.There is only 1 background score which also appears not that often.There are no traditional Scorsese fast cuts here.Again,this is a really slow burner and I have seen even fellow Scorsese fans labelling it as “boring” but honestly this story was supposed to be slow.
-CGI affect didn’t help either.You can de age the faces but you can’t de age body movements.Bob fight scene was a disaster,should have made it with a stunt double.I personally don’t think it’s also the best de aging on face part,felt bit animated to me although I appreciate ILM’s effort.
-3hr 30 mins,3hr 18 mins to be precise is very long for major award bodies in this day and age.If the film is as slow as this those 3hr 18mins feel even more long.
-
This reply was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by
.
-
This reply was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by .
-
This reply was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by .
ReplyCopy URLKubrick-Tarkovsky-Scorsese-Bergman-Bresson-Kurosawa
The extreme runtime (3.5 hrs) + the de-aging criticisms were probably the major culprits. The industry ended up liking other films better along the way. It happens. Also, while Scorsese has earned the right to think whatever he wants about how films should be watched (didn’t stop him from taking all that Netflix $$$ to make his pet project) and what film actually is (this I agree with him on: Marvel films are theme park rides, not cinema), he and the old guard will have to get with the times eventually. Sorry Marty. Sorry Spielberg. Streaming and VOD will eventually erode theater-going completely to the point where it will go the way of drive-in theaters (Google it, kids.). They won’t be around for it, but this could realistically happen in our lifetimes, at least.
ReplyCopy URLcan someone explain how does splitting votes work? why would Irishman have better chances to win if Parasite & 1917 splits votes?
did vote splitting happen with Roma or Green Book?
No it doesnt work that way. An example of vote splitting would be Pesci and Pacino splitting votes that clears the way for Pitt to win. But really they dont have enough support for that to even matter and Pitt is winning on his own accord. But when people say vote splitting that is what they mean. 2 random movies can’t split a vote.
ReplyCopy URLA total slog and a huge bore. One of the most overrated films of the year, by far. So of course critics went bananas for it. So predictable and pretentious, just like the film in question.
That over 3 hour running time sure didn’t make it easy, because I doubt many people even finished watching it in one sitting, let alone at all.
ReplyCopy URLScorsese’s untrue comments about what Cinema is had nothing to do with Irishman losing steam. The voters obviously enjoyed the film enough to give it a ton of Oscar Nominations, they just didn’t enjoy it enough to make it win anything substantial. Let’s face it, it is not winning a big award at the Oscars. Once the awards shows started ignoring Robert De Niro I knew that film was DOA and had no shot at Best picture.
ReplyCopy URL -
This reply was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
