Almost 3 hours of hell.

Rating: 3/10 (23 January 2017)

What was Martin Scorsese thinking? Is he trying to set a record for the longest time to bore an audience?
It used to mean something when someone said "it's a Martin Scorsese film". Does this now mean it's long and boring?
How can anyone who invested 2 hrs and 41 min not say this was way to long and could have gotten the message across in a comfortable say.. 1 hour?
Such a waste of talent. No big story here, the summary accounts for the almost 3 gruelling hours of boredom with no real message, although the one I did get made this even more of a time-waster.
How can this be rated so high? Is society that bored and have that much time to waste on non-entertainment?
Save yourself, you've read the summary, you're better off moving onto another movie.