A Movie to Appreciate for Unappreciated Reasons

Rating: 9/10 (30 November 2019)

In the past ten years, I have had to sit through some of the most average films that were garnering Oscar-attention to try to see what the fuss was all about. I would sit there with an open-mind trying to see, or extract, what exactly was so good about these "hyped" movies.
Take just the last year or two for instance. As I peered hard into stuff like Roma, A Star is Born, or 3 Billboards, and similar stuff, it was like searching for a grain of sand in a field of tall grass to find what was so "classic" or special about them, compared to my four decades of watching and rewatching true greats and classics. By the time I got done, the best I could do was shrug and say, "I guess" (guess it was decent). But the truth was that none of these movies satisfied. The best you could say was that one or two scenes were good or that it was "artistic", but that doesn't mean much when there is no plot and it's just visual scenery.
So the thing with the Irishman is it is understandable this movie will not be for people who don't like to sit through long movies at about 3 and a half hours long. So it will get it's fair share of casual movie-goer criticisms. However, when you really read these reviews, one thing almost all of them have in common is that they are very superficial. Nobody is arguing the merits of the actual true story, how good the acting was, or how good the director was. They are just stressing CGI effects of deaging, the actors are too old (I don't understand this one since Hoffa has been normally shown historically in photos to be at least in his 50s in most news coverage when telling his story, and that is fairly old), or that the movie is too long. Some are just dullards with short attention spans who even admit they only watched the first half hour or so and are trying to critique an epic story that unfolds, which is just dumb. So the criticisms are actually shallow and perfunctory.
Now, here is the experience that I got. I went into it unbiased and with relatively low expectations. First off, the lengthy run time scared me a little, and I thought I may be in for a snoozer. But let me tell you right off the bat that within the first half hour I knew I was watching a vintage Scorcese movie due to the style, the editing, the music, and the top notch acting performances. That, first and foremost, got my attention, and then before I knew it an hour and twenty minutes had gone by and I had held in my need to use the bathroom, it was that compelling and riveting; I didn't want to miss one line or one scene because every single scene (and there were many with so many cuts and edits) was imperative to the story.
Unlike in most of the years of the past decade, I truly felt like I was watching a true movie that I didn't need to squint at to try to extrapolate some level of quality that wasn't actually there to try to justify the warranting of critical acclaim and Oscar-buzz talk. It was unforced and naturally immersive, and this is something to really appreciate these days imo.
To be naturally taken in by a good story with great acting, with surprise elements (such as the repeated inclusion of historical events like the JFK victory, the Bay of Pigs and Castro, how the mafia had casino investments in Cuba, Kennedy's assassination, Bobby Kennedy as Attorney General going after the mob despite the fact that the mob was one of the reasons why Kennedy won in the first place, and subsequently even the Nixon years) was a true pleasure each and every scene. While the glass-half-empty people can criticize the deaging CGI, nobody can argue for one minute that all 3 lead actors were at least good, and this is not to mention all of the solid supporting characters (I mean to have Harvey Keitel as like a secondary character in a movie like this is a luxury with his menacing glare and wise-guy presence).
Best of all, this is all based on a true story so all of these people really existed, and I would be lying if I told you I didn't laugh several times throughout the film, including at the screen stoppage and captions that revealed when and how many of the side characters eventually died (which was usually something like "1981, 8 shots to the head" or "1980 six gunshots to the back of the head"), or the conversation in the car that extends and Pacino asks Sally Bags what he knows about fish ("Have you ever even caught a fish?"). Being real people and based on true historical events is an incredibly understated asset of this film. Even the road movie aspect of it, how it is in the present day and they are driving through Pennsylvania and stopping for smoke breaks for Pesci's wife on their way to Ohio I found to be pleasingly realistic.
For most of the movie, especially Pesci, it doesn't feel like the actors are acting at all. Sometimes DeNiro had some forced scenes, and Pacino always goes over the top at times, but overall the acting was just excellent.
Even though I fell asleep at 5am about halfway through the movie on the first night it was released, which was already way past my usual sleep time, I still couldn't wait to finish it the next day. But I'll be honest, I thought it was going to get boring since it had slowed down in the middle a little bit. But later in the day I returned to pick up where I had left off and I was in for a big surprise as to the rest of it.
Reminding me slightly of the Aviator, the ending of the movie goes into DeNiro's/Sheeran's later life and old age, as well as Pesci's. These scenes were all gold and well done, surprisingly, I truly appreciated the maturity and realism with which Scorcese constructed this portion of the movie and its scenes and themes. I don't understand some critics who saw this part as Scorcese himself as atoning for his violent movies at all, although that's a fine interpretation if that works and perhaps it has some truth to it. Instead, what I saw was the humanity of this gangster (gangsters including Pesci) being shown to the audience as he struggles with ailments and immobility. I'm not going to lie, but personally, I was immersed and saddened by this final half an hour.
Sure this guy was a killing SOB, but in old age, I really felt bad for him. I'm not sure what exactly that means. It's not that there haven't been other movies or shows that didn't make you feel bad for the villain. But one thing it did mean is that Scorcese made this movie more soulful and emotional than it really needed to be, he ended it with that, and that will probably make it ultimately memorable in a unique way. Anyone who shut the movie off in the first 30 minutes or halfway through doesn't deserve to catch the final 30 minutes because they don't have the depth to access and appreciate such raw material and emotional truths about life anyway.
I was just appreciative that I finally got to see a real movie about real people, who weren't overly glamourized as say in The Wolf of Wall Street, or as boringly evolved as in the Aviator. I got to see a truly good movie that easily deserves its Award-buzz without feeling like I was trying to find a piece of sand in a tall field of grass, and for that, I'm appreciative.