People HATE My Review of The Irishman
Vložit
- čas přidán 29. 08. 2023
- Follow me on Letterboxd - letterboxd.com/joelhaver
Main Channel - / makingshorts
Support -
Patreon: / joelhaver
Paypal: bit.ly/2ZI7uff
Merch - joelstuff.store
Social -
Instagram: / joelhaver
Twitter: / joelhaver
Drawings: / joeldrawsandwriteshaver
I love movies
When people insult my reviews I cheer myself up by eating a DELICIOUS sandwich and doughnut. However, I do NOT drink the doodoo water.
It’s gross and taste like dirty dishes, you made the right call
It's worth celebrating, it means your review was valuable enough for someone to disagree with yours.
I love that this is a comment that exists on the internet. It's wacky no matter whether you understand it or not.
Every time you eat one, a person who disagrees with you dies!
I see this as a win-win!
@@joeltalksaboutmovies all the other stuff is great but that drink is too yucky wucky. it's green and that reminds me of turtles, then I wonder if turtles shells grow on them or if it's something they find.
Nothing funnier than having a different opinion than someone else
Was that even an opinion? Just some random babble about the budgets, zero real critique to the movie, the story, everything. Yall dont even fkng know what "a review" is anymore. Bunch of illiterates.
Dude. I love the framing of this video. Just wonderful. And your insert shots of the environment make me so happy. Thanks for your thoughtful words as always.
Thank you Houston!
I was just about to comment the same thing. I wouldn’t mind seeing this as a set-up more often
Yeah, I really liked the space. Very appropriate.
Joel’s set here looks like he’s sitting inside of a painting. Really pretty work of art especially considering it was just supposed to be the backdrop to Joel talking about movies. Draws my attention almost as much as 50% of the screen dominated by subway surfers gameplay would.
De Niro arguably owes a large part of his career to the fact that Coppola DIDN'T de-age Brando for the flashback sequences in Godfather II. He should have said "nah, hire a young guy" when Scorsese asked him to play the 40-something version of himself.
climbing up the ladder and then pulling it away from everyone else once they get to the top is that generation's MO
I would like to disagree as I truly think the movie actually needed an old actor to create the entire vibe. Everything from cinematography to music to editing has a slow and somber pace. It's not about the plot or the story. It's about Martin's deepest passions and expression of his most pressing concerns about life. It would not have worked with any other actor. It's not a violent action movie. In a sense it's a deconstruction of those movies. It's like turning the volume down completely and listening to the breeze. Or like stripping all the glitz and glamour from those movies and seeing the depressing reality. I can see why some might not like it, but for me it might be the best movie of Martin's career.
I mean correct me if I’m wrong but de-aging didn’t exist in 1974. And who knows, maybe he did say that, but ultimately it’s Scorsese’s movie
@@chefgoldblum8446 That's irrelevant to their point. Casting a new actor led to DeNiro's rise to stardom, and yet _The Irishman_ says "nah, let's just give the parts to these old ass millionaires instead of hiring new blood", and then undoubtably stiffed the vfx people they hired to make them look young.
As another commenter said, they're climbing up the ladder and chopping off the bottom.
I wouldn't say he SHOULD have out of some weird moral obligation to take whatever action maximizes jobs.
But if you de-age Joel, I can watch your awkward 90 year old animated body movements when you inevitably beat up a man outside a grocery store.
Someone should use Joel's animated style to put the RPG Hero over Deniro in that scene.
Whether people agree or disagree with your opinion, everyone should appreciate the amount of nuance and specificity you're bringing to the conversation of filmmaking. Keep it up!
Joel, I found this video insufferably opinionated and I can’t wait to see more.
Please do more review content. I love seeing reviews that take the alternative route, using subjectivity to tell how a piece of media impacted the reviewer through the lens of their own life and experiences. Too often we seek objectivity from art, with black and white, 1-10 star transactional viewership. Art is not something that can be boiled down to a number so easily. Sometimes the way a movie affects the watcher is more important than the content of the movie itself.
i hate de-aging. Those people had their time. Let new stars raise.
No. We will be using a CGI corpse marionette instead.
It’s certainly a practice rooted in nostalgia and an unwillingness to let go, which was simultaneously thematically resonant and dissonant in The Irishman
@@joeltalksaboutmovies I dont mind a subtle de-aging, when for some reason they need to shave 10 or maybe even 20 years of a character ( one of the Avengers/Iron Men do it Tony Stark for a scene and its fine). But no matter how much money they threw at De Neros face he is still 250 years old and moves like one. That scene in the film where he is beating the guy up for upsetting his daughter looks exactly like a CGI effect overlaid on an old man who moves exactly like an old man. Its just really jarring. Its a shame, because its a good movie, just way to long and way much overreliance on SFX.
Which is ironic given Scorceses (Sp) opinions on SFX laden films.
Yeah, but there's cash to be wrung out of the 'brand'. It'll probably be come the norm. (If anyone is remotely interested I made a silly little video on the subject myself. czcams.com/video/Wyoezd63_6g/video.html)
Let new stars rise and let old people be old people in movies. Old people have a lot of interesting stuff to say
I can imagine Joel going to a coffee shop not long after filming this, sipping from his beverage and noting the warning on the side of the cup that confirms the little known fact that liquid can indeed be hot.
I still liked The Irishman but I can see the validity of your take. Makes me want to rewatch it under that viewpoint.
"i love your sketches but your philosophy in this review is stupid"... as if the sketches don't exist bc of and represent that exact philosophy
That's one lovely room
First time seeing this review. As a fan of the Irishman takes like "recognizable faces, recognizable icons, technical polish" initially read as reductive, but you've made a compelling case for why we shouldn't prop legacy directors up as the "future of cinema." I think a lot of what you direct towards the Irishman, I've been feeling a bit towards movies like Oppenheimer - features that suffer from bloated casts and plotlines, which have little to say beyond their subject matter, and which are compositionally inaccessible, pushed as a benchmark cinematic ideal for young filmmakers. At their core they are fun movies, they're not creatively bankrupt, and they do get asses in seats. Nolan, Scorsese, Fisher, etc., now dominate these larger, ambiguous conversations about the importance of pop cinema and imo the self-importance of the spectacle is failing to push the needle in an interesting way. Thanks for the video Joel :)
Very well said!
I only wonder: has someone really (recently) called Scorsese 'the future of cinema'? Xd
It insists upon itself
Because it has a point to make it's insistent!
I can agree with the take that this large amount of money is ridiculous, and that de-aging is generally a really lazy workaround for keeping recognisable stars involved in a project instead of hiring new talented actors (which is what they should be doing), but I can't see it as a slight to this movie, I think its strengths in filmmaking go beyond the technology and I think it's a fantastic piece of cinema despite that rather than because of it.
Do I think they should've hired younger actors instead of de-aging De Niro? Sure, I think that'd be awesome.
Do I think the de-aging ruins the film and the messages it speaks to? No, I still think it's one of Scorsese's finest films.
To be perfectly honest I would much rather see $175,000,000 spent on a mature, artful film like The Irishman over most of the CGI clusterfuck nightmares we're seeing over in the superhero blockbuster genre (although I'd rather rather it be split up and spent on multiple smaller movies).
This. I only disagree on the younger actor bit, I think the story was constructed in such a way that it might not have worked just as well as having one actor slightly aging from one segment of the movie to the next. Also, I think there is a symbolic meaning behind Scorsese working with de Niro as the main star; I'm pretty sure this was the last feature they did together, and I suspect that the premise of making it in the first place was to have de Niro as the central character. I think how he looks or whether the CGI works matters not, as - I agree here - it is one of Scorsese's best works - so... I wouldn't really hold anything against these guys at this particular point; there are way much shittier and more expensive productions, so... I have little idea why all this vitriol against this particular movie (a great work of art in and of itself, plus a -likely- farewell of a great master)
can i just say how genuinely pretty and well composed this shot is??how does he do it!!
I haven't seen the movie... or even heard of it, but I can 100% say you are wrong!
Love the framing of this shot and the colors and setup of this room. The shirt goes great with the poster in the back. Nice work.
Also, you let em have it, Joel.
Side note: are you alive Joel, or are you in Heaven? The lighting and this room look angelic.
Netflix was the only studio that was willing to pay that much money and they have recently come out and said they're gonna slowly move away making big budget movies like Irishman. Martin got extremely lucky to get that kind of budget. Nobody else wanted to pay him the kind of money that he was asking for.
They could have made most of it back, but they completely ganked its theatrical release. They wanted it to go on the books as a flop for whatever reason. 'Hollywood accounting' and whatnot
While I really enjoyed The Irishman, I absolutely understand your opinion and how the cost is unnecessary in making quality cinema. Your film Pretend That You Love Me is one of my rare 5-star films in letterboxd and I love all your low-budget features. Your opinion is completely fair and justified and I hope you feel the support more than the hate because you deserve support not only for the content you make but the people you inspire.
pretend that you love me is SO fucking good
Scorsese's issue with Superhero films isn't their budget, it's that, for decades, they've crowded out features with real human stories. As he put it- ". . .they have no stakes.".
I don't buy that for a second. People like disposable action films. If superhero movies didn't exist as a genre, there wouldn't be more arthouse films, just another genre of disposable action flicks.
@@philipsalama8083
Who said anything about "Art-house"? Just movies for grown-ups.
@@jacobwright5542 You're deflecting from the actual point. The point is, it's not a zero sum game. Less Marvel movies won't create more demand for 'human stories', and vice versa.
@@philipsalama8083
There's something called "The Telecommunications Act of 1996" which allowed media distribution corporations to merge on a huge scale, conglomerating the vast majority of the mainstream media on offer to us down to only a handful of companies, Disney being one of them. Which means that, no matter what kind of films the public votes for with their dollars, these companies funnel it all into a few massively budgeted lowest-common denominator blockbusters, thus leading to over a decade of total superhero saturation in movie theaters, which has muscled out a large variety of other kinds of offerings, including non-comic book style action movies. Not to mention the effect all of this has had on ticket prices.
It might not be a zero sum game, but there might have been a certain shift towards silly escapist entertainment (for instance, it seems to be more present with the Millenial adults than with the previous generations). In order to know for certain, we'd need an honest analysis, some statistical data etc.
I love what you do Joel. I think this is a great topic of discussion for filmmakers like yourself and I appreciate you sharing your thoughts.
Love hearing you talk about movies.
A lot of what you said in the first half really helped me put a point on why i didn't like Barbie, despite it ostensibly being a movie made for me. i did the barbenheimer meme and the first thing i saw sitting in the Oppenheimer theatre right after seeing Barbie was a truly atrocious Barbie tie-in ad for Google shopping. It really blows a huge hole in your film's supposed anti-consumerism, pro-feminist themes when there are ads playing in the same building where an air-headed barbie talks about how much she loves shopping and pink stuff and has a crush on her hot neighbour or whatever. It was a real crystallization of how (imo) that movie really fails in its goals in part* because of its context and baggage.
No film can be removed from the context it was made. You can love a movie despite or because of that context. I enjoyed the Irishman, I didn't enjoy Barbie. Now I have to try to reckon with myself about why that's the case! Thanks for giving me food for thought as always Joel
I love your framing. Even just just for a short video about a movie review it is such a nice shot
I love your open space very comforting
Love the framing! Beautifully shot :)
Oh my lord, that apartment is adorable!
Randy Quaid would have been a better lead. Deniro is like a coffee pot you find in a hunting cabin-sure it will work, but it's toasted!
The thing that gets me in those comments, and maybe this isn't the point of this video, but it's how many of them open with "I love your videos, but" like they want you to know that you should "know your place." It's so toxic.
I think that this is a very interesting perspective to take. Sometimes there are external factors that can affect one's enjoyment on a piece of media and I don't think that's a bad thing at all. I guess some people just expect everyone to look at media in one specific way and get caught off guard when they find someone who approaches media differently from them. For clarification I haven't seen The Irishman but even with that fact in mind, I can say that I really enjoyed how chill you were in this video. I'm glad that you explained your opinion without being disparaging or pompous. I really dislike it when others have an unpopular opinion and act as though they are enlightened and see the flaws that no one else see, therefore that makes them better in some ways. Movies are art, and the beauty of art is that it can make people feel a myriad of different emotions. Whether they be positive or negative, it's fun to share your experiences with art. I find it's a good way to connect with others. I doubt anything I've said in this comment is groundbreaking but I just wanted to put my thoughts to paper, or keyboard I guess. It's clear you love movies and your movies have changed my life for the better. Any hot take you have that I disagree with isn't going to change that. And if by some miracle you are reading this, I hope you're having a good day.
Seeing this and Joel’s newest video on his main channel, I’d love to hear him talk about Starfield! His positivity and the wonder he tries to inspire in filmmaking is right up that game’s alley
Are the cuts to the plants to poke fun at the Irishman? Because it definitely feels that way and gave me a chuckle each time. Also I really appreciate these thoughts, you make it clear that you’re talking about it as art and it’s meaning and how it made you feel, which I think is more valuable and interesting than just talking purely about the plot of a story
The Irishman pains me to no end. As a VFX artist, my personal goal has been to show people that CGI can be pushed further, and used for more things than simply underpaid patchwork. When you have a medium that can do as many things as CGI, it hurts to see it used in such a creatively bankrupt way. I can't imagine the gruelling effort it took these artists to simply "make an old man look less old". I get that CGI is still in its infancy as a medium, but I really hope we start seeing people using this tool in the way it deserves to be used. Not as a fill-in for more expensive practical FX, but as the form of expression it deserves to be.
Damn, that last shot is so good i had a Mandela effect moment and thought it actually stayed there and that close up didn't exist.
I love that this is basically Joe dissecting movies on a professional level as somebody in the profession that has experience versus just an outsider that maybe only reviews videos but doesn't make any. it's so naturally conversational because it's like you're talking to a colleague.
Cactus on the left lookin like a plant gundam
Love you Joel ♥️ as a film lover, I appreciate your reviews. Keep doin what you're doing. Don't listen to the haters. 😊
I really like the colors in this one! Did you get a new camera?
I replaced my Blackmagic Pocket 4K! Same camera but just a new one!
wtf this shot is so beautiful
That ladder stresses me out. Please confirm that it's anchored somehow
I don't think it is about fading icons. But getting old, pretty much that. However, I do see your point.
That ladder is giving me anxiety! What if it falls?!?!
I have been following Joel from the beginning, because he is transparent about his passion in a world where many are just fading into the background with their options.
Can you give any breakdown of your edit/crop/colour correction choices for this shot?
I find it such a calm and composed way of creating an authentic discussion visually, I’d love to try and replicate that feeling.
"The deaging special effects artists who put years into this movie." I think you'll find they took years *out* of it.
Joel just needs to go back to reviewing Apple Jacks commercials
Yesterday night I was procrastinating and read through all 64 pages worth of Joel's letterboxd reviews. I even went into the comments of the Irishman to see what people said in response. Weird coincidence that the day after, Joel does a video on it.
I appreciate contrarian perspectives, so I fully respect your viewpoint. Personally, I found "The Irishman" to be quite impactful; it lingered in my thoughts and left a haunting impression. How a chain of ill-fated choices and steadfast loyalties can culminate in a lifetime marked by solitude, remorse, and anguish. The theme of the relentless passage of time and the prominence of aging and dating was disturbing and way more pronounced in The Irishman rather than Goodfellas or Wolf of Wall Street. You really feel the profound impact that the passage of time has on their lives way more than Scorcesse's previous films. It's undeniably a somber film. Your critiques regarding the budget and the de-aging process are valid points. Your review delves more into the technical details or production nuances that aspiring filmmakers like yourself, that have an eye for the craft, would naturally gravitate towards. But the average viewer tends to experience a film on a more visceral level, focusing on the storyline, characters, and emotional resonance; so the issues you mentioned didn't really bother me. I think that's why it really effected me and others too.
The steadfast loyalty, and SPLIT loyalty in particular is a huge part of the film. I think the take that its about "faded glory" and is supposedly a meta thing about Scorcese is a pretty popular take both among Haver and a lot of people who like the film, but I think is actually off the mark. I don't exactly disagree with many of Haver's issues with the film, but I think he gets the themes pretty wrong in the way that most people do, by fixating only the mob aspect and somehow not talking at all about Jimmy Hoffa, who is NOT a mob guy, and is the most active, provocative, and charismatic part of the story! The crux of the movie is the main characters admiration of HIM and their strained relationship
It's absolutely off the mark! Scorsese not receiving an Oscar might have been about 'fading glory', the movie was about something very different
Couldn't agree with you more, well maybe I could but I can't think of anything right now.
I have never heard you say “um” once. Goes to show you think before you speak. Love your work Joel xx
4:00. Regarding CGI deaging. Like so many film remakes, it is the same thing with actors
I enjoyed the Irishman. I don't have much of an eye for cinema so I wasn't thinking about the cinematography and didn't notice the CGI. I wasn't around during the whole Jimmy Hoffa thing so it was a new story to me, and an interesting one.
That being said, I appreciate your perspective, and I see where you're coming from. It's in-line with the philosophy you've already demonstrated in your own work. In that light, I can see how the movie wouldn't hit the same at all. It's a shame so many people just went straight to lashing out instead of actually engaging with the ideas you put forward. Although I'm not surprised to see it, pretty par for the course for reddit (and social media in general lol).
I really liked the Irishman, I didn't agree with your review, but I also respect it. You bring up good points on how a real rebel would just do something outside the studio system, and yea the cgi, is not that great lol. Even when I disagree with you Joel, you still challenge my views and make me think about these contradictions
You can be a celebrity and feel alone or forgotten. Alone in a crowd etc. Not that those who cared about them could ever actually forget them
Totally off topic but Joel have you seen Lake Mungo? It's a found footage style improvised Australian horror film (the structure was planned but the acting was improv, similar to what you do). I would be curious to hear what you thought about it!
When I made ‘reviews’ as AHAB on Letterboxd, I delighted in the absurd responses to my absurdities. Your work is marvellous, Mr Haver. Taking nothing but a good hearty chuckle from the salty comments is an excellent way to go about your business.
That dining area makes me go uwooooguh! I can't help it I just do that when I see something real nice
I love this channel and I like listening to your unedited (?) Thoughts
So many people base their opinion on their own snap-judgement of the first paragraph, first scene, first note of an expression of art. Even if I don't agree with each and every opinion you or someone else may have, Joel, I still greatly enjoy hearing your side of it. Love you and your work, man. Thanks for being around and being you.
Oh, and I didn't like The Irishman, either. I wouldn't say it was a waste of time, but I don't think I'll ever watch it again in my life.
Shortly after that guy defended ‘the Irishman’ in the comment section of a letterboxd review, Scorsese bought them a yacht
Hi Joel have you ever looked into Australian films? Some amazing writing and directing with super low budgets that make sense for the film cost. (the castle is iconic shot 1997 in only 11 days )
Ghosts of the Civil Dead by John Hillcoat (1988) is one of the few films that gives me the same excited dread as Taxi Driver. Unforgettable, and currently free on CZcams.
Joel they’re not gonna comment about this but I think the way you framed this review of a review goes crazy. Love the background
I've tried 3 times to watch it, put me to sleep within hour 1 each time.
The ultimate irony I suppose is that the returns from its theater run seemingly capped off around 8 mil and most watched it at home on streaming services for 10 bucks a pop. I 'liked' the film but you're right it really is nothing new Scorsese-wise. Thinking about it in this context does sour the whole conversation about Martin's posturing with what's "cinema".
Also shout out to letterboxd It's a beautiful thing. I find myself irrationally enraged by some reviews but when I can check out other reviews from that same person in question it's not long before I am lead to reconsider their words after seeing their appreciation for so many films that I also like. (That or it's confirmation they just hate films and aren't worth the headspace haha)
Love what you've done with the place by the way
When I see a letterboxd account whose rating graph is heavily on the left side I just wish that person well hahah. Why are they even watching movies at that point! But yes I love letterboxd despite the frustrations. Scorsese is a legend and has earned that and I also think it’s okay to be critical of his work!
I thought I was doing something wrong when it took me two sittings to finish The Irishman while my film peers unanimously lauded it. I vividly remember Taxi Driver but can't even name a line from Irishman, yet I first saw them both in the same month in 2019. Now I know why--thank you for the validation
Very nice discussion Joel! And I think that's interesting that Scorsese brings some discussions about the contemporary cinema nowadays too (it doesn't mean that I agree with those pov). Anyway, what do you think about the "Killers of the Moon Flowers"?
The idea that no one should say anything that isn’t widely agreed is pretty absurd when you consider it. How dare someone think differently than everyone else about a thing
Coming from a small country (Austria) my perspective is that low/mid budget movies are the norm. Most of my favourite Austrian movies are super indie and experimental. Of course there are some bigger production, but those usually just try to mirror what Hollywood does best anyways.
I can really recommend getting into Austrian cinema though! Small country but lots of interesting stuff
I'm assuming that random close up shot of the plant at 7:55 was a nod towards the close up shot at the end of the movie. I hope that was the intention.
I Love the room You sit In ❤️ 😄
Cheers!
Finally, someone who doesn't treat Scorsese as a religious savior who'll die if his (extremely flawed) filmography receives literally any criticism.
I love the plants. Great vibe
Honestly I don't think we are critical enough of movies these days. Too many 7.5/10 imdb movies that are really sub 5.
Pacino salvages whatever this movie was supposed to be, but if it were not for him I don't think there was much to write home about.
the people responding to you for that comment are off the walls. hope they chill 1 day
I needed to be de-aged after watching The Irishman
Irishman was the best 3 hour nap i ever had
Nice plants. I see a bunnytail cactus, jade, that tall thing is an "african milk tree" i think. Also a mother of thousands! You should do a plant review
I admire your courage Joel. Also your home is beautiful.
“You have to stomach the annoying comments” - Martin Scorsese
I feel as though utilizing de-aging technology removed what would have been one of the most interesting facets of the idea of this movie; and that is the three actors that would have been needed in lieu of the technology to actually fill these pivotal roles. Mob movies already channel a significant theme of lineage, and that theme would have felt infinitely stronger if the most renowned Mob-movie actors of the past several decades would be passing that lineage down from them directly to these potentially newer, younger, actors.
I'd pay money for a Joel Edit of this movie. Tell Scorsese to give you access to the tapes!
I felt very similarly about the 1990 film: A Gnome Name Gnorm. It was well-loved by critics and audiences alike, but I considered the overinflated budget to bring in Gnorm was absolutely a detractor. The director, Steven Winson, just saw dollar signs and followed the money while making the film. It had such great potential and while most people loved I think it fell short. I would love a Joel review on this piece of cinematography.
"Your opinion is insufferably opinionated" ... like what LMFAO
I think for Joel, the people and story *behind* the creation of a film informs his viewing of it more than it does for most people. For as polished or pro a movie is, the bloated nature of its budget sours the entire experience for him, just as a rough and poorly-acted film could be seen as endearing for it’s ambitions and intentions. I can agree with most of what he said, I think I just personally see films for what they literally are more than I am empathetic to what it took to make them. Idk.
He’s a filmmaker who makes his movies for like $5 (exaggeration), so I take his point to be valid. The Irishman having such a bloated budget while trying to be about how these people are washed up and nobody cares anymore full of older cast members trying to say that they don’t crowds as much does hurt this movie. I think in this specific case, it’s okay to complain about the budget being so bloated, since it single-handedly disproves the central thesis of the film
Agreed about the budget issues, but The Irishman is not about Scorsese or any of the actors, or the generation - it's about a person who screwed up his life by making wrong choices (similar to Raging Bull) and ends up dying alone, with no comfort in his past. The idea that it is somehow about Scorsese is weird and sounds like it came from somebody who didn't watch the movie (so I'm guessing it snowballed from the original reviewer to others xd)
You know, I have a particularly hot movie take that has to do with The Goonies, but I won't mention it here for the reason you made this video. I loved The Irishman, but getting upset over an opinion is just insane to me. Keep being you, Joel. Love ya. :D
I would love to hear you Goonies hot take!!
@@joeltalksaboutmovies The hot take is that I didn't think it was that good.
I'm almost 40, and in my 20's had never seen it. I got so much flack from so many people that I decided to turn it into a game. I'd do things like walk into the break room and announce to a room full of coworkers, completely unprovoked, "I've never seen The Goonies," and watch their minds melt. Like, "OMFG, you've never seen THE GOONIES???" There was a guy I was dating who would look at me with disgust whenever the topic came up. People just couldn't handle it. Oddly enough, either no one owned it or they were reluctant to lend it to me whenever I asked.
Years later, I finally managed to obtain a DVD rental from Netflix, and the children screaming the entire movie just set me over the edge. Particularly the Short Round kid. The whole movie was nails on chalkboard for me. It also bothers me when characters keep making bad decisions, which seemed to be the whole movie. Plus I already read Tom Sawyer multiple times, and it seemed like a modern day take on that, so I didn't find it particularly original.
The Goonies is always the example I bring up whenever the topic of nostalgia is discussed. Many people have argued that I don't like it because I didn't grow up with it, and it's pure nostalgia for them. I'm sorry I can't go back in time and watch it for the first time as a child, but for me that's not what makes a movie good. There are plenty of terrible shows and movies I loved as a kid that I've tried to re-watch as an adult and I realize they're actually terrible. In the same breath, I know a lot of adults still really like The Goonies. Opinions are funny, aren't they?
I don't think this take is that hot, and I'm not even saying it's a bad movie. I just didn't think it was that great, yet people are very passionate about it. Now I'll wait for the hate comments to come rolling in. :)
@@vanessa39308 There are movies that are "dumb, guilty pleasures," and there are movies that are actually good.
Taken is a good movie.
Commando is not.
@@Selrisitai oh yeah, I totally understand guilty pleasures, and I have many of them. Commando was way more up my alley.
@@vanessa39308This was my exact same reaction to seeing the Goonies for the first time 😅 It felt very 80s in a way that didn’t age well. It’s odd. So many mainstream movies are focused on capitalizing on nostalgia, rather than trying something new, regardless of whether or not the thing itself is worth immortalizing with nostalgia in the first place.
I’ve had that exact same experience of watching a film from my childhood that just doesn’t hold up, and I find myself enjoying my memories of the film more than I can enjoy the film itself. And I think that’s ok. It served its purpose.
What’s really special is rewatching something you loved as a kid and discovering that actually, it WAS that good. Finding that you enjoy the film for completely different reasons, and realizing you’re watching it from a vastly different perspective or from a different place in life. That’s when you know you had good taste as a kid and never even realized it. 😂
I love the look of your apartment man
I think you already know for every one of these responses there are 10,000 people that get exactly what you were trying to say with a level head.
I also did not enjoy the Irishman. Felt like I was being gaslight by how much everyone loved it, like they were all just trying to convince themselves they loved it when I really can’t see how that’s possible. Just so long, and so boring.
I really like you and this review. I like how earnest you are. Thank you :3
Scorsese should have used Ebsynth for deaging. Way cheaper
I agree with your mentality in regards to what society considers to be a "film", and love that you're a big advocate for defending the art form in its purest form, without relying on the pretense of self importance our culture feeds us, but I have to agree with the haters somewhat in this case. Imagine The Irishman was made for 5 dollars as everyone was really generous and wanted to make it, and the film was released for free on CZcams by some unknown old director, but it was exactly the same as it is now, would you still give it 1/5 stars? If so, I don't actually have an issue with that, as we just have very different opinions. But if your rating and opinion of the film is being influenced by what the film represents to you rather than the film itself, I don't agree that that's the way we should engage with art. Similarly to how it would not make sense for me to say Chinatown is a horrible film because Polanski is a pedophile. Or that I don't like The Shining because Kubrick was an awful person to Shelley Duvall.
I think we should ignore context to some extent when it comes to art, and not let outside elements influence our opinions to such an extent, that way we are neglecting the art in favour of an agenda.
I can be completely wrong about this, but I feel like your hostility towards films like The Irishman is a product of an ideological disagreement regarding Hollywood, and the result of your insecurities of not being taken seriously because you don't fit into the established system. If this is the case, I want you to know you don't have to take down other films that were made according to the system, those can be great too in their own right, and you are no less of a filmmaker just because you work outside of said system either. These things are not mutually exclusive and you stand for something really special, I believe with time, newer forms of film production and distribution (like indie CZcams films) will be more widely accepted as real films, and you were one of the main faces of that change! But other films don't have to be invalidated for that to happen. I happened to find The Irishman and incredibly touching and effective portrayal of how we deal with our mortality, the fact it took millions of dollars to make doesn't, and shouldn't, get in the way of how I perceive the content of the film itself.
I also think the parallel you're seeing between the "fading icons" subject matter in the film and the real life people making the film is a bit misguided, as the fact that these people are all famous or the film was expensive doesn't negate the truth about how they too will end up being forgotten by newer generations as time goes on. Beyond that it also seems a lot more likely to me that the thread connecting Scorcese's real life to the tale in the film is not his professional tragectory but his personal family life, as he has said that he thinks he made a mistake in not finding the right balance between filmmaking and raising his kids, and some of his older children grew up without much connection to him because he spent so much time working on films instead. He said he learned to find a better balance later but he still regrets the way he lived decades ago. Similarly, the character in The Irishman also neglects his family throughout his entire life, knowing one day he will be left with the regret of mistakes that can't be undone and knowing he didn't spend his time in the things that really mattered.
Anyway, I love your content, despite disagreeing with you this time, it's still interesting to find opposing views
I believe we just fundamentally disagree and that's okay! I believe the separation of the art and artist/artistic process is a far too detached way to approach art. Art is made in the real world, by real people. The best art is not only a mirror to the audience, but a portal into the artist. It is far more interesting to acknowledge that Chinatown was made by an immoral person, it reveals more truths about the multifaceted nature of humanity. Surely The Cosby Show is much harder to watch knowing what a monster Cosby was, and simultaneously the fact that a monster can create something endearing and comedic is compelling in a whole new way. The fact that immoral people can make lasting art is fascinating because we like to imagine the things we like to be made by equally quality means, but that is often not the case. I think it can be true that The Shining is an impeccable film and also that it was a film made through immoral practices that muddy the waters on whether or not the ends justified the means.
Regardless, even in a bubble The Irishman was not compelling to me. With that said, had it been made independently and released independently I would appreciate it much more and rate it higher. The problems I have with the film are exponentially exacerbated by the film's ludicrous budget. No movie that cost $175 million should look as drab and ugly as The Irishman, nor be so lazily edited. Whereas a $5 CZcams movie has much more leeway to be unprofessional and allow that to be part of the experience. If somebody is getting $20 million dollars in their pocket, there should be an expectation that the product they're selling you is good. If someone makes something as a labor of love, I am far more inclined to take it at face value and admire the persistence it takes to make something and get nothing in return.
@@joeltalksaboutmovies I don’t think outside factors should have no bearing but it does seem like that is a big focus of your review of this particular movie when the critique seems more aimed at an industry. I also didn’t like this movie but the budget seems more like a side effect of this bad movies not a cause. I think I hated that a 3 hour ego project is being projected as art even thought it feels soulless and has themes this director has already addressed in better films. If people need to look at films with a more critical eye and not just be told what art should be, you need to emphasize why this movie felt bad outside of its crazy cost imo. You could agree with this and we are talking pass one another though.
@@joeltalksaboutmovies Thanks for reading that old testament I left there and replying! I do understand what you mean that art doesn't exist in a vacuum, if 2001 had been made by hitler I would probably think the whole thing was about the superiority of aryan genetics, but just like in this example, I only think these outside elements would detract from my enjoyment of a piece of media in very extreme cases, and the irishman costing millions to make didn't really interfere with the tale of regret and mortality Scorcese was telling for me. overall I do think we disagree on that aspect, but like you said, nothing wrong with that. Thanks for the reply and keep doing your thing!
I think this kind of misses the point made in the review, and this video. It's not that big budgets are inherently bad, it's how The Irishman used theirs. He's not saying only spend 5 dollars making a movie, he's saying it's not worth it to spend so much just to hire and de-age big stars who have already had their time in the limelight.
Also, it's sketchy to try to attribute this perspective to insecurity. People are allowed to have different opinions without it being some kind of flaw or failing. That whole paragraph just comes across as very condescending, I am surprised Joel responded to it.
Please do these in 4:3 aspect ratio so its the only video that fully fits my screen .
That cactus is edging towards the door mate, ya better catch it!
Joel wondered out loud and everyone yelled "why wasn't I consulted?" lol
I like a different view on the film. I would love to know your opinion on the movie outside of the budget. If you never knew what he said about Marvel movies, or didn't know the budget, or even the director. What would your review be based on factors outside of those factors.
i really liked the irishman but i totally get your qualms with it, pretty eye opening.
I remember seeing this review on letterboxd and while I didn't really fully agree with it, I didn't get why people got so upset over it.
I appreciate your reviews about Joan Cusack.
I appreciate Joan Cusack as well