DeNiro, Pacino, Pesci, Scorsese.....The Irishman trailer

[Deberg_1990]

Holy shit. Probably the last hurrah for these guys. Looks great

Scorsese. De Niro. Pacino. Pesci. THE IRISHMAN. Get ready. pic.twitter.com/xYyaOapXXZ

— Netflix Film (@NetflixFilm) July 31, 2019

[scho63]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Go back 20 years and tell me that ANYONE would've thought Joe Pesci would've 'won' a movie w/ DeNiro and Pacino.

Even in Goodfellas he seemed overmatched by DeNiro (who was in the midst of his prime, IMO) and Liota.

I think they may have overplayed the 'understated quasi Mafia-Don' persona, but I don't know Buffalino's history all that well.

The 50's and 60's were such a fascinating time for NY Organized crime. All the post-war jockeying of the families to establish territory in the wake of Luciano's deportation makes for some good reading. Luciano himself is a really interesting character as well with Lansky and Siegel. Luciano essentially created the 'NY Mafia' as we know it.

The Mafia in the 60's and 70's went underground and the bosses were quiet as hell as well as out of the spotlight. You would NEVER see a mafia boss and say "OH, that guy's a gangster." They didn't dress like hoods, they didn't drive flashy cars or big houses and kept real low profiles.

The big turning point of the mob coming above ground and the dumb street rats taking over and destroying the mob was Nicky Scarfo first in Philly killing Angelo Bruno and setting off a violent mob war and then flashy John Gotti killed Paul Castellano. Once those two goons took over the mob went from quiet ruthless businessmen to loud obnoxious serial killers and psychopaths.

Those two guys decimated the mob in about 10-15 years.

Some of the new old time leaders from Italy are trying to bring it back underground.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by scho63

The Mafia in the 60's and 70's went underground and the bosses were quiet as hell as well as out of the spotlight. You would NEVER see a mafia boss and say "OH, that guy's a gangster." They didn't dress like hoods, they didn't drive flashy cars or big houses and kept real low profiles.

Coincides with the Apalachin Meeting.

"Coincides" is probably not the right way to put it. "Was a direct result of" is probably more accurate.

What a hilarious shitshow that whole thing was. Vito Genovese may have been the biggest idiot in the annals of organized crime, including the mouth-breathing triggermen (which was essentially all Genovese was to begin with).

I'm not criticizing the way Pesci played the understated way that Pesci played the role, I'm more curious with how much control they have vested in Bufalino. It just seems that they had a few too many roads leading back to him.

Maybe I'm wrong; it's possible that the universe being portrayed in this move is a little more narrowly focused than I am understanding and in fact he WAS the big dick in charge. It just seems odd to me that they are suggesting that Bufalino was possibly directly responsible for the Anastasia assassination or at least had to sign off on it.

I mean c'mon - Anastasia ran the what would be come the Gambino outfit at the time, no? Am I really to believe that this guy had the power to sanction a hit on the leader of arguably the most powerful family in NY? My recollection is that the entire NY Commission pretty much had enough of Anastasia's shit and had him killed. That's not something that Bufalino would've been directly responsible for.

[Deberg_1990]

Originally Posted by Dayze

I. Pesci was really good. Subdued , but powerful.

Pesci was probably the best thing about the movie. He was so good.

And it was a completely different role than Goodfellas and Casino. He wasnt an enforcer.

It was a quiet understated role. I liked him alot in this.

[ShiftyEyedWaterboy]

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

Pesci was probably the best thing about the movie. He was so good.

And it was a completely different role than Goodfellas and Casino. He wasnt an enforcer.

It was a quiet understated role. I liked him alot in this.

Agreed. He nailed it.

[scho63]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Coincides with the Apalachin Meeting.

"Coincides" is probably not the right way to put it. "Was a direct result of" is probably more accurate.

What a hilarious shitshow that whole thing was. Vito Genovese may have been the biggest idiot in the annals of organized crime, including the mouth-breathing triggermen (which was essentially all Genovese was to begin with).

I'm not criticizing the way Pesci played the understated way that Pesci played the role, I'm more curious with how much control they have vested in Bufalino. It just seems that they had a few too many roads leading back to him.

Maybe I'm wrong; it's possible that the universe being portrayed in this move is a little more narrowly focused than I am understanding and in fact he WAS the big dick in charge. It just seems odd to me that they are suggesting that Bufalino was possibly directly responsible for the Anastasia assassination or at least had to sign off on it.

I mean c'mon - Anastasia ran the what would be come the Gambino outfit at the time, no? Am I really to believe that this guy had the power to sanction a hit on the leader of arguably the most powerful family in NY? My recollection is that the entire NY Commission pretty much had enough of Anastasia's shit and had him killed. That's not something that Bufalino would've been directly responsible for.

The Mob is like Linkedin for criminals. It's just a giant network of who knows who knows who knows knows who. It's how a person can get favors from anyone anywhere.

Buffalino was an incredible networker and guy who quietly built an immense network of contacts all over the region he was in control of. It was outside most of the big regions like NYC, Chicago, Las Vegas and Los Angeles.

You look at the Patricia family of New England, Santo Trafficante of Florida, Carlos Marcello of New Orleans, Buffalino of New York State and rural Pennsylvania and other midest areas. They guys had a lot of power because they were the only one family and had huge regions.

Angelo Bruno was another old school, quiet businessman that kept a very low profile. He had tons of politicians and contacts everywhere and was very respected from both sides.

Vito Genovese was definitely more thuggish than a businessman.

Albert Anastasia was one of many who died during the 50's when the mob families were fighting for control and dominance.

They got real quiet in the 60s and 70s and made billions once the violence slowed down

[Simply Red]

It was great, until

Spoiler!

Al Pacino came into the film. He's unwatchable in this movie.

[alanm]

Started watching it this movie this morning. Love it so far. I dunno I guess you gotta be Italian. Brings back memories of old KC, South Omaha. Mom's family ect. My Grandpa who's nickname was the "Pope". I grew up with this shit. Then I went into Law Enforcement.

[Mennonite]

Originally Posted by Simply Red

It was great, until

Spoiler!

Al Pacino came into the film. He's unwatchable in this movie.

[alanm]

And always ALWAYS show up early. It's disrespect if you don't. At least a hr. I can't tell you how much " Face" means. Especially with the Mex cartels now. 15 yrs. working with them after 911.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Simply Red

It was great, until

Spoiler!

Al Pacino came into the film. He's unwatchable in this movie.

So I'm about halfway; Hoffa's clearly on the scene now.

I'm not actually opposed to how Pacino's portraying him. Hoffa was, by most accounts, a fiery dude who had a hell of a temper. Going over the top to play him isn't exactly unreasonable.

I think the problem isn't Pacino in this movie, it's Pacino in every other movie he's made in the last 20 years and the audience reaction to him. We're just kinda worn thin on his particular form of scenery chewing. This is pretty much just what Pacino does now so all we see is Pacino. We don't see Pacino playing Hoffa.

Should Scorsese have seen that coming and cast someone else in the role? Possibly. I think you can criticize Scorsese for the casting choice because it is a little difficult to stay in the movie when he's on the screen. All you see is Pacino in much the same way that Tom Cruise is always Tom Cruise.

But in a vacuum, had we not been 'treated' to 2 decades of Pacino shouting, I don't think we'd have a problem with how he handles the role in this movie. It's not like it's as bizarre as him playing King Richard or anything...

[alanm]

As a teamster membster o f @459 at the moment. And as a former fed, IM Torn. Everything is so ripped up,

[alanm]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

So I'm about halfway; Hoffa's clearly on the scene now.

I'm not actually opposed to how Pacino's portraying him. Hoffa was, by most accounts, a fiery dude who had a hell of a temper. Going over the top to play him isn't exactly unreasonable.

I think the problem isn't Pacino in this movie, it's Pacino in every other movie he's made in the last 20 years and the audience reaction to him. We're just kinda worn thin on his particular form of scenery chewing. This is pretty much just what Pacino does now so all we see is Pacino. We don't see Pacino playing Hoffa.

Should Scorsese have seen that coming and cast someone else in the role? Possibly. I think you can criticize Scorsese for the casting choice because it is a little difficult to stay in the movie when he's on the screen. All you see is Pacino in much the same way that Tom Cruise is always Tom Cruise.

But in a vacuum, had we not been 'treated' to 2 decades of Pacino shouting, I don't think we'd have a problem with how he handles the role in this movie. It's not like it's as bizarre as him playing King Richard or anything...

Pacino was good in this movie. Hoffa was a idiot. My best guess he was retired in the Greart lakes. Just my take. WTF do I know know I'm just a retired @@@ Agent.

[alanm]

I was assigned s a young field officer. Got nowhere. Still a open case for the most part..

[MahiMike]

Originally Posted by Graystoke

Wasn’t impressed

This. 3 1/2 hours of meh. I fast forwarded the last 50 mins.

[Simply Red]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

So I'm about halfway; Hoffa's clearly on the scene now.

I'm not actually opposed to how Pacino's portraying him. Hoffa was, by most accounts, a fiery dude who had a hell of a temper. Going over the top to play him isn't exactly unreasonable.

I think the problem isn't Pacino in this movie, it's Pacino in every other movie he's made in the last 20 years and the audience reaction to him. We're just kinda worn thin on his particular form of scenery chewing. This is pretty much just what Pacino does now so all we see is Pacino. We don't see Pacino playing Hoffa.

Should Scorsese have seen that coming and cast someone else in the role? Possibly. I think you can criticize Scorsese for the casting choice because it is a little difficult to stay in the movie when he's on the screen. All you see is Pacino in much the same way that Tom Cruise is always Tom Cruise.

But in a vacuum, had we not been 'treated' to 2 decades of Pacino shouting, I don't think we'd have a problem with how he handles the role in this movie. It's not like it's as bizarre as him playing King Richard or anything...

After say - 1980 - the only thing I recall liking him in was The Devil's Advocate. He single handedly ruined this film. DeNiro was the star and JP was a close second.