MovieChat Forums > The Irishman (2019) Discussion > How many Oscars will it win?

How many Oscars will it win?


I predict The Irishman will win 4 Oscars, including best picture, best director, best adapted screenplay, and best editing. What do you think?

reply

BSA for Pesci

reply

I think the Academy might snub it because it came out on Netflix.

reply

5 oscars

reply

Pesci or Pacino deserve noms. Maybe even wins

It will definitely get a nomination for Best Picture. De Niro might get a nom for Best Actor. Probably also for director. Maybe for Adapted Screenplay. It might even get a nom for special effects

I'm really bad at predicting Best Picture winners. Mainly because I have not liked most of the winners for many of the last several years. Moonlight, Hurt Locker, The Artist, The King's Speech, etc. were all so dull and unimportant

Scorsese deserves another Oscar for best director, IMO. Maybe not because Irishman was such a great film, but if we accept the fact that the Academy bases their votes on who needs their "due", Scorsese deserves to end his career with two Oscars. Ideally, he should have at least 3: for Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, and Goodfellas.

reply

>>I'm really bad at predicting Best Picture winners. Mainly because I have not liked most of the winners for many of the last several years. Moonlight, Hurt Locker, The Artist, The King's Speech, etc. were all so dull and unimportant

The King's Speech is a masterpiece.

reply

"B-b-because I have a VOICE!"

Phony Oscar bait crap. Is it really that inspirational that a guy who was born literally into royalty, with all of the necessary resources at his disposal, was able to overcome a non-lethal disorder?

I mean it was a nice cozy crowdpleaser. But the academy tends to elevate these feel-good journeyman to a level where they don't belong. Just like Green Book, Shakespeare in Love, Driving Miss Daisy. They are rewarding "cuteness"

Colin Firth deserved the Oscar, his acting was superb. Geoffrey Rush was also excellent. But the movie itself is pretty forgettable

reply

I disagree. The film was a crowdpleaser, sure, but what does that really mean? That people were pleased after watching it? Is that wrong?

I thought the journey that the character Geoffrey Rush played, made the film go into masterpiece level. The filmmaking behind it is exquisite, with great directing and lead performances, but the ending with Rush watching the King take the applause gets me every time.

Did you like Green Book?

reply

Yes, Geofrey Rush was definitely incredible in the movie. Definitely the most enjoyable scenes in the movie all included him. I won't begrudge someone for thinking any good movie is a masterpiece. All movies affect us all in different ways. I have probably a pretty weird top 10 myself, so I get it. And I thought Green Book was ok. A solid movie, but Best Picture materal? Not for my tastes

reply

Same here. What's your top 10? Are we talking Lynch, Cronenberg and Polanski?

My top 10 would consist of weird along with crowdpleasing. As long as the movie is good, it doesn't matter if it's oscar bait or a Cassavettes cinema verite. Ah, screw it, I'll attempt a top 10 at a fast pace without really thinking it through:

1. My life as a Dog (1985)
2. Picnic at Hanging Rock (1975)
3. The Game (1997)
4. Amadeus (1984)
5. JFK (1991)
6. Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
7. The Lost Weekend (1945)
8. The Fugitive (1993)
9. Threads (1984)
10. Back to the Future (1985)
11. Taxi Driver
12. Empire Strikes Back

and many more. A top 10 is almost impossible to make.

reply

Way to early to predict winners, but for nominees:

Definitely:
Best Picture
Best Supporting Actor (Pesci)
Adopted Screenplay
Make Up

Other possible ones:
Lead Actor for DeNiro and Pacino. I think both will be in the lead category.
Best Director, although I can see self righteous Hollywood not wanting to nominate Scorsese because he had no minorities in the movie, and barely any women. He even had an Oscar winner in it (Pacquin) and she barely had any lines. Also because he dared to have an opinion about super hero movies.

reply

Hmm, if only it was “an” opinion. But two months later, and he’s still waging war on superhero films sounding like the typical out of touch old man yells at cloud. If he simply said he didn’t like those big bad superhero films and they weren’t his kind of cinema (yes, they are cinema), all would be good. But what has he done? Well, first of all, he has pretty much promoted his new wise flick - once again filled with super one-note characters - this way. No doubt the industry that, yes, still loves him, was always going to shower his new film with praise no matter what. But rarely does the topic of Scorsese and Irishman come up these days and his stance against the biggest films out there isn’t brought up. So as beloved as Scorsese is by cinephiles, I seriously doubt his new film would have attracted the attention it did if not for his snobbish comments regarding films that aren’t only massively popular, but ACCLAIMED. So, clever little fella!

Second of all, he called these films an “infestation” (this year they only made up 3% of all wide released films btw) and “implied” movie theaters should do something about this and put a stop to them (looks like we have the Donald Drumpf of filmmakers over here!). Yea... that’s pretty much a demand rather than an opinion. Oh, sure, his fellow nerdy film elitists absolutely - but falsely - believe that “kiddie” superhero films are all that’s out there and they need to end. But like them or not, the reality is they are not “infesting” movie theaters. Marty’s got his facts wrong. And for sure he has disparaged the people who’ve worked hard on these films. He can do so cuz of who he is? F that! Just because he is a god in the eyes of cinephiles/film snobs, doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be criticized himself. To say he’s shown he’s full of ignorance would be an understatement.

And here’s the thing, he is no fan of escapist films in general. That’s right... whether it’s the action genre (which he has bashed for decades) or pure fantasy cinema, it’s quite obvious this guy has such an archaic and 100% elitist view of what “real cinema” is (I still wonder why he made the unrealistic, mediocre Hugo since it was anything but a complex human story). In past interviews, he has admitted that he doesn’t like to watch new films, and on top of that he’s used the good ol’ “kids these days don’t know anything” rhetoric. Predictably, he’s using the same desperate arguments against superhero films AND their audiences. “Kids may consider them cinema, but...” ugh. Bearing that in mind, OF COURSE he’s gone after superhero cinema. These films dare to not be a hardcore reflection of grim reality , and so essentially they are everything he detests about cinema, which is... escapism.

What’s more, previously he said that he “tried” giving them a chance. Knowing how he feels about certain cinema and modern films in general, though, I call bs on that (I have since day 1). In fact, in a recent interview he straight up said he’s only watched two comic films. TWO! What a shocker! It’s so surprising considering how “in-depth” and “specific” he’s been when he’s criticized these “theme park” films rather than make generalizations. *eye roll* So while clearly he was never going to give these film snob-disapproved escapist films a fair chance, after he admitted he’s only seen two of them (from Marvel or DC, it makes no difference to him) his ill-conceived and preposterous op-ed he wrote about superhero films looks more pathetic than ever.

Mostly “real” cinema fans may believe and agree with everything that denigrating Marty spews. But, the real truth is he’s not sounding like a fair-minded individual who knows what he’s talking about — he is as snobbish and clueless as it gets. Seriously, he watched only 2 of these films (they might’ve been from the 90’s, for all you know!), he felt he saw everything this side of cinema had to offer, and so now he’s out there smugly proclaiming that CBM’s are “all the same thing” and they lack real human emotion. Wow, that’s real rich coming from a guy whose beloved wise guy/crime movies are filled with abhorrent characters that are anything but complex.

Now lol, he comes out with his 50th mob film that’s a love letter... to himself. XD ’Well-made as it is, Irishman has NOTHING new to offer. All the overused Scorsese tropes are there and it’s like... yea, I’ve seen this already. Originality! Characters shouting and acting intense? That ain’t deep nor complex. The film is also self-indulgently long! (My favorite gangster film is “Once Upon a Time in America”, and I dig the extended cut that’s over four hours long, so spare me the short attention span bs.) His ONGOING war on superhero films is just sad, boring, and childish!

But hey, the gang is all back together making a film that's again dedicated to one-dimensional goons, so let’s be in awe! Tony Stark>>>>>> Jake LaMotta, Jordan Belfort, Frank Sheehan, Hoffa, Tommy DeVito, Henry Hill, Bill da Butcher, etc.

reply

By the way.... no minorities (in a couple of decades that won’t be the case) and very few women? Please, you know Hollywood saw that coming a mile away in a Scorsese film, and yet most of the big wigs in regressive-disapproved Hollywood raved about his new film. As such, the “it wasn’t PC enough and that’s why he got snubbed!” reactionary excuse ain’t gonna work. He WILL get nominated.

That said, IF he doesn’t receive a nomination, then maybe it will be because his ludicrous anti-superhero comments will backfire (this despite the fact that older voters that more or less have the same ridiculous high standards as Scorsese still have a large influence). But I say a likelier reason, is because there are more deserving directors. Yes. As a matter of fact, there are more deserving films than The Irishman in general. Now I know mentioning them will be utterly useless, albeit I suppose it’s mandatory.... Parasite, The Farewell, Jojo Rabbit, Knives Out (far more unique, unpretentious, and just awesome), 1917, Once Upon a Time In Hollywood (which I wasn’t even impressed by), and maybe a few of the upcoming December releases. But don’t worry, he’ll definitely get those Oscar noms.

And going back to his oh-so-mature superhero bashing. Gee, he so edgy he dared to have “an opinion” about them regardless of how pompous and sad it’s made him look? This simply being an old man yells at cloud case, it’s more like he has an agenda against them. As it is, don’t act like it’s unreasonable that, not only fans of “fake cinema” but many in the industry, have taken issue with Marty’s opinion. I get that he and many nostalgics who are prejudiced against spectacle films and most modern films in general are missing the old, beautifully white days of cinema (hilarious, Marty likely hates many non-reality based films that were made both before and during his time; his friendship with Lucas aside, he’s reportedly always hated Star Wars!), but the industry, as imperfect as it is, continues to grow and change as always. And luckily, those who aren’t narrow-minded like Marty and actually embrace superhero epics (not just wise guy epics), are indeed having a bigger voice in the industry. So if there’s any chance Marty’s comments DO backfire mainly because of younger and more open-minded individuals come Oscar season (nah, older elites still rule), then... LOL! Anyway, Marty and others like him will keep miserably railing at CBM’s. However, no matter how much he bitches, these epic and resonating films ain’t going anywhere any time soon. Not cinema? OK BOOMER!

reply

It'll get a lot of nominations, but one win and that's Joe Pesci. He was brilliant.

reply

I can see this getting nominations for: picture, supporting actor (Pesci), director, screenplay, and editing. I don't see it winning many though.

reply

Pesci is a lock for best Supporting actor but I don't think it will win best pic.

reply