I love De Niro, Pacino, Pesci and Scorsese. I love really good old age make-up, good acting, great sets, period costumes, tunes that set the mood of the era, and fine cinematography. This film contained all of these elements. What it didn't have was believability, for one. De Niro and Pacino, well into their 70s, were playing guys in their 40s to 50s. The special effects used to "de-age" them, and Pesci, were ridiculous. It made De Niro look like Yul Brenner from the original West World. And Pesci calling De Niro "kid?" Gimme a break! Okay, another issue was the very forgettable, cardboard cutout, cliched cast. Paquin walked through scenes like a zombie, Romano is a t.v. actor who belongs on t.v., Cannavale and Keitel didn't have enough screen time and everyone else, like I said, was forgettable. Thirdly, the 3 1/2 hours running time seemed longer than that. Long films are fine, if they're good, if they move along and if they are interesting. This one was slow and plodding, featuring silly, nonsensical exchanges and scenarios. There were scenes that could have easily been chopped. Heck, the director and three leads would all have to take two bathroom breaks each if they sat through this. The Irishman may very well be Scorsese, De Niro and Pacino's celebrated last hurrah, however, is it being celebrated for what it is, or for who they are?