GoodFellas...Is It Really THAT Good?

Okay, so I finally caved and watched GoodFellas (I know, I'm late to the party!). Everyone always raves about it, calling it the best gangster movie EVER. And yeah, it was good. Really good. But I have some reservations, particularly with how they handled the violence. Like, don't get me wrong, I like my movies with a healthy splash of the red stuff, but sometimes it felt a little...gratuitous? I'm thinking specifically about the Billy Batts beatdown scene. I get it, he insulted Tommy, but did they REALLY need to stomp him into the ground like that? It felt excessive, even for a bunch of cold-blooded killers. What I DID love was the pacing and the performances. Joe Pesci was absolutely terrifying as Tommy. Seriously, that guy could stare into your soul. And the whole rise-and-fall narrative, seeing Henry get sucked into that world and then watching it all crumble around him...that was compelling stuff. The ending, when he's finally in witness protection and just completely miserable because he can't have his lifestyle anymore? Chef's kiss. But here's my question for everyone else who's seen it: Does the violence enhance the movie for you, or does it sometimes feel unnecessary? I feel like the movie could have made the point about the brutal gangster lifestyle without quite so much on-screen bloodshed. Maybe I'm just being a sensitive Sally, but I'm curious to hear other people's takes! And also, how accurate is it to the real story? I hear a lot of it is true but also embellished for entertainment's sake.