|
Basebf555 posted:Depends on how young the story calls for, because I definitely feel like the kids they cast in Once Upon A Time In America bring the whole thing to a screeching halt. I wish Leone had just made a whole movie with De Niro and Woods(obviously the story would've needed a re-write). I don't remember where I saw it, but the best point I saw made was "if coppola made the godfather part 2 today would he have deaged Brando, or would DeNiro still have been in it?"
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 21:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 00:17 |
|
|
zer0spunk posted:I don't remember where I saw it, but the best point I saw made was "if coppola made the godfather part 2 today would he have deaged Brando, or would DeNiro still have been in it?" Valid, but I laugh at the idea of anyone getting Marlon "Can Jor-El be a bagel?" Brando agreeing to do MORE work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 22:16
|
|
|
zer0spunk posted:I don't remember where I saw it, but the best point I saw made was "if coppola made the godfather part 2 today would he have deaged Brando, or would DeNiro still have been in it?" In the Netflix featurette Scorcese explained that by de-aging the actors he could ensure the continuity of each character's interpretation, and I found that persuasive. If you have two actors playing the same character they're inevitably going to have different approaches and thoughts as to the character's personal thoughts, ideology, and mannerisms. That could be interesting, but I found the continuity in The Irishman to be powerful. For instance, one of the themes of the movie is that Sheeran cannot change and adapt, but if you had different actors playing him he obviously would change. pospysyl fucked around with this message at 23:01 on Dec 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 22:59
|
|
|
The main issue I had with the de-aging was that there’s no way to make them not move like old men. They’re all just really old dudes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 23:05
|
|
|
Drunkboxer posted:The main issue I had with the de-aging was that there’s no way to make them not move like old men. They’re all just really old dudes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 23:13
|
|
|
pospysyl posted:In the Netflix featurette Scorcese explained that by de-aging the actors he could ensure the continuity of each character's interpretation, and I found that persuasive. If you have two actors playing the same character they're inevitably going to have different approaches and thoughts as to the character's personal thoughts, ideology, and mannerisms. That could be interesting, but I found the continuity in The Irishman to be powerful. For instance, one of the themes of the movie is that Sheeran cannot change and adapt, but if you had different actors playing him he obviously would change.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 23:23
|
|
|
Khablam posted:I feel like if you do this with relatively unknown actors, people pretty much just accept it. Moonlight should be all you need to see for that to ring true. But in Moonlight I thought that part of the effect of switching actors was to emphasize an extremely dramatic transformation, especially between the second and third acts. The final act subverts that by revealing that the main character actually didn't change all that much, but you can't get that subversion without first suggesting a discontinuity by switching actors and acting approaches. pospysyl fucked around with this message at 23:51 on Dec 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 23:49
|
|
|
I think when you use separate actors you’re very clearly separating periods of time- THIS is when the character was a young man, THIS is him at middle age, etc. Using the same actor with CG/makeup makes it all run together a bit more. I’m not sure if that’s a positive or negative but that’s the effect.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 23:52
|
|
|
Khablam posted:I feel like if you do this with relatively unknown actors, people pretty much just accept it. Moonlight should be all you need to see for that to ring true. That's definitely a part of it. Especially with a guy like De Niro, who's physicality was always such a huge part of his presence. It's hard to not notice when I have these images of him in Raging Bull or Taxi Driver or even later stuff like Ronin tattooed on my brain because he's such an iconic actor. Edit: I think I misunderstood your post but my point still stands
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2019 23:59
|
|
|
Khablam posted:I feel like if you do this with relatively unknown actors, people pretty much just accept it. Moonlight should be all you need to see for that to ring true. Or IT, Sleepers, Superman, Forrest Gump...I'm leaving out 100 movies because it's been done a million times. They even did it Goodfellas, Godfather 2 and Bronx Tale. I really love the film but think using younger actors over the cgi would have been fine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2019 02:58
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:DeNiro also didn’t look young enough in a lot of the flashbacks IMO I'd say he always looks at least 50. Pesci's older face also looks a bit like a faceapp photo. The deaging worked in Captain marvel I think but I dunno, this just felt like too much for it. And I feel like it confused the narrative a bit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2019 03:14
|
|
|
Taear posted:The deaging worked in Captain marvel I think but I dunno, this just felt like too much for it. And I feel like it confused the narrative a bit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2019 04:34
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:Using the same actor with CG/makeup makes it all run together a bit more. I've seen people mention that Hoffa was initially supposed to be in his late 30s and I guess Sheeran is supposed to be the same in the delivery truck sequences? And then Russ is in his early 50s or something? I didn't get that at all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2019 08:12
|
|
|
Yeah I thought Sheeran would have to be in his 30s when the flashbacks start since it is clearly after WW2, so late 20s/early 30s I did laugh when Pesci called him ‘kid’ and he still looks no younger than 40 even with the CGI
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2019 15:48
|
|
|
Yeah I was thinking why is he calling a guy his age "kid"?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2019 16:09
|
|
|
Overall it was less distracting than I thought, though. Normally any kind of CGI face stuff immediately takes me out of the movie, like in the Marvel movies and the Star Wars movies. It's ironic that I'm apparently completely fine with it in a movie that is clearly not designed as a CGI spectacle.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2019 18:52
|
|
|
Yeah, I didn't have a problem with the de-ageing because I didn't really care or think about how old they were supposed to be, just how old they were relative to narrator Frank. It worked in that regard.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2019 20:42
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:Yeah, I didn't have a problem with the de-ageing because I didn't really care or think about how old they were supposed to be, just how old they were relative to narrator Frank. It worked in that regard. The problem is that most of the time it all looked like they were the same ages - over 60.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2019 22:27
|
|
|
I watch a lot of japanese live action on the regular so the CGI didn't really distract me, but nthing the feeling that De Niro looked like he was in his mid forties at the beginning of the movie. I didn't quite feel much of an aging progression beyond "mid forties" and "too old for retirement's home" by the end of the movie
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2019 23:11
|
|
|
Payndz posted:I can't be the only one who sees the thread title and immediately thinks of Rudy Giuliani yelling "WHO DO I TELL ABOUT THE CRIMES?" I heard you paint white houses
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2019 23:44
|
|
|
Taear posted:The problem is that most of the time it all looked like they were the same ages - over 60. I dunno. There was narrator Frank, trip with Russ and the wives Frank, and younger than that Frank. It worked fine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2019 00:11
|
|
|
I didn't have a problem telling those apart he just didn't look as young as he was supposed to be and there wasn't much of a progression as he aged. The CGI wasn't distracting he just looked close to the same age as Pesci when they met.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2019 00:18
|
|
|
I guess "how young he was supposed to be" just wasn't a thing I cared about. I definitely laughed the couple of times Pesci called him "kid" though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2019 00:27
|
|
|
I used the same suspension of disbelief that I use when Goodfellas tells me that Pesci and De Niro are supposed to be in their 20s for a chunk of it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2019 02:23
|
|
|
Or any tv show starring "teenagers"
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2019 05:38
|
|
|
Holy gently caress this sucked poo poo. I'd call it slow but that would imply it went somewhere. there was some stuff I liked about it--pacino did great as always but pesci and deniro were sleep walking. felt very long and over indulgent. lot of very padded scenes--did we really need two separate instances of pacino dancing with Anna Paquin at the dinner? the mumbling about the fish, the mumblitn about being late, "it's what it is," "well maybe someone should say" etc all were necessary scenes but just should have bee edited. Gay Horney fucked around with this message at 19:30 on Dec 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2019 08:28
|
|
|
It's a shame you feel that way, Gay Horney.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2019 13:44
|
|
|
It wasn't that it took me out of the movie it's that I didn't even realize how young he/they were supposed to be.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2019 14:16
|
|
|
It might have helped if they had put the year up in some of the earlier scenes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2019 14:27
|
|
|
I think it was intentional that the only dates explicitly mentioned were the dates people died and when Peggy stopped speaking to Frank.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2019 15:18
|
|
|
Sagacity posted:I think your analysis is pretty much spot-on. Petty feuding, arbitrary rules, and constant counterproductive changes in policy? Sounds exactly like how a business is run
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2019 22:55
|
|
|
I'm not really sure how anyone could dislike this movie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 06:46
|
|
|
Firstborn posted:I'm not really sure how anyone could dislike this movie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 06:49
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:This movie did get me to finally request Hoffa from the library, I’ve slept way too long on seeing Danny DeVito direct Jack Nicholson with a script by David Mamet It is about a tenth as good as something with that pedigree should be.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 07:51
|
|
|
I'm still getting through the thread but I hope someone else pointed out the weird stuff going on in the edit and with ADR. It wasn't enough to ruin what was a very good movie but there were cuts, mostly out of Pacino lines, that were very jarring and amateurish. Guessing they had to leave a lot of stuff out even at 210 minutes and did their best to cut around the missing material. And I very much enjoyed Fat Tony's line: "Who does he think he is, Castro?" Really points out how dangerous Hoffa was and shows you what side the mob is really on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 07:55
|
|
|
The editing is pretty bad in places, presumably because the first cut was over 4hrs and they had to get liberal with it. There's also a few shots where DeNiro's face goes to a sharp angle vs the camera, and the de-aging falls off (especially in the opening truck scene; he looks down and his nose doubles in size) and more than a few Pacino moments where it looks like 'cut' has already been called before the cut stops - he stops emoting in the last frames. I saw these on a first watch, and I wasn't looking for them - how does this kind of thing get through? There's also some weirdness around the picture quality in the film. Given there's noise over their CGI faces, and it's consistent with the rest of it, I suspect they've used digital de-noising on the whole image, and then added noise back in artificially. There's just a consistent 'digital' feel to what is apparently a film mostly shot on 35mm.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 13:41
|
|
|
Davros1 posted:It might have helped if they had put the year up in some of the earlier scenes. Agreed. They tried to do it subtly with the music, cars etc. I think they even showed some movies or bands on a marquee,and also some tv news if I remember right. Stuff like that helped me a lot but maybe a little bit more of it would have added some clarity. Have a TV playing with a famous show or sporting event in the background or some news over the radio about Nixon, Vietnam of the Challenger disaster that everyone knows sets the year. And, yeah, I can't get how anyone can hate on this movie. At worst, I could see someone thinking "it was OK" since it has its flaws but I was sucked in the entire time. Also got a kick out of recognizing actors. Some of them took me a while. I didn't pick up that was Harvey Keitel right away.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 13:52
|
|
|
Khablam posted:There's also some weirdness around the picture quality in the film. Given there's noise over their CGI faces, and it's consistent with the rest of it, I suspect they've used digital de-noising on the whole image, and then added noise back in artificially. There's just a consistent 'digital' feel to what is apparently a film mostly shot on 35mm. I had assumed while watching it was shot digitally since it had that look throughout.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 14:58
|
|
|
It was shot on 35mm except for scenes that required the deaging.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 15:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 00:17 |
|
|
Sagacity posted:It was shot on 35mm except for scenes that required the deaging. Isn't that almost half of it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 23:11
|
|
