Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Tart Kitty
Dec 17, 2016

Oh, well, that's all water under the bridge, as I always say. Water under the bridge!

Really enjoyed this. And it was a great reminder of how consistently funny Scorsese is as a director. He might be the best "edit as punchline" filmmaker out there next to like, maybe Edgar Wright.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Tart Kitty
Dec 17, 2016

Oh, well, that's all water under the bridge, as I always say. Water under the bridge!

Captain Jesus posted:

The CGI de-ageing was extremely distracting to me, especially in the first half of the movie. It gave me flashbacks to Joseph Gordon-Levitt's horrifying make-up in Looper. Somehow it just didn't look right. It also turns out that taking a man in his late 70s and making his face look younger is not enough to make him actually appear young. De Niro might have looked like a man in this mid 40s at best but he certainly didn't look like a man in his 30s. It's made worse by the fact that we know how De Niro, Al Pacino and Joe Pesci looked like when they were younger and they certainly didn't look like the way they did in this movie.

The blue eye contacts on De Niro were really distracting in a couple of scenes. The worst of them made it look like he a was a host to Pazuzu or something.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply