Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 10:37:17 PM

Login with username, password and session length

The Irishman (new Scorsese film feat. De Niro, Pacino, Pesci)

Started by Blinder Data, October 16, 2019, 03:57:53 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

HAVANAGILA

On Netflix now but (unless I'm missing something) not available to download? C'mon guys, I want to watch it the way Marty intended - broken up into 20 minute snippets scattered across train journeys, lunch breaks and emptying the dishwasher, on a 5 inch phone screen - without bustin' my balls* to stream it all the way through.
(*balls = monthly data allowance)

*edit* NEW PAGE SCHNOOK

*12pm edit* Ah fuhgeddaboudit, available and downloaded now in time for lunch.

bgmnts

It's a bit funny watching this as if you know a little bit about the mafia and organised crime you recognise all the names and such.

Also the de-aged old timers look fine to me.

Overall it was a bit boring to be honest, Pacino and Pesci were highlights.
Unsure as to why they cast a relatively high profile actress in Anna Paquin when that subplot is crap and she says like 4 words in the entire 3 and a half hours.

Custard

Just watched the lot in one sitting, and absolutely loved every second of it. Could be my film of the year, at this point

It's like an older, more laid-back Goodfellas, and I especially enjoyed Pesci, Pacino and Graham. De Niro was really trying here, and I think he pulled it off very well. The entire cast are great. Enjoyed spotting cast members from previous Scorcese films, The Sopranos, and Boardwalk Empire.

I must admit the CGI faces at the start were awful looking to me, but as it went on I started to forget about it and just found myself going with it. As others have said, once the characters start getting nearer to the actors' ages it becomes a non-issue. The scene at the grocery store looks baaaad, though. Those limp, old man kicks. Like Uncle Junior in the old people's home

The scenes with Graham and Pacino were fantastic, and very funny. The scenes with De Niro and Pesci actually quite moving. Especially their last one. Felt like we were saying goodbye to their onscreen partnerships, and I got a bit moist eyed. So much history and brilliance there

So yes, loved it. A near 5 star job, and will be right up there with Scorsese's best, I feel

bgmnts

Laid back be fucked, it makes snails paced seem like warp speed.

Also Pacino looks fine with the de ageing but on a rewatch De Niro's eyes are fucking mental, they look like CGI cat eyes.

Custard

But for me it was always interesting. Whereas Once Upon A Time In Hollywood bored the arse off me

peanutbutter

Quote from: Pearly-Dewdrops Drops on November 20, 2019, 02:18:15 AM
Are you people just pretending? Where is the de-aging stuff noticeable other than the "old man movement" discussed above (which is not even unrealistic considering DeNiro's character is, what, 40+ at that point? And probably has war injuries?). Post a screenshot, you frauds!

Maybe it will be more obvious streaming on a computer, but at the theatre it was a non-factor. Even better than the very impressive Samuel L Jackson de-aging in Captain Marvel.
Saw a trailer yesterday before marriage story and I must say the faces looked far better. I think it was a combo of all the worst ones being very early on (mostly De Niro, but the first Pesci scene looked odd as fuck) sitting front row with a very big screen.

chveik

god this is boring. I've read about the story before, there's nothing new or exciting in the film. he's just following the instructions of his gangster films book. it looks quite silly too, not only the de-aging, but the whole cinematography, goodfellas under morphine or something. and there's still an hour and a half to go


phantom_power

This was pretty bloody good, and didn't seem at all like 3.5 hours. De Niro was immense playing an understated psychopath and Pacino was great fun as Hoffa. The de-aging did look odd to start with, particularly when Pesci fixed De Niro's engine, but it soon seemed to sort it out and was barely noticeable after that.

SteveDave

Quote from: Shameless Custard on November 27, 2019, 04:15:26 PM
I must admit the CGI faces at the start were awful looking to me, but as it went on I started to forget about it

Fugeddaboudit!

phantom_power

Slightly odd that the start and end have the original title "I Hear You Paint Houses" as well as "The Irishman" at the beginning as well

Custard

It even felt at times that they forgot to CGI a scene. Look at Pacino's hands in the prison scene with Graham. Old man's hands on what looks to be a 40/50 year old. Looks really strange

I think the de-aging worked best on Pacino overall, mind. Wasn't as obvious, somehow. And his body moved more naturally

It does look a bit strange on the young version of De Niro at the start though. When he first starts out doing jobs for them, how old is he meant to be? Cos he looks and moves like at least 40. Or is it cos we're so used to seeing him older? If someone who had never seen the man before went into this film, would it look far more realistic and natural?

De Niro as an older man has a wider looking face, with droopier features (don't we all). So them erasing the wrinkles can't automatically make him look like 70s Bob again, and he doesn't. It's pretty close to Goodfellas Bob, but it still feels a bit off. Like a slightly uglier twin or something

Again though, it really doesn't matter once the characters start aging. It's a fascinating process though

phantom_power

I think you are right that part of the problem is we know what De Niro looked like younger and that isn't it. It is some alternate younger version which might look OK in its own right but doesn't jibe with the one in our heads

oy vey

Rewatched. I think it forms a thematic tribology with Goodfellas and Casino.

Goodfellas=young and stupid
Casino=mid-life crisis
The Irishman=OAP lament

From the POV of sociopaths, obviously.

Scorcese's voice over narrations are great. He's the only one who gets away with showing and telling simultaneously.

HAVANAGILA

Quote from: Shameless Custard on November 28, 2019, 11:31:51 AM

It does look a bit strange on the young version of De Niro at the start though. When he first starts out doing jobs for them, how old is he meant to be? Cos he looks and moves like at least 40. Or is it cos we're so used to seeing him older?

Wikipedia quotes an Empire article suggesting he's meant to be 24 at the start (i.e. when he's fixing his car) - I'm not buying that for a second.

The de-aging definitely threw me on occasion - coupled with the shifts back and forth through time, I'd often be taken out of the action by thinking "How old are they meant to be *here*?" But if the alternative was to have a completely different actor play Sheeran for a large part of the film, they definitely made the right choice.

checkoutgirl

Quote from: bgmnts on November 27, 2019, 11:15:23 AM
she says like 4 words in the entire 3 and a half hours.

Enjoyed the film and love Scorcese but it's almost like he saw the criticism of him not being able to write for women and took that to a level of self parody. The women in it are practically non existent, complaining about not being allowed to smoke in the car. Although the young girl in it did play a pivotal role in the point about the aftermath of violence, so there's that.

checkoutgirl

Quote from: bgmnts on November 27, 2019, 04:32:52 PM
Also Pacino looks fine with the de ageing

I had a problem with his hairline, particularly when you first see him. It seemed odd. Also the de-ageing coupled with the chronological jumping back and forth made me a bit confused at times. Still, just a pleasure to watch these old masters at work.

Is it true nobody else agreed to finance it other than Netflix? I think Scorcese said that on Kimmel? If it's true none of the major studios were interested in financing a project with Scorcese directing Pesci, DeNiro and Pacino then the industry really is fucked.

checkoutgirl

Quote from: bgmnts on November 27, 2019, 04:32:52 PM
Laid back be fucked, it makes snails paced seem like warp speed.

I think you might be a stupid person. That shit flew by. And I was in a cinema and barely moved my head the whole time, my neck was killing me.

bgmnts

I am stupid but it was quite slow. I found myself checking the time on Netflix on more than one occasion. Now Goodfellas, that flies by.

checkoutgirl

Quote from: bgmnts on November 28, 2019, 01:25:29 PM
I am stupid but it was quite slow. I found myself checking the time on Netflix on more than one occasion.

I dunno. I was absolutely engrossed except for maybe a few seconds once, which is pretty astounding for 3 and a half hours. Maybe being in a cinema and handing over a tenner to see it makes a bit of a difference?

Custard

Nah, I watched it at home and I had the same reaction. Gripped from start to finish

bgmnts

Probably, I was watching on Netflix in my cosy bed so I was possibly quite bored cos of that. Plus I have the attention span of a 7 year old so I cant watch mammoth Scorsese flicks nae more. Maybe its because all the cast were old codgers it had that feel of it doddering along.

oy vey

You're not stupid for thinking it's slow. It is slow. Question is if that works for you (or you're somewhere you can pause it and take a piss, etc).

thugler

Didn't feel remotely slow in the cinema. Riveting from about an hour onwards

checkoutgirl

It took its time bit if you're involved in the story unfolding then it has earned the right to take its time.

phantom_power

Part of me did think the episodic structure could lend itself to a 3 or 4 part series, with maybe a bit more time given to Keitel's character and maybe Plemons as well but overall I think it works best as a long film with lots to ruminate on while you watch it

peanutbutter

Quote from: checkoutgirl on November 28, 2019, 01:20:47 PM
Is it true nobody else agreed to finance it other than Netflix? I think Scorcese said that on Kimmel? If it's true none of the major studios were interested in financing a project with Scorcese directing Pesci, DeNiro and Pacino then the industry really is fucked.
It cost about the same amount as a mid-tier Marvel film.


One huge caveat when it comes to Scorsese bemoaning Hollywood these days is that he clearly hasn't a fucking notion how to work with a budget anymore.

#87
Mid-tier Marvel movie = the biggest budget Scorsese has ever had aside from the 3D 'Hugo'

At 140 million it's cheaper than any MCU film while still being a massive budget, the only MCU-era superhero films that are cheaper is 'Logan', which had a famous budget slash, and 'Shazam' which still cost 100 mil with no star names

The budget for the Irishman went up massively over the years due to the advancing ages of the cast beginning to necessitate the de-aging CGI. Might have banged this out on a Departed budget if backers got off their arse

The de-ageing effects were the worst thing about this. They should have just started the story when the characters are slightly older, even if that bent the truth. I can only assume promises were made about the technology that weren't kept, but they couldn't simply scrap the scenes.

I was fine with the length, but it did make it seem more like a Netflix series binge than a movie.

Garam

The budget is about what you'd expect for a 3 and a half hour period drama with new CGI effects and A list actor fees. I saw the set for the scene where Bobby kicks shit out the grocer. Two busy streets in Queens shut down for 1-2 days, an entire shop bought out for over a week or so to change the stock, change the decor, pay for loss of earnings, make everything look like the 50s, get an artist to make a big poster for oranges in 50s style, get all the pristine 50s cars. For a 45 second scene. There's no way it could be cheap. Probably over 70 million just to pay DeNiro, Pesci and Pacino.