The Irishman (2019)

All non-Nolan related film, tv, and streaming discussions.
Posts: 5181
Joined: January 2012
Just checked the script again and De Niro is almost 20 years older than the character he's portraying in the ''Present'' timeline of the film. Mid-fifties De Niro/Pesci/Pacino is the further we'll get in the CGI thing. So that's a relief.

Sheeran was 35 when he met Hoffa (the scene in the trailer), they're not going for any accuracy just with the casting. Don't expect any baby De Niro in this

Posts: 42133
Joined: May 2010
Most of you guys are crazy. This trailer whips ass.

Posts: 54165
Joined: May 2010
Allstar wrote:
August 1st, 2019, 1:00 am
Most of you guys are crazy. This trailer whips ass.
Kind of obvious? Rarely you can see the level of cinematic mastery being presented here.

But damn those faces aren’t seamless VFX that function the story like we’re used to with his previous movies, they’re the baggage that could, sadly, become the talk of the day, instead of how awesome a movie this is. They already are if you read the comments online.

Posts: 2831
Joined: January 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Well, not surprised to see some people casting judgment on the VFX based on seeing it on fucking YouTube, embarrassing.


Go watch the trailer on Netflix itself, which is much less compressed OBVIOUSLY and then come back here. Drives me nuts to see that shitty compressed still used as a thumbnail and being the first thing you see when clicking on many of the links to the trailer.

ONCE AGAIN, you CANNOT judge VFX work off a YouTube video, the quality is horrendous. And what compression does, for the newbies, is that it destroys the texture of the image, it wipes it out. Ever watched trailers of films shot on film on YouTube? The compression struggles with the grain for example and all you see is a chunky, macroblocky mess. If you want to properly judge a film's visuals, at least seek the trailer out on Apple Trailers, much higher bitrate, lesser compression, the texture is restored, but it's still massively compressed.

The best quality online is Pro Res, but that's like 2 to 3 gb per trailer, YouTube is like 20-30 mb in comparison. Apple Trailers 160-180 mb. That gives you an idea of how IMPORTANT video quality is. Obviously, Netflix doesn't put their trailers on Apple Trailers or things like that.

Anyway, deaged De Niro looks a bit waxy on YouTube. He does not on Netflix itself. I watched it on the big screen and it's a revelation, the VFX work is jaw dropping, the texture is there, the grain pops (for the half shot on film (ie when they're playing their own age), it looks gorgeous. Not to mention half of it is shot on 35mm. (everything involving deaging is digital)


About the ages, it's odd because Netflix had a thumbnail of clearly a work in progress version of the trailer, and we see the info about the ages of De Niro and Pesci in those restaurant scenes. And De Niro says: 39, and he obviously looks older than he does in King Of The Comedy. Pesci says: 56. So maybe it's not done completely (although it looks complete) OR perhaps, they decided to not go back too much in terms of deaging and make subtle incremental changes from 50 something to 70 year old?!
LelekPL wrote:
July 31st, 2019, 12:54 pm
Ummm, kind of underwhelming, especially the CGI.

The trailer makes the film look like a cliched Scorsese mobster movie. I'm sure when the film actually comes out, it will have 100x more class, much better pace and character development than all the Scorsese-wannabe films, and it will have a fascinating mystery story and a potential for a great political/JFK conspiracy, but this trailer didn't really focus on that enough.

Maybe I expected a much bolder de-aging (e.g. a Godfather 2 De Niro), maybe I expected more life in De Niro's performance when working with Scorsese again but it just felt off.

Cinematography looks solid, though, I'll give them that.
Look at my post that I just wrote. Also, some insiders said on Twitter that De Niro's performance is said to be unlike what he's done before, very internal. I see zero issue on that point in the trailer. And Schoonmaker and others close to the film do say this is not Goodfellas or Casino, it's a very different animal. I don't think the trailer is generic, or cliché at all, it's just that on the surface, it feels similar to those.
Last edited by Ruth on August 1st, 2019, 12:09 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: double posting

Posts: 8121
Joined: May 2014
Jax_Teller wrote:
August 1st, 2019, 9:05 am
Go watch the trailer on Netflix itself, which is much less compressed OBVIOUSLY and then come back here.
Yeah, that's true. Watched the trailer on Netflix and it looks pretty seamless. Only De Niro's close up is a bit iffy, mostly because they went to great lengths to make his eyes blue, like Sheeran's. That applies only to the de-aged scenes, in the rest they used contact lenses. All in all, the trailer is fairly generic and it certainly misinterprets the tone of the film but the footage itself looks glorious.

Most anticipated performance is Pacino, he has the meatier role. De Niro will also have great material to work with, mostly in the third act. Pesci looks terrific as well, people will be surprised if they think his role will be similar to Goodfellas & Casino, it's very different. The typical Pesci role is occupied by Stephen Graham. Anthony Provenzano has the potential to be as iconic as Tommy DeVito, if Graham delivers.

User avatar
Law
Posts: 16647
Joined: July 2010
Location: Moonlight Motel
Jax_Teller wrote:
August 1st, 2019, 9:05 am
holy shit he's back

jax you havent been on here in literally 5 years and the first thing you post is super agressive. have you just been harbouring your rage all this time? why did you come back at all?

Posts: 2831
Joined: January 2013
Location: Hogwarts
I came on here to set the record straight. When you've got folks dissing the film's VFX based on watching it on YouTube of all platforms, it really irks me. By the way, there's nothing aggressive in my post, it's not as if tone really comes across online.

It's kind of baffling. And folks who are supposedly cinephiles or hardcore film fans should know better than to look to YouTube to make any kind of judgments on that aspect. And it's even more frustrating that most folks get their first exposure to the film and the frankly fantastic deaging work through YouTube.

I can't imagine how ticked off directors and VFX artists and DPs get when that's the way audiences get their first look at something, it's appalling. But hey, doesn't beat the Cats trailer debuting on Twitter, that was a doozy.




@Panapaok: What I'm wondering is how old they're all supposed to be in the trailer, and Pacino is technically supposed to be deaged in the trailer too. It's kinda crazy how I literally couldn't tell if I didn't know about it.

I like Scorsese saying the film is very much about Sheeran looking back on his life and his choices, Schoonmaker and others have echoed that as well.
Last edited by Jax_Teller on August 8th, 2019, 2:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

Posts: 54165
Joined: May 2010
Jax_Teller wrote:
August 8th, 2019, 2:41 am
I came on here to set the record straight. When you've got folks dissing the film's VFX based on watching it on YouTube of all platforms, it really irks me. By the way, there's nothing aggressive in my post, it's not as if tone really comes across online.

It's kind of baffling. And folks who are supposedly cinephiles or hardcore film fans should know better than to look to YouTube to make any kind of judgments on that aspect.
I watched it in 4k on my computer, the movie looks great and will probably be great as most Marty movies, but that last shot is all about the eyes and they were wrong.

Will I judge the movie based on that one shot? Of course not, but people have every right to comment on the trailer as it was presented and if you look it up online you’ll see a lot of folks, both general audience and so called ‘cinephiles’ noticed the issue, YouTube or not. Don’t capslock/@/judge me.

Posts: 2572
Joined: January 2015
Location: Poland
m4st4 wrote:
August 8th, 2019, 2:46 am
Jax_Teller wrote:
August 8th, 2019, 2:41 am
I came on here to set the record straight. When you've got folks dissing the film's VFX based on watching it on YouTube of all platforms, it really irks me. By the way, there's nothing aggressive in my post, it's not as if tone really comes across online.

It's kind of baffling. And folks who are supposedly cinephiles or hardcore film fans should know better than to look to YouTube to make any kind of judgments on that aspect.
I watched it in 4k on my computer, the movie looks great and will probably be great as most Marty movies, but that last shot is all about the eyes and they were wrong.

Will I judge the movie based on that one shot? Of course not, but people have every right to comment on the trailer as it was presented and if you look it up online you’ll see a lot of folks, both general audience and so called ‘cinephiles’ noticed the issue, YouTube or not. Don’t capslock/@/judge me.
Yep. Sam Jackson in Captain Marvel and Kurt Russell in Guardians looked much more convincing.

Post Reply