criterionforum.org

True, plus that’s just a strange group of directors to bunch together when comparing process. I can’t imagine they have many, if any, similarities when planning or crafting their respective films.

therewillbeblus wrote: Thu Sep 26, 2019 2:17 am True, plus that’s just a strange group of directors to bunch together when comparing process. I can’t imagine they have many, if any, similarities when planning or crafting their respective films.

Hugo, The Tree of Life, Goodbye To Language. I would also add Fincher to the list.

Never Cursed wrote: Thu Sep 26, 2019 1:46 am Scorsese has already made movies like the ones Jost and Kiarostami describe

Just because a film uses a lot of CGI does not mean it was made by scrolling through a catalog on a computer. I guess Hugo and Tree of Life and Benjamin Button have no artistic value. Surely The Irishman is just bad CGI and nothing else.

Also please explain how Hugo or The Irishman were made backwards from a computer catalog. These films weren't just conceived to be showcases for technology. Ah yes, Tree of Life, Malick's passion project about the wonders of CGI dinosaurs.

Give it a minute and see if you realize that all you're doing is proving that you don't actually agree with Kiarostami's comments (which is fine)

domino harvey wrote: Thu Sep 26, 2019 2:44 am Give it a minute and see if you realize that all you're doing is proving that you don't actually agree with Kiarostami's comments (which is fine)

If this is directed at me, I am not sure how this is relevant to my comments. I am just talking about how Kiarostami's comments are not relevant to this film or Scorsese's oeuvre in general.

There are no exceptions made in the quote, only in the defenses of auteurs one would have to dismiss if you ascribe to it

quim_font wrote: Wed Sep 25, 2019 10:42 pm Even outside of it looking poor, the first one doesn’t look anything like a 24 year old. More like a 40 year old.

I suppose I’m just skeptical of the necessity of it, but, yes, it doesn’t really say anything about the movie itself, yet.

Does De Niro actually wear the same expression throughout the entire film? Is this an elaborate Kuleshov Effect experiment?

domino harvey wrote: Thu Sep 26, 2019 2:56 am There are no exceptions made in the quote, only in the defenses of auteurs one would have to dismiss if you ascribe to it

Please read: “...nowadays they scroll through the technical catalogs on the computer, and make the movie backwards from there.”

The quote doesn't CGI is this or that way. It is not a categorical claim about CGI. The Irishman isn't using some molotov cocktail of CGI effects splattered indiscriminately and purposelessly across the screen. It wasn't built backwards from a computer just to showcase the technology. Explain how any of Scorsese's (or any other directors I mentioned) films fulfill the conditions in the quote.

If you think the quote is about any film that uses CGI, I don't know what to tell you. The way you are reading it, we could apply the quote to every Scorsese film since The Aviator as they all use CGI in one way or another. I am sure Kiarostami was railing against Scorsese and Malick with their no-good, big budget, CGI showcases

...which is why it’s not a very insightful or useful quote, unless one uses it to demonize films they already don’t like while conveniently not doing the same for those they enjoy

New Trailer:

https://youtu.be/fjrzu37-ljI

All right, I'm starting to sway. This could work well.

TwoTecs wrote: Thu Sep 26, 2019 4:06 am New Trailer:

https://youtu.be/fjrzu37-ljI

OK -- the first trailer to make me actually want to check it out.

Had no idea Jesse Plemons was in this

Very impressive trailer considering how eerily poor those stills were.

flyonthewall2983 wrote:Had no idea Jesse Plemons was in this

In the previous trailer there's a shot with an older Pesci sitting next to who I suspect is an aged (through make-up) Plemons, so they went both ways in this film.

Not that I wasn't going to watch it before but this trailer had me completely sold. I am hoping it plays near me when it's in theaters.

mfunk9786 wrote:Very impressive trailer considering how eerily poor those stills were.

I'm feeling a little better about it. It worked in the trailer. That one shot as a GI is still hokey but the rest was holding up.

I would guess they also did that with Anna Paquin's character too

cdnchris wrote: Thu Sep 26, 2019 5:52 pmI'm feeling a little better about it. It worked in the trailer. That one shot as a GI is still hokey but the rest was holding up.

I still can't over the fact that what's supposed to look like a mid-20s De Niro in the WWII scene (Sheeran was born in 1920) looks...absolutely nothing like the mid-20s De Niro we've seen in the early Brian De Palma films. Doesn't even look like the mid-30s De Niro of 1900 and The Deer Hunter.

I don’t know how you get the exact image. It sounds almost impossible to me to duplicate his looks from his 20’s and 30’s

If anything, they probably tried to get him to look more like Sheeran in his 20s than De Niro in his 20s - why wouldn't you if you were using CGI anyway?

Plus guys in their 20's during that time just looked older anyway. It's not quite the same, but nobody really complained that Johnny Depp was too old to play John Dillinger in Public Enemies, despite being around 15 years older and without the aid of any obvious makeup. If anything, if you compared pictures of the real Dillinger and Depp you wouldn't see much of a difference or maybe think that Dillinger was even older.

There is definitely something to that. Whenever I watch Gable, Grant, Stewart, Garfield and the rest in films they made in their 20s and 30s they always look older to me than actors in their 20s and 30s today. I’ve had this conversation with friends and others and almost everyone agrees. It’s hard to explain. Don’t know if it’s the styles, attitude or mentally matured faster in those times.

The destructive force of alcohol combined with many of those actors leaving the country to serve in the war took a toil on their physical appearance they had to culminate through film. I believe those eras just had more men who were matured looking in their early youth and never tried to push back against the appearance, where the leading men today have to still look glamorous into their fifties. Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt are playing roles that are a decade or two younger than their actual age.

ford wrote: Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:24 pm

therewillbeblus wrote: Wed Jul 31, 2019 8:38 pm Spoilers for the trailer only (because some people like to not know anything):

Spoiler

If you freeze-frame the trailer at the 1:31 minute mark, it looks like a younger DeNiro with glasses on who is strangling the man from the backseat of the car. If that is him, he looks to be in his 30s, or 40s tops.

No I believe that is

Spoiler

Louis Cancelmi playing “Sally Bugs,” a guy mentioned in the book who did a “bad hit” by strangling someone with a nylon rope.

Looks like that is a young DeNiro after all.

The trailer appears to be selling the film as much different than the slower and more subdued movie recent reports have indicated this to be, which is expected from a trailer but still not exactly indicative of its overall vibe. I also can't help but notice that the trailer shows a lot of de-aged shots of characters at a distance. I can't tell if that's my own (paranoid) perspective, or possibly suggestive of compiling some carefully selected moments due to a lack of confidence in the results, or if the film was actually shot that way intentionally as a way to hide the effects of the post-production techniques in advance.

I’m still not sold, though I’m cautiously optimistic.

therewillbeblus wrote: Thu Sep 26, 2019 9:53 pm

ford wrote: Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:24 pm

therewillbeblus wrote: Wed Jul 31, 2019 8:38 pm Spoilers for the trailer only (because some people like to not know anything):

Spoiler

If you freeze-frame the trailer at the 1:31 minute mark, it looks like a younger DeNiro with glasses on who is strangling the man from the backseat of the car. If that is him, he looks to be in his 30s, or 40s tops.

No I believe that is

Spoiler

Louis Cancelmi playing “Sally Bugs,” a guy mentioned in the book who did a “bad hit” by strangling someone with a nylon rope.

Looks like that is a young DeNiro after all.

The guy popping up from the backseat to strangle the guy? No that’s definitely Cancelmi. Google him. He’s one of the FBI agents in The Looming Tower. As I said, he’s listed on IMDB as playing “Sally Bugs” who, in the book, does exactly what we see in the trailer.

FrauBlucher wrote: Thu Sep 26, 2019 8:23 pm I don’t know how you get the exact image. It sounds almost impossible to me to duplicate his looks from his 20’s and 30’s

Michael Douglas in the last Avengers movie looked a lot like he did in The Streets of San Francisco. Him and De Niro are about the same age too.

ford wrote: Thu Sep 26, 2019 11:49 pm

therewillbeblus wrote: Thu Sep 26, 2019 9:53 pm

ford wrote: Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:24 pm
No I believe that is

Spoiler

Louis Cancelmi playing “Sally Bugs,” a guy mentioned in the book who did a “bad hit” by strangling someone with a nylon rope.

Looks like that is a young DeNiro after all.

The guy popping up from the backseat to strangle the guy? No that’s definitely Cancelmi. Google him. He’s one of the FBI agents in The Looming Tower. As I said, he’s listed on IMDB as playing “Sally Bugs” who, in the book, does exactly what we see in the trailer.

Yeah I can see how it could be him but I’m not convinced, especially because that entire beginning interview with DeNiro is edited to insinuate that the continuous cuts to brief scenes of events are ‘flashbacks’ to his own deeds in accordance with the interview questions. I didn’t read the book and believe you there, but his face never becomes clear enough in this trailer to make a definitive call and he looks like a young DeNiro to me. Either way, I doubt we’ll get a closer look until the release.

For the record, I hope you’re right though. Scorsese allowed himself a long enough runtime to avoid the narrative practice of blending multiple characters into one for the sake of too many moving parts, a strategy that’s all too common and can be aggravating to fans of the source material. Having never read the book I don’t personally have a stake in the matter, but for those that did I’d hope that significant details will be valued as such.