|
Post by Mattsby on Nov 28, 2018 20:56:45 GMT
I think this is from yesterday De Niro talking about the project a little and the title, nothing new. Doesn't seem like they're too advanced in the editing and sfx yet cus he'd have some kind of impression on the deaging no?
Side note - have any reporters really looked into that Scorsese/Streep Netflix project? What is it and why aren't people breaking down doors to find out??
|
|
|
Post by Leo_The_Last on Nov 30, 2018 0:50:19 GMT
Nothing special, but the one and only Bo Dietl enthusiastically on The Irishman. He even got to scream at De Niro đ. Must have been a dream come true. http://instagram.com/p/Blk_jFbAJv3 (Sorry for only copying the link. I have yet to learn how to make this more reader friendly.) On a side note: He is playing mobster Joe Glimco (here a short YouTube video someone did on him: There has been some speculation about what part the late Frank Vincent would have played, had he lived to make the picture (and if cast by Scorsese). The most obvious answer would probably be Tony Provenzano, who was said to be quite a volatile guy, which would have fit Vincents screen image. Stephen Graham is playing the part (who could be a standout in the movie, his role apparently being quite colorful, with some heated exchanges with Pacinos Hoffa, reminiscent of Pesci in GoodFellas). I don't think Vincent would have played Provenzano. I would have liked to see it, with Vincent being part of Scorseses key players in past movies and Tony Pro a good and in regards to the supporting cast relative big part. But he was even older than the rest of the three central OldFellas, which meant him also being CGI-younged, so to say, and that would have stretched the enormous budget even more. That's why I think he could have played the smaller part of Glimco (or being left out entirely, so Scorsese could distance himself from the sense of repeating GoodFellas/Casino).
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Dec 2, 2018 18:09:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Viced on Dec 2, 2018 18:13:10 GMT
Even juicier:
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Dec 13, 2018 21:36:44 GMT
Variety article from today... May still seems kinda soon. Also, Netflix should get on top of confirming the title change already!
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Dec 13, 2018 21:39:48 GMT
Variety article from today... May still seems kinda soon. Also, Netflix should get on top of confirming the title change already! That Roma f up still stings.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Dec 13, 2018 21:59:07 GMT
Variety article from today... May still seems kinda soon. Also, Netflix should get on top of confirming the title change already! May seems very early - especially given some of his editing history (Age Of Innocence for one) and the described scope of this film. I think in some ways, as much as I love Netflix and what they've done here - movie of 2018, one to watch for 2019, Lisa Taback on their payroll they almost have are like a baseball team with 4 Cy Young winners - and trying to juggle them all. This is going into unknown territory for them and while they've be exemplary so far, you got to seal the deal. I mean if it's not ready, it's not ready, people will wait longer for it, you don't have to go to Cannes and win that battle too. Work in progress maybe @ Cannes.............?
|
|
|
Post by Leo_The_Last on Dec 15, 2018 1:52:49 GMT
There was also something in the trades some time ago about Fremaux meeting Sarandos & Stuber at the Lumiere FF.
I can't really think of any chance, realistically, that the movie will be finished for next years Cannes Film Festival. A work-in-progress also seems unlikely, given that the de-aging stuff is so central to them succeeding, and the risk to screen the film unfinished would probably be too high.
And true, Scorsese is very, very slowwwww at editing his features. Additionally, Venice and/or the rest of the fall festivals have been quite successful launch pads for oscar season in recent years. So they're more likely going to opt for that route.
Poor Thierry, he was quite bummed when Scorsese couldn't finish Silence in time for Cannes. I'm sure he would love to have The Irishman, not least to show that Cannes isn't loosing touch with modern times, after the whole Netflix/Roma thing this year.
|
|
|
Post by Leo_The_Last on Dec 18, 2018 2:02:11 GMT
From a recent New York Times article on Netflix/Scott Stuber
And I might just add that reader comment below the article:
I certainly don't want the movie going experience to go away (and I don't think it will), but this new model gives filmmakers the opportunity back to work on different, edgier material AND have the budget to support their vision. I'm not just talking about big-budget arthouse stuff, I'm talking about mid-budget genre films, you know, the ones Hitchcock, Ford, Polanski, Friedkin,... used to make. I like Spielberg, but he can go fuck himself.
|
|
|
Post by Leo_The_Last on Dec 19, 2018 3:40:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Leo_The_Last on Dec 19, 2018 4:05:05 GMT
Here's Bobby Milk, talking a little bit, just a little bit (after the 7min mark) about The Irishman, Big Al & Little Joe (or was it the other way around?), confirms the title being I Heard You Paint Houses (or at least he & Scorsese want it that way), talks Netflix, including briefly on something he's working on with David O. Russell, also for Netflix (Bale also recently mentioned he might soon team up with DOR again...).
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Dec 19, 2018 10:23:53 GMT
The best part of that is actually the genuine affection - or respect maybe is a better word - she has for him for The Deer Hunter which she saw in Paris at 17 or so. That's what movies used to mean to people and its why he specifically will always be linked to that golden age, the last golden age really.
He did reveal something here where he talks about the 3 actors having a friendship as the characters in The Irishman - that implies that Hoffa has scenes with Bufalino which to be honest I wasn't sure of - I almost thought it would be Hoffa scenes with Sheeran only - we have no on-set photos of anyone else with Hoffa. I think this is actually a key to the film - the Hoffa story could sustain a whole film itself but Sheeran's story that is the basis of the film and his story has plenty in it besides Hoffa.........Scorsese definitely has to balance that out or he runs that risk of having an uneven film.
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Dec 19, 2018 18:02:01 GMT
The hitman movie De Niro mentions is probably Frankie Machine, right? And pacinoyes there's a scene that's pretty important later in the book that has four characters sitting in a row at a restaurant - De Niro, Pacino, Pesci, Keitel. I can't imagine them not having it in the movie! It's a tense, key scene in terms of the dynamic of that group.
|
|
|
Post by Leo_The_Last on Dec 25, 2018 6:31:45 GMT
Yes Mattsby & pacinoyes De Niro is definitely talking about The Winter of Frankie Machine (wonder what happened to that one? Friedkin took over as director (great), and suggested publicly casting McConaughey or Walton Goggins in the title role (whaaaat?!)) Regarding that scene you've mentioned Mattsby, the only scene the big four share together in the book, apparently it isn't in the script. At least according to a guy on YouTube. But that screenplay floating around on the net is an early draft, from 2009 or so. They certainly rewrote and fine-tuned the whole thing a million times since then. De Niro recently mentioned how long and how thoroughly they worked on the script to get it in good shape. A few months later, the same guy posted another video and there he suggests that said scene was indeed filmed, at least according to actor Gino Cafarelli, who plays the (smaller) part of Mayor Frank Rizzo. I watched the original skype interview with Cafarelli, where he talks (partly) about the movie. But at least in my opinion it doesn't become quite clear if that information is indeed correct. Another thing is that Charles Brandt, the book's author, was flown into NY by De Niro/Scorsese/Zaillian as soon as they actually started to get the thing going and together they worked on the script for a few weeks, delivering new drafts. Here's the quote from an interview with the Irish Examiner two months ago: So we just have to wait and see. Personally I think there has to be some sort of scene with the four of them acting together. And the scene you've mentioned, the scene that's in the book, could indeed be a great one. As far as I know, there's only one (unofficial) picture of Keitel on set. So his scenes probably were mostly filmed on the studio lot. And, but that's nothing new, his part seems to be considerably smaller than those of the other three main guys. Here's a descripion of that scene (not really spoiler heavy) And here's the one in which the scene still exists, according to Gino Cafarelli And credit where credit is due, here's a link to the fellow, The Cine Ranter, who makes those videos regarding The Irishman and other stuff. m.youtube.com/user/TheBlah95/playlists
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Dec 25, 2018 11:22:17 GMT
This picture was posted earlier in the thread - which if that is Keitel (arguable but I think it is) would be him seeing Frank Sheeran on the streets in Philly and that would make sense since the Cannavale role mentoring Frank (Skinny Razor) is a legendary figure and the Keitel role (Philly mob head Angelo Bruno) is connected to Pesci's Bufalino character etc. But I haven't read the book and don't know if the Angelo Bruno character is presented there like that..... www.imdb.com/title/tt1302006/mediaviewer/rm2018988288
|
|
|
Post by Leo_The_Last on Dec 28, 2018 17:44:42 GMT
Frank Adonis Dies: âGoodfellasâ & âRaging Bullâ Actor Was 83 R.I.P. Anthony Stabile I thought I post it here, as I was hoping he might pop up in The Irishman too, just as Scorsese's other mobster movie bit players Vinny Vella, Welker White, Paulie Herman, Bo Dietl, Garry Pastore, Craig Vincent, Philip Suriano & maybe Joseph Bono (who was also in Raging Bull and who I think I've seen on one of the set pictures)
|
|
|
Post by wilcinema on Jan 27, 2019 21:48:54 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Viced on Jan 27, 2019 21:58:01 GMT
^ I'd take that with a grain of salt, but even that is probably too much.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jan 27, 2019 22:09:50 GMT
I wouldn't be so sure about that Pesci thing - so many of those supporting roles (ie not DeNiro) don't necessarily cross-connect so you can be in the cast and not "know" - ie does Maniscalco or Cannavale or Plemons cross connect with other roles for timelines or storylines.........that's one of the problems with the film - if it's 3 hours it's like 3 movies in a way at least and that's 2 or 3 cast lineups.
If I had to guess, I'd say Graham is a strong threat to steal this film and he's another one who is odd too, I'm not sure would interact with many in the cast (except in his case within the Hoffa arc specifically).
|
|
cranly
Junior Member
Posts: 372
Likes: 173
|
Post by cranly on Jan 27, 2019 22:53:12 GMT
At least based on the draft of the screenplay I've read, the only two supporting parts meaty enough to be likely to inspire awards contention are Pacino and Pesci. The film covers a LOT of ground very quickly and most of the supporting cast is foregrounded for only a brief moment here and there. De Niro is a big question mark, simply because the role as written is somewhat of a cipher - the hollow instrument of other men. It could be another richly internalized Neil McCauley-type characterization or it could just come across as flat or redundant to his previous work in the genre. The bottom line is that it doesn't exactly read on paper as an automatic Best Actor role by any means. Pacino and Pesci strike me as very strong bets for supporting actor though, to the point that I'd put money on it.
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Jan 28, 2019 0:23:13 GMT
This is from the book, about the Pesci character - âFrank Sheeran said that of all the alleged crime bosses he ever met, the mannerisms and style of the Marlon Brando portrayal in The Godfather most nearly resembled Russell Bufalino.â
Besides the one dude's tweet, I've been thinking this could potentially be a major performance from Pesci, something very unexpected, something serious, along with some shimmer due to most people not having seen him in a movie since the late '90s. He'll have a sizable role, if anything they might've boosted his part to lure him to accept. As for Oscars, what's the chances they push co-lead with De Niro/Pacino?
Also thought I'd share: I recently talked to someone who was on set for two scenes - one with Pesci character and a minor spoiler, the other De Niro working in meatpacking. He observed, and told me, that Scorsese would talk in depth with those two guys about how they would move at their given age. Like how they'd sit up out of a chair, for example. At any rate it's very exciting and new, for actors these age to not just look young, but act young. To think ahead, there'll be a lot to talk about when they promote the movie.
|
|
|
Post by Leo_The_Last on Jan 30, 2019 2:28:27 GMT
Regarding how to "act" at a certain age:
From an interview with De Niro in The New Yorker a few weeks ago
The first time I hear about this. A good sign, shows they're aware of the pitfalls of "acting young".
|
|
|
Post by Leo_The_Last on Jan 31, 2019 0:17:25 GMT
When it comes to potential acting contenders for next year's Oscars, Anna Paquin and possibly Stephanie Kurtzuba (who also had a pretty long shooting schedule, if I remember correctly) could be candidates for the Best Supporting Actress category.
Stephen Graham, as has been mentioned, is another one. He's a fine actor, who has been doing solid work over the last decade or so, worked with a lot of people, so if he delivers, they might wanna give him his big break. Plus, he has a showy role, the 'Pesci'-part if you will, a violent, nasty sociopath.
Cannavale gets to age quite a bit, so he's around for some time, how prominent however, no idea. He's a similar case like Graham, career wise, so there's a chance of him being a possible dark horse. Romano is also going to be around for some time, but I don't think the part is showy enough to register with voters. But I look forward to him, think he's smart casting. Sebastian Maniscalco, no idea. Gallo is a colorful character, so that might help, but Maniscalco is pretty new to acting and it could be a small part.
Jesse Plemons is shaping up to be one of the most exciting young actors around and Chuckie O'Brien could be a good part. Morally conflicted, Hoffa's foster son who turns on him. It just depends on how they're gonna tell the whole thing. Lombardozzi, Basaraba and the others are probably no real possibilities at this point, but who knows. Jack Huston could be playing RFK. But I don't think there's going to be enough room for all those guys if you consider there are Pesci and Pacino, two legends with meaty parts.
I'm really looking forward to Keitel. There was a big question mark over his involvement in the last couple of years. Other than De Niro telling Roger Friedman he was part of it, there was never anything solid about this. And that was around the release of Shutter Island. Even Keitel himself apparently didn't know much about it, repeatedly telling journalists he hadn't been asked when questioned about his involvement. I'm more than happy he's reuniting with Scorsese. Angelo Bruno is an interesting character to play, a highly intelligent guy, who could be the star of his own movie. The question remains how big the part is going to be and I think it's not going to be that big, sadly.
It's an interesting question to think about who Scorsese would have cast as Bufalino if they couldn't have convinced stubborn Pesci to say yes. I would have gone for Keitel, and it's possible they would have too. Other than him, who could have been in the mix? Maybe you have some ideas. Should have been another iconic guy from their age group I think. Plus someone who is convincing at playing an Italian. That probably rules out Nicholson and Hoffman. James Caan? F. Murray Abraham? Walken could have been a good candidate. Or someone more unexpected, like Giancarlo Giannini, Mark Margolis or John Saxon. Armand Assante? Chazz Palminteri, Burt Young... Tom Hanks would have been interesting. Risky, potentially disastrous, but interesting.
Then there's Pesci. A lot is going in his favor: Retired, in recent years public shy Oscar winner coming back to work with his trusted and most celebrated collaboraters. Plus Bufalino is going to be a much different character than those who made him famous and part of film history. The public's perception of Pesci could give his performance a nice dynamic, people associating him with brutality and violence, and here you have a pretty subdued gangster boss, but the audience will know instinctively what a guy like that is capable of, without having to show them much in that regard. Casting against type and it could work beautifully.
Pacino playing Hoffa is a big part in terms of the movie succeeding or not. To a certain degree he's going to be the focal point of the story. Without Hoffa at the center you wouldn't have a story, or at least not this story. Will he be able to pull it off? What about his voice, which is much different to Hoffa's more high pitched intonation. Does it matter? Pacino has the problem, like many iconic performers entering the later stage in their careers, that he has become almost a caricature of himself (in public perception). And don't get me wrong, I do think overall this perception is just lazy criticism, and Pacino delivered great work in recent years, but when you become as much part of popular culture as Pacino has, your mannerisms (and every actor/actress has them) etc. will lead to the same old lamentations "he's just playing himself again" and people and critics stop seeing what's actually there in the performance (not to say that there aren't instances were such accusations are justified). I have a good feeling. Scorsese is a great actor's director (though he also failed at times in the past / I'm still not sure what to think of Garfield in Silence, and it's also part of the director's tasks to guide his actors), and Pacino is a different animal than Nicholson, who run amok on the set of The Departed, which was a very unhappy time for Scorsese. Ballhaus even mentioned later that Scorsese is somehow insecure towards big stars (I don't necessarily agree, but what do I know... / plus I kind of like Jack in The Departed quite a bit, I know that's not a very popular opinion around these boards).
The Irishman is probably Pacino's meatiest part in 20 years (theatrical), probably since The Insider (or Any Given Sunday/Insomnia). And in his late 70s, there aren't going to be that many high profile movie parts coming his way that have the potential to get him nominated for an Oscar, and I guess the Academy is aware of that. So if he delivers, if Scorsese delivers, if all the stars align and Oscar season politics don't generate problems, then it has to be Pacino's moment. He also has another BIG movie coming out this year, and probably some time before I Heard You Paint Houses opens, so that certainly helps (the same is true for De Niro).
As for De Niro, there's a lot of pressure on him. He's clearly the lead, carrying a huge movie at 74/75, and then the whole de-aging stuff (also for the other two main guys). We all know how De Niro was looking in the past. But unlike Pacino, De Niro had big weight fluctuations over the years, and I'm not talking about Raging Bull. He was a skinny guy in Mean Streets/Taxi Driver, lean and mean in The Deer Hunter and Heat for example, a little bit on the puffy side around the time of The King of Comedy/True Confessions and especially Once Upon a Time in America, and pretty overweight in City by the Sea etc. Sheeran was a big guy, so I already hear people calling "young" De Niro fat. And he lost a lot of respect among movie fans and I would guess also within the industry because of the way he handled his career since the turn of the millenium. Just look at him loosing the SAG award to Alexander SkarsgÄrd. He really has to bring his A-game to prove the naysayers wrong, not just be solid, he has to be at least greatish. He was always a pretty internalized performer, with a few exceptions, so Sheeran getting lost in his own life story is a real danger. And with a big performer like Pacino playing the part of the big performer Jimmy Hoffa aren't making things easier. But there are other arguments to be made against such a potential outcome. Sheeran's family life is going to be part of the story, including his wives (one played by Aleksa Palladino I think), his daughters, not only the Paquin character, even showing the way they looked at their father when they were little, how his tendency for violence shaped them etc. And most importantly, there's a whole section in the movie that could turn out to be the most emotionally involving, with an old Sheeran, his resentment, his loneliness and isolation, having to deal with the consequences of the path he has chosen for himself. This part of the film will probably separate the movie most clearly from Scorsese's other two decades spanning epics, GoodFellas and Casino, and could give this story a depth and resonance that evokes something like The Godfather Part II (I know, calm down Leo-The-Last...).
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jan 31, 2019 0:42:06 GMT
Great post Leo.
One of the things with this historic Pacino/Scorsese thing is in Pacino's case, his entire reputation even now at nearly 80 - and this board just voted him the greatest actor ever - is based on him delivering when it matters and people envisioning him before seeing the result.
He has never cashed a paycheck opposite a big star or gotten shown-up by a big co-star in his 50 year career, male or female. For him to fail in this film would be a surprise just on that level and would be analyzed to death - some of his best work in the 2000s is specifically opposite great females which he had never done prior much imo - Streep, Sarandon, Mirren, Chastain, Bening, Hunter.......which suggests he knew how good they were and how good he had to be and not to mess around.
The stakes are exponentially higher than that with Scorsese and all these co-stars.
|
|
|
Post by Leo_The_Last on Jan 31, 2019 2:30:45 GMT
Thanks pacinoyes!
Very true, I can't really think of a Pacino performance that he failed at when he knew he had to deliver, knew he was working with good material, with good people. Like with every actor, there are some not so fully realized performances, where you could tell something isn't quite working, and the material isn't up to it, and he knows it and it shows. But even then, he never was a lazy performer. God, just look at Jack & Jill and tell me he isn't trying to make it work (and he's fun in it, at least as much fun as it was possible with that pile of shit he had to work with). In that regard he has an edge over De Niro, the only actor I rate higher than Pacino (I know you disagree there, but nobody's perfect... and I'm talking about myself đ).
What is seldom mentioned and what I think is a key element to be a good actor, is how performers try to engage with their co-stars. As in De Niro's case, there was always a lot of talk about how generous he is with his fellow actors, giving them room, helping them to make the scene and their performance work, not much of that whole vanity bullshit that's so common among movie stars. And without knowing much about it, I guess the same is true for Pacino, if you look at his work and that of his co-stars.
I mean, I adore Daniel Day-Lewis, and I wouldn't disagree with anyone calling him the dominant male actor in english language movies in the last two decades or so. But I don't think he is a generous co-star. Not that his fellow actors and actresses didn't deliver wonderful performances opposite him, or maybe were even inspired by his whole acting approach, but what I've read over the years, it wasn't all sunshine opposite him. Not only that kid from There Will Be Blood that kind of collapsed and ran away, but also Vicky Krieps. She didn't really say much, or said what was expected of hear and good for her future career, but I kind of felt there was a certain tension with her, here and there, when she talked about her experience shooting the film. It worked overall, she was wonderful and DDL was great, but that's something I never liked when everybody swoons over DDL's method.
Just look at the great Pacino/De Niro-Heat scene, they didn't try to outact anybody, they gave each other the necessary space, it was like dancing. You're only as good as the guy/gal opposite you, and they knew it, and that made the scene fly.
I always wondered what would happen if a confident, serious, big-time performer would star opposite DDL. Someone who knows his stature within the acting community, someone who wouldn't necessarily go with DDL's approach, not just accepting it's The Method Man's show and he's just along for the ride. That's why, despite me wishing it would happen, I never thought a movie with DDL starring opposite De Niro or Pacino or Nicholson and others would be possible. Just imagine notoriously difficult and mercurial 70s/80s Dustin Hoffman would have worked with DDL in his prime, they would have had to shut the set down after a few days. đ
So, that's another thing to look forward to, the two Italian stallions pushing themselves to live up to their potential. I worry less about Pacino, despite him being not a slam-dunk for the Hoffa part, at least on paper. But De Niro, has he still enough interest in the whole acting game to stretch himself, dig deep and deliver something special. The elements are all there, his undeniable talent and the material he has to work with. It just depends on him and him alone I think. Was he willing to go the distance? Even if he fails, I won't be mad at him, I just want to see and feel that he tried and pushed himself. The early signs are encouraging at least, he talked about that it was one of the most difficult things he had done in recent years, but also one of his best experiences. And what one shouldn't forget, The Irishman was always De Niro's pet project, just like Raging Bull was. He always pushed for it, worked tirelessly to make it happen, always talked it up to generate interest over the years, kind of making a fool of himself, mentioning the project in every tv show he was a guest in, and a lot of people probably laughed behind his back, not only those misanthropes on the old IMDB board, but also within the industry. I remember reading some of those hacked e-mails during the whole North Korea scandal, and Scott Rudin writing to Jolie or Amy Pascal or someone it would never happen or something along those lines. He wanted it badly, he wanted to do it with Scorsese and only Scorsese, he wanted to do it with his old friends. He got what he wanted. Now he has to deliver.
|
|