|
|
Post by Mattsby on Apr 4, 2018 21:59:54 GMT
What are your thoughts on CGI de-aging? And what kind of trajectory or consequence do you think new technologies will have on the movie business? I'm more specifically talking about de-aging because of The Irishman and this article from The Ringer site that vehemently opposes the de-aging of older actors. The article states that "The practice and its execution are so distracting that the goal is irrelevant." But they ask "if de-aged characters could look perfect, would that be a compelling enough reason to employ the technology?" I mean....yeah, no? De-aging has only really been done in about 10 or 15 movies... here's the wiki page listing them. Douglas in Ant Man, RDJ in Civil War, Kurt in GotGv2... they aren't that bad. But there's room for perfection. Most distracting is when you clearly know it's not their body (see Hopkins in Westworld). But for me it tips slightly in favor of the awe of seeing our great actors "young again" than being "jarred" by that very thing. Up to now, they've only employed this de-aging in a digestible relatively unobtrusive way (it's usually a quick scene, or merely a moment, like Leia at the end of Rogue One). The Irishman is going to heighten this discussion in a big way, I think. And I'm already starting to wonder - say the film succeeds and everybody is mind blown - what kind of opportunities will open for older actors/actresses? CGI stuff is expensive obviously but will there be a new market for seeing our favorite older actors in younger roles they would not have been afforded before?That's all. Have at it.  |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Apr 4, 2018 22:06:37 GMT
I still think it's fucking stupid, and it hardly ever looks natural. Baby-faced Robert Downey, Jr.'s soulless eyes in Civil War haunt my dreams. Douglas looked okay, but he was de-aged, what, fifteen years, and he was still portrayed as middle-aged. Kurt looked decent, but still really soft-focused.
The technology hasn't evolved to make me believe that men in their seventies could convincingly play half their own age, though. If Scorsese can "crack" it with The Irishman, all the more power to him, but I still think that it's a dumb idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Apr 4, 2018 22:38:13 GMT
I think in the case of The Irishman it's just a historic artistic dare. If it fails (quite possibly it will), it's a license to attack all those artists and Netfilx for a stunning amount of waste and hubris and then attack the failure of it. I mean it's not just the main actors, what they had to go through to have everyone available schedule wise alone was mind-boggling. I don't think it's too different from like when Heaven's Gate flopped and studios regained power from the movie brats of the 70s.
I would think that there's 2 things in play here - can you make it look better than it has and can you storyboard it and think through it to minimize it. I think that's what Scorsese is thinking ....."outfoxing" it ......It isn't going to be like Goodfellas where the first time you see DeNiro he's said to be "28" and he's like 46 and the camera zooms dead in on him with great energy.........at least I don't think it is anyway. That is a charming example of what the movies were but if this raises the bar it's going to be a huge thing in the industry and if it works, it changes thinking.
In Heat when the Vince Hanna character jumps the Henry Rollins character, you can clearly see it's a
stunt man, me and my friends always laugh at the scene, it's an in-joke to us.......in this case though a failure is laughing at the whole movie. I don't think if DeNiro looks "ok" it's gonna necessarily be enough to make it work.
But if they pull it off it's almost like sound coming to cinema - exaggerating but not by much.
|
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Apr 4, 2018 22:55:48 GMT
I still think it's fucking stupid, and it hardly ever looks natural. Baby-faced Robert Downey, Jr.'s soulless eyes in Civil War haunt my dreams. Douglas looked okay, but he was de-aged, what, fifteen years, and he was still portrayed as middle-aged. Kurt looked decent, but still really soft-focused. The technology hasn't evolved to make me believe that men in their seventies could convincingly play half their own age, though. If Scorsese can "crack" it with The Irishman, all the more power to him, but I still think that it's a dumb idea. The only time it hasn't looked like shit to me is with Sean Young in the Blade Runner sequel. And a lot of that was because you only saw her for like 5 seconds. |
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Apr 4, 2018 23:28:51 GMT
pacinoyes Yes, the upside is so massive I'm almost too afraid to think of the possible downside. I really hope they did enough tests and proof of concept that they wouldn't go ahead without knowing for sure they could pull it off. Helps that Netflix will back 'em if they need more money during post - who knows. Another thing, will we actually see the movie this year? Next? Scorsese isn't known to edit fast (Silence took like 20 months in post). And Netflix won't make him cut the movie down (like Harvey with GoNY). Add onto that 3 1/2 hour long sundae....practically every scene (especially the banana aka De Niro) will need fx work (sprinkles etc, I regret the metaphor). Side note - There's also the currently filming Ang Lee movie Gemini Man (out Oct '19) that's de-aging Will Smith.
|
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Apr 4, 2018 23:34:27 GMT
I think in the case of The Irishman it's just a historic artistic dare. If it fails (quite possibly it will), it's a license to attack all those artists and Netfilx for a stunning amount of waste and hubris and then attack the failure of it. I mean it's not just the main actors, what they had to go through to have everyone available schedule wise alone was mind-boggling. I don't think it's too different from like when Heaven's Gate flopped and studios regained power from the movie brats of the 70s. I would think that there's 2 things in play here - can you make it look better than it has and can you storyboard it and think through it to minimize it. I think that's what Scorsese is thinking ....."outfoxing" it ......It isn't going to be like Goodfellas where the first time you see DeNiro he's said to be "28" and he's like 46 and the camera zooms dead in on him with great energy.........at least I don't think it is anyway. That is a charming example of what the movies were but if this raises the bar it's going to be a huge thing in the industry and if it works, it changes thinking. In Heat when the Vince Hanna character jumps the Henry Rollins character, you can clearly see it's a stunt man, me and my friends always laugh at the scene, it's an in-joke to us.......in this case though a failure is laughing at the whole movie. I don't think if DeNiro looks "ok" it's gonna necessarily be enough to make it work. But if they pull it off it's almost like sound coming to cinema - exaggerating but not by much. The thing of it is, I look at it less like a "historic artistic dare" (because we technically had something similar with The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, just in the opposite age direction) and more like a "why the hell bother?" situation. De Niro, Pacino and Pesci are old. They walk and talk like they are old. And if most of the movie is going to rest on their characters' "prime years" (Hoffa died almost 30 years younger than Pacino is now), it's going to be extremely obvious in how they move. And if we assume they're going to be using doubles like The Social Network in order for them to move believably as men in their thirties/forties, well, you've taken away a massive weapon in an actor's arsenal: his body. And with their faces being radically CGI'd in order to make them look decades younger, you're basically making the computers do the brunt of the work in facial expression. And even if you overlook that, they still sound like men in their seventies. To me, it's tantamount to using Pacino, De Niro and Pesci as marionettes, except it's computers that are pulling the strings. The fact that this has become Scorsese's most ballooned budget just makes the whole thing seem even more like folly. There is absolutely no reason why a movie like this needs a budget that currently dwarfs what Gangs of New York had. And the fact it's going to be so CGI-reliant worries me because I despised the aesthetic of Hugo. I just think so many people want it to be a masterpiece because it's a long-desired collaboration between De Niro/Pacino/Scorsese (and Pesci!), but really, did the story of Frank Sheehan require all of this effort? |
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Apr 4, 2018 23:39:09 GMT
It's improving, but it's still not there. I was impressed with Douglas in Ant-Man, and it's gotten better since the days of Bridges in Tron Legacy (good god), but there's still an "unnatural" feeling to it all. I do think it makes sense in The Irishman given the circumstances, but I'm still not sure it'll entirely work there either, and could still really be distracting.
I suppose it'll eventually start looking seamless, but we're still not there.
|
|
|
|
Post by jakesully on Apr 4, 2018 23:54:09 GMT
I have high hopes for The Irishman but yeah, the "de aging " concept gives me some pause. Mainly because its not that convincing . I think the best I've seen of it used is Pitt in Benjamin Button.
|
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Apr 5, 2018 0:23:40 GMT
Just one note in stephen's fine post - Pacino is 77, Hoffa disappeared at 62 so that's not too bad - the problem of course is they apparently are going back to age 39 (!?!) for Hoffa for a scene.
|
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Apr 5, 2018 0:29:46 GMT
Here's a fun idea: either cast appropriately or find a way around having to de-age a character through dialogue, old photos, more clever use of flashbacks, etc. So far the only times I've seen de-aging be even close to necessary were in The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, where the entire premise of the film is seeing Brad Pitt get old and then get young, and Blade Runner 2049, where it was only about a minute under fairly dark lighting anyway to help obscure any uncanny imperfections.
EDIT: One idea I've had with using de-aging for flashback sequences or period pieces is to try to increase the amount of film grain or digital noise, whether it be by shooting in the lowest ISO possible and/or using some post-production techniques to wear down the image to give it that rougher kind of aesthetic. Not only would the de-aging effects look better (CGI placed in a real setting looks better the more you can obscure it) but then you have something else going on in the film to serve as a visual reminder of the scene's place in time. Fincher kind of knew this with Benjamin Button hence the underlighting and the emphasis on browns and yellows like old-timey photographs, but he undercut that idea by keeping his digital image as pristine as possible so his old Button looks only a little more convincing than Scrooge from Zemeckis' A Christmas Carol a year later.
|
|
