Open discussion about ILM and the magic they create. Also VFX and movies in general. Anyone can post topics here.

Moderator: malducin

User avatar
By ShaneP
#34792
Here is additional confirmation, coupled with what Paul mentioned about Empire magazine, and that is that DeNiro, Pesci and Pacino were all de-aged:

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/20 ... rence-nyff

I still find the Pesci and Pacino stuff to be remarkable. Yes, the DeNiro stuff is fantastic too but that other stuff is so good....and hidden. Pacino mentions in the article above he didn't even realize why Pesci looked so good in some test footage ILM did in 2015.

But the movie's cost wasnt just for the cutting edge vfx but also because of the large number of location shooting and camera setups. It is a huge movie. Its running time is 209 minutes. :eek:
User avatar
By ShaneP
#34794
Yes in a few of the interviews with Scorsese and cast at the New York Film Festival this week they stated they didn't want these actors wearing rigs. I don't blame them. But DeNiro did mention something about having dots on his face. The fact they are full CG heads doesnt surprise me. That seems to be the preferred method for the big CG houses.
User avatar
By ShaneP
#34797
If correct, I find this extraordinary. I'm sure people's mileage may vary, and there will be lesser shots, but to me its a new level of achievement.
Empire Magazine has a picture of a de-aged Pacino that is when he is appearing before Congress. It is the same scene in the trailer and....good lord....I can't believe that is a full CG head. I mean, it is Pacino. He just looks younger. Damn.

ninja turtle, I would say that at this point people are saying the film is at least worthy of many nominations.

Will it be nominated for vfx? I don't know. If nominated, will it win? I dont know. Knowing the Academy, I just dont know.
User avatar
By ninja turtle
#34855
So anyone saw it ? I watched it 5h of november at the teather. Great movie, maybe too long, but not i n my top 5 Scorsese. Great work by Ilm, i don' t think there is any bad shot, but yes, the best work is on Al Pacino.
User avatar
By vfx fan
#34857
This (along with 6 UNDERGROUND) is a movie that deserves to be viewed in a theater, and I have yet to see either. The only theaters playing THE IRISHMAN are some of the arty cinemas in town. I didn't see it today because I didn't feel like sitting for 3 1/2 hours, so I saw KNIVES OUT instead.
User avatar
By PaulILMFan
#34858
Yeah saw it thought most of the de-aging looks horrendous TBH :e_sad: So distracting as well. Its the eyes mainly they needed way more time & money to perfect. I would say about 70% of the movie has the de-aging CG they should have delayed another few months to perfect it all but the actual movie is also pretty weak to me.

Not a patch on Casino or Goodfellas.

Joe Pesci steals the show as well I can see him winning another Oscar but he would probably not even bother turning up to accept as he is retired!
#34859
Not agree at all that the de-aging is horrendus! It's a bit problematic only in a couple of scenes at beginning of the film with Joe Pesci, but the rest is stunning ! If it's true that Pacino ' s head is cg all the time, it's best achievement in history of
photorealistic animation.
User avatar
By ShaneP
#34860
I think the film was spectacular and ILM's work was monumentally great. This film is a milestone.

The only time I was taken out of the film was right at the first transition when DeNiro is driving the truck but that was because I was thinking "That's ILM's work!" at the time. Then I relaxed and enjoyed the show.

The work on Pesci and Pacino is the best. Flawless. But I thought that from the get go all the way back to the first trailers. DeNiro's is likely just as great too but mentally I know I am looking at a younger DeNiro and seeing ILM's work so it reads differently.

The thing I love about this work is it seems or feels incidental to the shots. So much CG work feels stagey or showcase because they are usually a part of high concept science fiction or action films(and poor ones at that). The way Scorsese and the DP shot this feels true to me. It helps pull you into the work better than some of these shows where everything feels artificial, including the cinematography, before you even get to the vfx work.

This is my favorite Scorsese film in nearly thirty years.

Pablo is the man.
#34864
Yes, Shane, i agree.Very insightful what you wrote about Scorsese' s approach to make the cgi looking more natural.

I could be wrong, but i had the impression that also Keitel was "deaged" .
User avatar
By ShaneP
#34865
Yes, Shane, i agree.Very insightful what you wrote about Scorsese' s approach to make the cgi looking more natural.

I could be wrong, but i had the impression that also Keitel was "deaged" .
He was? :lol: Damn. I guess he would be too if he is around the same age as Pesci and DeNiro. :eek:

Fantastic work.

edit: I just looked him up and Keitel is four years older than Pesci and DeNiro. So he must've been de-aged. The more I think about it, the more impressed I am with the work all around. At a minimum, this show should bag a few tech awards. The idea they didn't use those damn face cameras and tights is a great achievement. I'm very curious now what they did, if anything, for clothing replacement or body replacement. I'd read it was the actors filmed and then they did the de-aging on top of their performances so those bodies must be the actors....right?
#34871
i think the bodies and clothes are almost always real(but who knows?) , except maybe for the sauna scene , where De Niro is half naked? That could be all CG! when the hell will be on line the first coverages of the vfx work?
Keitel actually looks only a bit older than Pulp Fiction times, so yes, he was deaged, imho.
User avatar
By aslan
#34874
Just watched it, great film. Almost an anti mobster treatise, the emptiness and futility of that life. Beautifully made.

I'm none the wiser as to the methodology of the vfx! I think there are a variety of practices at play here, not just cgi heads. Frankly there's no way that some of those shots, particularly Pacino, are full cgi. That being said, I never would have thought the cg head replacement in Terminator dark fate was cg either, totally convincing. It seemed this is the year when that particular nut was cracked. The work is tremendous, an astonishing achievement. I just don't understand people who say it's poor work, ooh! Look how individual and observant I am, self aggrandizement is the goal, and the lie.

Congrats to Pablo Helman and ILM, hopefully Oscar will come knocking.
User avatar
By aslan
#34886
I think I must be a bit thick. Just read the article, thanks for posting it Shane, and I still don't really understand!

So what am I looking at in the film? Are they full cg heads? Smoothed out projection of the actors onto a captured performance? What does that even mean? Everything is changing so fast, I'm going back to the 80's, I understood that.

Old man shouts at sky.