MovieChat Forums > The Irishman (2019) Discussion > Main reasons why the CGI "de-aging" look...

Main reasons why the CGI "de-aging" looks weak

posted 5 years ago by Poozer91 (614)
8 replies | jump to latest

With the film's massive budget (159 million) and nearly two years of post-production work you would think the CGI would be outstanding. However, there are two big reasons why it does not work.

1. De Niro was very stubborn and uncooperative by refusing to where face cameras and motion capture dots on his face saying that he would never do it and the visual effects artists had to figure out other ways. Well, it would have been a lot more realistic and believable if he did it the former way. Instead it looks creepy and not effective, when De Niro was called "kid" by Pesci, I actually laughed a little. Here is the link for proof https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/movies/story/2020-01-02/irishman-de-aging-of-hollywood-how-they-did-it

2. They should have had body doubles for one major scene. The beat down that De Niro gives the grocery store owner was really pathetic. It looks like an elderly man giving a half-assed pushing, punching, and light kicking to a over exaggerated grocery manager. Did Scorsese or for that matter look at the dailies and say "yeah, this looks amazing" or was everyone to embarrassed to tell De Niro it looks terrible and should be re-shot with a body double, because they certainly had the time and money to graft or integrate De Niro's face onto a double's body.

[–] spurtle467 (1553) 5 years ago

I have to agree, particularly about the grocery store scene. That is meant to establish Frank as this tough and intimidating character. We're supposed to react to it the way his daughter does, but instead it takes us out of the movie and makes us question how ridiculous and laughable it looks to have a pensioner beating the shopkeeper to a pulp when the sort of moves he was doing wouldn't even put out a fire.

[–] Aries (847) 4 years ago

Agree with both the posters above re. the grocery scene. De Niro was just too frail and elderly to look convincing enough to pull it off.

They should've chosen someone appropriate.

Elliot page, for example, would've OWNED that scene with "his" overwhelming masculinity and intimidating physical presence.

[–] ReelReviews14 (1220) 4 years ago

I thought DeNiro's de-aging LOOKED pretty good, though the body movements may have been off, and you made a valid case about the grocery store scene not being physically convincing.

Al Pacino's "de-aging" seemed WAY off though. He seemed like he was a video game character in several scenes. Pacino sounded himself, but certainly didn't look like himself from the 1970s or early 80s.

[–] kwestmo (4385) 4 years ago

They should have used actors that weren't 50 years too old for the roles.

[–] Fredo (64) 3 years ago

Especially when you consider that Frank is supposed to be in his late 20s or early 30s when he is driving the meat truck. The CGI didn't take that many years off.

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

They needed to hire younger actors to play the geezers when they were young. None of them move like young people when they're supposed to be younger. This de-aging stuff will never compensate for the slowing down of, well, everything that natural aging causes.

[–] [email protected] (2039) 8 months ago

Someone on yt described it as t-rex arms lol.

[–] Jakethesnake (42) 5 months ago

I'd like to add to this, something that's extremely obvious to me, but that Ive never heard mentioned. The ears and noses. It's a well known fact that these grow with age. They didn't shrink those back, and the end result look like two trolls.