From Producer Gaston Pavlovich:

You don’t use prosthetics, make-up; they have acting and the technology is able to have them go through different time ages without the prosthetics. So we’ve seen some tests and it looks extraordinary. We were able to film Bob and just do a scene. We saw it come down to when he was like 20, 40, 60, so we’re looking forward to that, from that point of view, for The Irishman … Imagine seeing what De Niro looked like in The Godfather: Part II days, that’s pretty much how you’re going to see him again.

I think most of us who have been following The Irishman are against digitally de-aging the actors for the flashback scenes. I’d much rather they went for casting different actors, a la Once Upon a Time in America. As well as the margin for error being smaller, it would also add a nice dynamic, seeing as though it is probably going to be noticeable when actors who are over 70 years old are going to be playing 30 year old versions of themselves, but when you cast different actors they bring their own little ticks to the role.

It’s also quite ironic that the producer mentions TGFII, seeing as though this is a film where De Niro was cast as a younger version of Marlon Brando’s character. He could have picked a better example to talk about. Also, many articles online are incorrect in linking the technology with Rogue One’s effects for Grand Moff Tarkin – that character was 100% CGI. With The Irishman the actor will do his thing and then will be de-aged in post. A whole different ball game. A better comparison would have been, say, Michael Douglas in Ant Man or De Niro again in Joy.



Below I’ve listed what I think the pros and cons of the de-aging technology might be.

Pros:

– De-aged De Niro means more De Niro.

– Technology is always improving. So if there’s a time to do it, now is the time.

– Test footage has already been shot and it apparently is “extraordinary”.

– Scorsese is very anal about getting every frame right. From the way director of photography Rodrigo Prieto has spoken of the shoot, they are planning the footage very carefully. It reminds me of Spielberg talking about how every shot involving effects for Jurassic Park had to be pre-planned with the special effect dudes to ensure it would come out great, from the camera placement to the lighting. Compare that to the modern day strategy of filming an actor running around in from of a green screen and just adding whatever you want later in post.

– Due to the fact that a relatively new company, whose aim is to bring back mature mainstream cinema, has provided the budget I imagine Scorsese is going to have a lot of pull. And that means not having the film rushed into theaters if it isn’t ready.

– The budget is $100 million, so they’re not strapped for cash.

– If it does turn out great, well then…great!

Cons –

– As previously stated, whether the effects look good or not, we are still going to be seeing 70+ actors (who are past it) playing themselves in their prime. They are likely not going to give a better performance compared to a younger actor in the same role.

– We know what they looked like back then, so we’ll be constantly scrutinizing the effects which will ruin the immersion.

– Doing it right will be time consuming. A late 2018 release seems unlikely if filming is going to be done in Autumn 2017.

– There isn’t a single example from another movie that you can can flawless and most digital effects do not age well. It’s not like animating a dragon or a dinosaur, where the intention is often to showcase grandeur. The objective here is for the effects to be as little-noticed as possible.

– Scorsese isn’t exactly known for his digital effects. A lot of the scenes involving CGI from The Wolf of Wall Street, The Aviator, Shutter Island and those horrible digital blood effects from The Departed already look outdated. This de-aging feat is something that you’d have a technical visionary like James Cameron do, not a veteran of gritty, practical film-making.

– The film is probably not going to have that natural look of previous Scorsese films like Goodfellas and Casino, where you know that everything that is in the frame is actually in the frame. In fact, Scorsese might even decide that this will be his second film shot completely digitally. It would sure be easier for the effects guys.

– A few seconds worth of footage being “extraordinary” is a far cry from an entire film having said effects.

So, what are your opinions?