That's hardcore nostalgia porn.

Plenty of bushes in this one.

Finished The Irishman. I liked it a lot more by the end. The first part of the film is the least interesting and seems like the same old Scorsese gangster thing, but it does add a different angle as it goes on.

Pesci is really good in it, and I also liked Pacino, perhaps because it needed someone to put a bit of energy into it. De Niro was less convincing, especially as, you know, the Irish man.

But then it kind of had to be him

So old Pesci in The Irishman = contemporary Paul Gascoigne.  You can never unsee it.

FFS X2

Post of the year.

Knives Out

Good fun movie, if you have a spare afternoon while it is in cinemas I definitely think you could do worse.

I’m seeing it tomorrow, can’t wait

Knives Out was a thoroughly entertaining delight. Genuinely very good fun.

Slow clap due to all the nerds who chased Rian Johnson away from making any more Star Wars films, ya bunch of idiots.

Why, did he have plans for one that was good?

Moot_Geeza wrote:

Finished The Irishman.  I thought it was excellent, certainly good enough to be sneak into Scorsese's top tier.  Pesci was outstanding.  Some of the de-aging was off, although as mentioned by others not because of the effects, more the old playing young thing.  Minor imperfections didn't bother me a jot on the whole though, superb film.  It's not like the wonky street fight took the shine off The Godfather, so I'll give this one a pass too.

I've not seen it yet, but reading a bit about the production and how much improvisation there was, body doubles just wouldn't have worked.  https://www.fxguide.com/fxfeatured/de-aging-the-irishman/

?
I mean, yeah, looks a bit tentative like DeNiro doesn't want to kick the other (stunt?) guy too hard, but I'm not about to sit here and start saying that Scorsese doesn't know what he's doing. 

If that's the worst of it then IMHO everyone's overreacting. I actually respect it more that he stayed with the shonky performance from DeNiro when he's got ILM at his fingertips to fix it in post - a lot of CGI that looks weird to me is because it is lit and looks "too perfect" because people have slaved days over each shot to polish it to the nth degree (e.g. Tarkin in Rogue One). I like it when the set wobbles a bit

It looks very ropey, whatever the reason. After mulling it over for a few days I've come to the decision that I don't much like the film. It's way too long, dull, the story is uninteresting and the effects and makeup are distracting. 4/10. I don't know if a lot of it is that it's Scorsese, De Niro, Pacino, Pesci et al, so it couldn't possibly be anything less than a masterpiece. With Scorsese, I'd be tempted to think that maybe it's me that's missing something, but in this case it's not. I just think it's a poor film. In fact, I don't think Scorsese has made anything really great since 1995.

The Irishman and Shutter Island are his best since the mid 90s for me, but I've thoroughly enjoyed plenty of his less extra special output.

I mean, Paul's scene up there is objectively terrible. It's an elderly man de-aged by decent effects doddering around on the cobbles. By comparison the Irishman tapdancing on Billy Batts 25 years ago looks like Michael Flatley. I laughed at it, same as when he old man luzzes his guns in a river, but it didn't even put a dent in what I thought was an outstanding film.