"but why do you want to cast a dead actor anyway" "Because" "That works." "And also you should get off my back with that whole 'dead actor' thing." "Sorry 'bout that."
“But won’t the fans be really upset?” “No we reckon they’ll be jazzed about him coming back as a digital dead puppet” “Yes digital dead puppets are tight!”
They will start doing exactly that sort of thing. They will higher people who look like what they want their character to look like and higher someone else to do the voice they want and someone else to do the body acting. And they pay all three a tiny fraction of what a top hollywood star demands. CGI characters are the way of the future and, yes, some of them will be made to appear like historical characters, but most of them will just be tailor made to the part.
@@chrisjimenez2192 Don't worry with today's technology we can de age him and even his great great grandfather lol but ye the future is looking more screwed up each day
I was lucky enough to be acquainted with Mr Cushing for a few years before he died. He was one of the kindest, gentlest, sweetest men I have ever known. He also had an absolutely zany sense of humour - he would probably loved the fact that he was resurrected to play Tarkin 20 years after he died...
He was in two adaptations of the first two Dalek serials, yes. He also was considered for the Second Doctor but didn’t want to commit to a long term role on Television at the time.
Many Whovians consider Peter Cushing to be The Forgotten Doctor. The two movies he starred in were remakes of two William Hartnell episodes... Doctor Who and The Daleks and Doctor Who and The Dalek Invasion of Earth 2150. It was the first time Doctor Who had been filmed in color. The Dalek Invasion of Earth was also the first time Bernard Cribs, who played Wilfred Mott Donna's Grandfather, guest starred in Doctor Who.
Me: get comfortable in your own skin, it's illegal to wear other people's. Hollywood: Yeah we're gonna have you put on this dude's face so you can play a role.
Casting dead actors sounds like more residual income for Hollywood studios and the actors' estates. Plus it kinda devalues the actual actors who have to do the actual work for the animators to make a reference of.
I was thinking along similar lines. Their are something like 160,000 current SAG members of which only a small portion of are actually actors and are cast as main characters/ recurring characters in TV & Movies. So wearing a motion suit is the work that they can get. It actually helped Andy Serkis' career.
Acting is no longer admirable. The best cinema has been made. Fairy Taleing thru make believe lives isn't real. Do something concrete. Then write a book about your experience.
“Boy, it must be really hard to recreate a dead person’s face and actually give them credit for the role.” “Actually, it’s Super Easy, Barely an Inconvenience.”
How would Deans family even know if he would want to be brought back, unlike Peter Cushing where the people who knew Cushing well would still be alive, James Dean died 64 years ago the people who knew him best are dead or not far from it those in charge of his estate wouldn't of known him
That assumes that the de ceased person would agree with the angle of the biopic. Subjects who are alive are consulted with the direction and the facts portrayed in a movie about their lives. You can't do that if they are dead and their estate is a poor substitute.
Hollywood has been recycling movies for years, is it really a big surprise that now they want to do it with actors as well.... God were has all the original thought gone, it's like there not even trying anymore :(
I think it's great that technology can bring people back in cgi, maybe when an actor signs onto a studio, they can sign something saying if they're ok with themselves being used in other movies when they die? That might be a way of getting around controversy
Right, if they get permission. Sort of like the organ donor clause on some drivers licenses, but for an actor's likeness being used post-mortem. I could see where an actor could very weil want his family, especially their children, to be the beneficiary of his likeness being used. Wow, 20 years ago I never thought I'd actually type sentences like these in sincere conversation!
@@RobertJackson-sl1mk plus it is immoral. Tf you mean . The person is dead. We dont need some cheap ass clone that was made on a computer to come on screen and pretend to be that person
My Nephew is 17 and he is training to be an actor but Now days you can make a movie with any dead actor? The trouble is you can only get there image on screen and not there acting skill? Because someone like James Dean has been dead since 1955? What next? Elvis Presley & Marilyn Monroe in a musical remake of love story?
I'm really on the fence with this new tech, but if the actors cool with it I'm not going to complain. Nevertheless, It was great to see Peter Cushing again in a Star Wars movie.
I know right I mean this can be okay and creepy if nowaday actors that are okay with being put in future movies sign something but if they get used in a movie their family also has to agree and they have to get paid the money that he would have made but only if he signs something that says he's okay with it that's how the system should work so people who don't want to be in movies after they're gone cannot be put in movies
I'm kinda ok with that, I mean we already make "historical" movies about dead people and we even have a CGI of a volcano based in the face of a dead man, I don't see that much different to use the CGI face of dead actors if they have the consent of the family.
There was an adventure show, set in a cyberpunk dystopia, on ABC in 1987 that was all about digitally recreating dead people to keep them on TV. It was called MAX HEADROOM. "You could have all your politicians in little boxes."
Living actors might want to declare their desire of how their image is used, after they pass away. My opinion is Peter Cushing would not have had a problem with how his character appeared in "Rouge One". A very professional actor. Who took the good with the bad, in his various roles. with James Dean, I question whether he would have approved of this idea.
I think you have made a mistake by talking about DONALD GLOVER instead of CRISPIN GLOVER. He is the actor who has been the most vocal opponent of the use of actor's faces in commercial productions without their explicit consent. He has given countless interviews about this problem since the 1980s. Are you sure you wanted to present Donald's views instead of Crispin's?
There's a note hit here that actually skewed my thinking about it. When talking about using the likenesses of historical figures, I've also been watching Disney's "The Imagineering Story" lately, and in the first episode, they talk about one of the first big attractions being the audio-animatronic Abraham Lincoln that they had doing a show, "Great Moments with Mr. Lincoln." This attraction debuted a century after Lincoln was assassinated. The tech is different, but is the idea truly that much different from what Walt Disney and his team created back then?
Producer guy- "Hey I agreed on casting James dean for our new film" Screen writer- "But isn't he dead" -"sorry didn't realised that" -"Whoops!" -"Whoopsie!"
Live actors can cost millions each for just one film and the pool of them is very small. Voice acting gigs cost thousands per person for just one film and there is a much larger talent pool for them. So you can reduce the cost of your film by a large percentage by using familiar (deceased) faces with current voice acting talent. On top of this, CGI characters don't age, so you can have a franchise not time sensitive. Well 100% WILL see CGI characters replace live action actors in the very near future and they will be just different enough from the people they are based off of to avoid legal issues.
RULES, Boundaries MUST be created. Respect of those who are not here to speak for themselves anymore. Get permission with rules the actor sets from today going forward. For those already gone, only recreating their roles as they did in Star Wars and Fast Furious is ok. Casting them in a movie they had nothing to do with in any way at all is not right.
I think the real question for the estate...is not whether they would have agreed to do the movie if they were alive but whether they would agree to being in a movie after they are dead and that specific movie. I think celebrities going forward need to really deal with this in their wills.
Actually Peter Cushing would have done it because of his very good friend Christopher Lee was in the Prequels and the worked together on over 20 films together and he mentioned interviews years ago that he was upset that his Grand Moff Tarkin character was killed off in the original 1977 Star Wars film.
Very serious... I'm all for the technology but not for its abuse. I think an actor should verbally amd contractually agree to such things. And not just be used....
I've assumed for several years now that actors, particularly older ones, are getting maximum resolution scans done of themselves, so their children/family/estate can choose to lease that famous person's likeness in perpetuity as another asset they inherited along with stocks, bonds, property, intellectual property, etc. But yes, if I were an actor signing contracts now, I would be wary. And if the estate of James Dean wasn't paid to lease his likeness for that film, the studio or whomever should be sued. And yes, it is a bummer that many future films might leverage leased, dead actors' likenesses in place of living actors trying to make a living.
In film school back in 1993 they told us that in the future movie heroes will be digital and non physical just like in the movie Simone. So this is nothing new to me.
I personally think it should be up to the individual actor if they would like to be put into movies after they have passed on. Now that being said actors like James Dean would not be able to consent to this kind of thing because the technology did not exist back then so in that circumstance I feel that actors prior to this technology being implemented should not be used and going forward give actors the option to be used in movies after they are gone and the actor should be allowed to set strict rules on how they can or cannot be used in movies.
If i was in a big movie Franchise i would have felt honoured to have people work so hard to give me a respectful and loving ending. Thats exactly how this tech should be used and for these things the creators should be celebrated. I personally would even like being seen as the ultimate face of a character and being brought back for short cameos in later movies in that franchise, although I would have wanted my replacement and the effects team to get a lot more credit for the performance than it'd end up in reality i believe. I would however heavily object to being cast as anything i have had no connection with during my lifetime, even if my family thought I would have loved it. Not just because they might get it wrong, but because I would hsv had my chance. My dead body would've been used to tske the spotlight from someone who did the actual acting, that would be a problem for me.
I just saw "The Crown" and there was an elderly gentleman there that was perfect to play Grand Moff Tarkin. Don't think anybody would be able to tell the difference.
There should be a Black Mirror where an all-Robin Williams cast tries to break free from the Spiderman remake they're forced to work on. And obviously they fail.
I think arthur c clarke predicted this a few decades ago. he also invented the geostationary satellite for worldwide communication, so he is NOT just an SF writer. why wouldnt everyone just watch bogart, brando, marilyn, dean, etc? what will audiences get sick of?
The funny thing is, Running Man with Arnold Schwarzenegger predicted *all* of this years ago in 1987! Remember the scene where the corporate state wanted to make it look like Arnold's character died to stop the public support that was building for him? They took some poor fall guy and had one of the "game's" villain types kill him in combat, and then mapped Arnold's face over his corpse. That movie was way ahead of it's time and pardon the pun, "dead on" about remapping the dead.
The only person who needs/deserves this treatment is Stan Lee, because marvel movies just ain't the same without those cameos... otherwise let the dead rest.
This will definitely ruin opportunities for upcoming actors. In fact those who actually finally get the call might actually feel they have to have their face CGI'd into a dead person just to get a role. I guess maybe that might increase my chances if I want to become an actor but then everybody would just know my role as young Sean Connery instead of my real self as Sean Frye playing this Sean Connery look alike
I think acting, the skill, is part trained and part talent. Expressions of the skill are influenced by the direction and production. The drive for "more realism" has driven a major component of the cost of a film into areas other than people using acting skill. Conclusion: The skill actors bring to the table are much less important than they previously have been when looking at a typical budget. Consequence: highly paid actors are going to be a little pissed when they can be replaced by (cheaper) automation. My personal view involves having a larger discussion about how a likeness can and should be managed. Questions: Does the production own a part of the likeness of the characters played in it or not? Can or should people's relatives inherit the right to manage the likeness of those who have died?
Nothing wrong with it, it honors them, says that after all these years there still isn't a guy just like that actor/actress. It is true that certain people are one of a kind and another actor would get it wrong, to just recreate a person's likeness and acting style will allow for better portrayals in movies in the future, but maybe only if a currently living actor can't pull it off.
Deaging actors is one thing they signed for those projects or putting JFK and John Lennon in scenes of Forest Gump nothing wrong with that but casting dead people such as James Dean in a role is wrong. You’re not only taking a spot that can be filled by a living actor, you are also using the reputation of the dead who have no say in the matter for you’re own gain. I feel the same way about using Tupac and Michael Jackson as holograms on stage. The entertainment world is plain sick when it comes to this. I hope that movie bombs 💣 so that this doesn’t continue to be a thing.
I knew this was going to happen. Eventually there will be no actors. Think of how much money a movie studio could save if they didn’t have to pay actors.
I think it depends on the situation and context, really I think people would be more sympathetic if it’s more about bringing a specific version of a character back, like say Warner wanting to make a new Christopher Reeve Superman movie or a Linda Carter Wonder Woman movie. Actors themselves are more debatable.
There will come a time, probably not so long into the future, where we won’t even know for sure if the actor is actually a real person or is even in the shot. Technology is going to make a lot of stuff weird.
Who would have a problem with this? Bringing actors back from the dead, I mean isn’t that what they would’ve wanted from the start? To be remembered. To be immortalized for their work. Personally I would consider it an honor to be brought back from the dead.
Yes i think its ok to cast dead actors, get with the times. If the family person itself or representative gives the ok then its of course ok for me. Let the dead spread their legacy even further! Welkom to the future
If this precedent holds what would stop Hollywood from making an actor star in a movie they don't want to act in while alive? I mean, if it becomes acceptable to make the dead act, is it a stretch to make the living act? On that point, there's actually software you can download that uses machine learning to swap faces. I can put any actor or actress in any porno I want. Dead or Alive. Should I be allowed to do that? I hope not.
You shouldn't be able to use a dead actor unless the terms of use were negotiated with the actor while they were still alive. As long as you tell a good story, your audience will be willing to suspend disbelief if you must replace a deceased actor to continue a storyline.
This makes me think of Fantano referring to the "weird licensing bars" on Chance's The Big Day. To me the bars were heartfelt concern, and Fantano's comment felt insensitive. Maybe he just hadn't heard of the reality of this weirdness yet.
This is awesome. Janes Dean, who I never saw, could be a movie star again....forever. I look forward to seeing him in a movie. Technology is awesome. The estates of dead stars will love this. If they don't do a good job of re-creating the dead star then the movie will probably lose money, so lots of pressure on the FX department to up their game. More jobs created by having more potential actors like this to chose from.
Y'all being too dramatic I see no problem with this. Also making a movie of a historical figure and using cgi to recreate his face is actually cool. So if they make an animation and recreate their face you have no problem with it but if they do that in a movie y'all get mad?
"Is it gonna be hard to cast James Dean? I mean he is dead after all."
"Actually it's gonna be super easy, barely an inconvenience."
"Won't it be a bit immoral to use someone who's dead?"
"I'll need you to get all the way off my back."
"Oh, alright then."
"but why do you want to cast a dead actor anyway"
"Because"
"That works."
"And also you should get off my back with that whole 'dead actor' thing."
"Sorry 'bout that."
“But won’t the fans be really upset?”
“No we reckon they’ll be jazzed about him coming back as a digital dead puppet”
“Yes digital dead puppets are tight!”
"Really?"
"Yeah, I thought we just do it."
"Ooh... hiring dead actors is tight."
Woopse!!
Just get James Franco I tbink think he looks a lot like James Dean!
He got his big break playing James Dean in the biopic
@@jamesgatz4490 even better
Besides Franco's now way older than Dean ever was
This reminds me of how people really wanted Joe Anderson to play Kurt Cobain. Never happened
They will start doing exactly that sort of thing. They will higher people who look like what they want their character to look like and higher someone else to do the voice they want and someone else to do the body acting. And they pay all three a tiny fraction of what a top hollywood star demands.
CGI characters are the way of the future and, yes, some of them will be made to appear like historical characters, but most of them will just be tailor made to the part.
@@chrisjimenez2192 Don't worry with today's technology we can de age him and even his great great grandfather lol but ye the future is looking more screwed up each day
Actors: I want to be remembered forever
Hollywood: *makes digital copies*
Actors: No not like that.
'Right guy for the job'...then show us the audition tape of James deen for the role.
This is eventually gonna lead to a Black Mirror episode, I swear.
tbh lately real life is way spookier than Black Mirror
Is Black Mirror good?
@@fawzigramajo The concept is good, but beware a lot of sex scenes.
The latest episode sort of addressed this issue when they wanted to use a simulation of a pop star when the real one was in a coma.
TheZooropaBaby 💯
Great, that's one more thing actors have to include in their will to either allow or deny your likeness to be used after your passing
I don't really know, but I would imagine it's been around for a long time. Something about using one's likeness now or in the future in perpetuity etc
I was lucky enough to be acquainted with Mr Cushing for a few years before he died. He was one of the kindest, gentlest, sweetest men I have ever known.
He also had an absolutely zany sense of humour - he would probably loved the fact that he was resurrected to play Tarkin 20 years after he died...
Peter Cushing is the Doctor no one seems to remember. He starred in the Doctor Who movie in , I think, 1965(?).
He's not even the Doctor as described in the TV show that came years before.
He was in two adaptations of the first two Dalek serials, yes. He also was considered for the Second Doctor but didn’t want to commit to a long term role on Television at the time.
Yes ..but not the Timelord just a guy that makes a time machine.
Many Whovians consider Peter Cushing to be The Forgotten Doctor. The two movies he starred in were remakes of two William Hartnell episodes... Doctor Who and The Daleks and Doctor Who and The Dalek Invasion of Earth 2150. It was the first time Doctor Who had been filmed in color. The Dalek Invasion of Earth was also the first time Bernard Cribs, who played Wilfred Mott Donna's Grandfather, guest starred in Doctor Who.
@@Foebane72 true enough, but at least someone besides me remembers. Now I don't feel quite so old.
“Your contract expires in 50 years”
“But I’m 63”
“YOUR CONTRACT EXPIRES.......”
Me: get comfortable in your own skin, it's illegal to wear other people's.
Hollywood: Yeah we're gonna have you put on this dude's face so you can play a role.
Face off 2 is it Nicholas Cage playing the role or someone else, who knows (evil laughter ensues)
@@robm6726 lol
@@robm6726 good one.
In my opinion, this crosses a line. Hasn't anyone heard of let the dead Rest In Peace.
Rob M they are still dead it’s not like they actually brought them back to life to play a role
Casting dead actors sounds like more residual income for Hollywood studios and the actors' estates. Plus it kinda devalues the actual actors who have to do the actual work for the animators to make a reference of.
I was thinking along similar lines. Their are something like 160,000 current SAG members of which only a small portion of are actually actors and are cast as main characters/ recurring characters in TV & Movies. So wearing a motion suit is the work that they can get. It actually helped Andy Serkis' career.
"Sometimes dead is better"
Said every necromancer ever in the history of dnd.
Before you know it the next Bond villian will be Dr. No played by Hitler lol
You know who I wanna play janes Bond next
Tom Hiddleston
For some reason, this made me laugh.
@@dragonheart632 yes exactly
Hollywood b like: *don’t gotta pay the actors if they’re dead* 🤪
Never mind dead actors, they'll do it with live actors too if it becomes cheaper or easier
this is not okay. as a struggling actress, we shouldn’t have to compete against the DEAD!
Just find your Weinstein, easy enough. Plus later you can sue him. After you make all the money of course.
Seriously, who can compete with so many past greats.
Learn 3d modelling and vfx art, it is not too late. But as I heard it isn't well paid. A level designer for a game has better faith.
@Han Lockhart It's about both, moron.
Acting is no longer admirable. The best cinema has been made. Fairy Taleing thru make believe lives isn't real. Do something concrete. Then write a book about your experience.
“Boy, it must be really hard to recreate a dead person’s face and actually give them credit for the role.”
“Actually, it’s Super Easy, Barely an Inconvenience.”
How would Deans family even know if he would want to be brought back, unlike Peter Cushing where the people who knew Cushing well would still be alive, James Dean died 64 years ago the people who knew him best are dead or not far from it those in charge of his estate wouldn't of known him
I think it should only be allowed in biographical movies
That assumes that the de ceased person would agree with the angle of the biopic. Subjects who are alive are consulted with the direction and the facts portrayed in a movie about their lives. You can't do that if they are dead and their estate is a poor substitute.
Every movie that disrespects deceased actors and actresses in this way should be straight boycotted.
Hollywood has been recycling movies for years, is it really a big surprise that now they want to do it with actors as well.... God were has all the original thought gone, it's like there not even trying anymore :(
Using the dead to disadvantage and dispossess the living is very distasteful.
I’m only okay with this if it specifically concerns ScreenRant using Ryan’s likeness to keep Pitch Meetings going on for as long as humanity lasts.
not ok. Going forward, if an actor includes advanced permission in a will or something like that then MAYBE, but as is, it's not cool.
I think it's great that technology can bring people back in cgi, maybe when an actor signs onto a studio, they can sign something saying if they're ok with themselves being used in other movies when they die? That might be a way of getting around controversy
Right, if they get permission. Sort of like the organ donor clause on some drivers licenses, but for an actor's likeness being used post-mortem. I could see where an actor could very weil want his family, especially their children, to be the beneficiary of his likeness being used. Wow, 20 years ago I never thought I'd actually type sentences like these in sincere conversation!
Fucked up that they want to capitalize on dead people's career and the love people had for those actors🚶🏽♂️
@Jon Seymour don't forget pet actors too
BIGDICK TYRONE it’s just like that Simpson episode
@@RobertJackson-sl1mk plus it is immoral. Tf you mean .
The person is dead.
We dont need some cheap ass clone that was made on a computer to come on screen and pretend to be that person
Rogue One’s Tarkin always felt like a tribute to me. But the James Dean thing seems like it would be in a Tropic Thunder sequel.
Then can we please expect our
STAN LEE to come back😭
I'd love it if Stan Lee could come back, but he cant. Hes dead and anything you see of him now is just a different person wearing his face.
@@raynekarkados7609 yes, i agree with you.
But his presence itself would make a huge difference.
@@ruchith9928 it would not be his presence though. It would only be his likeness on the body of another.
Only if they use previously unused footage
Ruchith not it wouldn’t, it would look fake and you’d know it’s not him and it would ruin things
My Nephew is 17 and he is training to be an actor but Now days you can make a movie with any dead actor? The trouble is you can only get there image on screen and not there acting skill? Because someone like James Dean has been dead since 1955? What next? Elvis Presley & Marilyn Monroe in a musical remake of love story?
Next step: casting actors than haven't been born yet. Now that's the future!
Not surprised. Paul Walker was announced for Furious 9
I'm really on the fence with this new tech, but if the actors cool with it I'm not going to complain. Nevertheless, It was great to see Peter Cushing again in a Star Wars movie.
Well, it depends if people will go and see this movie with James Dean. The controversy may help or hurt the movie.
Really good well done
Hehe
It’s a route you just can’t take.
The actor choose the role.
You just can’t think for them if they die.
It’s wrong in every way.
I know right I mean this can be okay and creepy if nowaday actors that are okay with being put in future movies sign something but if they get used in a movie their family also has to agree and they have to get paid the money that he would have made but only if he signs something that says he's okay with it that's how the system should work so people who don't want to be in movies after they're gone cannot be put in movies
Robert Jackson their family does.
Robert Jackson So i can make a porn with Marilyn Monroe in the leading role?
wait you chose that scene where James Dean says that famous line about tearing him apart? wow that's nice the Room reference
We live in a strange time
I'm kinda ok with that, I mean we already make "historical" movies about dead people and we even have a CGI of a volcano based in the face of a dead man, I don't see that much different to use the CGI face of dead actors if they have the consent of the family.
There was an adventure show, set in a cyberpunk dystopia, on ABC in 1987 that was all about digitally recreating dead people to keep them on TV. It was called MAX HEADROOM. "You could have all your politicians in little boxes."
Living actors might want to declare their desire of how their image is used, after they pass away. My opinion is Peter Cushing would not have had a problem with how his character appeared in "Rouge One". A very professional actor. Who took the good with the bad, in his various roles. with James Dean, I question whether he would have approved of this idea.
I think you have made a mistake by talking about DONALD GLOVER instead of CRISPIN GLOVER. He is the actor who has been the most vocal opponent of the use of actor's faces in commercial productions without their explicit consent. He has given countless interviews about this problem since the 1980s. Are you sure you wanted to present Donald's views instead of Crispin's?
Weird but the only thing I want done with this is to make ghost busters 3 with Egon Spengler I love those movies
There's a note hit here that actually skewed my thinking about it. When talking about using the likenesses of historical figures, I've also been watching Disney's "The Imagineering Story" lately, and in the first episode, they talk about one of the first big attractions being the audio-animatronic Abraham Lincoln that they had doing a show, "Great Moments with Mr. Lincoln." This attraction debuted a century after Lincoln was assassinated.
The tech is different, but is the idea truly that much different from what Walt Disney and his team created back then?
Peter Cushing would have loved to continue his acting career!
And how do you know this? What did you do a seance and talk to him about it?
This is ethically blurred.
I disagree with the Dead coming back unless there's a significance, ie, Peter Cushing. Allow LIVE actors to play the role.
See the movie, "Looker"
Producer guy-
"Hey I agreed on casting James dean for our new film"
Screen writer-
"But isn't he dead"
-"sorry didn't realised that"
-"Whoops!"
-"Whoopsie!"
Live actors can cost millions each for just one film and the pool of them is very small.
Voice acting gigs cost thousands per person for just one film and there is a much larger talent pool for them.
So you can reduce the cost of your film by a large percentage by using familiar (deceased) faces with current voice acting talent.
On top of this, CGI characters don't age, so you can have a franchise not time sensitive.
Well 100% WILL see CGI characters replace live action actors in the very near future and they will be just different enough from the people they are based off of to avoid legal issues.
RULES, Boundaries MUST be created. Respect of those who are not here to speak for themselves anymore. Get permission with rules the actor sets from today going forward. For those already gone, only recreating their roles as they did in Star Wars and Fast Furious is ok. Casting them in a movie they had nothing to do with in any way at all is not right.
Next level : bring back from the dead celebrities so they can tell us all how they LOVE this tech.
Cast Marc Maron to do Stan Lee cameos in the future
joker 2 with heath ledger meeting joaquin phoenix
ye ... thats weird
I think the real question for the estate...is not whether they would have agreed to do the movie if they were alive but whether they would agree to being in a movie after they are dead and that specific movie. I think celebrities going forward need to really deal with this in their wills.
Actually Peter Cushing would have done it because of his very good friend Christopher Lee was in the Prequels and the worked together on over 20 films together and he mentioned interviews years ago that he was upset that his Grand Moff Tarkin character was killed off in the original 1977 Star Wars film.
I would like to hear Crispin Glover's opinion on this technology.
Year 2050: we're rebooting the godfather and decided Grumpy Cat will play Vitto Corleone.
Very serious... I'm all for the technology but not for its abuse. I think an actor should verbally amd contractually agree to such things. And not just be used....
Prediction. In 5-10 years there will be entire movies created, written, directed by AI and populated entirely by CGI characters.
That’s what’s gonna happen. Robots are going to take all our jobs
Maybe we can expect luke perry to come back or john witherspoon
I've assumed for several years now that actors, particularly older ones, are getting maximum resolution scans done of themselves, so their children/family/estate can choose to lease that famous person's likeness in perpetuity as another asset they inherited along with stocks, bonds, property, intellectual property, etc. But yes, if I were an actor signing contracts now, I would be wary. And if the estate of James Dean wasn't paid to lease his likeness for that film, the studio or whomever should be sued. And yes, it is a bummer that many future films might leverage leased, dead actors' likenesses in place of living actors trying to make a living.
Hey if we're gonna make a movie about Nelson Mandella can we stop pretending the man was a saint? He wasn't. Not even remotely.
In film school back in 1993 they told us that in the future movie heroes will be digital and non physical just like in the movie Simone. So this is nothing new to me.
I personally think it should be up to the individual actor if they would like to be put into movies after they have passed on. Now that being said actors like James Dean would not be able to consent to this kind of thing because the technology did not exist back then so in that circumstance I feel that actors prior to this technology being implemented should not be used and going forward give actors the option to be used in movies after they are gone and the actor should be allowed to set strict rules on how they can or cannot be used in movies.
Love Ryan George's videos... so insightful, entertaining, informative and the various clips to illustrate points... wow, wow, wow, wow, wow, wow!!!!
If i was in a big movie Franchise i would have felt honoured to have people work so hard to give me a respectful and loving ending. Thats exactly how this tech should be used and for these things the creators should be celebrated.
I personally would even like being seen as the ultimate face of a character and being brought back for short cameos in later movies in that franchise, although I would have wanted my replacement and the effects team to get a lot more credit for the performance than it'd end up in reality i believe.
I would however heavily object to being cast as anything i have had no connection with during my lifetime, even if my family thought I would have loved it.
Not just because they might get it wrong, but because I would hsv had my chance. My dead body would've been used to tske the spotlight from someone who did the actual acting, that would be a problem for me.
I just saw "The Crown" and there was an elderly gentleman there that was perfect to play Grand Moff Tarkin. Don't think anybody would be able to tell the difference.
There should be a Black Mirror where an all-Robin Williams cast tries to break free from the Spiderman remake they're forced to work on. And obviously they fail.
I think arthur c clarke predicted this a few decades ago. he also invented the geostationary satellite for worldwide communication, so he is NOT just an SF writer. why wouldnt everyone just watch bogart, brando, marilyn, dean, etc? what will audiences get sick of?
The Simpson's did a episode were homer was killing celebrities, so that Hollywood wouldn't have to pay the actor's.
The funny thing is, Running Man with Arnold Schwarzenegger predicted *all* of this years ago in 1987! Remember the scene where the corporate state wanted to make it look like Arnold's character died to stop the public support that was building for him? They took some poor fall guy and had one of the "game's" villain types kill him in combat, and then mapped Arnold's face over his corpse. That movie was way ahead of it's time and pardon the pun, "dead on" about remapping the dead.
The only person who needs/deserves this treatment is Stan Lee, because marvel movies just ain't the same without those cameos... otherwise let the dead rest.
When he said "22 earlier" I was like, wow has it been this long? And then he said "in 1994"... I officially wanted to kill myself.
This will definitely ruin opportunities for upcoming actors. In fact those who actually finally get the call might actually feel they have to have their face CGI'd into a dead person just to get a role. I guess maybe that might increase my chances if I want to become an actor but then everybody would just know my role as young Sean Connery instead of my real self as Sean Frye playing this Sean Connery look alike
I think acting, the skill, is part trained and part talent. Expressions of the skill are influenced by the direction and production. The drive for "more realism" has driven a major component of the cost of a film into areas other than people using acting skill. Conclusion: The skill actors bring to the table are much less important than they previously have been when looking at a typical budget.
Consequence: highly paid actors are going to be a little pissed when they can be replaced by (cheaper) automation.
My personal view involves having a larger discussion about how a likeness can and should be managed.
Questions: Does the production own a part of the likeness of the characters played in it or not? Can or should people's relatives inherit the right to manage the likeness of those who have died?
I'm not into this. We should always be moving forward, not going backwards 😐
Nothing wrong with it, it honors them, says that after all these years there still isn't a guy just like that actor/actress. It is true that certain people are one of a kind and another actor would get it wrong, to just recreate a person's likeness and acting style will allow for better portrayals in movies in the future, but maybe only if a currently living actor can't pull it off.
Years from now, it'll be super easy to make Pitch Meeting sketches with CGI Ryan.
Deaging actors is one thing they signed for those projects or putting JFK and John Lennon in scenes of Forest Gump nothing wrong with that but casting dead people such as James Dean in a role is wrong. You’re not only taking a spot that can be filled by a living actor, you are also using the reputation of the dead who have no say in the matter for you’re own gain. I feel the same way about using Tupac and Michael Jackson as holograms on stage. The entertainment world is plain sick when it comes to this. I hope that movie bombs 💣 so that this doesn’t continue to be a thing.
Can't wait for the new Humphrey Bogart Vin Diesel Buddy pic! LOL.
Do you think that they could do the CGI "Resurrection" thing with Cameron Boyce with another Descendants Project? Like a prequel movie?
I knew this was going to happen. Eventually there will be no actors. Think of how much money a movie studio could save if they didn’t have to pay actors.
I need to see the Pitch Meeting For this!😂
Just cast James Franco. He's a talented actor and looks pretty similar to James Dean.
It makes sense. They don't have any issues. No drug addiction, no arrests. They can be at any age.
Hey, James, wanna be in a movie?
-I’m dead
I think it depends on the situation and context, really I think people would be more sympathetic if it’s more about bringing a specific version of a character back, like say Warner wanting to make a new Christopher Reeve Superman movie or a Linda Carter Wonder Woman movie. Actors themselves are more debatable.
There will come a time, probably not so long into the future, where we won’t even know for sure if the actor is actually a real person or is even in the shot. Technology is going to make a lot of stuff weird.
*Fullmetal Alchemist theme plays*
Who would have a problem with this? Bringing actors back from the dead, I mean isn’t that what they would’ve wanted from the start? To be remembered. To be immortalized for their work. Personally I would consider it an honor to be brought back from the dead.
As long as the families of the deceased agree to Hollywood using them and using CGI to recreate them then I am fine with this
Best video on the topic I've seen. In depth morality discussions are TIGHT.
Yes i think its ok to cast dead actors, get with the times. If the family person itself or representative gives the ok then its of course ok for me. Let the dead spread their legacy even further! Welkom to the future
Oh so that's how Palpatine is in Star Wars Episode 9. I thought he died in episode 6.
If this precedent holds what would stop Hollywood from making an actor star in a movie they don't want to act in while alive? I mean, if it becomes acceptable to make the dead act, is it a stretch to make the living act?
On that point, there's actually software you can download that uses machine learning to swap faces. I can put any actor or actress in any porno I want. Dead or Alive. Should I be allowed to do that? I hope not.
You shouldn't be able to use a dead actor unless the terms of use were negotiated with the actor while they were still alive. As long as you tell a good story, your audience will be willing to suspend disbelief if you must replace a deceased actor to continue a storyline.
This makes me think of Fantano referring to the "weird licensing bars" on Chance's The Big Day. To me the bars were heartfelt concern, and Fantano's comment felt insensitive. Maybe he just hadn't heard of the reality of this weirdness yet.
This is awesome. Janes Dean, who I never saw, could be a movie star again....forever. I look forward to seeing him in a movie. Technology is awesome. The estates of dead stars will love this. If they don't do a good job of re-creating the dead star then the movie will probably lose money, so lots of pressure on the FX department to up their game. More jobs created by having more potential actors like this to chose from.
Y'all being too dramatic I see no problem with this. Also making a movie of a historical figure and using cgi to recreate his face is actually cool. So if they make an animation and recreate their face you have no problem with it but if they do that in a movie y'all get mad?
Wow. Just wow. This a discussion I never thought would need to be had.