James Dean Resurrected for New Film

[Frodo]

Reading that article, “Dean will play a character called Rogan...”

No, Dean won’t “play” anything. An uncredited anonymous actor will play Rogan, with Dean’s CGI face superimposed over him.

James Dean is not going to play Rogan, and the Hollywood Reporter should have the honesty and journalistic integrity to state the obvious, even if the filmmakers don’t.

I guess you've sort of answered my question, but are these producer's claiming that the film will star James Dean or is that the headline?

 

[DarkKnight88]

More or less.

“The family views this as his fourth movie, a movie he never got to make. We do not intend to let his fans down."

 

[TheVileOne]

This feels a bit obtuse, Vile.

I don't take a word back. The melodramatic outrage over this is silly. It's silly.

 

[TheVileOne]

Oh Vile

I don' know about Sky Captain, but in the case of Superman Returns, they included Brando with unused footage from Superman The Movie. They still had to get permission from the Brando estate, of course, but it seemed reasonable to use footage that Brando shot for Superman, especially since SR is considered a sequel to the Donner films that he starred in.

What this film is doing with James Dean goes way beyond that and is just plain weird.

If they got permissions from Dean's estate here, what's the problem?

Sky Captain had Laurence Olivier as the film's villain. He's credited in the film as the villain. It's just cleverly edited archival footage, CG, and another actor doing his voice for extra lines.

 

[I Am The Knight]

If they got permissions from Dean's estate here, what's the problem?

Sky Captain had Laurence Olivier as the film's villain. He's credited in the film as the villain. It's just cleverly edited archival footage, CG, and another actor doing his voice for extra lines.

According to THR, it seems "Finding Jack" will use a similar technique (archival footage and an actor to record his lines) except it will be a full performance and not just a hologram appearance like Olivier. Because Rogan is reported as being an actual lead character in the film (and not a hologram like Dr. Totenkopf or Jor-El) another actor and someone behind a computer will surely be required to make his body movements and animate his facial expressions.

Since Olivier did not personally agree to be in Sky Captain, I can see that being wrong, but I still think that this is worse because of the potential extent of the recreation and because these filmmakers seems to want to use this gimmick to sell the film. I don't recall that being the case for Sky Captain. I mean really, these people supposedly couldn't find anyone else to play Rogan, and they need James Dean so bad that they will spend a lot of money to create a new performance using his likeness? Come on.

 

[Schlosser85]

"The family views this as his fourth movie"

More like "the family"---whoever that is, as he neither has children nor siblings---views this as a big paycheck.

 

[Deck Rickard]

More or less.

“A movie he never got to make” is so ****ing misleading. If it was a movie that he had planned to do but got canned (or his role was recast) due to his death, that would be one thing and perhaps there would be some merit to this. But this is nothing of the sort.

 

[Frodo]

If they got permissions from Dean's estate here, what's the problem?

Judging by the backlash there are several issues or problems people seem to have with this "casting" or as I call it " use of likeness" .

1) Is the general principle of using a dead actors likeness and having someone in essence portray them portraying a fictional character. There are people who are against that principle in general , though Hollywood has been dipping its toe in that water for a while now, with examples such as Peter Cushing.

2) The Concept of " casting " said dead actor or actress when its really just using the likeness and having an actor projecting how filmmakers think that said dead actor would portray the part.

3) That using there likeness in this way disrespects their memory and legacy.

4) That people think its a cash grab by heirs, estates, and which ever studios do it

5) That it deprives living actors opportunities

6) The concern that I suspect actors like Chris Evans have , is that their likeness of their younger selves will be used , years and years after their gone. In Evans case in particular, I don't doubt he's probably concerned that Disney would continue to make Captain America films and adventures using the CG likeness of a 30 something Chris Evans for decades after he's gone.

Those are the issues that have the internet and Hollywood fired up. The backlash may end up pulling the plug on the project anyway, though as I've said before in the thread, I suspect this issue is gonna come up again and again in the years to come. This"James Dean Casting" ,
is a trial balloon I suspect.

 

[TheVileOne]

Judging by the backlash there are several issues or problems people seem to have with this "casting" or as I call it " use of likeness" .

1) Is the general principle of using a dead actors likeness and having someone in essence portray them portraying a fictional character. There are people who are against that principle in general , though Hollywood has been dipping its toe in that water for a while now, with examples such as Peter Cushing.

How are real-life actors portraying dead people who are no longer around any better? If this is an issue, why do we not hear a single peep about this being terrible when it happened in Rogue One or multiple other films. Superman Returns and Sky Captain being other examples, where the dead actors received credit for playing the roles.

2) The Concept of " casting " said dead actor or actress when its really just using the likeness and having an actor projecting how filmmakers think that said dead actor would portray the part.

When Rogue One came out or Sky Captain came out, no one benched about these things other than maybe the quality of the visuals.

3) That using there likeness in this way disrespects their memory and legacy.

That's all just opinion at the end of the day. Did showing that weird CG Leia at the end of Rogue One just days after she passed away disrespect the memory of Carrie Fisher? Does repurposing scenes of Carrie Fisher for a movie she didn't even work on or film in Rise of Skywalker disrespect her memory or legacy? This idea is absolutely laughable. Once again, if the estate or family members approve it or got permission, then what sin is being committed here?

4) That people think its a cash grab by heirs, estates, and which ever studios do it

Is it any less a cash grab when Lucasfilm does this? To try and profit off people's nostalgia for Peter Cushing or Carrie Fisher?

5) That it deprives living actors opportunities

Arguable. You know what has actually deprived living, working union actors more opportunities in the last 20 years? REALITY TV. The explosion of reality TV in the early aughts cut down the opportunities for working actors significantly. The reality of these shows are questionable, and the performers on those shows aren't unionized.

6) The concern that I suspect actors like Chris Evans have , is that their likeness of their younger selves will be used , years and years after their gone. In Evans case in particular, I don't doubt he's probably concerned that Disney would continue to make Captain America films and adventures using the CG likeness of a 30 something Chris Evans for decades after he's gone.

To each their own. If Evans doesn't want that, he should make that explicit to his estate and his living relatives when the time comes.

Once again, I saw no one talking about the morality of this type of performance when Rogue One came out. Not a single one.

Those are the issues that have the internet and Hollywood fired up. The backlash may end up pulling the plug on the project anyway, though as I've said before in the thread, I suspect this issue is gonna come up again and again in the years to come. This"James Dean Casting" ,
is a trial balloon I suspect.

The movie might not even happen. I still find the idea of the moral panic and outrage over this laughable. Absolutely laughable. And people saying I'm making a bad faith argument, sorry. But I stand by what I said.

 

[The Guard]

One more thing that The Simpsons predicted.

 

[TheVileOne]

According to THR, it seems "Finding Jack" will use a similar technique (archival footage and an actor to record his lines) except it will be a full performance and not just a hologram appearance like Olivier. Because Rogan is reported as being an actual lead character in the film (and not a hologram like Dr. Totenkopf or Jor-El) another actor and someone behind a computer will surely be required to make his body movements and animate his facial expressions.

Since Olivier did not personally agree to be in Sky Captain, I can see that being wrong, but I still think that this is worse because of the potential extent of the recreation and because these filmmakers seems to want to use this gimmick to sell the film. I don't recall that being the case for Sky Captain. I mean really, these people supposedly couldn't find anyone else to play Rogan, and they need James Dean so bad that they will spend a lot of money to create a new performance using his likeness? Come on.

Peter Cushing didn't personally agree to be in Rogue One.

 

[StarLord]

It may not have been as vocal as this news, but there were certainly several comments about Cushing's involvement in Rogue One being ''morbid'' or ''off-putting''.

 

[moviedoors]

It makes more sense for Rogue One. It wasn't just arbitrarily putting Cushing in a role he never had anything to do with. It's not all that different from Revenge of the Sith when he was recast using practical makeup effects.

This movie has absolutely nothing to do with James Dean. NOTHING. If it was some kind of bizarre sequel to Rebel Without a Cause, then sure. Do whatever you think will work. But this is just dumb. And the language the filmmaker is using to talk about it is so stupid. No dumbass, you didn't "cast" James Dean in your movie. I'd bet a thousand bucks that no one that worked on Rogue One would say they "cast" Peter Cushing in it.

 

[moviedoors]

How are real-life actors portraying dead people who are no longer around any better? If this is an issue, why do we not hear a single peep about this being terrible when it happened in Rogue One or multiple other films. Superman Returns and Sky Captain being other examples, where the dead actors received credit for playing the roles.

Then you weren't paying attention, because those conversations most certainly happened at the time.

This kind of move has been controversial since the 90's when Dirt Devil had a digitally altered Fred Astaire dancing with a vacuum in a commercial.

 

[DarkKnight88]

Peter Cushing didn't personally agree to be in Rogue One.

And Cushing wasn’t credited as starring in Rogue One. Tarkin was created by immitating his performance, but the studio never claimed that he was actually in the film, only his likeness.

That’s not what they’re claiming for this.

 

[Schlosser85]

Probably because Rogue One was made by actual professional filmmakers, not two bit hucksters trying to grab attention based on a gimmicky stunt.

 

[TheVileOne]

And Cushing wasn’t credited as starring in Rogue One. Tarkin was created by immitating his performance, but the studio never claimed that he was actually in the film, only his likeness.

That’s not what they’re claiming for this.

So what? That's not the only issue I got cited here.

 

[DarkKnight88]

So what? That's not the only issue I got cited here.

So what’s your issue? That people are hypocrites? Or that you think there’s absolutely nothing wrong with using someone’s likeness and claiming it’s an all new performance?

 

[Frodo]

How are real-life actors portraying dead people who are no longer around any better? If this is an issue, why do we not hear a single peep about this being terrible when it happened in Rogue One or multiple other films. Superman Returns and Sky Captain being other examples, where the dead actors received credit for playing the roles.



When Rogue One came out or Sky Captain came out, no one *****ed about these things other than maybe the quality of the visuals.



That's all just opinion at the end of the day. Did showing that weird CG Leia at the end of Rogue One just days after she passed away disrespect the memory of Carrie Fisher? Does repurposing scenes of Carrie Fisher for a movie she didn't even work on or film in Rise of Skywalker disrespect her memory or legacy? This idea is absolutely laughable. Once again, if the estate or family members approve it or got permission, then what sin is being committed here?



Is it any less a cash grab when Lucasfilm does this? To try and profit off people's nostalgia for Peter Cushing or Carrie Fisher?



Arguable. You know what has actually deprived living, working union actors more opportunities in the last 20 years? REALITY TV. The explosion of reality TV in the early aughts cut down the opportunities for working actors significantly. The reality of these shows are questionable, and the performers on those shows aren't unionized.



To each their own. If Evans doesn't want that, he should make that explicit to his estate and his living relatives when the time comes.

Once again, I saw no one talking about the morality of this type of performance when Rogue One came out. Not a single one.



The movie might not even happen. I still find the idea of the moral panic and outrage over this laughable. Absolutely laughable. And people saying I'm making a bad faith argument, sorry. But I stand by what I said.

I see your points, and let me be clear, I was basically stating the arguments i've heard and seen made against doing this James Dean thing. I'm not attacking you or critical of your argument , I was just listing the issues people have with it.

My own view on this whole thing is actually more nuanced then alot people debating and arguing about this thing.

In terms of using the likeness ala Rogue One, I actually don't see a great difference between that and the James Dean movie. Regardless of whether Cushing played the role before, they're still using his likeness to get an actor to copy Peter Cushing playing Tarkin.

In both cases the filmmakers are trying to evoke the essence of a dead actor and trying to make the audience suspend their disbelief, and believe that actor is alive on the screen for the 2 hours we're watching them. In that sense, they're doing the same thing as far as i'm concerned.

The difference I see between these two situations is the idea of advertising " Starring James Dean" because its not James Dean.

As far as using likenesses of a dead actor in general principle, which underlines much of this argument is about, clearly people are divided about whether its ethical or not . Alot of people were fine with Rogue one, alot weren't. Clearly there are some who are open to accepting this using CG to bring back dead actors, and some who are totally against it.

Even if this James Dean film is canned, I doubt we're done dealing with this issue and this argument is gonna come up again and again in the future.

As the technology progresses as the decades go on , the film industry and the film going audience is gonna confront this issue and are gonna have to decide with what they feel is acceptable and what isn't , probably on a case by case basis.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Side note... all this Dean talk made me go down a rabbit hole the other day and read up a bit on some aspects of his life I wasn’t aware of, particularly the troubled production of Giant. What went on behind the scenes was bat**** and far more interesting than the movie itself; I honestly wish someone would make a movie about that. I guess if these guys did it, they could “cast” Dean, Liz Taylor and Rock Hudson as themselves, lol.

 

[DarkKnight88]

See, if they did that using this technology, people wouldn’t complain as that would actually make logical sense.

 

[Detective Conan]

WTF!?

 

[Schlosser85]

Ugh

 

[DarkKnight88]

Oh boy, I can’t wait to see what Malcolm X has to say about the state of the world.

 

[Zorro]

Wow..just wow