Resurrecting dead actors via CGI?

[AlluAllu]

I'm little surprised that there doesn't seem to be a thread about this yet.

We've seen digitally de-aged faces in Ant-Man and Civil War, and one of the movies opening in December has a character with the likeness of an actor long ago deceased. What do you think about this? Does it raise ethical problems? Could we see new movies that star for example Humphrey Bogart, Marilyn Monroe or Robin Williams?

Where would you like to see this tech used?

Edit: Discussion below has spoilers about Rogue One.

 

[Consona]

Let them rest.

 

[Ipodman]

Didn't they try it for Aubrey Hepburn in that chocolate commercial.
If done tastefully, why not.

 

[Zant]

Its creepy, disturbing and disrespectful. I don't expect Disney/Lucasfilm to care, since they only seem to be obsessed with pointless fan service. I fear what creepy abomination they will create next.

 

[David H.]

I mean, there's a reason why they did it in the movies you mentioned above; it's easier to bring back or de-age an actor for a five minute scene than recasting and re-adjusting an audience in those five minutes.

It's cleaner, though costly.

 

[jmc]

De-aging alive actors I've got no issue with, but yeah dead actors, this is something I'm not 100% in agreement with. It's a grey area. Seeing Peter Cushing's face in Rogue One was off putting.

 

[Jochimus]

Eh, I don't think this is an option that should be pursued quite THAT vigorously.

Digitally reconstructing actors as they once were - whether dead or still alive - is something that I've found as a moviegoer only works out of absolute necessity, and even then that's still dependent on HOW it's used.

Take TRON Legacy, for example. Something about the digital replica of Jeff Bridges in his younger days felt off to me when it was used for the flashbacks of Flynn, yet it came across more effectively when it was used for Clu. Granted, that's just me, since there are times when I find something's inherent phoniness actually works to its advantage: for example, I don't think the original JAWS would work as well if Spielberg tried to "Special Edition" it with an ILM-issue CGI shark, since I find the mechanical Bruce far more implacably terrifying than even the live-footage great white that the Taylors got, and that's due largely to Bruce actually BEING a mindless machine. Same with the giant ants in THEM!, too (that and that great chattering sound effect of theirs).

Superman Returns was similar in some ways with the digital Brando, since the Jor-El hologram as originally depicted back in 1978 was ALREADY being used to represent a character long dead by that point in the story. I mean, it felt a little odd, obviously, since Brando himself was dead by the time SR was being made, but I was never really troubled by that particular use of it.

I also think digital de-aging is best left to brief sequences, like with Ant-Man. I think it helped that we don't really see the de-aged Michael Douglas in any other scene except the opening flashback. It's like a time-travel movie; if you're gonna have two versions of the same character on the screen for a substantial amount of time, it'd probably still come across less creepy either using the same actor in age make-up for the "older" version" (a la BTTF), or casting somebody else entirely - although preferably with at least SOME resemblance - to play the "younger" version (a la MIB3).

I don't think we need worry about Digital Zombie Bogart, Marilyn or Mork haunting screens anytime soon (since I think their respective estates or whatever's still around that would pass for them would probably have something to say on the matter, too). B'sides, they only use digitally-resurrected celebrities in TV commercials to sell junk food, so I think we're safe.

 

[Symbiotic]

Upon seeing Rogue One, I immediately got excited by what you could potentially achieve, especially with Paul Walker's character in future Fast movies. In complete honesty, I'd love 'em to just go nuts with it... *if* the movie-going public could widely accept it. And I don't know that we'll ever get to that stage.

 

[Guts]

I don't think they should be doing it. What if these CGI actors gain sentience.

 

[AlluAllu]

I don't think they should be doing it. What if these CGI actors gain sentience.

That's funny.

Well, now that Cushing has been directly mentioned, I'll say that imo Tarkin was the best thing about Rogue One. Like Symbiotic, I got excited about the potential. But at the same time, I recognize that we have no way to ask permission from the already deceased. But if currently living actor would grant permission to use their likeness after death, great!

Hmm... this could be a way to always have Stan Lee cameos. Sounds great, but also admittedly creepy.

 

[C. Lee]

If I remember right.....the first time something like this was done was over 15 years ago with John Wayne. It wasn't CGI recreation so much as digital insertion of old movie footage into a different filmed scene. It was for a beer commercial.....the Wayne family approved it because the company paid millions to cancer research (for those that don't know, John died from cancer).

The way I see it....if the estate of the dead actor is compensated, then it's for the good. Not every actor leaves millions of dollars to their family after they die. This could help some families. When a company uses an actor's likeness in an animated film (like say Adam West in the currently released BATMAN '66 animated movie) fans say cool, great, way to go.....I see no difference in CGI.

 

[Abudefduf]

It's a distasteful and pointless practice. Maybe one day those CGI clones will look 100% convincing but right now they don't, they're distracting as heck.

 

[Neno_Kos]

we dont want dead people start rolling in their graves
so no

 

[terry78]

I don't think they should be doing it. What if these CGI actors gain sentience.

What do you mean "if?"

 

[moviefreak]

As C Lee mentioned, John Wayne was one of the notable one even though it wasn't CGI --I'm o.k. with it as long as the deceased actor's families/estate approved/o.k. along with some compensations like donations to charities.

In the case of Peter Crushing in Rogue One, the Cushing estate was involved in the film.

I'm also o.k. with it if the actor died before the completion of the film and the likeness digitally recreated to complete some of the scenes like in the case of Oliver Reed's character Proximo in Ridley Scott's Gladiator. As long as all parties are in agreement.

You might not be able to do say Robin Williams since he signed a waiver prior to his death preventing any use of his image until 2039 at the earliest. At least he'll remain deader than dead. heh.

 

[Guts]

Laurence Olivier played the villain in Sky Captain using archive footage.

 

[terry78]

I mean, if you're doing like a flashback scene of a movie that is a direct sequel or something or a movie set in a certain era, I am fine with a CG actor being placed in. If someone does like a kung fu flick set in the 70s and wants one of their characters to have been played by Bruce Lee, a CG one wouldn't bug me too much. Not a starring role obviously.

 

[Arachnerd]

Depends on how they use it.

I personally didn't mind CG Tarkin so much in Rogue One because the character was instrumental in the construction of the Death Star, and while they could have just mentioned him once or twice, it wasn't really that bothersome to me.

CG was still questionable though.

 

[Drizzle]

we dont want dead people start rolling in their graves
so no

Because that's an actual thing that happens!

 

[Guts]

Because that's an actual thing that happens!

A coffin can be cramped and uncomfortable. Have you ever laid down on your arm and lost feeling in it? When you're in a coffin your only choice when that happens is to roll around and get into another position.

 

[MbJ]

Its creepy, disturbing and disrespectful. I don't expect Disney/Lucasfilm to care, since they only seem to be obsessed with pointless fan service. I fear what creepy abomination they will create next.

Didn't mind it one bit. His estate was involved and gave permission, and I thought it looked fine.

For the practice, I don't think it needs to be done unless there's an actual reason behind it. Star Wars is a running franchise that began in the 70's, so the idea of digitally inserting a character played by an actor who was in the old movies but is no longer with is makes sense if you're doing a prequel. And while it ultimately proved to be a stupid decision, I can see why Singer wanted to use a digital Jor-El in Superman Returns since he was trying to market his movie as a sequel.

Other than that I wouldn't see the point. Someone mentioned someone like Bogart but why would you even need a CGI Bogart unless you're doing something stupid like a prequel or sequel to Casablanca?

Sky Captain is the exact wrong way to do it. There was literally no reason to put Laurence Oliver in the movie and it needlessly cost the film a bunch of money to use his likeness and voice.

 

[Kane52630]

Legally speaking, if the estate approves of it then I got no problems about bringing someone back from the dead.

 

[AlluAllu]

Other than that I wouldn't see the point. Someone mentioned someone like Bogart but why would you even need a CGI Bogart unless you're doing something stupid like a prequel or sequel to Casablanca?

Because it would sell tickets. "A beloved actor 'returns' to the big screen in all new movie!"

Doing something like that would be contriversial and questionable, but it would be interesting.

 

[Auteur]

I remember they did it in The Sopranos tv show with Tony's mother and it looked weird.

 

[MbJ]

Because it would sell tickets. "A beloved actor 'returns' to the big screen in all new movie!"

I mean, most of the people in the target audience for Bogart are all already old and probably close to death. I'm not sure how big a draw that'd actually be.