Using CGI to bring dead film stars back to life

Meanwhile an actor or actress is sitting out of work, creativity goes out the window and in fifty years all we have are cgi characters spouting inane drivel because it's easy money for studio bosses. In fact no studios either, no camera operators, soundmen, no support staff, caterers and who knows what other jobs tied in with film making.

That's a silly argument, virtually every film that required special effects since Toy Story (1995) has had some form of CGI in it !
 
No it's not, 'some cgi' is ok but when they start to replace the actors entirely it's a slippery slope. Don't think for a moment that if film studios think they can make a film cheaper by doing away with the actors that they won't jump at the chance.
 
No it's not, 'some cgi' is ok but when they start to replace the actors entirely it's a slippery slope. Don't think for a moment that if film studios think they can make a film cheaper by doing away with the actors that they won't jump at the chance.


But the main draw for a lot of film goers /watchers is to see their favourite actors. So it's not really likely to happen.
 
No it's not, 'some cgi' is ok but when they start to replace the actors entirely it's a slippery slope. Don't think for a moment that if film studios think they can make a film cheaper by doing away with the actors that they won't jump at the chance.

Well it's nothing new, the first ever cartoon was in 1908. CGI has now taken over from hand-drawn animations. Actors still do 'voice overs' so I doubt they will loose any work !
 
Of course they will, who needs actors to voice a cgi character? a voice can be 'created' too. You are thinking about it from a cinema goers point of view 'today'. It wouldn't take much to get the next generation used to cgi only.
 
Of course they will, who needs actors to voice a cgi character? a voice can be 'created' too. You are thinking about it from a cinema goers point of view 'today'. It wouldn't take much to get the next generation used to cgi only.

They already have Batman -v- Superman bring a classic example !
 
So it's already starting.
 
I hear that this has happened in Rogue One. I'm seeing it Saturday, so I'll see for myself.
 
I hear that this has happened in Rogue One. I'm seeing it Saturday, so I'll see for myself.

It has. I didn't know beforehand until I saw him appear in the movie. As a Star Wars fan, it was great to see the old character originally but it was obviously CGI which I found myself noticing every time he was on screen.

I don't wanna give any spoilers but there is another instance of human character CGI in the movie.
 
Depends on your definition of successful I suppose.

I've just rewatched this advert, and now, being in the know, it does look a little "off" to me? Can anyone put a more technical term to it? Brilliant advert, but certainly a little.. something not quite?
 
I hear that this has happened in Rogue One. I'm seeing it Saturday, so I'll see for myself.
In rogue one, it is to ensure continuity from this film as a prequel to a film from 1977, it would be very odd not to have the cgi characters, they also used old footage that they cut around and slotted in as well
 
I thought it was very well done in Rogue One but if that's cutting edge technology they've a long way to go , it still looks very artificial but they needed to do it in this instance for continuity
 
I've just rewatched this advert, and now, being in the know, it does look a little "off" to me? Can anyone put a more technical term to it? Brilliant advert, but certainly a little.. something not quite?
At the same time I saw a young girl reading a magazine which was advertising the Hepburn diet for a waif like figure.

Hepburn was waif like because she spent month living in a cellar in Arnhem eating tulip bulbs. The UN treated her malnourishment, anemia etc. Not sure it's a "diet".
 
At the same time I saw a young girl reading a magazine which was advertising the Hepburn diet for a waif like figure.

Hepburn was waif like because she spent month living in a cellar in Arnhem eating tulip bulbs. The UN treated her malnourishment, anemia etc. Not sure it's a "diet".

Yes there is always a rather nasty side of things to a great many "ideals"
 
The jerky Hepburn struck me as more than odd and not knowing the film, I wouldn't know how much of it is CGI

Cushing's character in Rogue One, I have to admit, had me thinking it was Bill Nighy playing the role
 
The jerky Hepburn struck me as more than odd and not knowing the film, I wouldn't know how much of it is CGI

Cushing's character in Rogue One, I have to admit, had me thinking it was Bill Nighy playing the role

The CGI Hepburn is from an advert.

 
The CGI Peter Cushing was very impressive in Rogue One, far less so was the CGI Carrie Fisher in the last few minutes - although I think it's a hodge-podge of CGI and body double. I think it might have been better without the CGI and just going with Ingvild Deila in costume, accepting she's a good enough double for Carrie Fisher and potentially setting her up in her own right for other movies to come.
 
The CGI Peter Cushing was very impressive in Rogue One, far less so was the CGI Carrie Fisher in the last few minutes - although I think it's a hodge-podge of CGI and body double. I think it might have been better without the CGI and just going with Ingvild Deila in costume, accepting she's a good enough double for Carrie Fisher and potentially setting her up in her own right for other movies to come.

The Peter Cushing was CGI and body double too.
 
The Peter Cushing was CGI and body double too.
But was so much better done. The CGI Carrie Fisher looked like it was made of slightly melted wax.
 
Well having read various comments, I was expecting the worse. However I think Rogue One's use of CGI actors was very very good!
 
Back
Top