Why It's WRONG to Resurrect Dead Actors with CGI | Invosstigation #6
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 чер 2023
- The Flash resurrected Christopher Reeve and George Reeves. Star Wars resurrected Carrie Fisher and Peter Cushing. Furious 7 resurrected Paul Walker. Is this illegal or unethical?
Support us with an Indiana Jones shirt: nerdriot.shop/collections/the...
What is the history of Hollywood reanimating deceased actors in films, from Bruce Lee, Brandon Lee, Paul Walker, Carrie Fisher, Peter Cushing, Harold Ramis, and now Christopher Reeve and George Reeve in The Flash (2023)? Erik Voss breaks down what laws are on the books to govern this process, the technology used to do this, and whether we've crossed an ethnical line with titles like Rogue One, Star Wars The Rise of Skywalker, Ghostbuters Afterlife, and The Flash.
Welcome to The Deep Dive, a new channel in the New Rockstars Digital Network. Hosted by Erik Voss, The Deep Dive is the destination for more pointed media investigations. From full seasons of Marvel streaming shows to cult classic films, Erik will dig to the roots of the hidden agendas beneath every title.
Subscribe to The Deep Dive: / @deepdivenr
Subscribe to New Rockstars: / newrockstars
Follow The Deep Dive on Twitter: / deepdivenr
Follow The Deep Dive on Instagram: / deepdivenr
Follow The Deep Dive on TikTok: / deepdivenr
Follow Erik on Twitter: / eavoss
VIDEO CREDITS:
Written and Produced by Erik Voss
Lead Editor: Devin Cleary
Edited by Devin Cleary
Executive Producer: Erik Voss - Фільми й анімація
Robin Williams was smart enough to state he didn't want his likeness used in future movies.
It worked perfectly in Ghostbusters Afterlife! Harold's Family approved of it and he looked fantastic.
They also got an experienced actor to do the stand in.
Yeah there was so much emotion and build up to his return, and the Cgi looked insanely good.
Yeah that was a fun movie, I enjoyed it
Fr
I agree
It's so nice to see New Rockstars keeping the memory of E A Voss alive with VFX like this, it's really like he's still with us so long after the tragic incident. I'm sure he would've loved this channel. :]
His family said no. They did it anyway.
This is now the lore of this channel.
EA as in electronic arts?? 🤔
Still looks a bit rubbery
What was the tragic incident? That time that NR video went out before the episode aired? 😄
I think, like Erik said, it depends on the context and the reasoning. Ramis in Ghostbusters: Afterlife is one where, for me, the technology was used in a positive and moral manner, giving the character of Egon a proper send-off while also giving Harold a chance to be honoured too.
The Flash cameos on the other hand were superfluous from the get go, adding nothing to the movie. And even though he's not dead, the apparent use of Teddy Sears' face without his knowledge is another low blow.
if it is subjective then nobody can complain at all.
It needs to be addressed by laws.
@@pst5345 Agreed: we can all have subjective takes on what WE think is respectful use or not - I agree with TheThird on (subjective opinion) the use of Harold Ramis in GB: Afterlife. It came over respectful and looked good. A nice goodbye... but that is what I think, and what TheThird thinks... it's not close to what Harold himself thought as we don't know: he's dead. There needs to be cut and dried law made regarding this, especially since VFX and AI generated imagery is coming on so far and so fast.
I believe it was just a Jay Garrick The Flash cameo as a character, idk why people think it look like Teddy Sears. it really doesn't. He didn't even play the real Jay Garrick.
with VFX, CGI, and AI, we soon won't need actors at all. Entire live action projects could be made on computers.
I only like it when, like you stated, it fits within context and reasoning. Another time I like it is when the late actor’s family/estate approve the use of their likeness.
Here’s the connection between this topic and Spielberg. It’s like in Jurassic Park when Ian Malcolm says, “your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should” which is appropriate for this topic given that visual effects artists sometimes are so fixated on the idea of improving their craft that they don’t really stop to think about whether it’s appropriate to do some of the things they have done.
Great reference! Totally agreed
I 100% agree n great use of the quote from jurassic Park
The VFX for Christopher Reeve in ‘The Flash’ was terrible. I would have loved footage from the original movies.
And Erik, you are right. As a fan, I would be appalled if they ever used a digital Chadwick Boseman.
Just the worst.
was better then the nic cage cgi and hes still alive
I love the concept of Nic Cage's Superman fighting Lovecraftian creatures, but, man that cgi was some ps1 graphic stuff.
@@cameronliddell9533 why didn't they just asked Nic to film the actual scenes. he would have loved it. plus, they had to pay him anyway to use his likeness.
I wonder what Carrie Fisher would have made of Leia's digital resurrection. She always had a love/hate relationship with the whole thing and the fame and attention it brought her, seemingly often feeling like she didn't own herself; "I'm not famous, Princess Leia is famous; I just happen to look like her", and her oft-repeated "We had to sign away our likeness so now, every time I look in the mirror, I owe George Lucas a couple of bucks."
Leia outliving her on screen felt like the final irony. I can imagine her making some joke about them not even needing her anymore.
She signed off on Rogue One Leia before passing so I guess she wouldn't have minded.
I think her daughter agreed, and im guessing she probably spoke with Carrie before her death about it
Well considering she had also signed on for episode 9, I think she would have been ok with it. They didn’t make her the star, and cut down her storyline. Plus her daughter okayed it, got the profits, and Carrie was very close with her daughter.
Rogue One is a modern classic war movie and just that last, false image of digital Leia hurts it. Fix it with Deep Fake (like Carrie’s old lover Ford). We all get old.
Too bad there weren’t additional footage from ANH with young Leia like they had of Gold and Blue Leader, some survivors from the Battle of Scariff.
They didn't recreate Leia in episode 9. That was all footage she shot in episode 7. She was inserted into episode 9 with that footage.
Crispin Glover is one of the reasons why actors made sure directors and studios don't use their likeness without their consent since back to the future part 2 used his likeness and he sued the director and studio
He won that lawsuit.
@@TurboGTO288 yup and The studio ended up rewarding him $760,000, and the lawsuit led to new stipulations among the Screen Actors Guild's collective bargaining agreements. Despite the payout, neither Gale nor Glover has yet stepped in to make peace. Gale not once did he ever apologize and he was known for milking the back to the future franchise via merchandise and explains why we never got any George McFly merch with Glover face since he doesn't want Gale to make money off his likeness
@@Lopez03Eduardo. Glover probably still makes millions in royalties from the 1st movie.
@@TurboGTO288 pretty sure he does since Zemeckis and him have made peace with each after trilogy ended as Gale not so much
@Lopez03Eduardo. That would explain why we don't see much of him anymore, he probably gets good royalties from everything he did (Friday the 13th, Part 4, etc ) ... if he was so worried about his likeness being used in BTTF, pt 2 ...
I think the two major components that make it acceptable are; “Was the actor alive for part of production?” and second “Are they a critical character that can’t be written out in any way?”
Examples like Paul Walker fall into this because it would’ve been super weird if either Brian was in like half the movie, or wasn’t in it at all with no real explanation.
There are a couple times where it’s done properly and outside the two things I mentioned, like Egon in Ghostbusters, where they don’t make it necessarily a big deal, and it ends up looking good/believable.
Yeah this. I think it’s okay if there’s no other choice but to write them out and re-edit if they die mid way through production. But doing it for a nostalgia bait cameo? Nah don’t do it. For the flash they could have just shown archive footage or just the suit from behind or something, especially if it doesn’t look good
@@TheEman11910 I haven't seen the Flash, so no idea, what's going on there, but why would they even need Christopher Reeve's face? Like couldn't anyone play Superman? Henry Cavill? Or anyone, who at some point played Supes and still lives? Dean Cain from the Adventures of Lois & Clark? Tom Welling from Smallwille? Or other guys, like the one from Superman Returns? Why was especially Christopher needed so much, that they decided to "resurrect" him? Other than pure nostalgia of course.
@@Croftice1 Rememberberries. They knew the Flash film was going to not do so well, so they scrambled to do anything and everything to get bums on seats to see it - "OH look! Batman! Yay! Superman The Movie!"... didn't go to see it, not even going to sail the seven seas to do so. For many reasons, one of which is that the actor playing the Flash can't act his way out of a wet paper bag. I didn't even know til this vid that my beloved and favourite Superman actor was horned into it post-mortem just to try bumping their takings. Sickening.
@@Iluvantir the actor playing the flash also commit many crimes such as kidnapping, grooming and burglary among many others and yet they still kept them in the movie and continued shooting the film.
@@derpydemon1233 dark flash commits all those crimes, come on. he dies at the end. so it's ok
i think this gets at why the nostalgia bait worked in No Way Home but not in the Flash. seeing Tobey and Andrew come back, ACTUALLY come back, get new scenes and new opportunities to play around as those characters again, made it feel like those ACTORS were excited to be back on our screens like that, which made it incredibly enjoyable. When they use deepfakes of actors instead, it feels like the STUDIOS want us to be excited about it, which means it inherently feels false and gross
That's how I felt about de-aged Indy in the opening of Dial of Destiny. I would much rather have them have hired a new actor to portray indy.
I think only Leia, tarkin, and egon in ghostbusters worked becuase they were important to the plot, while reeves wasn’t and was just a cameo thrown in for nostalgia bait
And looked horrible
@brianjohnston5221 Yeah, his face looks way to wide, his torso literally looks like it does in Multiversus
I think it really depends, to finish a movie seems fine, I think most actors would want to see their project finished but to bring back a dead actor it more nuanced. Ghost busters: afterlife was probably the best version of this, it was heartfelt and very respectful and almost felt like a send off to the actor as much as the character, the Flash seems to be the worst version of this, just a gimmick to make money from a corpse.
What about Donald Pleasence in Halloween Kills from 2021. That was not CGI or a VFX, but a crew member looking like Donald Pleasence, adding with some makeup and prosthetic
The thought of them using the image of Chadwick in a Marvel movie is so gut wrenching. I hope so strongly that they never make that play. Right now I don’t suspect they’d even consider it. But time changes things.
When I saw Harold Ramos it made me smile and I felt nostalgic. When I saw Christopher Reeve it was a shock and then I felt really bad
Bad for what? Grow up.
@@deadheroz did you not see how bad the cgi was? At least put in the effort.
@@brianjohnston5221 I don't think that's what the other guy mean by "felt really bad", you're just slamming bad cgi everywhere, even onto people's emotion
As mentioned, there are times when I think it is okay. Like a final send-off and has importance to the story. The Reeves cameo in The Flash didn't have importance to the story and was used just as a gimmick. As you said, they could have used archived footage or even another DC character that was alive. I agree it was a poor choice in the instance of The Flash.
Why not use grant and jws from the other flash shows???
For the amount of screen time and very little action in those scenes, they absolutely should have stuck to archive footage in The Flash. I was annoyed when I watched the movie, but not nearly as disturbed as I was with Peter Cushing and Carrie Fisher in Rogue One - the scenes of "Cushing" speaking looked like a video game character, and "Fisher" looked like a plastic doll.
I imagine there will be a scramble by actors now to forbid using their likeness in this cut-and-paste BS after they pass.
@@jhouck1969 Tarkin frustrates me so much because the actor playing him LITERALLY LOOKS MORE LIKE TARKIN THAN WHAT THEY WENT WITH! It wasn't just bad, it was unnecessary.
@@officialmonarchmusicexactly. WAY less jarring then recent Marvel recasts, and the uncanny valley would have been gone.
@@ghiggs8389 Guy Henry looks more like Tarkin than their weird, CG recreation of him. And that’s WITHOUT makeup and all the little things you can do to make him look more similar
I hate when studios do this. It’s just so tacky and indicative of lazy writing. If the only way you can get audiences invested in a story is by photoshopping in a dead celebrity, then your script is already bad.
Thumbs up for the stealie
I think there are exceptions to that rule, mainly Tarkin in rogue one. The story of the Death Star and the story of Grand Moff Tarkin are heavily intertwined and it would feel weird if he was absent from the movie, so I give it a pass there especially since they did it carefully to make it look good and had approval
@@Chubby_Runs That's what I used to think, until I saw on set photos of the actor's actual face. He looks more like Tarkin than the CGI version does, and I think it would have been better just to not use CG and still have Tarkin
The one in the Sopranos is till the most uncanny to me
I don't generally like it, especially when the actors could not have possibly given their consent. I have a huge problem with the George Reeves one, since he felt that role ruined his life and he commited suicide.
I also dislike how manipulative it is.
But given Rings of Poowah I think we're way past shitting on beloved ppl's graves.
Still I'm glad some ppl are still feeling squeamish about seeing the defecation.
Perhaps it should only be allowed if the actor consents to it prior to their death like burial preferences.
I think Harold Ramis would love that Egon came back as a ghost. However George Reeves would probably hate being back as Superman in any form.
This is a topic I’m very interested in. Can’t wait to see your research Erik!
@@DeepDiveNRJust finished the video, really loved it! Probably one of my favorite In-Voss-Tigations yet. In my opinion, I feel like an actor should A) There estate allows it, B) It honors both the Actor and the Character, and C) The actor must have written consent somewhere, whether that be posthumously by their family and estate, or before their passing in a will, that their likeness may be used for a digital recreation.
For me, the modern film that’s done this best was Ghostbusters Afterlife, just because of how they handled it, because it was equally the resurrection of the character of Spengler as it was Ramis, because they specifically went back to what he looked like in older films, and what makes this one so different to me was that they went out of their way to make him look different from how Ramis actually looked as he got older, and more of what they thought Spengler would
I think you nailed it Erik. There is a clear line ... if an actor dies during a production it's safe to say the actor had the intent of finishing the project. Paul Walker is the perfect example, as you highlighted and I agree as a huge fan of Mr. Walker that was handled incredibly respectfully and beautifully. It also had the full support of his brothers and family ... so much so that his brothers jumped in to help bridge the gaps in performance. -- It is wrong to create new performances for new projects that the actor never had the possibility of having intent. -- Thank you Erik!! I have not yet seen the Flash ... but this cements that I won't be seeing it anytime soon and I for sure will not be giving my money directly to Warner Bros.
Tell that to his to his family Paul Walker's brothers want his character back do you think you know him heading to his family I don't think so so if the family wants him back that's their choice
You're such a fun watch, Voss. I look forward to every video. Been an avid follower since GoT season 1. Just wanted to say thank you for all you do. You help my mind escape when needed. Never stop, brother.
Apparently, in Freddie Mercury's last days he said to his manager something to the effect of "do what you want with my music, but don't make me boring." I think about that quote and I wonder what he would think about AI.
I think some actors have already started thinking about and making these decisions, so that this exact argument isn't brought up later. James Earl Jones recently signed the rights to his voice as Darth Vader over to Lucasfilm/Disney, so that they can digitally generate it in future projects if needed. He's clearly given consent, and whether or not we like the idea it's his right to do so. I'm sure other actors are weighing the pros and cons too. I feel like the studios and filmmakers should have the respect to not do a cameo like in the The Flash if they can't get the actors' consent. They apparently created a wholly digital likeness of golden age Flash that 'just happened' to look like Teddy Sears, so I don't see why they couldn't have done something similar for the Superman cameos. The obvious assumption is that they wanted to cash in on that nostalgia, and that's the bigger problem for me. They're monetizing these actors after their death, and I have to assume that minimal money would go back to the actor's estate or family. In George Reeves' case there isn't even anyone to give that money to, as far as I know. So this is studios looking at easy profit with as little investment as possible, not having to pay actors so they can save a few bucks.
All I have to say to this is.... NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
@@pawacotengGood one! 😄
Glad to see other people feel it's unethical. There can be some leniency I feel, when an actor passes away during production, but it's like you said: it all boils down to intent. If it's meant to help honor and finish the performance, then it makes sense. The Christopher Reeves one and even Rogue One made me very uncomfortable so I've watched neither movie as a result.
You should look into the Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus to compare how Terry Gilliam handled the loss of Heath Ledger during filming to see the right way.
I hope this channel gets 1M subs by end of the year. Love the content and Erik
I would say it is pretty screwed up. I mean, for movies like Rogue One, where the character is shown like once or twice, then I guess it's okay, but since Rogue One, Hollywood has been doing that so freaking much. I think they should stop.
Carrie Fisher was still alive at the time Rogue One was being made. I heard that she enjoyed watching her 19 year old self onscreen.
Exactly what you said, it’s about integrity. When it’s not a production thing, like Superman in the flash it just feels like a gross money grab
I wonder if this will ever be in the contracts of these actors.
Great vid as always Eric
I loved the Ghostbusters one because it was Jason basically giving a nice tribute to Harold Ramis
Depends on the situation if the families give permission
The Carrie fisher one was for a send off
If it’s for a send off that’s probably ok
@@DeepDiveNR With that in mind, I wonder if a new standard operating procedure in Hollywood will be to get some sort of contractual language in most movie contracts allowing the future use of their likeness if/when they die and the studio wants to revive them... Then this whole thing will just become another fact of life for actors unless you are a major bankable star and you put up a stink about it and refuse.
For me if it’s for a send off for a movie they died during the production of its fine i.e Fast 7 and Star Wars ep 9. But using them in future films or bringing someone back who’s been dead for years is horrendous
@@DeepDiveNR ok. Then you should reach out to Samuel L Jackson and Harrison Ford if they would be okay with that seeing as how they both have allowed themselves do be digitally deaged
@@BigPurp9 Fully agreed. Unless they specifically (very publicly, not just in a random document that surfaces after death) say they'd love to be digitally composed into something in the future, leave them alone.
@@BigPurp9 I agree, and I think that makes a big difference. If it was in there contract, then they should be able to do it
Since we are on the subject of resurrecting dead celebrities, could we get a deep dive on the Tales from the Crypt episode starring Humphrey Bogart? Its one of the earliest examples of the concept and a shocking special effect for the time.
Was it plan 9 from out of space, where when the actor died they had a a new actor cover his face with a Cape for the rest of the movie?
Yeah; Bela Lugosi died while filming Plan 9 from Outer Space, so Ed Wood used footage he had shot of Lugosi for another movie as well as casting Tom Mason (who was a chiropractor, not an actual actor) to fill in for other scenes... despite him being much taller and looking nothing like Bela. 🤣
Like most people on Planet Earth I didn't see the Flash had no idea that "George Reeves" made a cameo
The Flash tv show "Crisis on Infinite Earths" did cameos the way they should be done. Only bringing back surviving actors. The joy of seeing these characters is still there, I got a big smile seeing Burt Ward reprising Dick Grayson taking his dog for a walk. Having Christopher Reeve being CGI'd badly just turns me off. For many of us he's THE definitive Superman, but I don't wanna see him brought back with CG. I can go back and watch his films.
I absolutely agree with what you said! It may be legal but it's unethical unless they get the actors permission before they pass. And I REALLY hope they don't digitally reanimate Chadwick for Secret Wars, that would be so messed up. (The term itself "digital reanimation" gives me the creeps.)
Watching this, and seeing the footage of "Game of Death", made me remember something. Not that long ago, I was discussing Fake Shemp with someone. Shemp Howard of The Three Stooges died on November 22 1955. The Three Stooges were still contractually obligated to complete four more shorts to fulfill the contract. To complete these shorts, new footage of Moe and Larry were shot, and prior footage from shorts starring Shemp were recycled. All new footage of Fake Shemp, played by stand-in/body double Joe Palma, was either shot from behind so you can't see his face, or had Joe moving quickly to also obscure his face. "Game of Death" uses the idea of a Fake Shemp, with two stand-ins, played by Kim Tai-jong and Yuen Biao. That cardboard cutout, they didn't even try to hide that it wasn't Bruce. Fast forward to today with the CGI examples like you've shown, and it's essentially the modern day Fake Shemp.
When I first saw "Game of Death", the two body doubles and the cardboard cutout face wasn't what angered me. It was the fact they used actual newsreel footage from Bruce Lee's funeral procession to cobble together a scene where Bruce's character fakes his death. Regarding ethics, I can go with Paul Walker and Harold Ramis being done in CGI. Their absences should be acknowledged and get a respectful sendoff. I like that they put Christpher Reeve and George Reeves into "The Flash" with the multiverse scene, but it was made so poorly that I'd say it's disrespectful. Carrie Fisher and Peter Cushing was simply a cash grab with nostalgia glasses. But using Bruce's funeral footage the way they did I'd say is definitely unethical.
Good analysis there!
I don't have a problem with them just recasting. Especially with comic book movies where characters are already drawn by different artists with different styles in the comics and animation. Heck, they recast actors who aren't available or are too difficult to work with.
If I remember correctly, Chadwick's family are the one who wants Disney to recast T'Challa instead of killing him off
This is one of those tricky topics. I personally think it's okay when it's done in a small capacity and it lends itself to an overall story. I don't think it's exploitive because they are thinking about the character first. Much like Tarkin playing a major role in Rogue One, and at the end of RO they had to bridge the gap between that story and A New Hope. Again, it's primarily about the characters rather than exploiting likeness.
I agree, I think Tarkin is the perfect example of where it being a major role within the universe makes sense but the sequel trilogy Carrie Fisher one I saw as a way to say goodbye to the actress & her most famous role, though there would have been the option for them to write in the story that Leia died from the grieving over the loss of her brother between the two films. I think when it’s done in a small capacity as you say & it’s done with respect then it’s a good thing but if it’s done for the sake of a cameo for no logical reason then it becomes an issue such as the Christopher Reeves example as that could be seen as “exploiting” the dead actor for a “wow” moment
I do believe Hollywood should leave the deceased alone. Unless they sign it away in their contract and allow their estates to do them. But in the case of Harold Ramis, & Paul Walker. They were the best CGI remake ever done. It completed the story arc & gave the fans a final closing.. Everyone in the theater cried for F&F & Ghostbusters Afterlife. These 2 films alone should be the benchmark of all CGI going forward.
This has also been done in award shows and music videos with dead singers/actors. Not too sure which started doing this first, but it has been happening for a while. And those shows and videos certainly did not have a necessity to have the deceased person make an appearance in them.
I specifically remember shortly after Carrie died they said they wouldn't use CGI. Then her whole body is CGI in the movie...
That wasn't CGI. That was leftover footage from Force Awakens.
I've read Peter Cushing's family was happy to 'see' him again (tho I don't not if it's accurate or the article just paraphrasing the actual family consent) and it's my personal belief that Carrie Fisher was perfectly handled in Rogue One (and as much as I love the sequels' new characters, TROS is another shitshow tbh). Walker and Ramis were honored in their late cameos and clearly the families were on board. The Flash... was a total disrespect. 100% different category and I don't think it's even comparable.
Cushing didn't have childrend or direct family, so whoever owns his image was probably happy to get money
I think it will always boil down to whether the movie is good or not. Rule of cool as they say. If the scene showing a deceased actor shows an epic tribute to their character, and if the CGI is excellent, and if it's necesaary to the story, then audiences will most likely respond positively to it. If you are missing 1 or 2 of the above categories, not so much.
Ghostbusters was the only one so far to do this tastefully.
It actually meant more to me seeing him that way as opposed to anything else really
I really like your videos keep up the good work
Thanks for all your great work. Love from Belgium 🇧🇪 ❤
I agree with you, except Leia. It sounds like it was done respectfully and she signed up for that trilogy.
Hi Eric, greetings from Denmark. Love your work.
I’m loving your passion on the subject..
love the channel!!!
I just feel that they could have used old footage with "assistance" of CG to insert Christopher Reeves into the movie along with Super Girl (and Nicolas Cage as Superman). Especially considered this took place "outside" of the Chronin bowl (did I incorrectly misspell this word)! So it didn't make sense for there to be bad CGI on these characters!
Nicolas Cage wasn't CGI, he was actually on set in the costume.
This is incredibly well said. Thank you for this. Not enough people care for integrity or respect for someone’s wishes.
I’m glad you do.
Good work on this video! Just curious - why do you think ready player one sucks?
This topic reminds me a lot of what happened with Marilyn Monroe's likeness.
When greed and profits are on the line, integrity is left by the wayside.
As far as merchandise is concerned, I understand that anything related to any toy, statues, products etc using Christopher Reeve’s likeness, whatever amount Reeve would’ve earned all goes to the Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation for spinal cord injuries.
I believe Christopher and Dana Reeve’s children are in charge of that. It would make sense that this extends to any reuse of his likeness in The Flash ⚡️
The overuse of CGI in current movies is tiresome enough without the additional tastelessness of digital graverobbing.
I was more angry that they used VFX to recreate Adam West, George Reeves, Christopher Reeve than I was had they simply shown quick HD remastered scenes. Because seriously, that would've been more respectful, showing the actual performance instead of a recreation
I was surprised to hear you say you'll never do a deep dive of the movie Ready Player One. You said it was terrible! Surprisingly, as you shared your memories of movies with your mom, at the end of your dive of Everything Everywhere All At Once. You said there were no bad movies, only interesting ones. I personally enjoyed RPO and would have enjoyed a deep dive. Perhaps do a video explaining what you didn't appreciate?
I love your channels, btw!!
It feels like a case of identity theft. The possibility someone can make you do or say things that you would never do or say is horrible.
Shout out to the creepy 2007 digital Orville Redenbacher popcorn commercial 🍿🧟♂️
really glad you made this video. we gotta nip this in the bud.
I would’ve rather seen a poster or a statue of Christopher Reeve’s Superman, rather than have him be digitally recreated, it would’ve made sense for him to be the Superman in Keaton’s universe, they could’ve just had a statue for him, like the one in BvS, and left it ambiguous as to if he was still active in the universe or not.
I enjoyed the Christopher Reeve and George Reeves cameo in the flash movie I got teary eyed. Especially with Helen Slater as Supergirl.
@@DeepDiveNR Keep up your great videos.
Same here, but it is morally ambiguous bringing them back after they’re dead, especially George Reeves, who allegedly killed himself because he couldn’t bear his acting career to be seen as just being Superman, and now that’s what they’ve done to him. That just turns me the wrong way.
@@jodanger37 I disagree though. But Everyone has the right to their own opinions.
@@CalebJacobs762 Ofc, but that includes you, so how do you disagree?
@@jodanger37 It's no one's business how I disagree I just do.
Don’t be surprised if the new Hollywood contract include a clause about using your likeness after you 💀
I need more info on why Erik doesn’t t like Ready Player One. That movie was great.
This could be a black mirror episode! Where an actor dies and they vfx him,and then he comes alive in the matrix!
I gotta admit, I can't help but shed a tear every time I see Harold Ramis' 'ghost' in 'Ghostbusters Afterlife'. I think they handled that brilliantly.
Hey now! I wish you would've shared your thoughts on recasting for deceased actors. I think this issue will be basically mute going forward. Actors will make a point to express their wishes going forward. I don't have an issue if the actors or their families approve.
I had a bigger problem with stuff like the Bobby Driscoll reference in the Rescue Rangers movie. That boy died of a heroin overdose as his mother desperately looked for him, and Disney thought it'd be funny to have Peter Pan be portrayed as a villain for it.
Movies like the Ghostbusters three movie where they used it for Egon, that something that kind of works for that because it literally deals with ghosts and since he’s already dead and using a CGI image for him works great within context, as for anything else it really depends because you can take something a little too far
I still remember when they reused footage to complete Wagons East when John Candy died during production.
Christopher Reeve’s son is an anchor at ABC so I’m surprised he hasn’t said anything at all.
I always hate it, especially when they find a still living actor who looks just like the dead person they’re recreating. Just use the new actor, movie watchers can suspend their disbelief enough for magic and monsters I think they can accept a new actor that barely looks different.
Been saying this for so long! If they don't stop it's going to get grossly out of hand!
Love your insight or take on this...I agree with you...
It's all about the context for me. If it's a Paul Walker type situation where the actor dies mid-production, and if the family gives their blessing, then that's fine with me. With Ghostbusters: Afterlife, that's obviously made with so much affection for Harold Ramis, and it worked so well, that's also fine with me too. I've not seen The Flash, but just chucking in old actors with solely the purpose of "look, it's your old fave actor!", naah...
I'm actually quite excited to see Christopher Reeve appear as Superman again. Ok so it's not really him, but if it's done sensitively with a real effort to capture the soul he brought to the character, like they did in Ghostbusters Afterlife, I think it will be quite an emotional moment for me.
Since I'm of a certain age, for my money, no one has ever played Superman better than Christopher Reeve. He really brought that pure of heart, overgrown boyscout soul to the character. He was heroic but humble and gentle. I think this was Christopher Reeve's personality shining through, and was perfect for the character. No one else has managed to play him this way as successfully.
I had always hoped to see him play Superman again and I remember being devastated when he was injured and paralysed. Such a shocking thing to happen to basically the person who, to me, when I was a kid, WAS Superman as far as I was concerned.
I think Dean Cain is probably next best in his portrayal in the TV series. Not really a good comparison but Christopher Reeve left him a pretty big cape to fill.
I’m fine with the ghostbusters one, it’s a nice send off for a great character
Is it "wrong", in general, yes absolutely.
Doing a final send off, if done perfectly, can be beautiful. It needs to be done right or else it's weird. And you only get 1 chance.
Edit: i agree with the voss man. Archive footage is okay, dont dishonor human beings with cgi crap.
@@DeepDiveNRyes absolutely. Nostalgia in superhero movies is so hot right now. I appreciate the fan service we are given.
You're absolutely correct. Previous footage is okay, but faking their face is weird.
For me, I think it depends on how they do it. As long as it’s respectful and the actor hasn’t expressed a distaste for it (Prince is an example of this, which is one of the reasons people had issues with his tribute during the Super Bowl), and as long as the actions ring true towards the character then I’m okay with that.
Also the disrespect of replacing Bruce Lee in Game of Death pales in comparison to them using footage of his actual funeral and body. The sequel did it too. 🙄
Can you do a deep dive on terminator 1 and 2?
I don't think you can just say "It's ok to do this" or " It's wrong to do this" you have to go case by case
When I saw Christopher Reeves in the Flash, it was just AS if He would smile from heaven, I sure they did it with a huge respect. I guess it should be okay in some cases, if you need to finish a film, or to give an actor the chance to say goodbye, like Reeves or Walker did. But a whole Film?
Harold deserved that send off. The movie lead up to that moment. It was earned.
Reeves was thrown in there.
Idk how to feel about these types of appearances. It seems very unethical to take a dead actor into a movie, and especially if it is done poorly. If this is to happen, the deceased actors should have been enthusiastic about their character, get full permission from the families of the dead, pay the families well, and make sure the cgi isn’t shitty. Imagine the outrage of when Shuri took the Heart Shaped Herb, Chadwick Boseman showed up in a poor cgi model, smiled at her, and she went back to real world. People would be pissed. Cgi cameos of dead actors I feel like will only lead to a more dangerous era of cinema, where actors who are dead are completely brought back for roles after death with cgi and ai. I hope these cameos stay as camoes, and are done with respect and care for the family of the dead.
I knew that they were recreating Peter Cushing for Rogue One before I watched it, and kind of accepted it as this movie is set literally right before IV so it makes sense, but I was really surprised that they made him have so much screentime, whilst the tech is impressive it's still not good enough to trick you with full close ups
The rod puppet Cushing used in New Hope was a lot more realistic. Practical effects are always better))
As long as the family agrees to it and maybe even get paid, there’s nothing wrong with it. Most actors would love the idea of even after they’re gone, they will still be able to appear in films and be seen by new generations.
Opening killed me 💀
Nah, it’s disrespect to Paul by placing out his face to Christopher Reeves doesn’t seem right. Cause Paul VFX belong to Furious 7, and Christopher Reeve VFX belong to The Flash movie 🙄
Not quite a humor to me in my opinion
@@DeepDiveNR I cannot describe in mere mortal words, how honored I would be! In a more serious note, thanks again for an amazing take. Also thanks for all the great work man, been watching since the ole game of thrones breakdowns!
Absolutely right. I am a composer and law expert for Paris Court of Appeal, and I am tired of Hollywood's growing lack of moral principles for commercial reasons. Art (and entertainment) should remain ETHICAL.
Totally agree. To paraphrase: Just because they could, doesn't mean they should.
I totally agree with Eric, I hated the Christopher Reeve CGI, bad cgi at that. I enjoyed the flash movie but I didn’t understand the point of recreating superman. They could of used stock footage.
If an actor agrees with his image being used in the future then I think that might be ok but I still want to see the real performance.
It’s coming. Actors will be ‘persuaded’ to sign out their likenesses for any and all moral purpose as part of any contract they sign, especially potential up and comers.
IMO *if* it's done sparingly, and done with respect to actor and if their family or surviving relatives give permission to use that person's likeness, I have no issue with it. Have a respectful note in the credits "Appearance of *insert name* in respect and permission from the family of .... In our hearts, rest in peace" or something like that. I do think some people are making WAY too big a deal out of this
Yes, keep doing this. Do your best effort, and wisely hide/tweak the not so good, like Leia should have been shown as a reflection in glass to tap down on the uncanny valley of her physical presence on the ship, people would have taken less to little notice of a glass reflection. And some deepfakes that came out after official productions show that you can just about nail it, the review and edit of such would help get past the 'good enough' if time permits. Make time, you're trying to make money.
Wow. Ready Player One must be really bad. I’ve never heard him say a negative thing about a movie ever.
If it’s done in good taste, and family of the actor get some kind of compensation, I don’t have a problem with it.
8:13 so no Crystal Skull? 😢... Well anyway this is certainly an interesting subject. Like most people i say it depends on the circumstances and certainly the execution, Ghostbusters Afterlife is a good example: personally I was happy to see Harold Ramis because of how they did it, i think it was beautiful, if it wasn't his likeness then that scene just doesn't work, it feels like paying respect to him and the character he brought to life, not to mention a world he helped create. Of course nostalgia will play a part in the film being successful and that's a trope hollywood has been abusing lately, but if done right it's ok to have both.
what about DLC game skin? do you feel the same about those?