Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 38

Thread: Star Wars: The Return of Peter Cushing

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 5, 2008
    Location
    near Akron
    Posts
    15,348
    Images
    1
    Blog Entries
    2
    I'm not invested in this at all, I gave up Star Wars decades ago. But, I'm always interested in casting and I find this CGI stuff somewhat creepy. And perhaps it's intended as an homage, but to me it's either pandering, disrespectful, or both.

    I'd rather see another actor of a similar type essay Tarkin.
    WANTED: Dick Grayson SI trousers; gray AJ Mustang horse; POTA Fortress signal-flasher--top mirrored portion or mirror sticker; POTA Forbidden Zone prison doors, walls, bar; minty Wolfman tights; mint Black Knight sword; minty Launcelot boots; Lion Rock (pale) Dracula & Mummy heads; Lion Rock Franky squared boots; Wayne Foundation blue furniture; Flash Gordon/Ming (10") unbroken holsters; CHiPs gloved arms; POTA T2 tan body; CTVT/vintage Friar Tuck robes, BBP TZ Burgess Meredith glasses.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 31, 2003
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    11,045
    Images
    17
    Sounds great. Actor dies (and/or not interested), and the rights are available to present their replicated visage and voice---the, by ALL means DO it. It's a future of movies that I'm not only comfortable with, but that I'd also like to happen ASAP. A lot of the weak criticisms of Force Awakens were punctuated by phrases like "Well, the prequels were pretty bad, but Force Awakens was worse, as it wasn't pioneering as far as the effects/film-making aesthetic." Well, there ya go.

    I'm not into SFX, but an effect that attempts to bring the actor that played Tarkin back from the dead in a new Star Wars movie? Sign me up! A Harold Ramis ghost for a genuine GB3? Sign me up!

    This process is simply an extension of all your Stan Winstons & Phil Tippets, Pete's Dragon & Roger Rabbit, thru Jurassic Park thru the Star Wars prequels, Avatar, etc etc. It is also (if you have to look at this way) a soul-sucking, dark process--okay---but, so is life---and, this Cushing/Tarkin stuff is for freakin' entertainment. Alec Guiness may have not particularly enjoyed that there were Obi-Wan figures out there with his likeness--- but Guiness was in the entertainment business, and so was Cushing. It was the darker... cheesier side of entertainment. This was/is these actor's lives.

    Kenobi, Tarkin, Spengler were OUR lives.

    Sign me up!
    "No. No no no no no no. You done got me talkin' politics. I didn't wanna'. Like I said y'all, I'm just happy to be alive. I think I'll scoot over here right by this winda', let this beautiful carriage rock me to sleep, and dream about how lucky I am." - Chris Mannix

  3. #13
    I'd love to see it if they can pull it off, but honestly, I can't think of a CGI human that I've seen on the big screen yet that hasn't looked off in one way or another.
    "Trying is the first step towards failure." - H. J. Simpson, 1997

  4. #14
    Join Date
    May 11, 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    1,757
    I wonder if someone isn't trying to prove a point by using this technology. No I don't know what the point might be but it's the impression I get.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 22, 2011
    Location
    Tennesse
    Posts
    1,623
    Images
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by PNGwynne View Post
    I'm not invested in this at all, I gave up Star Wars decades ago. But, I'm always interested in casting and I find this CGI stuff somewhat creepy. And perhaps it's intended as an homage, but to me it's either pandering, disrespectful, or both.

    I'd rather see another actor of a similar type essay Tarkin.
    I agree. It does seem disrespectful. I can't imagine how I'd feel if that were my family member. It's hard for me to look at pictures of my family who are gone much less see them brought back as an animated thing.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    May 11, 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    1,757
    I wonder if this would be happening if Peter Cushing had any surviving, immediate family members.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 31, 2003
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    11,045
    Images
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by TomStrong View Post
    I agree. It does seem disrespectful. I can't imagine how I'd feel if that were my family member. It's hard for me to look at pictures of my family who are gone much less see them brought back as an animated thing.
    Quote Originally Posted by phil View Post
    I wonder if this would be happening if Peter Cushing had any surviving, immediate family members.
    Well, Tom, looks like we don't have to worry about Cushing's family potentially having any hard times.

    That said: To address phil's question (as well as all that feel similarly)... I'm assuming that the concern here is that Cushing couldn't have predicted his likeness would be used in such a realistic fashion?

    Okay. I mean, as I pointed out earlier, actors (whether they be Ford or Hamill---or even Guiness or Cushing) are/were in the entertainment business... they're not people from an ancient mystical tribe whose ancestry embraces the idea that certain types of media suck your soul away, but others don't.

    I mean, dead actors likenesses can still be seen in movies shown today with impunity (even movies that they were in that they ***gasp*** hated), simply because they were in the entertainment business, and that's how that business rolls.

    Even IF the aforementioned dead actors were magically resurrected, there's nothing they could do to change things about this.....and they'd be crazy to try.
    Last edited by huedell; May 1, '16 at 12:14 AM.
    "No. No no no no no no. You done got me talkin' politics. I didn't wanna'. Like I said y'all, I'm just happy to be alive. I think I'll scoot over here right by this winda', let this beautiful carriage rock me to sleep, and dream about how lucky I am." - Chris Mannix

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 17, 2012
    Location
    Rochester, New York
    Posts
    7,228
    I agree. I say go for it. The re-cast actor in Revenge of the Sith was unconvincing. This kind of technology has been talked about for a long time. If they can really pull it off, and stay out of the uncanny valley, I mean REALLY pull it off, it will be groundbreaking.

    Maybe with Disney dollars behind it, they can really get it right. My jaw hit the floor when they de-Aged Michael Douglas for the flashback sequence in Ant-Man.

    This is the future of visual effects. It's evolving. Maybe in the near future we can get a young Han Solo spinoff with young Harrison Ford. Or better yet, a proper Indiana Jones sequel with Ford set in the 1930s again.

    Now, who's up for a sequel to Dracula starring Bela Lugosi?

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 5, 2008
    Location
    near Akron
    Posts
    15,348
    Images
    1
    Blog Entries
    2
    I don't want to see a Dracula sequel that badly, but that would probably be one license Junior would grant.

    I'm surprised so many of you are willing to settle for an ersatz performance out of an actor's control or interpretation. I can only interpret this this as the influence of video games on film. So little discussion of the artistic or moral implication of this.

    Because we're not discussing tweaking facial characteristics---that could be considered homage. Nor are we discussing likeness rights in relation to other media, say comics, games, or animation. That I can concede, though I think some of the analogies posted here about rights and likeness are false. It's not even restoring footage.

    But an ersatz "real-world" film performance featuring a dead actor? Not a depicted recording as of Doktor Totekopf (Laurence Olivier) in Sky Captain? I'm not up for that, we might as well be watching games or cartoons for that, not film. It's a slippery artistic slope with no accounting for volition or interpretation and I don't endorse it. Just because we can do almost anything on film doesn't mean one should.

    If it's the future of film, I find it sad. It's masturbatory, not creative. I'd be interested in how some industry insiders here feel about where this is all headed.
    Last edited by PNGwynne; May 1, '16 at 8:50 AM. Reason: typo/clarification
    WANTED: Dick Grayson SI trousers; gray AJ Mustang horse; POTA Fortress signal-flasher--top mirrored portion or mirror sticker; POTA Forbidden Zone prison doors, walls, bar; minty Wolfman tights; mint Black Knight sword; minty Launcelot boots; Lion Rock (pale) Dracula & Mummy heads; Lion Rock Franky squared boots; Wayne Foundation blue furniture; Flash Gordon/Ming (10") unbroken holsters; CHiPs gloved arms; POTA T2 tan body; CTVT/vintage Friar Tuck robes, BBP TZ Burgess Meredith glasses.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 31, 2003
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    11,045
    Images
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by PNGwynne View Post
    I don't want to see a Dracula sequel that badly, but that would probably be one license Junior would grant.

    I'm surprised so many of you are willing to settle for an ersatz performance out of an actor's control or interpretation. I can only interpret this this as the influence of video games on film. So little discussion of the artistic or moral implication of this.
    Well, PNG... you said:
    Quote Originally Posted by PNGwynne View Post
    It's masturbatory, not creative.
    You obviously used the word the term "masturbatory" here in a negative sense... but to me, that "masturbatory" element is the origin of why special effects have been in film for a century or so.

    What is a "Hollywood" movie, heck, what is "art" if not an "excessively self-absorbed or self-indulgent process" creating something that hits that sweet spot for yourself as the artist... that you hope others will relate to... and, in the case of Hollywood film particularly: That people will pay money for.

    Another way of saying this is: It's a fine line between "creative" and "masturbatory".

    Quote Originally Posted by PNGwynne View Post
    Because we're not discussing tweaking facial characteristics---that could be considered homage. Nor are we discussing likeness rights in relation to other media, say comics, games, or animation. That I can concede, though I think some of the analogies posted here about rights and likeness are false.
    Well, of course one will feel ANY analogy "false" if they already have their line drawn in the sand about "what is sacred" (and what isn't)... it's just a matter of perspective. I wouldn't be so foolish as to presume to change minds on this. However, I instinctively offer analogies... simply because they are so dang clear to me personally that when someone like yourself brings the aspect of "moral implications" into this, that's the time when my own "Oh my goodness. What is being said here" alarm goes off.

    I mean, I can't help but think that film has already violated all KINDS of "natural law" for it's audience's (and the creator artist's) pleasure, but THIS is where one would draw the line? Just when it's really getting interesting?

    It's the entertainment business... there's no better arena that suits the "give the people what they want" maxim better.

    Now, before you imagine I'm totally blind to my admittedly excessive passion for entertainment extravagance.... I DO feel like the evil "Running Man" Richard Dawson saying stuff like that... so, please, whatever you do, don't send Peter Cushing's ghost to track me down to kill me with a billboard.

    That said: Those guys were commenting on the future of reality TV... game shows... and what-not. Again, there's no "lying" going on here with Cushing. It's a creative endeavor... a special effect... a "puppet" if you will (where's Frank Oz's Oscar nomination for Yoda!)... to please the audience.

    But an ersatz "real-world" film performance featuring a dead actor? Not a depicted recording as of Doktor Totekopf (Laurence Olivier) in Sky Captain? I'm not up for that, we might as well be watching games or cartoons for that, not film. It's a slippery artistic slope with no accounting for volition or interpretation and I don't endorse it. Just because we can do almost anything on film doesn't mean one should.

    If it's the future of film, I find it sad. I'd be interested in how some industry insiders here feel about where this is all headed.
    But I think you already know how they feel.

    Insiders are the same as the people posting on this thread. Some agree with the process and some don't. Yet ALL of them know that their bread is buttered where their bread is buttered.

    And, we know it too....

    $



    You can't stop progress... but one can speak up, speak out, and do one's best to regulate the whole thing... hopefully that'll retain a bit of integrity that we'd otherwise lose without an unfettered-by-jadedness moral compass keeping us on our toes... if not "honest".
    Last edited by huedell; May 1, '16 at 10:19 AM.
    "No. No no no no no no. You done got me talkin' politics. I didn't wanna'. Like I said y'all, I'm just happy to be alive. I think I'll scoot over here right by this winda', let this beautiful carriage rock me to sleep, and dream about how lucky I am." - Chris Mannix

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •