Page 1 of 1

bit late for halloween but

Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 12:30 am
by stevemarl
It seems after years out of the limelight finally James Dean is about to make his return to the big screen: wonder how much `he` will earn? Discuss.

Dean's return to the big screen will reportedly be accomplished via CGI, with the F/X artists using archival footage and photos for reference and a voiceover actor recording Rogan's lines. While the Star Warsblockbuster Rogue Onefirst dipped a toe in these waters by digitally resurrecting Peter Cushing to reprise his role as Grand Moff Tarkin, Finding Jackwill be the most extensive "performance" by a deceased actor yet. And if it works, it could open the door to more posthumous on-screen appearances. The Hollywood Reporterspoke with Mark Roesler — CEO of CMG Worldwide, which represents the Deans, as well as the families of such deceased celebrities as Burt Reynolds, Bette Davis and Christopher Reeve — who said: "This opens up a whole new opportunity for many of our clients who are no longer with us." ... id=webmail

Re: bit late for halloween but

Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 7:50 am
by Andrew 2.8i
stevemarl wrote:
Thu Nov 07, 2019 12:30 am
If you insist!
A CGI screen comeback might not be as daft or far-fetched as it sounds though, Audrey Hepburn was used in that TV advert for Galaxy to great effect. There must be other examples too.

I'm not sure what the situation is here, but it's fair enough for families to make money out of stars that are no longer with us, but should agents still profit from them?


Re: bit late for halloween but

Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 8:29 am
by D366Y
I know they've done it for short sections of Star Wars as well - in Rogue One right at the end they green screened Peter Cushing (died in 1994) and a young Carrie Fisher into some scenes and that was in 2016 and was pretty impressive, could barely tell it was green screen at all!

Re: bit late for halloween but

Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 10:26 am
by stevemarl
I think there`s a difference if a character is an integral part of an existing series (such as in Star Wars) and CGI is used for a small `reprise` of an existing character, but I think to bring back a dead person and basically re-animate them to star in a brand new role (solely to make money on the back of a name) is different?
I suppose my feeling is that it`s turning a human being into a commodity or a bit of IP that can be sold . Would he have read the script and said `I`m not having my name attached to this crap!` No choice now, he`s dead. And if it IS crap, doesn`t that diminish the `legend`?
There`s also the other side: what about all the upcoming actors who could probably (being alive) have done at least as good a job but will never get the chance. It all comes down to brands and money, a good brand is worth $$$$s . Cynical, money making, nothing to do with what films should be about, the art of film making. I love old films , but I don`t want Bogart, Davis, Stewart to be making films again, they have a body of work and now they`re dead, move on, there are plenty of talented actors in the present with new things to offer.

Re: bit late for halloween but

Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 11:07 am
by Paul G