Post subject: Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021 movie)
Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2019 1:49 pm
Biker Librarian
Joined:
26 Mar 2007
Posts:
25152
Location:
On the highway, looking for adventure
Brotoro wrote:
Has anybody polled a large number of current actors to see if they would be in favor of getting CGI gigs after they die?
It seems ghoulish to me. Not to mention kind of ironic for a cast member of "Ghostbusters."
_________________ The kingdom of heaven is like a merchant seeking fine pearls who, when he found an especially costly one, sold everything he had to buy it.
Post subject: Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021 movie)
Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:30 am
...
Joined:
26 Oct 2006
Posts:
59406
That meddlin kid wrote:
Brotoro wrote:
Has anybody polled a large number of current actors to see if they would be in favor of getting CGI gigs after they die?
It seems ghoulish to me. Not to mention kind of ironic for a cast member of "Ghostbusters."
Hollywood has flirted with this concept for decades - remember those Pepsi commercials in the 80's? I'm sure that, as soon as they're able to, they'll be making movies starring CGI versions of Marilyn Monroe and James Dean. Given all those 'deepfakes' videos floating around I'm sure the technology exists, it's just a matter of licensing and making sure they don't wreck their 'brand' with an unimpressive movie. The people who run the estates of dead actors will definitely want to use this as a way of making money.
_________________ "They'll bite your finger off given a chance" - Junkie Luv (regarding Zebras)
Post subject: Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021 movie)
Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 9:22 am
The Modfather; Wizard of WAN
Joined:
05 Oct 2006
Posts:
56209
Location:
Under the Iron Bridge
Bannings:
freely handed out
Simon wrote:
That meddlin kid wrote:
Brotoro wrote:
Has anybody polled a large number of current actors to see if they would be in favor of getting CGI gigs after they die?
It seems ghoulish to me. Not to mention kind of ironic for a cast member of "Ghostbusters."
Hollywood has flirted with this concept for decades - remember those Pepsi commercials in the 80's? I'm sure that, as soon as they're able to, they'll be making movies starring CGI versions of Marilyn Monroe and James Dean. Given all those 'deepfakes' videos floating around I'm sure the technology exists, it's just a matter of licensing and making sure they don't wreck their 'brand' with an unimpressive movie. The people who run the estates of dead actors will definitely want to use this as a way of making money.
Where have you been? They've resurrected Peter Cushing for a role in Rogue One, recreated a young Carrie Fisher for the same film, and have done little bits here and there with other actors in the recent past as well. We're well on our way to that future, assuming people don't find it too ghoulish. I thought Peter Cushing's recreation was pretty good, while the Leia looked a bit off. As I understand it, how they do it is to use a stand-in of approximate build to match the original, then use CGI to recreate the face.
Post subject: Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021 movie)
Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 9:50 am
...
Joined:
26 Oct 2006
Posts:
59406
Leia looked like a waxwork dummy, IMO. Even that few seconds was unconvincing. They should've not shown her face, in my opinion. I thought the Cushing one was good, though. Not perfect but the best example of this whole technique I've ever seen.
I'm just saying that Hollywood has been wanting to do this for ages, but it's only recently that they've been able to. Also, the virtual Cushing was only in a few scenes and was - in my opinion - obviously computer generated. When they can do an entire movie where the resurrected actors don't look like the virtual Carrie Fisher but look perfectly natural in terms of movement, etc, then we'll see a whole bunch of them being made. I don't think they're 'there yet' in terms of convincingly making CGI people look natural. Monsters and dinosaurs is one thing, but getting CGI people out of the uncanny valley is a harder job.
Daphne mentioned the irony of Ramis being dead and being in a Ghostbusters movie. It might well be that they feature Ramis' character as a ghost in the upcoming movie. It'd be one way of having him in it without having to make him look totally natural or human.
_________________ "They'll bite your finger off given a chance" - Junkie Luv (regarding Zebras)
Post subject: Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021 movie)
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2019 1:16 am
Helpful Librarian
Joined:
Day WAN
Posts:
197024
Location:
IMWAN Towers
Bannings:
If you're not nice
Quote:
'Ghostbusters' Director Jason Reitman Promises to "Hand the Movie Back to the Fans"
Jason Reitman wants people to know something about his upcoming Ghostbusters movie: He’s making it for the True Fans. Not fans of Ghostbusters, I hasten to add; instead, he’s apparently aiming it directly at the subset of the movie’s audience that actually believes in a hierarchical structure of fandom that makes such a thing as a “True Fan” (or, for that matter, a “fake fan”) a possibility in the first place.
Talking on the most recent edition of Bill Burr’s Monday Morning Podcast, Reitman went out of his way to reassure those still seemingly traumatized by Paul Feig’s all-female 2016 reboot of the franchise that his movie wouldn’t be anything like that, saying, “I’m not making the Juno of Ghostbusters movies,” referencing his 2007 Ellen Page film centering on a pregnant teenage girl.
"We are in every way trying to go back to original technique and hand the movie back to the fans," said Reitman, noting that his team painstakingly researched techniques used in the 1984 original film, directed by his father Ivan Reitman, for the movie's first teaser.
Let’s put aside, for a second, the hopefully accidental sexism in the Juno reference, which is as likely to be a reference to the tone of the movie as it is the gender of the protagonists and potential swipe at the Feig movie. Although it’s worth remembering that Juno was nominated for four Academy Awards, including best picture, so maybe a Juno version of the franchise wouldn’t be a bad thing.
For that matter, let’s ignore Reitman’s other comments during the same interview that he “consider[s] myself the first Ghostbusters fan” who “want[s] to make a movie for my fellow Ghostbusters fan,” and instead ask this simple question: Why is Reitman saying this? That the 2016 reboot of the franchise underperformed at the box office is hardly a secret, and so some course correction should be expected. But “hand the movie back to the fans” seems a little over the top, at least.
For one thing, it suggests that Ghostbusters has at some point been taken away, somehow, from the fans, which is clearly untrue; the two original movies remain available to be viewed at any point by anyone who wants to, even if they may not entirely stand up to the nostalgia many have for them in the cold light of day (Ghostbusters II, especially). Even if taking the comment less literally, it’s a curiously gatekeeper-ish concept: When, exactly, was the franchise taken away? How? And from whom?
Was it the 1986 animated TV show The Real Ghostbusters, which took the concept from its live-action roots — and slightly edgy comedy — by transforming the whole thing into a kid-centric sitcom? Was it any of the multiple comic book takes on the idea, from the 1980s Now Comics series based on The Real Ghostbusters to the current IDW comics? Perhaps it was the just-announced Hasbro toy that crosses Ghostbusters with the Transformers property, bringing giant robots into the whole shebang?
Perhaps Feig’s Ghostbusters weren’t the ghoul-finders moviegoers were looking for, but is it really going to be the case that audiences would prefer to see a slavish recreation of a movie from three decades earlier?
After his comments sparked backlash online, Reitman tweeted Wednesday night, "Wo, that came out wrong! I have nothing but admiration for Paul and Leslie and Kate and Melissa and Kristen and the bravery with which they made Ghostbusters 2016. They expanded the universe and made an amazing movie!"
Sony has the new Ghostbusters film dated for July 10, 2020. Hear the chat, above.
Post subject: Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021 movie)
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2019 1:59 am
Dendritic Oscillating Ontological Tesseract
Joined:
25 Oct 2007
Posts:
51030
Location:
Milwaukee
Quote:
Let’s put aside, for a second, the hopefully accidental sexism in the Juno reference, which is as likely to be a reference to the tone of the movie as it is the gender of the protagonists and potential swipe at the Feig movie. Although it’s worth remembering that Juno was nominated for four Academy Awards, including best picture, so maybe a Juno version of the franchise wouldn’t be a bad thing.
If only they could have gotten the director of Juno to do this new Ghostbusters movie, instead of that sexist Jason Reitman asshole.
Post subject: Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021 movie)
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2019 3:11 pm
Roll for initiative!
Joined:
27 Aug 2004
Posts:
1270
Location:
Southern Illinois
Quote:
'Ghostbusters' Director Jason Reitman Promises to "Hand the Movie Back to the Fans"
...Reitman went out of his way to reassure those still seemingly traumatized by Paul Feig’s all-female 2016 reboot of the franchise...
I wasn't traumatized by the 2016 movie any more than I am by any other bad movie. I will admit, however, that I might have looked at it with a different mindset had it acknowledged the original movies and taken place in the same world they created. Starting over as if from a blank slate was one of that movie's biggest problems.
Users browsing this forum: Apple [Bot], Jason Gore and 1 guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum