It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Why are people OK with the one, and not the other?
Yeah. That's why.
I can understand using technology to make an actor look younger when that actor is actually playing in a film. Like they did with RDJ in Captain America: Civil War. But creating a 3D model of an old or dead actor from scratch and equipping it with a sound-alike is something completely different. As @Birdleson said, it's insulting to the actor's talent and creativity and, by extension, supports the idea that humans are completely expendable and their individual talents and creative ideas are insignificant and unnecessary.
Games don't require actor performances. By definition, games rely on computer-generated models, while films rely on humans. Just because a 3D model has the likeness of an actor it doesn't mean that the actor performs in the game. Take for example Nightfire. They used Brosnan's likeness for Bond, but that doesn't mean Brosnan acted as Bond. They just scanned his face and created an animated model. It can be argued that Brosnan did give a performance in Everything or Nothing, since he gave his voice, but as Nightfire proves, you don't really need the original actor to give his voice in order to create a believable character and a good video game.
On the other hand, films rely exclusively on the actors' creativity, talent and acting skills. That's the huge difference between video games and films, and that's why I don't really mind seeing old actors rejuvenated in games.
Having said that, I'm not really sure about having dead actors in video games...
The stuff in Rogue One looked a bit ropey to me although it bothers me less in a Star Wars movie than it would in a bond film
And even if that wasn't the case, I doubt someone in their late 80s, like Sean Connery, would be able and/or willing to do motion capture either for a film or a video game.
As for the 86 year old Sean Connery, we won't have to worry about him. They will merely use his early years likeness, because any studios know these days that accuracy is a requirement, so they'll hire the best vocal impersonator and even an actor who excels in his facial expressions to match that of Connery's will find a way to the right compartment to beam the spotlight. Peter Cushing and Carrie Fisher both were wonderfully rendered in Rogue One. Imagine what could the tech give us in 15-20 years time. It's not as far fetched as you think it is. 'You' as in people generally, of course.
Peter Cushing CGI looked like a Toy Story/ Polar Express character in Rogue One. A CGI Bond is an abomination.
I'm not saying Cushing and Fisher looked too real. But, they were close. And I didn't mind them. Perhaps not now, but in the future, maybe the next decade or five years more on it, I don't mind a CGI Bond at all.
Whereas I am horrified by the concept. The day we have a CGI Bond the franchise will be dead to me. Not interested.
We had one in Die Another Day!
Off-topic, but I'd like to know: is there any way to prevent Bond from entering public domain, cinematically?
Yes, kill all mankind.
The interesting question is will CGI be used to recreate human actors or will we see digital actors instead? On that basis, could we finally see the perfect James Bond ? (I know some think SC was that person) but the opportunities of creating a digital character to fit the role rather than finding a human to play the role will be interesting.
In the long term, movie acting will die , or at least be something relegated to art house movies IMHO
Good scripts will always be the big factor rather than the quality of the CGI and its another topic worthy of discussion re will we see CG scripts?