The CG Actors in ‘Logan’ You Never Knew Were There - Sensationalist Headlines

I hope this just stays for stunt doubles in the future.

[QUOTE=elowin;51949803]I mean, if you make them look and sound similar? It's pretty jarring when a character suddenly completely changes appearance for no reason.[/QUOTE] but there is a reason, and it's called 40 years between movies

[QUOTE=Loadingue;51948958]I think it was better than the alternatives: having a new actor or not having him at all.[/QUOTE] I'd rather they just didn't have him at all. Or just have him appear in holograms, at the end going [sp]"Oh by the way, I'm on my way to take over the Death Star."[/sp]

So have there been any actor guild movements to limit or reduce the amount of cgi actors in a film representing a real actor? Probably a pessimistic vision, but I could imagine C-Level Actors filling in for the physical role of an A-Level actor, while the A-Actor does the voiceover. A-Actor gets paid less because he/she's doing only a voiceover, C-Level Actor gets C-Level Actor money, budget is now less.

Weta digital (LoTR, King Kong, Avatar, etc.) did a talk at my uni for the computer graphics students once. She said that they once fully replaced an actor in a film, but it was all hush hush because they didn't reveal who it was, or the film.

[QUOTE=bdd458;51948864]A lot of people I talked to didn't even realize Tarkin was CG. It only looked weird to me for like the first scene. So i think people's milage may vary.[/QUOTE] I didn't realize Tarkin was CG in Rogue One, his facial expressions were a tad odd (I assumed prosthetics) but I never clued in that he was CG until after the movie.

Is Colin Farrell his fucking stunt double?

[QUOTE=Big Bang;51952677]Is Colin Farrell his fucking stunt double?[/QUOTE] Don't think so. Colin Farrell is fucking hot, this guy's average. Trust my testicles on this.

[QUOTE=The bird Man;51952720]Don't think so. Colin Farrell is fucking hot, this guy's average. Trust my testicles on this.[/QUOTE] That stunt double is hot af, dude. No homo, so you can trust my [I]huge brain[/I] on this one!

[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;51950053]but there is a reason, and it's called 40 years between movies[/QUOTE] But Rogue One takes place right before A New Hope, the final battle leads right into the chase.

wow, I only just watched it a couple of days ago and would never have guessed

[QUOTE=Jimesu_Evil;51948770]Using CG faces for stunt scenes is fine, CG Peter Cushing in Rogue One was abysmal.[/QUOTE] It was good enough to fool like 90% of veiwers at the big screen, so tbh I'd say that's far from abysmal. For the most part Cushing looks better than Logan, but Logan is making limited use in fast-action scenes, where's the Cushing dupe was center-stage in dialogue scenes. It's really not a fair comparison. Also Hugh Jackman isn't dead so it's not like they didn't have other options at their disposal.

It's fairly obvious in the stills. I though something looked weird in the movie, but the pace didn't leave much time to think of it. Even as good as this looks, the faces still don't quite look real, there's a texture to them and the way they're lit that just doesn't look real. They look a bit greasy.

That's pretty impressive. I didn't notice at all.

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;51953067]It was good enough to fool like 90% of veiwers at the big screen, so tbh I'd say that's far from abysmal. For the most part Cushing looks better than Logan, but Logan is making limited use in fast-action scenes, where's the Cushing dupe was center-stage in dialogue scenes. It's really not a fair comparison. Also Hugh Jackman isn't dead so it's not like they didn't have other options at their disposal.[/QUOTE] I honestly didn't realize it with Tarkin. I feel stupid after the fact because obviously he would be dead by now as he was old in the OT. Also I work with CG graphics so it was dumb of me not to realize but I truly didn't notice.

I don't understand how someone could look at Tarkin in Rogue One and not immediately tell it was CG. It looked so obvious to me.

[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;51950053]but there is a reason, and it's called 40 years between movies[/QUOTE] Which is easily fixed. By CGI. Checkmate

[QUOTE=DeEz;51954182]Which is easily fixed. By CGI. Checkmate[/QUOTE] But I don't think it's a fix. Or rather, I don't think changing actors is something that needs fixing. It's just another aspect of suspension of disbelief that I've never really minded

[QUOTE=Hamaflavian;51954171]I don't understand how someone could look at Tarkin in Rogue One and not immediately tell it was CG. It looked so obvious to me.[/QUOTE] I won't lie, I did notice a subtle hint of CGI with Tarkin around the time I first saw him in the movie, but I wouldn't really say that it was blatantly bad.

Don't get me wrong, use CGI all you want. I'm not opposed to exploring new ground in filmmaking, and I'm not opposed to CGI Tarkin either. Just saying I wouldn't have cared if they found a new actor *oops merge break*

I don't like the idea of digital people. [editline]13th March 2017[/editline] The idea of reviving dead actors with CG puts a fucking shiver down my spine and I don't get why people are so okay with it. I've never been okay with it and I don't think I ever will be. It's counter to absolutely all my beliefs in regards to mortality.

[QUOTE=DOCTOR LIGHT;51955542]I don't like the idea of digital people. [editline]13th March 2017[/editline] The idea of reviving dead actors with CG puts a fucking shiver down my spine and I don't get why people are so okay with it. I've never been okay with it and I don't think I ever will be. It's counter to absolutely all my beliefs in regards to mortality.[/QUOTE] What about replacing the actor?

I had no idea that was Jackman though.

[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;51952265]So have there been any actor guild movements to limit or reduce the amount of cgi actors in a film representing a real actor? Probably a pessimistic vision, but I could imagine C-Level Actors filling in for the physical role of an A-Level actor, while the A-Actor does the voiceover. A-Actor gets paid less because he/she's doing only a voiceover, C-Level Actor gets C-Level Actor money, budget is now less.[/QUOTE] The closest comparison would probably be Jeffrey Weissman replacing Crispin Glover as George McFly, which led to controversy on the rights of Glover's likeness vs the appearance of his character. [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Back_to_the_Future_Part_II#Replacement_of_Crispin_Glover[/url]

[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;51950053]but there is a reason, and it's called 40 years between movies[/QUOTE] He obviously means an in-universe reason

[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;51954196]But I don't think it's a fix. Or rather, I don't think changing actors is something that needs fixing. It's just another aspect of suspension of disbelief that I've never really minded[/QUOTE] Takin's face is not something you can just replace though, their options are: CG the character Have a completely different person play him (why even include him then?) Permanently retire the character (because option 2 is non-viable)

[QUOTE=eldomtom2;51955666]What about replacing the actor?[/QUOTE] With another actor? That's fine. But it's kinda creepy to me to make digital actors.

[QUOTE=Jimesu_Evil;51948770]Using CG faces for stunt scenes is fine, CG Peter Cushing in Rogue One was abysmal.[/QUOTE] Tarkin's was just fine, Leia's was crap

[QUOTE=DOCTOR LIGHT;51958028]With another actor? That's fine. But it's kinda creepy to me to make digital actors.[/QUOTE] But what's the difference? There was still an actor doing the voice and motion capture for Tarkin, Guy Henry.

[QUOTE=The bird Man;51952720]Don't think so. Colin Farrell is fucking hot, this guy's average. Trust my testicles on this.[/QUOTE] I would kill to look that "average"