The CGI Paradigm Shift

[1HAPPYGHOSTHOST]

Here’s a radical idea: hand drawn animation showing craft, depth, warmth, charm. It might be something to build a company on, even.

Well now that is just silly

 

[larryz]

Even if you can replicate famous actors with CGI, there's still the matter of licensing their images.

 

[flynnibus]

I thought we called these animated films

 

[DVCakaCarlF]

Even if you can replicate famous actors with CGI, there's still the matter of licensing their images.

Yeah but then you don’t have to deal with their bagel by 7:00, trailer exactly 78 degrees, and attitude.

 

[Brer Panther]

Methinks this will eventually be a reprisal of Robert Zemeckis' motion-capture films. Remember those?

 

[socalifornian]

I’ve been told that Hollywood has already been body scanning actors for a while now, especially after what happened to Paul Walker and his involvement in Universal’s #1 franchise. It was a wake up call

 

[socalifornian]

Yeah but then you don’t have to deal with their bagel by 7:00, trailer exactly 78 degrees, and attitude.

I’ve seen production assistants finish their hour long Starbucks run only to have part of the order be wrong for a key creative/lead actor, then have to repeat the trek just for a drink or two. That Hollywood mentality is real sometimes

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

Even if you can replicate famous actors with CGI, there's still the matter of licensing their images.

This. For example, Back to the Future's Crispin Glover (George McFly) did not return for Back to the Future 2. But the film makers had a face mold of Glover apparently made during the production of the first movie. They made a mask out of the mold and had a different actor wear it for the scenes his character appears in for Part 2. Glover did not give them permission to do this, and he filed and won a lawsuit over this.

One would assume it will still be cheaper to license an actor's likeness than having them appear in person, but i'm admittedly not 100% sure. It would still be expensive for the more famous and wealthy ones. Plus the technology to create ultra realistic is also still expensive and difficult.

 

[tirian]

Recieved word recently that Disney is seeking to diversify its ability to produce movies and shorts in the event that the pandemic continues into the future, or in the event that such a crisis should ever occur again. According to sources, Disney is seeking to push forward with the same technology used to create movies such as The Lion King 2019 and The Jungle Book 2016, as well as human facial CGI seen in Rogue One, to begin work on an unnamed film that would be fully computer animated but presented as a live action film featuring human characters. The goal is to test the waters of creating computer animated films indistinguishable from live action, thus bypassing the need for actors (and actor salaries), as well as the need for proximity. According to one source, the unnamed film is a movie about young Indiana Jones, though no other person has been able to corroborate the subject matter.

Specific to Walt Disney World, the interesting information is that due to Guardians of the Galaxy 3 film shooting being significantly delayed, the company is interested in using Cosmic Rewind as a proof of concept if they are unable to get the coaster film work completed by the actors in person on time. Given that the Young Indy film (if the one source is accurate) could be 3-5 years out, this provides perfect timing for Disney to test audiences' reaction to the technology they've developed within an attraction. Decisions should be made within the next 2 months as to whether or not you'll be seeing a virtual, yet indistinguishable from real, Chris Pratt when you hop on the coaster.

Feige has likewise expressed interest in potentially moving forward with an offshoot Marvel series using the virtual live action system. Meanwhile, Lucasfilm inked a deal with Mark Hammill without much fanfare within the past 18 months which permits them to produce films featuring a CGI Luke Skywalker. I'm told that within that contract, Disney also is given the ability to use CGI faux reality Luke in future adaptations of Galaxy's Edge. Unfortunately, due to the abysmal financial situation, the latter may not come to fruition anytime soon.

Both in the parks and in theaters, it is likely going forward that Disney will use the pandemic to slowly begin moving towards computer animation as a substitute for human actors. Of course this doesn't mean that Disney will immediately stop traditional live film, just that they have the capability for the first time in history (they believe), and they're now prepared to move forward with it to some degree... if only because they never want to be in their current stalled position ever again.

Yay, uncanny valley!

When you say “human” in Rogue One, are you talking about creepy Exorcist Leia? That wasn’t convincing but definitely looked like she was possessed by the Dark Side.

 

[TinkerBelle8878]

So would this be similar lookswise to Ready Player One? A good part of that movie wasn't live actors.

 

[Figments Friend]

Screen Actors Guild may have something to say about this.

Exactly what I was thinking.

This will be 'roadblocked' in some capacity.

-

 

[drew81]

Exactly what I was thinking.

This will be 'roadblocked' in some capacity.

-

If SAG throws a fit then I see other unions joining the disapproval. WGA, DGA and IATSE won’t want to be on the wrong side of this.

 

[ChrisFL]

Yay, uncanny valley!

When you say “human” in Rogue One, are you talking about creepy Exorcist Leia? That wasn’t convincing but definitely looked like she was possessed by the Dark Side.

That or Tarkin. They were not perfect, but getting quite close.

A lot can be done with AI now and "deepfakes" that look even better than those.

 

[DoleWhipDrea]

The CGI we’ve seen in this regard hasn’t been convincing.

I also have a hard time believing that a production would truly be saving a lot of money by doing this regularly. You may save money on licensing the likeness of an actor on merchandise, but you still have to pay an actor to, you know...act. And paying for CGI like that for a whole film? With the level of realism that they’re hoping to achieve? That’s absolutely going to get expensive.

As noted by other posters, Disney has learned the wrong lessons from Jungle Book and Lion King, and SAG will absolutely fight this.

 

[brianstl]

Even if you can replicate famous actors with CGI, there's still the matter of licensing their images.

You cut deals with the estates of dead actors and you cut deals with actors that have aged past their prime earnings years.

 

[_caleb]

Acting is the heart of television and film. When you remove that, the medium becomes hollow and cold. The human element gets removed. Regardless of whether this technique is efficient and financially successful or not, the movie industry will have changed for the worse upon its full implementation.

Guessing you’re not a big fan of animation?

 

[_caleb]

To me, the more important part of this rumor is Disney wanting to decentralize production in order to be pandemic-proof. I’ve said it before, animation (hand-drawn, computer-generated, or photo-realistic hybrids) can be produced by remote teams. These are the kinds of moves the company needs to make in order to be better positioned for the future.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

You create your own "Movie Star" super hot/cute original characters/actors. Have them be voiced by nobody voice talent. Lock them into a low ball figure on a six picture deal in hopes their fake "actor" becomes a hit.

 

[DVCakaCarlF]

I’ve seen production assistants finish their hour long Starbucks run only to have part of the order be wrong for a key creative/lead actor, then have to repeat the trek just for a drink or two. That Hollywood mentality is real sometimes

And I think I’m asking for too much when I say I want sweet n low and they bring Splenda...smh

 

[britain]

THIS is the only way a new Indy movie still starring 80 year old Harrison Ford would make sense. He’d look like 35 year old Indy.