Dear Hollywood, Please Stop Doing This. In this video, we break down CGI cameos from actors we have lost or the de-ageing of actors to be included in Hollywood movies. After a few very questionable 'cameo' appearances in the Flash movie, we look at the history of CGI versions of characters being used to finish movies when the actor was unable to do so. Ranging from Bruce Lee, Brandon Lee, Carrie Fisher, Peter Cushing, Oliver Reed and Harold Ramis, to the now very controversial cameo appearances from various DC hero actors of the past. Whether this process is done as a mark of respect or a simple money grab, what do you think? please take a look and let us know your thoughts!
#TheFlash #EndingExplained #Batman #TheBatman #DC #DCU #JamesGunn #Flash #TheFlashEnding #ComicBookMovies #Movies #Review #Spoilers #ChristopherReeve #AdamWest #GeorgeReeves #CGI #BadCGI #CGICameos #TheFlashCameos #Cameos #HaroldRamis #CarrieFisher #OliverReed #BruceLee #PeterCushing #MoffTarkin #PrincessLeia
If you enjoyed this video then please subscribe to the channel / @heavyspoilers
If You Want To Help Support The Channel So I Can Make More Videos Like This Please Donate Here:
/ @heavyspoilers
Check out our #shorts channel here HEAVY SPOILERS CLIPS - / @heavyspoilersclips8820
Check out our website at heavyspoilers.com/
Get some awesome Heavy Spoilers show clothes, phonecases and accessories at - shopzeroedition.com/collection...
Check out our BEST new videos below
The Flash Ending Explained - • THE FLASH Ending Expla...
Transformers Rise Of The Beasts - • TRANSFORMERS Rise Of T...
Across The Spider-Verse Ending Explained - • SPIDERMAN Across The S...
IT Welcome To Derry Breakdown - • IT Welcome To Derry Fi...
John Wick 4 Breakdown - • JOHN WICK 4 Breakdown ...
Super Mario Bros. Breakdown - • Super Mario Movie Brea...
Check out our Latest CLASSIC MOVIE BREAKDOWNS
Terminator - • THE TERMINATOR (1984) ...
Hereditary - • HEREDITARY (2018) Brea...
Robocop - • ROBOCOP (1987) Breakdo...
ALIEN 3 - • ALIEN 3 (1992) Breakdo...
The Exorcist - • THE EXORCIST (1973) Br...
Blader Runner 2049 - • BLADE RUNNER 2049 Brea...
Blade Runner - • BLADE RUNNER (1982) Br...
Listen to the Across The Spoilerverse Podcast at:
KZhead - • Across The Spoiler-verse
Spotify - open.spotify.com/show/2yWiU6I...
Amazon - music.amazon.co.uk/podcasts/9...
Apple Podcasts - podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast...
Check out our best Shorts videos
Fast X Post Credits Scene - • Fast X Post Credits Scene
Why GROOT said this - • Why Groot says THIS at...
Guardians Of The Galaxy Post Credits Scene - • GUARDIANS OF THE GALAX...
/* ---- SOCIAL MEDIA ---- */
Follow Us On Social Media At:
Website - heavyspoilers.com/
TikTok - www.tiktok.com/@heavyspoilers...
Twitter - / heavyspoilers
Instagram - / heavyspoilers
Facebook - / deffinitionmc
Follow our team at -
Host Paul - / heavyspoilers
Host Greg - / thegregalba
Editor Steesh - / steeshhaggie
Editor Matt - / superheronexus
/* ---- VIDEO INFORMATION ---- */
Ok so Movies at the moment are in a bit of a weird place. Franchises are hitting points now where we've had a number of different actors playing certain roles that people have fond memories of from their childhood. You also have technology hitting a point where it's possible to create life like looking CGI people and this has been done to great effect in things like The Book Of Boba Fett and so on.
However with this also comes the temptation that we can now resurrect the dead and use them in films to score some cameo points by banking off the back of nostaliga. I get why studios have decided to do it and a lot of the time it acts as a touching tribute to those we've lost since we fell in love with the franchise in the first place.
Music By - PSiMiTAR
► KZhead Subscribe - kzhead.info...
► Instrumentals - • [NO COPYRIGHT MUSIC] S...
► Twitter - / steeshhaggie
► Instagram - / steeshhaggie
Obviously there's gonna be a lot of different thoughts on this so make sure you leave yours below on what you think Hollywood should and shouldn't do.
I think that maybe they should introduce a contract for using CGI to bring back people instead of just using their face
When i read the title in my notifications, i thought you were getting demonetized 😅
I think there actually was merit to using the old footage.. It was giving an example of the reach of change that could in the past and connecting all the previous universes and versions
I TOTALLY Agree with you, they need to stop!
I’m glad you used your channel to address this practice. For every one example where the creatives have used technology to fulfill the wishes of a departed actor or create a respectful homage to their life and work, there are a dozen examples of it being utilized as an expensive gimmick. I too wish they would knock it the hell off. It’s often just creepy and weird, and clearly a play to make additional money.
As you said, it’s about creating a false sense of nostalgia. Let the dead rest, don’t try to squeeze every penny out of their talent, to which they never consented to. It’s a matter of decency in the face of Hollywood greed. It’s almost as if Hollywood treats actors as property. What’s next? Putting copyright on actors?
Yes, that's exactly what's next. Copyright and buy everything, rent us our lives if we're good
no its them believing you're stupid enough to be satisfied with this. Its the same reason their form of inclusion is skin swapping vs giving those ethnic groups proper IPs. The quickest buck with the least resistance. No Way Home was the exact same except you can enjoy that film if you turn your brain off.
False sense of nostalgia? I think if it makes you feel nostalgic then its not false. Your upset they used someone who other wise you wouldnt see and gave christopher reeves more shine than hes had in 40 years. Let the dead rest? Okay then throw away the pictures of your dead loved ones and dont talk about them today. Lets be real if people were portraying you as SUPERMAN even after your gone thats a blessing.
@@Duhbiee you are fucking chronically online
Hate to break it to you but there already is a company that buys likeness to dead actors.
Honestly it felt a bit weird and out of the uncanny valley, I’m sure the families signed off on these cameos but I still get many people feeling icky about their inclusions. I think they should just stick to having alive people cameo because using dead people can seem unethical.
Acting is an art and art requires soul to be meaningful. Doing this takes away that key aspect
I think it’s fine de-aging an actor is fine, if the actor is alive partaking in the process. Like a Mark Hamil, with Mando and Book of Boba Fett. But I think recasting is the way to go in the future.
Nah, just re cast the part. It is creepy
@@bobross1829Then comes the difficultly of recasting certain parts, take how Bryan Cranston and Aaron Paul were digitally de-aged in their appearance in Better Call Saul. You can’t just recast parts with characters as big and beloved as that, people are going to notice.
@@ItsJr I disagree. I do not get the fear of recasting parts in movies. Aaron Paul is not "that old". And Cranston just had a cameo. But when the guy is over 70 and you want the character to continue in a major way, just recast it. James Bond lives by that. It is also way chaeper.
One of my biggest complaints about this stuff is that it becomes the topic of conversation instead of the actual movie. I liked Flash. I had a lot of fun watching it. These scenes could have just been stock footage showing glimpses of the other universes, but instead they chose to create scenes. That choice as well as the Ezra Miller incidents are causing people to skip a movie, or to just go in with a predetermined conclusion. They see the negative stuff they heard about and they reaffirm the opinion they formed even before viewing the movie. In my opinion the same thing happed to Solo. Solo isn’t a bad film, it’s just not a film people wanted at the time.
I saw *"Solo"* just recently and it's not a bad inclusion in the Star Wars universe. Plus, you had the real negative ire aimed at Kathleen Kennedy, which was uncalled for.
Well, I commend you for watching and enjoying the movie (Flash) by following the character, not the person. I couldn't, I can't stand the dude. However, as always, whatever is published about Ezra Miller should be taken with a grain of salt, he's probably not the psycho articles/videos make him out to be. I don't think a dead person can care (to go back to the topic), so I see no harm... except for the relatives and fans. It is disrespectful only to them, yet disrespect is disrespect, especially out of greed.
I think going forward, actors should be able to sign off on wether or not they are willing to be in films posthumously. Payments for these appearances going to family and/or charities. It could easily continue AND respect the actors wishes. But I do agree, without something like this in place, we’re trusting studios to be respectful of these people, instead of the actors or their families.
I believe this is the case now. I’m sure I read that James Earl Jones has said he won’t voice anymore dialogue for any future Star Wars projects but has signed over the rights to use everything that he was already recorded up to now to be used to recreate and simulate his voice.
@@mysticnutmeg I’m fairly sure I remember that as well. I’m just saying it should happen with everyone. Part of the contract for every role. Although, now that I’ve said that, I can see how muddy it could get quickly. With big studios making new actors feel pressured to sign away their likenesses in order to land roles. 🤷🏻♂️ Regardless, there has to be a smart way to handle these things.
"within perpetuity throughout the universe" is a phrase used in entertainment contracts.
@@G3T3MGON I know, it’s gross. I’ve signed something similar just to be an extra in Alita. Actors have a Union. Certainly there’s something they can do to make sure the actors under their umbrella can get a better deal than “in perpetuity”.
I'm pretty sure that is a part of the SAG contract renegotiations happening right now cause studios own an actor's likeness as a specific character. Like, the studios don't own Harrison Ford's likeness, but Ford as Han Solo, they own that likeness
The idea that even after death a corporation will still use someone’s face and voice is so fucked up
Yeah agreed
Is it any different than using a photo or painting of the person for merchandise or in movies/shows?
@@keithsummers_exactly. It's their face and voice in that role, as that character. Not their face and voice going to the grocery store or spending time with their real life families, it's only in character. Which I imagine that Hollywood contracts most likely stipulate, and if they don't they will soon.
That we are in agreement on this means the film was successful in its intent. Andy M. actually got through to us. He made us see the horror.
@@keithsummers_Yes. The marketing materials are for films they were in while alive. Hence they agreed to their likeness being used for those purposes. Simulating an entirely new performance without the actor’s involvement or consent is completely different.
The director telling people he wanted the special effects to look off is like when I tell passengers my car is supposed to make that sound.... it's not
I thought the Harold Ramis one was a very touching tribute, which I think he would've approved of. All the ingredients were right & it's charged with emotion. I don't object in principal to resurrecting vintage characters but using those who died prematurely in tragic circumstances just seems tactless. Particularly when it's to prop up such a piss-poor movie is with a lead actor who should have been dropped regardless of being a criminal, he's just shit.
I agree completely. They really need to stop because it's getting creepy and inappropriate. It's ok to recast and we are all adults here knowing that sometimes tragedy happens. Getting people to have fake nostalgic moments just to get us to see the movie is inappropriate and they're just trying to make money off of our feelings. I have a feeling that at some point, the consent issue might come back to haunt Hollywood for doing this. I'm glad I didn't go see this in the theater for this and many other reasons.
If my family is getting paid for my likeness when I’m dead I’m cool with it.
I remember for a short period in the music world during major concert festivals, several deceased artists were "brought back to life" via hologram and the creative use of previous audio clips spliced together to interact with the live artist on stage. It went away after about a year or so because many concertgoers were not impressed by it, plus, the technology skyrocketed the tour budget, but the gimmick didn't increase ticket sales. This is a fad for the moment, but when studios realize how much it raises a budget of a movie with very little to no payoff at the box office, it will go away as it did in the music industry.
I don’t think so. The Luke Skywalker deepfakes showed that one person can do a much more impressive job at creating digital doubles than the vastly more expensive techniques used previously in big budget Hollywood features, e.g. Rogue One. On top of that saving, the stand-in actor that the deepfake is built on is also much cheaper to have on set than the A-list actor that is being represented. So you get a highly marketable actor’s likeness at a much lower price than their appearance would normally cost using vfx techniques that are also (comparatively) cheap. As the technology improves it will only be more convincing. Whether audiences will want to watch the ‘ghost’ of a young Harrison Ford in the 250th instalment of the Indiana Jones franchise is yet to be seen, but studios won’t stop doing it due to the costs of the technology.
I think Tarkin, even though it looked wonky, was key to the plot for Rogue One. It provided context and helped flesh out the universe. They *could* have done without, but I think it was better for it. The Superman ones: no. That's just bad. But I've been done with superhero movies for a while now, so I didn't even know this was a thing.
I understand where you're coming from. However, if any character is that important, then recast the part. I was born in '78 and grew up with Star Wars. I would personally rather see Tarkin be recast with an actor who is close enough to Peter Cushing than to have "obvious CGI Ghost Peter Cushing" so many years after his passing.
@@debiw8599 I think that would be a fair approach. If they can recast Darth Vader and Obi Wan Kenobi, they can recast Tarkin. :)
They did say if Tarkin didn't look perfect his lines would have been given to other characters.
Recasting is always going to be my preferred option. Passing the torch to a new actor, a new generation to tell new stories ensures those tales get to live on in a way that cgi and clever voice acting/modulation can't. You get a new actor to love, get to watch them hone their craft to bring their best to the audience. As nice as it is to have that nostalgic connection to faces we know, it robs new or overlooked talent of a chance to make a name for themselves. Chadwick wanted T'Challa to be recast. I'm sure there are others that would have loved to see their mantles pass to new talent too.
Wouldn’t say Chadwick WANTED that. His brother spoke as if he can speak for the dead when the truth is, he can’t. Plus, Tchalla was recasted…
Tchalla was recasted in a way !
T’Challa was recasted in a very organic way. Ryan Coogler did an amazing job in that regard.
It does not look like many people disagree below that there are many recent incidents of gratuitous use of deceased individuals. Someone else noted that it will only become more common, and people like us who find it icky will become more uncommon over time. The next generation will think nothing much of the likeness borrowing.
It’s crazy how it comes back in full circle. Ben Affleck portrayed George Reeves in Hollywood Land (2006).
Very good points Paul, I hadn't even thought about it from this point of view. I remember them once talking about being able to put the likes of Michael Jackson and Tupac in concerts as if they were still alive. I somehow missed they started doing that in movies too. Damn, that's disturbing to thing they're forced to work even after death. Oh and speaking of Black Mirror, before Jane is Aweful, they also did a similar thing starring Miley Cyrus in Rachel, Jack and Ashley Too, which is also relevant to this video.
Great video, as always, Paul! Love these video essays!
The Carrie Fischer one was ok and i liked it....but when it comes to others that have died years before was not fair to those actors and sad the families agreed to this Adam West was a line crossed for me!
I mean, they could've just use a older footage from the movies or Brandon Routh's Superman. There's no need for having a CGI version of those actors.
I didn't have a problem with the cameos. I thought it was more of a celebration of the DC universe on the big and small screen as opposed to nostalgia bait. And who knows? Maybe they'll inspire members of the audience to seek out the Christopher Reeve Superman movies or the George Reeves and Adam West TV shows. I don't see that as a bad thing. As for using CGI replications of actors who haven't given consent. I don't have a problem with this in relation to a cameo (although I wonder why they just didn't use archival footage.) I'm not an actor but I would assume that one fear of an actor is being forgotten (seems to be a theme in a lot of movies I've seen) and these cameos suddenly put them back centre stage in the public's eye. Isn't that what every actor wants? To be remembered? Of course, as long as it's done tastefully.
They see everything and everyone as a commodity to be repackaged and sold. And I don't think 'the estate agrees' is valid consent. Actors now should have posthumous rights written into contracts from the start. Actors who never explicitly sold the rights to their likeness should be off limits.
They're not going to stop, unfortunately. It's a huge money grab for them.
I'm still trying to understand why the cgi had a purposely unfinished look as mentioned by the director
I feel like the use of Christopher Reeve is exceptionally egregious, especially given what he went through in the last years of his life. It has to be such a slap in the face to his son to see him standing again, after he helped care for Christopher after his accident. I cannot imagine the gut punch of seeing that. I have to agree with the sentiment here. If an actor signed on for a film, but was unable to complete it, and there's enough footage that can be used to complete it, then that's fair. Otherwise, leave them alone.
When i sit down to watch a movie, my brain makes an agreement that everything im going to experience is FAKE. So i just roll with whatever is placed in front of me. Bad CGI, green screens, de-aging…🙈.. doesn’t distract in the slightest. Often, i have to have a KZhead point it out to me after the fact. Im basically Cypher from the matrix. Maybe i have a lack of respect for the dead 🤷🏽.
It is a delicate balance. If any possible surviving family gives permission and they respect the character and it's mainly a cameo for a nod then I am more at ease.. and at much better graphics lol.
I think it sucks, in all instances except when an actor dies when the movie is close to complete. The ending Furious 7 is the only movie that did it well. But when the character, like Tarkin, is unnecessary, just recast the actor or write around it. The deceased actors for Supes in The Flash. In it, it came off as jingling keys in front of a cat.
Yeah I think if they’ve signed on and were working on it it’s understandable, to just pull them out of nowhere even though theyre dead is a bit weird
I think this is a very important subject and you explained your point pretty well. IMO the thing with multiverses in movies where other actors who played the same roles coming back should just be done if the actors are still alive (like NWH). That way, it is clear that the actors themselves wanted to be in the movie and the bad CGI of bringing dead people back or the moral side of this where studios only use them for nostalgia bait won't be the main talking point when people are finished watching the movie instead of talking about the actual movie itself. Sadly, I think The Flash will only open the gates for studios to do more stuff like this in the future with the tech we currently have and what we will have in the years to come.
I took it as respecting the legacy of their portrayals
Thanks for this video. Helps us out a lot.
I think with the family's permission, it's more reasonable to accept. They often get re-introduced as cartoons, so I don't have a huge issue with it all. If my late wife was brought back in a film, I would find it difficult, but I would eventually be fine with being able to see and hear her again as long as it wasn't disrespectful in any way. Ultimately, I would want final approval.
I think at first they write the planned upcoming movies around the actors who pass during the progress of filming a series and since they couldn't fulfill their role they bring them back as a tribute.
I completely disagree with the idea of it being a negative. For starters if the family is okay with it nobody really has the right to argue it’s in bad taste. Secondly, actors do the job with one large goal of it being recognition. Becoming immortalized so to speak. I doubt any of the people shown would have had issue with having their image used. And to reiterate there is zero chance that WARNER BROS was able to do it without the agreement of the estates. Who are we to tell Christopher Reeves children their father shouldn’t be shown in a DC movie bc the cgi isn’t great. What’s infinitely worse imo is the studio using a CGI amalgamation of a Jay Garrick who wasn’t played by any actor.
Looking forward to this video since you talked about it in the podcast, which might have be been today? Not sure, life is hard work
Yeah dropped early for members such as yourself, should be out later on our podcast services
Dear youtubers please stop releasing spoilers before the movies out. You arent going to stop when we ask why should Hollywood?
Honestly, another reason why this may be the future of cinema. We don't know the stipulations of performers contracts anymore. Because they give away likeness rights for merch, video games etc...they are already being groomed to sign on to extended contracts. Which is going to see an uptick in LIVING actors who have leased out their likeness doing major image changes as well as surgeries. How else can they market themselves if their likeness can be leased for specific lengths of time??
It shouldn’t be a touchy subject. You’re blatantly right.
I didn't know the story about George Reeves & it's pretty sad how it all played out. That's why I love your channel.
Yeah he supposedly committed suicide, but there's speculation that he may have been murdered. Actually there was a movie about his death called "Hollywoodland" with Ben Affleck playing George Reeves. There's even scenes of Affleck wearing the Superman suit
As my good friend Paul knows, there are many times where we disagree on business practices. DAMN my friend, in this case you are 100% correct.
What the Flash did feels egregious because a) they literally brought them back just for cheap fanservice. They don't affect the plot in any way, they're just there to sell tickets. And b) George Reeves was upset about the fact that he couldn't get more roles outside of Superman, and it's believed that this played a factor in his eventual death. It's straight up disrespectful for WB to dig him up from the grave just to throw more cameos in our face. What's even worse is that there's actors who are actually alive that could be in the movie. Why not bring in Brandon Routh or Tyler Hoechlin's Superman? What about Grant Gustin or John Wesley Shipp to play their versions of Barry Allen? I doubt Christian Bale would come back for a project like this, but certainly you could find some way to squeeze in Joseph Gordon Levitt as a homage to The Dark Knight movies to play his version of Batman or Robin or Nightwing, or whoever he was supposed to end up being in that universe. Not only would they have avoided disrespecting deceased actors, but they could also utilize those cameos in interesting ways that would require a still-living, present actor to be there, as opposed to having a voiceless Christopher Reeves Superman just standing there.
Agreed. I just watched that Black Mirror episode; it's fascinating yet scary what can be done.
Why couldn’t have they used any other older dc media with the actors still alive? The cw flash show did this really good with flash from the 90s show and smallvile. Their likenesses was used for just a cheap cameo and tbh it didnt even work imo, the reveal of the colliding worlds as the solution to the equation was out of left field and half of the audience didn’t really cared.
I can see your point of view of Paul. Personally I feel nothing for the Cgi “cameo actors “ so it doesn’t sting. But if marvel tried to do this in 50 years with Cgi Hugh Jackman or Tobey Magiure, yeah I imagine that would piss me off
I feel the exact opposite. My little cousin had no idea who Christopher reeves even was before seeing this. Its continuing his legacy. People cry about everything today
Is it his legacy? Really? Acting isn't just being there and taking directions. Reeve would have had input into his role - without that 2-way process it isn't him at all, it's a waxwork.
@@jacobturnerart what people remember you for is your legacy. How people remember you is your legacy and guess what yes acting 90% of the time is stand there and take directions
yeah the entire point of having a director is to literally give directions - not just to the actors but the lighting and sound people, the camera guys etc - many directors take it one step further and pick up the camera themselves! people only see the actors on the screen so they assume what they're seeing is mostly something the actors are responsible for - it's not you don't literally see them on the screen but it's mostly the director, not the actors, who "made" that film the only other people with more control are producers - which is why you see so many actors now who have producer credits next to their name - so they actually CAN have some more say!
I think you make a very reasonable case. I also think that that very brief appearances of these old actors in their DC superhero roles could also just be seen as a tribute to these actors that we knew and loved in the past. (I haven't seen "The Flash", so I can't speak about the cameos in any detail, so I might be wrong.) I think it's no different than musician's including a small snatch of another song as a little nod to it (like Yes making a nod towards the Beatles by quoting "Day Tripper" briefly when they covered "Every Little Thing"... sorry for not being able to think of an example less than 50+ years old). Having a CGI Peter Cushing reprise his role in "Rogue One" is a whole 'nother thing, as you said, and in that case I think we should only do that when the actor in question has given his or her permission for their likeness to be used. Of course, Peter Cushing might have made that agreement with respect to his likeness being used in cartoons or toys, and no one expected at the time that a CGI version of him would be possible some day... or perhaps they did, and Lucasfilm really does have contractual permission to do what they did. Surely the actor's estate would have complained and/or sued if that wasn't the case, and they didn't like it. I would believe that any actor in the last 30 years or more would have had the opportunity to make this decision, especially in the case of an IP like Star Wars, that was an early adopter of CGI characters. Peter Cushing died in 1994, so it's conceivable he gave his permission for his likeness to use used in this way specifically. Ditto Christopher Reeve. I think we can be certain that that's not the case for George Reeves.
So I haven't seen the Flash but have seen and heard about these cameos. What I don't understand is why they don't use footage from the series instead of CGIing them from the dead. You still get your cameo and it's not weird/unethical. Everyone (except Nic Cage but he's still alive) had a movie or show, just show a scene or 2 and there it is. No need to parade them with your own PS2 creation
According to reports, Nic Cage actually filmed the scene in his version of the Superman costume but they still replaced him with the CGI version.
I felt like the Egon in Ghostbusters: Afterlife was very respectful but thats because it wasn’t bringing back Harold Ramis, it was bringing back the character of Egon.
I’m ok with cheeky Cage as superdude we never saw, but I’d rather let the dead rest
I agree 💯 Paul, good job on the video.
Great video and I hundred agree. I haven't seen the flash yet, honestly waited for your review of it before i even bothered but it is not a good look and it kind of makes me not want to watch the movie at all with how it's handled...
I think the bigger question is, did their estates give consent. This is also the same movie that didnt even have a photo of Michael Gough's alfred anywhere.
Don't have a problem about it at all. If all know estates or current family give consent (only, ONLY if the actor is shown in positive way) and used on a case by case basis, sure.
Mr. Krabs: "Am I really going to defile this grave for money? Of course I am!"
They could have used Brandon Routh as he isn't doing much these days as the Arrowverse is over. And they already had Ben Affleck who played George Reeves/Superman in 'Hollywoodland.'
It is not completely true that George Reeves failed to find other roles, this is a common misconception repeated over and over, Reeves had an offer for a movie and had other offers for television, but he seemed not to be willing to accept them. Reeves played a prank of pretending to suicide with a gun before and maybe it was an accident, we will never know for sure. Anyway not finding new roles seems not to be really a real reason, as he could easily make a living out of his career: the problem is that most offers were related to reprising his role of Superman, and he was not willing to do it. He had financial problems and maybe those uninvited guests that night trigger a bad moment for him
Dude i would love you to review Inside No. 9. Best written and acted show ive seen in awhile. Its Black Mirroresque but executed so much better. Its a brilliant show.
The earliest movie that resurrected dead people were in Forrest gump with the president's that Forrest meets in that movie. but the first instance for me that a dead actor is brought back to like is that one episode from tales from the crypt with Humphrey Bogart staring in an episode despite the actor being dead for several years at that point.
I want them to stop this, too, but they won't, Paul. Hollywood doesn't give a f&(# what we think, they just want money. Charles Dance should have been Grand Moff Tarkin in SW Rogue One. But, Hollywood gonna Hollywood.
in rogue one and rise of skywalker, i was fine with it. ghostbusters afterlife i was fine with it plus, it hit close to home for me since the movie came out a couple months after losing my mom to cancer april of 2021. but, these being in the flash movie felt very unwanted. i was actually really surprised by it as well and was like, WTF ? hollywood really should stop doing these things cause it feels like a disrespect towards those who have passed on.
i agree and the thing about gb afterlife as paul said bill, dan,and ernie in the scene with egon was all unacted they were speaking to how they felt about harold, it was a genuine reaction
2 things with Black Panther…1) Chadwick fought through extreme pain and illness to continue to bring T’Challa to life on screen. There’s multiple interviews where he speaks on the importance of T’Challa as a character in the MCU. He’s also said that “you should see the role, not the actor”. Them killing off his character hardly honors Chadwick’s wishes, it’s a slap in the face. At best you could consider it a “tribute”. When it’s done in such poor taste it’s hard to even say that. 2) they stood the casket ⚰️ upright during the ceremony… can you imagine what happened to the body inside of it!? 😧
T’Challa was recasted in a organic way. You guys who say stuff like this do not consider the mental health of the cast and crew who worked with Chad. You can’t just replace your friend like that. And to have a new comer fill in Chads shoes would have been extremely overwhelming for them because they would always be compared to Chad. They could never live up to him as Chads death is still fresh in our minds. Ryan did the an amazing job with WF. The man lost a friend and people like you are just concerned with your own entertainment.
@@madhistoryn no, people like me aren’t just “concerned for our entertainment”. Learn to listen and to read. Chadwick said CONSTANTLY that you should see the role, not the actor. He knew the importance of T’Challa as a character… not the mantle of black panther, certainly not fkn T’junior. He said “he understood that the role of a black King , a ruler and a warrior was an inspiration to people that looked like him. That had never had the opportunity to see that before. He was honored to play T’Challa.” It was his legacy, HIS wish that T’Challa was seen by people, not him. He fought through the worst stages of cancer to continue bringing him to life for people. It’s people like you that can’t see past your own grief and your OWN wishes to be able to actually respect and honor what Chadwick wanted. HIS legacy, not YOUR thoughts. WF was nothing more than a cash grab and a slap in the face to Chadwick’s legacy.
@@WinterSo1dier And? All you have just said was hyperbole. On the one hand, you're saying that Chadwick's legacy was T'challa, but on the other, you'reyou're saying that T'challa is more critical than Chadwick; which is it? WF was not a cash grab like Heavyspoilers said; they created a beautiful send-off to Chadwick without replacing him for your entertainment. And in the end, we still got T'challa Junior, who will eventually continue the mantle as T'Challa/Black Panther. You are pissed that Shuri, a black woman, took over, even though she takes over in the comics. Your sexism is so blatant because there is no way you are still complaining after the fact. The movie did brilliantly under the circumstances. It's no 2023. Move on.
For the Flash's unecessary legend cameos, they should've just gone with Tyler and Brandon Routh's Supermen instead, so simple and cheaper for the studio too, really don't get them.....
😂😂 Not him using an Aki and Pawpaw meme in his video...
The biggest problem I had with Tarkin is the urge to make it resemble Cushing. Whatever happened to just recasting? That actor that was playing what ended up being just the model was perfectly damn fine, amazing in fact. To me, the most annoying thing isn't resurrecting the dead as much as ignoring the living.
I mean imagine being dead and still having to work? It's my biggest fear.
Mine as well man
You make great true points, but there’s no chance they go back now. Sadly it’ll Only happen more with improving technology
if they used a still photo or frame of Christopher Reeve, or even archival footage, I think that would be okay, but the CGI looked so weird and creepy. As for George Reeves, i believe they used archival footage and not CGI.
I have a middle ground stance. You can do it if the original actor gives their blessings, or if you are absolutely sure they would have. I didn't mind Christopher Reeves as he has already shown he is willing to come back to celebrate the character when he was part of Smallville. Where you are spot on is with Tarkin and especially so with George Reeve. Just recast Tarkin, and let George rest in peace.
Thanks for the info
We will see this more and more. George Lucas predicted it, when he filmed the special editions of the OT he made license deals with all the actors or their estates that lets them use the actors likeness in perpetuity, they or their estates will receive royalties for each use. I think it was assumed for for cartoons, art, and other merchandising but the wording leaves it up in the air. Enough that Disney got permission from Carrie and also Cushing's estate again for Rogue One. As the technology gets even better most people won't be able to tell the difference. My fear is that at some point we will get entire movies with long lost actors, not just some cameo in a franchise.
I actually had no idea about George Reeves being depressed about Superman and not getting work cuz of that role. I guess I’m not entirely surprised cuz of other actor having said experiencing similar issues having been apart of big franchises as well. I think to some extent recently passed actors might of been okay with it cuz the idea and technology was there, my first thought is thinking of West’s Batman but I’m also sure his family also gained a decent profit as well. I guess the cameos wouldn’t have been so bad had they just looked better. The characters looked like the bts versions of when animators are showing us how they are making the character and it looks like it but also doesn’t cuz it’s not finished and they used the unfinished version for the final version
Consent is important and should be considered from an ethical standpoint. Imagine someone bringing your mom back without consent or using your image to make money without your consent. That is just wrong.
It’s a similar situation to people having plastic surgery in my mind. It’s fine when the patient is disfigured or disabled in some way but obvs people do it for no other reason than vanity and then it becomes questionable. So in the same way someone dies close to the end of production you can forgive a bit of effort to finish the job as real lives and paycheques are on the line but if it’s years later for a new movie it’s highly questionable.
I agree with you, I think there should be way less CGI in movies in general! Of course a 'Science Fiction Movie' is going to need CGI but I think you can limit it (like Interstellar or Dune), instead of de-aging they should re-cast! Just my thoughts...
Well, I am 100% convinced we will get new Episodes of Star Trek TOS or something like it again at one point. Or Sean Connery Bond movies. And I am looking forward to the discussions about that.
I can't believe, folks are complaining about the graphics....and sure they could've not included any cameos but THEY WENT BIG, but to complain about the graphics? To say the CGI was anything we see on consoles, really? I don't remember textures being as good as what we saw in the Flash....This all stems from Reeve's face looking janky...and babies that can't handle said jank...I'm just glad we get to see a decent DC movie finally...
I remember when cgi was new, and one of the things people were hyped for was bringing back dead stars. Like, wasn't there some commercial in the 90's with Bogart or something? I'm a heartless bastard though. For the Flash, I would have been playing across the DC-verse with every actor in history.
I liked the cameos, it shows that all DC shows and movies are part of the DCEUs multiverse. The Nicolas Cage cameo actually made me wanna see his version lol Also seeing Clooney come back as Bruce Wayne is pretty cool, especially since it appears that Barry is now stuck in that Clooney universe
Instead of George Reeve Superman, it should’ve been Max Fleisher’s Superman cartoon. Instead of Chris Reeves Superman, it should’ve been Brandon Routh as Superman. It was a big missed opportunity that they didn’t get to showcase the Superman for the new DCU or show some characters or scenes from the DCAU.
Harold Ramis only "worked" because he was a ghost, which CGI has time and time again done tremendously well. You know what didn't work? His dialogue. Because there was none! And he has a _weirdly long_ amount of screen time for such a short scene. It's beyond distracting!
I don't have an issue with using dead people being brought back through CGI if their estate doesn't have an issue with it. It's another way their families/estate can still make money.
Back in the 90's there was an episode of The Critic about this subject
I don't agree with the theory of "false nostalgia"? It's either nostalgic or it isn't? That's like saying "I suffer from false sadness". But while I think that your points about The Flash are valid, I did actually cheer to myself like a total utter bell-end when I saw Christopher Reeve even though the effects looked absolute utter shite. And to add insult to injury I watched it illegally on an iPad. Take that Hollywood.
That Beckham statue was hilarious 😂 😃 😄
Yeah, honestly, I wish they would just hire an actor that looks similar and let them stand in for the OG in a lot of these cases. Like, we as an audience can understand and suspend our disbelief.
Actors are going to have to start adding clauses to their wills stating that they don’t want to be recreated by cgi or ai in movies after they pass.
If it's done right, it's beautiful. Paul walker, luke skywalker and egon spengler were the best examples. The flash should have done more to get their remember berries presentable. Their heart was in the right place, though. I think dc had to do it.
I actually thoroughly enjoyed the movie and didn't mind what they did I just wish the CGI was better but I enjoyed it 7/10... Would actually watch a sequel
Same. I feel like people are picking it apart because they don’t want to like it. “The CGI really took me out of the movie!” …. Yeah? Well, does the shoddy VFX in movies like the original Clash of the Titans pull you out, or can you just watch, enjoy, and understand they were able to convey the images and message they were attempting…. Even if it does look bad at times?
I disagree but I can also agree. This is the industry, you sell your likeness as that character forever whether you like it or not. Yes the topic of consent absolutely comes into play, but they have the legal rights to your likeness as a particular character. My only issue is that it’s done respectfully and I saw no disrespect. To me it felt like celebrating a rich history of these heroes we love. Seeing them there, looking at our Barry was heartwarming. It also made you feel the weight of the climax and they didn’t need to impact the story, Barry needed to see what was at stake, who was at stake. He says Batman and Superman are friends multiple times throughout the movie. So in a way he was able to see he had more friends than he thought he could ever have.
Hollywood has opened a Pandora's box and just needs to close it
I am in 100% agreement with you and i find the whole thing a bit goulish, let the dead rest and stop bringing them back in pointless cameos. The Flash for example didnt need them and the one character that should have got a cameo (Grant Gustin) didnt so most of the others were pretty pointless
I thought Marvel was going to do this on the throne room scene in Black Panther 2 and I creeped out until the reveal.
The best take i have heard I have literally seen people saying that company need to have a copyright fkr the actor/actress 's face Its so fucked up man Seeing both Reeves like that Heartbreaking
I think going the route of what they did with Richard Attenborough's John Hammond, in Jurassic World, was much more tasteful.
Wasn't Brandon Routh's Superman movie technically a sequel to the Christopher Reeve Superman movies? It's weird that they put Reeve in this movie when he was recasted. Plus I noticed that when Routh played Superman, he kind of looked like Reeve too.
I also think a big part of what’s upsetting is, I haven’t seen the movie so I might be wrong but they brought all these characters back for cameos but then just killed them all when their universes collapsed into each other. So the studio raised the dead in cheap means for nostalgia and squeezing more profits out of whatever they can just for them to kill all these characters off for good? Like that’s pretty fucked up on a whole new level
That didn’t happen lol
@@duncandickenbals bitch what didn't happen are you this sheltered they brought back a dead man put his face in cg without permission from family and then killed them off at the end you don't see anything wrong with that
Similarly, it’s infuriating to see that Juice WRLD STILL has music coming out….he died like 3 years ago. what an uncanny nightmare world
It certainly rides a line that I would hate for them to cross. It's like the hologram performances of dead musicians. But there are two major differences and one issue specific to this situation. First, they haven't made an entire film based upon using the likeness of a dead actor. Definitely crossing a line. Two, the actors likeness is an aspect of characters. So, for example, Peter Cushing's likeness was right on the line, or perhaps crossed it. I could argue for either side. But in this situation with the Flash, it is all about the characters. You took issue with it not being necessary for the film.... but it really was. The original story of Flash Point was all about how there are different universes with different characters. And those universes are a corner stone of the comics. We are supposed to respect every version of every character and their stories. Those 'cameos' held purpose. It's not the only time DC has done this. They did in the Arrow Verse as well. As separated as all of these stories are, they are all under one reality umbrella. So... I really don't take issue with the clips used in the Flash Point movie. They weren't forcing actors into a movie that they couldn't consent to. They were including the characters that belong to DC (to put it harshly), but more importantly belong to us. They have been giving us these characters nearly a hundred years now. It's not as simple as 'nostalgia bate' in this specific situation. It's sewing together the fabric of 100 years of story telling. (But there certainly is nostalgia too.)
Nt mind doing g a quick cgi cameo of a dead character like the did in the flash..its when they start talking or if they become a big part of a film, that's where I draw the line