I wonder when media will become dynamic, as in making subtle to drastic changes in a work to tailor the experience to the individual. For example, in The Fast and The Furious XXXV the main character can be either James Dean, Mario Andretti or any other actors likeness that has been licensed. Entire scenes can be condensed or expanded on the fly depending on the individual users profile. Their cars are different from viewing to viewing. There might not even be a consensus on what a work is.
Christopher Reeves already made an appearance in the recent Flash movie.
You’re saying this all with sarcasm, I presume, but I actually don’t see the big problem here. Actors are portraying characters, which are not people. Replicating a character digitally is fine IMO. Would there be a big problem if Hollywood happened to find a human actor that looked and sounded uncannily like Christopher Reeves and cast him as Superman? Casting look-alikes has been done before. Digital stand-ins for actors have been used frequently for many years now, including in some cases for dead actors. This isn’t new and I don’t see what’s wrong with it.
Casting lookalikes is a thing but the original actor should still get recognition and be paid. Crispin Glover sued the producers of back to the future 2 when they did this and got a settlement payout.
The problem with replacing actors with digital replicas is that now you need to figure out how to find work for (hundreds of?) thousands of actors to support themselves.
No I don’t, that’s not my responsibility. If they wind up literally unemployed I’m fine with contributing to a social safety net for them, and ultimately I’m a fan of UBI which would help everyone, but if they find that they can no longer earn a living as an actor and still want to have a job then they should look for a different line of work. Lots of people try to make a living as actors and find that they have to do something else instead.
Sometimes changes in technology cause changes in fundamental economics, resulting in classes of jobs going away. There used to be human telephone operators that would connect you directly to whoever you were calling on the phone, they got replaced with automation and had to go find other lines of work. Should we have prevented the automation of telephony in order to save those jobs?
I myself am a programmer, and I can see the writing on the wall for some of the sorts of work that I do. Eventually AI will get good enough at coding that I’ll be relegated to a “manager” role of sorts telling AI what code to write, or possibly even have to find a second career to get started on. I accept that this sort of thing happens sometimes. I would rather have this sort of thing happen than ban the progression of technology, because I can look beyond my immediate needs and desire for a paycheck at the greater good that lies ahead from these increased capabilities.
Better get used to this folks. Fast and Furious XXXVIII is going to star James Dean, Marilyn Monroe, with an original soundtrack by Nirvana.
Christopher Reeves’ Superman is going to face off against Heath Leger’s Joker.
Their will come a time when nobody remembers the original talent, only the simulation. I can’t wait for Baudrillard’s next book.
I wonder when media will become dynamic, as in making subtle to drastic changes in a work to tailor the experience to the individual. For example, in The Fast and The Furious XXXV the main character can be either James Dean, Mario Andretti or any other actors likeness that has been licensed. Entire scenes can be condensed or expanded on the fly depending on the individual users profile. Their cars are different from viewing to viewing. There might not even be a consensus on what a work is.
Buy a Christmas skin for {lead actor} for $8.99!
Why bother with real people?
Superman is a cartoon. Asking who plays him can be a category error.
Christopher Reeves already made an appearance in the recent Flash movie.
You’re saying this all with sarcasm, I presume, but I actually don’t see the big problem here. Actors are portraying characters, which are not people. Replicating a character digitally is fine IMO. Would there be a big problem if Hollywood happened to find a human actor that looked and sounded uncannily like Christopher Reeves and cast him as Superman? Casting look-alikes has been done before. Digital stand-ins for actors have been used frequently for many years now, including in some cases for dead actors. This isn’t new and I don’t see what’s wrong with it.
Casting lookalikes is a thing but the original actor should still get recognition and be paid. Crispin Glover sued the producers of back to the future 2 when they did this and got a settlement payout.
Holy sh*t - TIL
The problem with replacing actors with digital replicas is that now you need to figure out how to find work for (hundreds of?) thousands of actors to support themselves.
Edit: “you” as in society
No I don’t, that’s not my responsibility. If they wind up literally unemployed I’m fine with contributing to a social safety net for them, and ultimately I’m a fan of UBI which would help everyone, but if they find that they can no longer earn a living as an actor and still want to have a job then they should look for a different line of work. Lots of people try to make a living as actors and find that they have to do something else instead.
Sometimes changes in technology cause changes in fundamental economics, resulting in classes of jobs going away. There used to be human telephone operators that would connect you directly to whoever you were calling on the phone, they got replaced with automation and had to go find other lines of work. Should we have prevented the automation of telephony in order to save those jobs?
I myself am a programmer, and I can see the writing on the wall for some of the sorts of work that I do. Eventually AI will get good enough at coding that I’ll be relegated to a “manager” role of sorts telling AI what code to write, or possibly even have to find a second career to get started on. I accept that this sort of thing happens sometimes. I would rather have this sort of thing happen than ban the progression of technology, because I can look beyond my immediate needs and desire for a paycheck at the greater good that lies ahead from these increased capabilities.
No lie, I’d watch it.