Loading...
> >

Yet another actors-oppose-CGI thread, James Dean edition

2»

Comments

  • Chris BarnesChris Barnes Posts: 67
    edited November 2019
    nonesuch00 said:

    And what actors do get to choose which of their scenes make the cut, get spliced, get edited or even decided they were going to get invited to consider being in the movie to begin with? The cases that you read about that do get to only get to because the mass media industry has promoted them as idols and so those types are given more of those choices. Very few & far in between those are. For most of those actors and other workers though it's a job, they get hired, and do the job they are told to do. It goes to show the extent that some of those folk are idolized that some people think actors should have a say in changing which is another's movie and art completely. Those paying for the production don't have to listen to a single suggestion from any actor or whether or not to leave that actor's work completely on the cutting room floor or not.

    What on earth are you talking about? This has nothing do do with actors having a say in the production process of a film they've agreed to work on. This is about actors being inserted into a film without their consent. You can't blame people for being upset about that.

    Post edited by Chris Barnes on
  • scorpioscorpio Posts: 8,533
    Chris Barnes said:
    nonesuch00 said:

    And what actors do get to choose which of their scenes make the cut, get spliced, get edited or even decided they were going to get invited to consider being in the movie to begin with? The cases that you read about that do get to only get to because the mass media industry has promoted them as idols and so those types are given more of those choices. Very few & far in between those are. For most of those actors and other workers though it's a job, they get hired, and do the job they are told to do. It goes to show the extent that some of those folk are idolized that some people think actors should have a say in changing which is another's movie and art completely. Those paying for the production don't have to listen to a single suggestion from any actor or whether or not to leave that actor's work completely on the cutting room floor or not.

    What on earth are you talking about? This has nothing do do with actors having a say in the production process of a film they've agreed to work on. This is about actors being inserted into a film without their consent. You can't blame people for being upset about that.

    No actor is being '' inserted into a film without their consent'' its a cgi animation not a real person.

    There was probably a similar outcry when they first let women onto the stage.

  • richardandtracyrichardandtracy Posts: 7,186

    I do find it very hard to care about the trials & tribulations of wealthy actors.

    I am also convinced that it will become unusual to have real actors in films in the long term. The requirements for this to happen are easily foreseen and simple: Computing power has to increase to the point at which it's cheaper to make a film with digital actors. Machines replace people when people make things more expensive: there's a long history of such substitution. Look at manufacturing industry..

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 108,327

    Closed as elements of the discussion are straying into political discussion.

This discussion has been closed.