Computer-Generated Actors Closer than You Think

[J_UNTITLED]

From IMDb.com

"Silicon Valley is on the verge of producing sophisticated software that will allow motion picture companies to create actors on a computer who are visually indistinguishable from real people, San Jose's Mercury News reported today (Thursday). In the words of the newspaper, which closely follows the software industry, when software engineers finally achieve what it calls "the holy grail of animation," stars would be able to "keep playing iconic roles even as they aged past the point of believability like Angelina Jolie as Lara Croft or Daniel Radcliffe as Harry Potter." Rick Bergman, general manager of AMD's graphics products group, told the Mercury News that his company "is getting real close" to producing computer-generated actors that will look identical to real human beings."

[Red Hood]

Wouldn't it be weird to see some of the people from the worst actors thread with acting abilities but then I would know its fake.

[EricJ]

Oh, dear lordy, they (meaning, JU) posted the article here, too...

The same exact article (with different star insertions, hence the '01 dated Tomb Raider ref) that studios plant once a year by the clock, in the hopes they can finally get that CGI resurrected dead-Karloff-and-Chaney "Frankenstein vs. the Wolfman" movie going again, because it sounded like such a neat idea back when Forrest Gump shook hands with JFK--
Twelve years, "Final Fantasy", and "Beowulf" later, and they're STILL trying to sell us on "With virtual actors, we could bring George Burns back from the dead, and he'd look so real! "

[STARSCREAM]

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

[quexos]

Already been done.
Didn't you guys see Final Fantasy: The spirits within ? Or the totally nonsensical Advent Children ? Or more recently Beowulf ?

[J_UNTITLED]

Originally Posted by quexos

Already been done.
Didn't you guys see Final Fantasy: The spirits within ? Or the totally nonsensical Advent Children ? Or more recently Beowulf ?

Incorrect as those above-mentioned titles did not feature truly photo-realistic CG-renderings of people. That hasn't come... yet.

[quexos]

Originally Posted by J_UNTITLED

Incorrect as those above-mentioned titles did not feature truly photo-realistic CG-renderings of people. That hasn't come... yet.

Dude we probably did not see the same version but (and unless my memory plays tricks on me), Angelina Jolie in Beowulf looked pretty damn much like Angelina Jolie though it was not really her. Same with Anthony Hopkins.
Now you could argue that this technology can go further but the fact remains that these Beowulf characters are photo-realistic, with colors closer to animation that realism granted but that was done on purpose.

[J_UNTITLED]

Originally Posted by quexos

Dude we probably did not see the same version but (and unless my memory plays tricks on me), Angelina Jolie in Beowulf looked pretty damn much like Angelina Jolie though it was not really her. Same with Anthony Hopkins.
Now you could argue that this technology can go further but the fact remains that these Beowulf characters are photo-realistic, with colors closer to animation that realism granted but that was done on purpose.

What I meant was although certainly leaps and bounds in terms of quality over far previous attempts at such CG-characterizations of real human beings, you can still very clearly tell in something like "Beowulf" that the characters you are seeing on screen are NOT REAL but created.


What I am talking about is seeing a film and literally not being able to tell the difference between a CG-rendered person and a real, physical actor... that has not yet been done or could be done. It is, however, coming closer and closer to realization than most realize.

[zombieking]

Beowulf was technically impressive, about the best I've seen for human character CGI. Yes it will only get better, but human emotion and mannerisms are difficult to capture. I don't know if we'll see a film which is impossible to distinguish between human and human CGI because of this.

Inhuman (Golem) from LOTR was more impressive IMO because as a creature, he appeared real and was so well fleshed out as a character of the films, he could have been nominated for an oscar. Serious.

[assydingo]

Maybe if they gave the money to the family or something... still would be creepy.

[wallendo]

Originally Posted by quexos

Dude we probably did not see the same version but (and unless my memory plays tricks on me), Angelina Jolie in Beowulf looked pretty damn much like Angelina Jolie though it was not really her. Same with Anthony Hopkins.
Now you could argue that this technology can go further but the fact remains that these Beowulf characters are photo-realistic, with colors closer to animation that realism granted but that was done on purpose.

Wasn't Angelina rotoscoped; i.e. she was filmed and then the CGI guys make her look different? I think the original article was talking about creating a digital actor from scratch that looks just like the real person.

[Liquid-Prince]

Originally Posted by quexos

Dude we probably did not see the same version but (and unless my memory plays tricks on me), Angelina Jolie in Beowulf looked pretty damn much like Angelina Jolie though it was not really her. Same with Anthony Hopkins.
Now you could argue that this technology can go further but the fact remains that these Beowulf characters are photo-realistic, with colors closer to animation that realism granted but that was done on purpose.

They said photo realistic. None of those movie looked anywhere near photo realistic... You could clearly see that they were CG.

[ArieS]

Al Pacino already did that and her name is Simone

[Barbie-Shrimp]

Originally Posted by ArieS

Al Pacino already did that and her name is Simone

I think there was a 1 in her name somewhere.

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by ArieS

Al Pacino already did that and her name is Simone

In fact, the movie was originally intended to be "The first movie boldly using a digital star"--
Until both the budget and Final Flop made them chicken out, they used flesh-and-blood Rachel Roberts instead, and pretended it was a "quirky fairytale allegory".

(Similarly, the live-action "Thunderbirds" movie was supposed to be the first American-made "Final Fantasy"-type action CGI, until guess the reason THEY also ultimately chickened out and used live actors...)

[thedarkangel1975]

I thought this going to be a thread on Keanu Reeves acting skills.

[EricJ]

(And because "Final Fantasy:TSW" gets mentioned so often every single time this thread comes back up, a musical moment from the movie for your enjoyment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0I_XdjE-MU )

[Cinema Jaguar]

Perhaps one day cgi will replace actual actors and actresses but not as of now and they would most likely do voice overs anyways.

If advances in gaming get to point where holography or something similar to the movie west world become a reality then the gamer(s) or general consumer can be in their own movie with other players in a horror/scifi/western or whatever that can be conjured up.

It is plausible that this form of entertainment could replace the cinema experience but not necessarily so.

[Crim122]

Could they bring Brando back!?

[waaimasjien.]

I'm too lazy to look it up, but wasn't a dead actor used in Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow?