Video: F/X wizards raise the dead
posted at 6:21 pm on January 20, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
It’s eight months old, but if you haven’t seen it, watch it now. Your mind will reel at the implications. My first reactions: (a) I can’t wait for that Beatles reunion concert; (b) Photoshop v15.0 is going to be awesome; (c) ten years from now, no one will trust anything they see on a screen.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Cant find Jamil Hussien ? Just make him up !
William Amos on January 20, 2007 at 6:23 PM
Isn’t there already a commercial with Orville Redenbacher animated something similar to this? It is kind of creepy that way.
CrimsonFisted on January 20, 2007 at 6:30 PM
Ewww, that Orville Redenbacher commercial is FREAKY.
NTWR on January 20, 2007 at 6:35 PM
Lileks posted about the Orville Redenbacher ad just this week.
Yet another path on the road to the pop star of the future is coming true.
Ed Driscoll on January 20, 2007 at 6:36 PM
We will all become immortal….
PinkyBigglesworth on January 20, 2007 at 6:41 PM
That’s a good thing. Nobody should believe what they see today, but they do. If this becomes mainstream, there wouldn’t be any more reason to doubt what you see on TV, but people would be more aware that images can be faked.
Eric12470210 on January 20, 2007 at 6:43 PM
Was this how they brought Brando back for his performance in “Superman Returns?”
Slublog on January 20, 2007 at 6:48 PM
They can post political candidates and put words in their mouths. They can say they dug up a Reagan tape with him saying bad things about President Bush and look so real. We have people today who believe the impossible, around the world.
StuLongIsland on January 20, 2007 at 6:52 PM
Well, Tom Hanks is a good actor and all…
But couldn’t we just go ahead and CLONE a few hundred Audrey Hepburns? Maybe do a whole range, from ages 20 to 40?
LegendHasIt on January 20, 2007 at 6:52 PM
Do the shroud of Turin! I wanna see Jesus selling Pier One furniture by the end of the week.
Savage on January 20, 2007 at 6:58 PM
Outstanding idea.
Slublog on January 20, 2007 at 7:01 PM
Calling Dr. Mengele and Industrial Light & Magic….
kevcad on January 20, 2007 at 7:19 PM
I will take two Hepburns please, one Audrey and one young Katherine.
bbz123 on January 20, 2007 at 7:20 PM
We will all have to be fitted with an implanted electronic chip that establishes us as the real mcCoy. Of course our banking information etc will be included on this chip.
This is just another conspiracy of the Bush administration to take away our rights to privacy! Ahhhhhhh! Hear the moonbats scream!
csdeven on January 20, 2007 at 7:25 PM
The price to digitally reproduce Sean Penn, George Clooney and Cameron Dias:
$200,000,000.
TO be able to turn them off after their performance:
priceless.
bbz123 on January 20, 2007 at 7:30 PM
Well, there goes Internet Dating…
Mazztek on January 20, 2007 at 7:54 PM
Look, within 20 years, you’ll be able to order Casbalanca on cable and pick it starring anyone you want. Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, for example. And you’ll be able to see Bette Davis starring as Scarlett O’Hara in Gone With the Wind, too. It’s coming.
ahem on January 20, 2007 at 7:59 PM
Hollywood itself predicted this years ago.
Looker, 1981, Albert Finney, James Coburn, Susan Dey
Rusty Bill on January 20, 2007 at 8:12 PM
Fake is the new real.
a4g on January 20, 2007 at 8:24 PM
Run Forrest, Run!!
CliffHanger on January 20, 2007 at 9:10 PM
I’m wondering if they can remove Yoko from our collective minds. Best band ever!
I think this is awesome and I can’t wait to see Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Stewart and Rita Hayworth.
x95b10 on January 20, 2007 at 9:18 PM
Wait. How does this translate into my sex robot. If it doesn’t, I’m not interested.
lorien1973 on January 20, 2007 at 9:32 PM
Yep.
Jim Treacher on January 20, 2007 at 10:37 PM
Hmmmmm….maybe now they can bring back the original Star Trek series complete with Kirk, McCoy and Spock.
.
GT on January 20, 2007 at 10:38 PM
Is it just me, or does the “frown” look really hokey?
JinxMcHue on January 21, 2007 at 12:28 AM
Jamil who?
Buck Turgidson on January 21, 2007 at 1:02 AM
Actually, what they are doing here is far more cutting-edge and more robust in application than what was done with the Brando stuff in Superman Returns. And they have been working on it for years (I had the Hepburn clip for years, for example). You can see the published work goes back a decade or so.
Unlike the Brando stuff, the underlying tech here has application to fields like facial recongition and such. A little Google action for those involved will tell you these guys are also getting DARPA money as part of the HumanID project.
Karl on January 21, 2007 at 2:46 AM
That whole male to female thing gives a whole new perspective on animus vs anima…
Militant Bibliophile on January 21, 2007 at 2:51 AM
omg amazing.
emmaline1138 on January 21, 2007 at 3:37 AM
i call shenanigans
paranoid on January 21, 2007 at 4:25 AM
I like that Idea….Frankinstien starting John Kerry as the Monster…John Edwards as the little Girl he throws down the well. Dennis Kusinich as Igor. and Howard Dean as Doctor Frankinstien. I can just picture him screaming It’s Alive It’s Alive EEEEeaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwww.
Fandango on January 21, 2007 at 8:53 AM
The still images look great, but once you apply animation, there’s still extremely subtle but equally important things missing. As with that creepy Orville Redenbocker ad, we’re extremely sensitive to the most miniscule cues in the movements of facial muscles, the stressing of skin, etc; missing even a bit of it makes the difference between watching grandpa and watching his reanimated corpse. (For non-humans, though, we aren’t nearly as easily offended; hence, Gollum leaves us amazed where Orville leaves us uneasy.)
But that just means we aren’t there yet. There are armies of animators and programmers working on these details, and you can see the progress being made on a regular basis. In 10 years, it might well be impossible to tell the difference.
Blacklake on January 21, 2007 at 12:05 PM
Hollywood itself predicted this years ago.
Looker, 1981, Albert Finney, James Coburn, Susan Dey
Rusty Bill on January 20, 2007 at 8:12 PM
I was thinking the same thing! I know I read a small article a while back they were planning to do a remake. I can’t find the bleedin’ article!
kiakjones on January 21, 2007 at 3:16 PM
One of my favorite films – lots of eye candy, and the title song* is… haunting.
The DVD is scheduled for release later this month.
“Looker” at WikiPedia
* Written by Barry DeVorzon and performed by Sue Saad
Rusty Bill on January 21, 2007 at 3:44 PM
Yeah, there’s that creepy zone where the closer a digital face looks to a real face without quite being there, the creepier the appearance. Until this is perfected, it’s just off-putting.
frankj on January 21, 2007 at 4:02 PM
* I wonder if “Mona Lisa” is Niccolo Machiavelli, feminized.
* Image certification–by means unknown to me–will become an important new industry. Some will make millions investing in successful companies, and others will lose their savings investing in flops and also-rans.
Kralizec on January 21, 2007 at 8:17 PM
I don’t usually use the word awesome…
but that’s awesome!
Tzetzes on January 21, 2007 at 9:25 PM
Look at the bright side. Computer generated actors can’t be liberal idiots! Only the programmer can be that!
Confederate on January 22, 2007 at 8:48 AM
Comment pages: