Discussion Deepfake or Recast? You decide! - Now with Poll

Simply put I’ve been wondering recently with the announcement of the new films particularly the Dave filomi film weather he would use the recast actors of the Han, Luke, leia and Lando should they show up or if deep fake is the way to go.

Personally I really enjoyed seeing young Mark Hamil in the book of Boba and Mando season 2 but I’d really like to see those new characters played by the recast actors all together in one film at this point.

this Twitter account I follow makes a good point on the trade offs.






Thoughts?

 

It depends.

For one or two supporting role scenes, the deep fake stuff works. Luke was actually played by another actor in BOBF and then his face was deep-faked w MH (who was on set and in costume as well for help and reference). In some scenes you can kind of pick out the other actor just a bit.

In some cases it works well. In others...it doesn't. The tech has come a long way since even Leia and Tarkin in RO. And...I'm not totally sold on Ford in Indy yet. The trailers look off and a little Vally of the Dolls still. We'll see how things go when the movie actually comes out.

That all said, I wouldn't want a whole movie looking at it. I wouldn't want Young Luke, Leia or Han in a whole movie, with deep faked faces. For other roles like Mon Mothma, in Andor, where they're in many scenes, recasting a look-a-like is totally preferable.

 

I’m 100% in the recast camp, and think that it would be a truly liberating decision, in terms of both live action stories that would then be on the table, and in terms of avoiding the major consumption of resources that would come with increasingly complicated deepfakes. Break the taboo with a brilliant performance from a recast character, and then forge ahead.

 

It's probably got to be a mix at this point. They're already deepfaking Luke, so might as well keep on keeping on with that. But I'm game for letting Alden Ehrenreich reprise his role as younger Han Solo. And I have zero qualms about re-casting Leia. I see it with the Batman movies. Anytime actor X is cast as Batman or actor Y is cast as Joker, it's the worst thing ever, until the movie comes out, and if the film is successful then all the complaints disappear (The Dark Knight, The Batman, Joker).

Anybody they cast to take Mark Hamill or Carried Fisher's place is undoubtedly going to be met with "OMG, Disney/LFL IS RUINING STAR WARS!" but if the story is good, if the performances are good, if people like the film, then upon release those complaints are going to disappear.

 

If they actually need to be characters, not cameos, recast for sure.

For Luke and Leia, I like Dacre Montgomery and Hailee Steinfeld, to join Ehrenreich and Glover.

Or for a film where they’re more middle-aged: Sebastian Stan, Kate Mara, Liev Schreiber, Chiwetel Ejiofor.

But anyways I doubt they’ll be main characters. But one day, when the tech is perfect and affordable (and if all the other SW properties are floundering), I could see Disney going back to the well with an OT cast film.

 

I think for a character like Mon Mothma, who has a grand total of one scene in the OT where she speaks, recasting is fine. It helps that Genvieve O'Reilly looks so similar to Caroline Blakiston. For characters like Luke, Han, Leia and Lando... I'm kind of mixed. It's easier to justify recasting for those characters when the depiction is younger than we've seen them, a la Ehrenreich as Han or Glover as Lando. It would feel kind of weird, though, to see other actors portray those characters during an "in-between period". Han Solo looks like Harrison Ford in Episodes IV-VI and VII, but... he looks like someone else in between those events?

I understand that this is fiction, but one of the things that Star Wars has that something like, say... Star Trek does not is a sense of internal consistency and continuity. It all blends together really, really well, where I can watch Rogue One and 100% accept that it's the exact same world and time frame as a movie released in 1977. Something like that is due to flawless design work, attention to detail, and of course, consistent casting.

 

I do not want a recast at all. But then again I also don’t need to have Luke, Han or Leia be anything more than cameos if they’re in the film at all. I prefer animation over live action if they want to continue their stories.

 

Its crazy to think the actress who played Mon Mothma in Episode 3 had her scenes deleted and not to see the light of date. But then suddenly she is appearing in Star Wars non-stop.

I see a benefit to both a recast and a deepfake. Obviously deepfakes are cool because in a way we are getting the impossible. we are seeing the faces of characters unaged 30 years later. Problem obviously is the limitations that, unfortunately, are there to really do alot with it. They are pretty much skimming on the edge of this new technology. While with a recast... you could do a whole movie with the character as the focus because you don't need to worry about CGI, lightning, realism, facial features and expressions.

I don't know which i prefer. They did a good job with Luke in TBOB, but every moment i watched, all i could think was how much of the budget that must have taken up.

 

I want a third option, I would prefer an animated series

 

Yep, this.

 

How about C) All of the above, and D) None of the above.

 

It’s got to depend upon how much screen time they want to give these characters during this time period. I’d be fine (and I think it would be better) with a recast if they wanted to tell stories centred around the OT3, but otherwise small supporting roles can probably be done with a combination of recasting and deaging. I’m not the biggest fan of TBOBF Luke to be honest. The actor looks enough like Hamill that they should just have him in the role without the digital make-up, and the technology isn’t there yet for it not to be distracting.

As @Bor Mullet mentioned the digital face replacement for an entire leading cast is a massive allocation of the budget that could be better used for films like these.

I think cameos with digital face replacement is the most likely, simply because I think they are worried that fans won’t accept a recasting.

 

Deepfakes are better for major characters. Other characters can be recast. Disney should spare no expense for making us happy given many of us have spent hundreds, thousands, or tens of thousands of dollars on SW stuff in our lives. (hundreds of thousands? Millions?)

 

Recast

 

Deepfake if just background parts/cameos (which I suspect for the Filoni film). Anything more substantial then they’d have to go with a re-cast IMO.

 

Depends on the situation. If it is a character who was previously minor, like Mon Mothmas or Jan Dodanna, a recast is fine. However, if it is an iconic or beloved character, like Luke, Han, or Leia, then I would prefer deepfake if they are in a supporting role and animation if they are in a lead role (i.e. make the entire production animated, not have an animated character in live action like Who Framed Roger Rabbit ).

 

There would be a lot of opposition, at first, to recasting major characters during periods close to their original appearance (Luke near or during the OT era, etc). But once done well, with a great actor and story, that opposition will fall away. Just as it did when Heath Ledger blew the roof off as the Joker. Sometimes fans just need to experience something they think they don’t want, in a very compelling way, to break the mould. I have spoken.

 

lol that would be awfully weak to have a Roger Rabbit version.

 

Lol. The actor could give the performance of his life, win an Oscar and I still wouldn’t accept him as Luke Skywalker. Thankfully Lucasfilm has made it abundantly clear that they have no intention of recasting the roles.

 

We’ll see!

ETA: That was some pretty blatant Chiz bait on my part, I must admit. Worked in record time. I know you know that, but I’m stating it here for the sake of transparency.

 

We already have.


There’s also Kennedy’s comments about Solo where she said recasting the main roles was a mistake (which I don’t agree with in regards to Solo but it does show their thinking on the topic.)

 

Oh, I’m totally aware of the official Lucasfilm position on the matter. But I do think that may change in the future. Indeed, I hope so, as I’d like to see OT and OT-adjacent live action stories featuring the OT3 as main characters, and thus, not as deepfakes. But I admit that it’s the sort of thing that may require another generation to be acceptable in the fandom.

 

What if Mark Hamill were to personally choose the next actor to play Luke, and give him on-set guidance and advice? Would that be worth considering?