Discussion in 'TV & Media' started by HaplessCrewman, Jul 12, 2013.
To be fair, that's not CGI.
i meant not as good as an advert. i could've been clearer.
Oh, I can stop, you just haven't given me a reason to, because you keep saying stupid, baiting things. Did you really think that was an intelligent or fair question given my argument? "Hey, if the person was still alive, and was clearly pissed that they were using his likeness in a commercial, would you still defend the commercial?" I mean really, you don't see the inherent logical problem there and how it's an entirely different set of circumstances? And you don't see how that depicts my argument as completely unreasonable and always in defense of the corporate ad makers regardless of the vastly different situations? You get a negative reaction because you provoke one.
I made the same basic argument he did. Since the daughter approved of the ad, that satisfies me. Why is it my business to tell her she's wrong? You could have just addressed the question to the thread in general and waited for someone to respond, or you could have asked him. Instead, despite previously expressing (whining, more like) a problem with me and the way I respond to your posts, you chose to ask me one of your typical stupid baiting strawman questions, despite knowing I don't care for them and will call them out for what they are. At what point does it become you looking for trouble?
But it's a bit arrogant to assume you or I know better than the man's own daughter, no? Especially when there's nothing particularly offensive being done here. Again, if she approved him doing some racist Stepin Fetchit type routine, I could sort of understand the outrage, but she didn't.
While Lee obviously couldn't have predicted the advent of CGI digital models of him being used in the future, he could have legally or personally (to family and friends) made it clear that he didn't want his likeness and/or voice and words (whether photos, art, film or audio clips, book excerpts, etc.) to be used in ads for certain things or just in ads in general. I'm assuming that he did not do this rather than assuming the worst about his daughter and thinking that she would just blatantly ignore his established wishes.
Regardless, in the absence of any specific restrictions prohibiting the use of his likeness, his daughter is most likely the one who is legally responsible for making those decisions, and even if just talking about things from an ethics rather than legal standpoint, she would certainly have a better claim to making that decision than you or I would. So, again, either legally or just in general, why is it my business to tell his daughter what she can or can not approve of?
I wasn't aware that you were authorized to make those decisions for everyone in the world, regardless of their closeness to the actual person in question. Congratulations.
You have your opinions on celebrities and historical figures and their depictions after their death, and that's fine. I don't always share your opinion there, and have found some of your comments on the matter in the past pretty extreme. I don't think we're going to find common ground here. But I find dictating to the man's daughter what she can or can not approve of to be a step too far.
I wonder if John Lennon would have objected to his likeness being used in that Beatles Rock Band game? Some of the commercials for it were pretty creepy.
This thread demands the return of the overused meme...
I do agree with you that Lee undoubtedly believed that alcohol was unhealthy (not "a part of this nutritious breakfast"), but I also did not go so far as saying that he viewed drinking it as immoral (although I realize that you are not saying that I did so, either! ). I just feel that someone that was very aware of what is good and not good for the health of his own body would probably (an assumption on my part, yes) wish to promote the same healthy practices (and encourage avoidance those unhealthy practices) in other's lives.
.... but maybe I am mistakenly making Lee into a health guru rather than an action hero.... !
I have no evidence to show that Lee would be violently outraged by the commercial, and I think he might be -if anything- simply 'greatly annoyed'. I may have overstated what I felt in earlier posts.
How about keeping some respect for the dead and trying to think about what they wanted, how they lived their life and if it's what they wanted.
I guess Lee's family didn't think much about it and i can imagine money was a deciding factor.
You may be right. I never knew Mr. Lee personally, so I couldn't say. But that's why I defer to his daughter's judgment because she knew him.
It's not up to you or me to decide what is respectful to Bruce Lee's memory. That's up to the family, and this is what they decided to do. As I said, if it weren't for the internet, we'd likely never have heard about it.
Like it or not, that's pretty much it.
How about we just get on with our lives and respect the Lee family's decisions?
Why can't we discuss this?
The question is "Would you do it as well?" and "Would you be okay if your kids do it some day?"
And "Where is the point where even you would be saying that it's not okay what his family did?"
You can discuss it all you want, even though it's pointless to do so.
If I'm dead my family can do whatever they want. I don't care. In fact, the longer I'm dead, the less I'll care.
Untrue. Whether freshly dead or 50 years dead I am guessing you won't care any differently.
Actually, it's all that matters. Since Bruce Lee is dead, his legal heirs have the right to control and license the use of his name, image and likeness however they see fit. That's how things work in this world. What you personally think is right or wrong is totally irrelevant.
In the absence of an advance directive or someone with power of attorney to make such decisions, consent for organ donation should be the default option -- as is the case in many countries. If you don't want to be an organ donor, you're free to make the "opt out" choice while you're still alive.
The ad is fine.
Maybe he did, when he drank.
On a more serious note, if there's any opprobrium to be dished out about whether this disrespects Bruce Lee, I think the daughter deserves a far greater share of it than the company. His image rights are presumably part of her estate now, I'm guessing? So it's up to her to decide whether something's in line with his wishes or not.
" I don't always drink whiskey, but when I do....."
Really? I thought it was damn near perfect.. With the exception being a couple of the straight on shots of his face that looked rubbery, ala, Tron: Legacy...
All issues with his image promoting alcohol aside, that was eerily realistic, and really damn cool...
Separate names with a comma.