Last edited by a moderator:
Using Deepfake in Trek... Yes or no?
- Thread starter Roald
- Start date
And plenty of time.
why can’t we have both? Maybe not a full season, but one-off “lost” episode of TOS would be fun to watch, and marvel in the technology.
No objections 
That would feel wrong. But, be just like comic books so I'm sure it will be done.
It's an interesting novelty, but I wouldn't want it to become a primary method of producing entertainment. There are situations where I can see it being very useful, though, like when an actor passes away or becomes otherwise unable to work during the production of a show or movie (as long as they gave their consent for this to be done).
I suppose the question is, when editing a feature-length "The Pegasus" together with "These are the Voyages..."
Do you:
a) de-age Riker & Troi in the 2005 shot footage from Enterprise
b) add 200 pounds and age them up in "The Pegasus" to match?
or
c) burn that finale, burn that finale with fire, lots and lots of fire
Do you:
a) de-age Riker & Troi in the 2005 shot footage from Enterprise
b) add 200 pounds and age them up in "The Pegasus" to match?
or
c) burn that finale, burn that finale with fire, lots and lots of fire
Last edited:
Definitely C.
D). Ignore it because the timeline is very difficult to square away.
I absolutely hate this method, especially when done with dead actors. It's one of the reasons I can't get into ROGUE ONE. Even crazier, given that the actor who stood in for Peter Cushing actually has a fair resemblance to him. They could have just applied some good make up on him and I would have accepted it.
Now, if you want to de-age an actor? Sure, but it's gotta be done in a way that isn't too distracting. Unfortunately, the attempt in THE MANDALORIAN was absolutely abysmal and pulled me out of the moment.
Now, if you want to de-age an actor? Sure, but it's gotta be done in a way that isn't too distracting. Unfortunately, the attempt in THE MANDALORIAN was absolutely abysmal and pulled me out of the moment.
Only if we can resurrect the writers, and train them to write in a style that takes all the good parts about 2020 sensibilities and not any of the bad parts.
Deepfakes look a lot like the person so far but they're still not out of uncanny valley.
Luke
Last edited by a moderator:
Whoops, sorry about that, forgot how recent that was.
Does it involve the original actors, writers with a similar point of view as TOS writers, and similar production values? If not, hard pass. It's holding on to the past in a way that simply doesn't appeal to me.
Season 4 of TOS would not quite materialize in any sort of believable way. I'll keep the books.
The Litmus Test to see if you're an Enterprise Fan or not.I suppose the question is, when editing a feature-length "The Pegasus" together with "These are the Voyages..."
Do you:
a) de-age Riker & Troi in the 2005 shot footage from Enterprise
b) add 200 pounds and age them up in "The Pegasus" to match?
or
c) burn that finale, burn that finale with fire, lots and lots of fire
Do you:
A) Hate it because "ENT sucks!" "Die B&B!" (these were for the forerunners of The Fandom Menace)
B) Hate it because you're a fan and you think TATV did the series an injustice?
C) Don't care because you're not really an ENT Fan and you just liked seeing Riker and Troi again?
D) Other
I fit firmly into "C" on my Litmus Test.
And I'd choose "A" on your list.
true, but keep in mind that this was basically the first time it was accomplished on a TV budget, things are only going to get better.
The Irishman looked better than in Mandalorian but still seemed just a little off.
We’ll get there but we’re not there yet.
We’ll get there but we’re not there yet.
It always felt like an extension of fan insecurities regarding TOS looking dated. I've seen this in many forms among Trek nerds that get so caught up in the minutia. The first classic example is the fans that went ballistic over the change in Klingon make-up. That because the filmmakers had the audacity to do such a change MUST mean they're telling us "TOS was not good enough, therefore we're changing it".
We saw that again 20 years later with ENTERPRISE. Despite working hard to give it an aesthetic that felt like a proper evolution between the modern day 21st century and the 23rd century as we saw before, it still looked "too advanced" because it featured stuff like animated LCD monitors whereas most of the time on TOS it was just static images because the budget couldn't support having every monitor run.
And that's why we see DISCO get so rejected by that subset of fans, because how they interpret the show is "your favorite show wasn't good enough". Using deepfake is just another way to try to keep Trek stuck in an image from the 1960s that no longer looks like our future.
We saw that again 20 years later with ENTERPRISE. Despite working hard to give it an aesthetic that felt like a proper evolution between the modern day 21st century and the 23rd century as we saw before, it still looked "too advanced" because it featured stuff like animated LCD monitors whereas most of the time on TOS it was just static images because the budget couldn't support having every monitor run.
And that's why we see DISCO get so rejected by that subset of fans, because how they interpret the show is "your favorite show wasn't good enough". Using deepfake is just another way to try to keep Trek stuck in an image from the 1960s that no longer looks like our future.
Are our identities as fans so insecure that such things are a threat to the ego for such a reaction? Fascinating.
You especially see that envy for how Star Wars approaches it. Unlike Star Trek, that franchise actually replicates the sets as they looked from the 1970s, and they use deepfake/de-aging for dead or aging actors. "WHY CAN'T CBS DO THE SAME THING????"
Because Star Wars was made to look good on the big screen, so many of the visuals don't actually need "updating" (unless you're George Lucas), especially since it's set on a fantastical universe that's separate from ours. Whereas TOS was meant to be seen on tiny fuzzy 13 inch monitors with colors bleeding all over. No one in 1966 ever imagined people would be watching it 60 years later in high definition on a TV screen that is the same size as the bridge monitor.
Because Star Wars was made to look good on the big screen, so many of the visuals don't actually need "updating" (unless you're George Lucas), especially since it's set on a fantastical universe that's separate from ours. Whereas TOS was meant to be seen on tiny fuzzy 13 inch monitors with colors bleeding all over. No one in 1966 ever imagined people would be watching it 60 years later in high definition on a TV screen that is the same size as the bridge monitor.
Similar threads
