Maybe to avoid confusion, try making your thread titles a little less cryptic. Also, full sentences in your opening post would be very helpul.
Spoilers What is Everyone's Thoughts on Recasting Actors (new series)
- Thread starter Photon
- Start date
It's not necessary.
A younger actor can take on Sisko's life pre-Battle of Wolf 359.
An animation in any style - TAS, LD, PRO - can capture his likeness. and Brooks can give them permission to use audio from DS9 or his other works for his voice.
Deepfakes can be used for a five second scene, a la Rogue One, before Sisko vanishes back to be with the prophets.
Even with a physical return, just ask if a photo can be taken with him and Cirroc at a baseball game, and the producers can pretend its a baseball game on Cestus III (or even a game on 2020s Earth featuring Buck Bokai) at some point in history. I'm sure SFA can figure out a way to weave it into whatever story they are telling. They did alright with the most recent episode.
Leave AI to OTOY.
A younger actor can take on Sisko's life pre-Battle of Wolf 359.
An animation in any style - TAS, LD, PRO - can capture his likeness. and Brooks can give them permission to use audio from DS9 or his other works for his voice.
Deepfakes can be used for a five second scene, a la Rogue One, before Sisko vanishes back to be with the prophets.
Even with a physical return, just ask if a photo can be taken with him and Cirroc at a baseball game, and the producers can pretend its a baseball game on Cestus III (or even a game on 2020s Earth featuring Buck Bokai) at some point in history. I'm sure SFA can figure out a way to weave it into whatever story they are telling. They did alright with the most recent episode.
Leave AI to OTOY.
Of course not. I haven't watched it on VHS in years, but from memory it's almost as if Avery Brooks did not exist. The show's opening credits are simulated at the end, but no Avery credit whatsoever.
I do recall that he steadfastly refused to participate and the project went out of its way to pacify him.
Yeah, he's extremely absent from it in general. I had a flick through it last night and Sisko does get mentioned several times, both spoken and written. But as you say, not seen. (Apart from a few wide shots where he's facing at least partially away.)
Do you know why he was so against it?
It was to do with the production of it intruding into their hiatus before Season Two started up, IIRC. He was exhausted and refused to contemplate having to do any extra promotional stuff that wasn't part of his original contract. I think he was ensuring that such stuff would not become standard.
So AI recreations - Specifically Sisko, or actors in general?
What about Odo. or Nog?
Brooks won't play Sisko again, but is still around for his views, but Rene Auberjonois and Aron Eisenberg aren't around to give permission, they can't be involved in any way. What about then?
If you had to bring a character back, I'd far rather recasting than AI. Maybe for a cameo or as a small amount of the overall picture (say reshoots if they died after primary production had finished). I'm happy with de-aging.
What about Odo. or Nog?
Brooks won't play Sisko again, but is still around for his views, but Rene Auberjonois and Aron Eisenberg aren't around to give permission, they can't be involved in any way. What about then?
If you had to bring a character back, I'd far rather recasting than AI. Maybe for a cameo or as a small amount of the overall picture (say reshoots if they died after primary production had finished). I'm happy with de-aging.
What are they really wanted to DO? Are their characters really a major part of the film? Then probably recast, emphasizing their style, movement, voice. If it's a minor part it doesn't matter much and they should maybe think about whether it's important having at all.
A good example of recasting being unacceptable to some fans: Icheb's shock cameo in "Star Trek: Picard". The brief, graphic scene was important for setting up Seven of Nine's new situation, but the production did not choose to rehire Manu Intiraymi due to a past indiscretion. But keen Icheb fans were unimpressed.
Similarly, Brian Brophy was not rehired as Bruce Maddox. A lot of people didn't even notice until it became a long-running thread on TrekBBS! It had been 20 or so years since Bruce had done any TV acting. Not sure if they even looked for him to play a minor scene.
Trek doesn’t really do recasting
Then they should have said that.
Since this thread due to renaming now covers all Trek, move to "General discussion"?
That raises another question: which do people find more interesting in prequels; the "how did so-and-so get there" for younger versions of characters with known fates, or following the lives of newly introduced/expanded-upon characters whose fates are unknown?
That raises another question: which do people find more interesting in prequels; the "how did so-and-so get there" for younger versions of characters with known fates, or following the lives of newly introduced/expanded-upon characters whose fates are unknown?
This is all pretty much a non-issue. If they do any more re-casting, re-booting, re-whatevering, it's either going to be TOS or TNG. So, DS9 is off the hook.
It made sense in doing the Star Wars "Rogue One" prequel since there's some intrigue in showing how the rebels got the plans and, for those brief seconds on screen, seeing Tarkin and Leia didn't exactly detract, even despite comparatively limited polygonal count compared to a decade later... The estates were also paid for the use of their respective visages. But it's the biggest surprise that their characters were treated right and felt authentic*. The authenticity of flair is easier to do in brief snippets than for numerous whole sections of dialogue and actions.
Then again, I can sit through numerous TOS action scenes featuring stunt doubles that are obvious even on a 15" CRT TV of the sort you'd see in 1967 and the CGI/AI is going to look closer to the actual characters than the stunt doubles had. Imagine if a recent show took a poor stunt double person and had them play the "real deal", topped with crap dialogue... wouldn't begin to fly, but I digress:
The other obvious worst risk is overuse or overreliance. In tandem with long stretches of dialogue that also put the character at risk for feeling inauthentic as a result, too much nostalgia isn't always grand either, on top of diluted and oversaturated amounts of content.
When in doubt, make a new series that may have been influenced or inspired by the old stuff but make it feel like its own thing (e.g. Firefly, Farscape, etc.). That bypasses a lot right out of the gate and makes it easier for audiences both young and old to be more receptive. Or so that one theory goes, there's plenty on social media...
* but neither have I not kept up with every show doing de-aging to have an actor do dialogue just to see what perceivably fits, and subjective vs objective analyses are two different things, of course
Then again, I can sit through numerous TOS action scenes featuring stunt doubles that are obvious even on a 15" CRT TV of the sort you'd see in 1967 and the CGI/AI is going to look closer to the actual characters than the stunt doubles had. Imagine if a recent show took a poor stunt double person and had them play the "real deal", topped with crap dialogue... wouldn't begin to fly, but I digress:
The other obvious worst risk is overuse or overreliance. In tandem with long stretches of dialogue that also put the character at risk for feeling inauthentic as a result, too much nostalgia isn't always grand either, on top of diluted and oversaturated amounts of content.
When in doubt, make a new series that may have been influenced or inspired by the old stuff but make it feel like its own thing (e.g. Firefly, Farscape, etc.). That bypasses a lot right out of the gate and makes it easier for audiences both young and old to be more receptive. Or so that one theory goes, there's plenty on social media...
AI is not advanced enough to look practical. even when there was big noise about a 10 minutes scene made by AI and all the tabloids were fast to declare that you can now make movies with AI, but the video itself looked incredibly fake and was full of errors all over.
Similar threads
