This is an actual acceptable use case imo. OG is still kicking but can’t reprise role due to medical issue. Instead of recasting the role they are using a tool to recreate the original with their permission to keep true to the original. No different than de-aging an actor in a movie like Tron legacy.
Is it though? The previous actor reprising their role is always a kinda nice little thing to have, but far from necessary. That role could go to someone else who would receive the pay, credit, and experience; and I think arguably it should.
Everyone is hungry for a “legitimate” use case and I don’t think this is it.
Well, if you read the article, the entire issue is that this is an expansion of the game which will be intermixed with 1000s of lines of dialogue of the actor’s old voice. Hiring a new person does not solve the problem of having the old voice lines mixed with new voice lines. Further, they are also planning to make an entire new game after this expansion, and the impression I get from the article is that they are happy to use the original actor with his new voice for that, and he’s happy to do it; so again it makes no sense to hire someone new.
Well, you can feel sympathy for either actor, but it’s not like a new actor is any more entitled to the role, and someone with medical issues who can’t work the same way seems to call for some accommodations.
Either option prioritizes helping a real actor versus replacing them, so I think it’s neutral - but that implies a legitimate use case.
Agreed. This is a very different situation from, say, a greedy estate ghoulishly agreeing to a deceased person being ‘resurrected’ for new appearances.
This is an actual acceptable use case imo. OG is still kicking but can’t reprise role due to medical issue. Instead of recasting the role they are using a tool to recreate the original with their permission to keep true to the original. No different than de-aging an actor in a movie like Tron legacy.
Is it though? The previous actor reprising their role is always a kinda nice little thing to have, but far from necessary. That role could go to someone else who would receive the pay, credit, and experience; and I think arguably it should.
Everyone is hungry for a “legitimate” use case and I don’t think this is it.
Sometimes a change of voice actor completely puts me off of a series. Or the change of an actor in a show. Case: the Witcher tv series
The wig budget, no matter how large it was… not big enough.
😂😂😭
Well, if you read the article, the entire issue is that this is an expansion of the game which will be intermixed with 1000s of lines of dialogue of the actor’s old voice. Hiring a new person does not solve the problem of having the old voice lines mixed with new voice lines. Further, they are also planning to make an entire new game after this expansion, and the impression I get from the article is that they are happy to use the original actor with his new voice for that, and he’s happy to do it; so again it makes no sense to hire someone new.
That’s cool how they will try to continue with the actor later.
Well, you can feel sympathy for either actor, but it’s not like a new actor is any more entitled to the role, and someone with medical issues who can’t work the same way seems to call for some accommodations.
Either option prioritizes helping a real actor versus replacing them, so I think it’s neutral - but that implies a legitimate use case.
Are they paying the original voice actor too?
Yes, they paying! And it all goes with the actor, not behind his back.
Agreed. This is a very different situation from, say, a greedy estate ghoulishly agreeing to a deceased person being ‘resurrected’ for new appearances.
Your cheque from OpenAI is in the mail