Digitally resurrecting actors is still a terrible idea

In the long-running Alien film series, the Weyland-Yutani corporation can not seem to let go of a terrible idea: it’s still attempting to money in on a deadly movie xenomorph.

No matter how again and again they fail, irrespective of how many individuals die in the method, each time the corporate comes across a familiar, chest-bursting, acid-blooded alien, corporate executives can’t help but say, “We can do this.”

Unfortunately, as much as I loved Alien: Romulus (and I did, a lot!), this recent sequel (or “interquel”) can’t appear to shake off a terrible idea: Hollywood’s obsession with using CGI to rejuvenate or resurrect beloved actors.

De-aging has grow to be more common as filmmakers have attempted to simulate a younger Harrison Ford in “Indiana Jones and the Shield of Destiny,” a younger Will Smith in “Gemini Man” or a younger Robert De Niro and Al Pacino in “The Irishman.”

But effects have also been used to bring actors and characters back from the dead, akin to Peter Cushing’s Grand Moff Tarkin in “Rogue One.” “Alien: Romulus” attempts a similar trick — while it doesn’t resurrect the very same murderous android from the unique “Alien,” it does feature a similar model, played apparently by the identical actor, Ian Holm, who died in 2020.

The filmmakers said brought Holm’s likeness to the screen using animatronics and a performance by actor Daniel Betts, and there is also clear CGI. Since replacing actors with digital simulacra was one among the hot topics from last 12 months’s actors’ strikeNo wonder the director of “Romulus”, Fede Álvarez, recalled hearing similar comments in the course of the shooting of the film: “I remember someone saying, ‘That’s it, they’ll replace us as actors.'”

But Álvarez believes these fears are exaggerated.

“’Man, if I hire you, it’s going to cost me one person’s money,’” he said. “You literally have to hire 45 people to do that. And you still have to hire an actor to do the show!”

So from a final perspective, working actors may don’t have anything to fret about… for now. And then there’s this: Every example I’ve seen, including “Romulus,” looks…

I’m sure there are various talented visual effects artists working on these effects, and I’m sure they’ve made some progress through the years. There’s something almost noble in the best way they keep throwing themselves at a problem, only to deliver the identical amazing results – irrespective of how close they got to the true thing, I’ve never seen a de-aged actor or digital ghost that wasn’t immediately obvious. Every single one among them makes me aware of their fakeness for each second they’re on screen.

“Romulus” provided a particularly stark demonstration. When viewers first caught a glimpse of Holm’s recent/old character, Rook, his face was obscured—we only saw him from the back and side, heard his familiar, distorted voice, and that was it. Suggestion did all of the work; no digital resurrection was required (no less than not visually).

Then, unfortunately, the film cut to his face, and I immediately gasped in recognition. Instead of specializing in the plain CGI on screen, my mind wandered, picturing some studio exec saying, “We can do this.”