Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Benjamin Olson" data-source="post: 9060310" data-attributes="member: 6988941">I would guess that the reason de-aging Mads Mikkelson was dodgier than de-aging Harrison Ford is that they had an extensive library of vintage footage of his character they were using to paint an 80s Indy face over Mr. Ford and/or his stand-in, whereas with Mikkelson they probably just used the computer's projection of what he looked like younger (to make that sound much simpler than it no doubt was) or if they were using reference materials from when he was younger they were disperate and not of him as that character. Also they just knew he'd be under less scrutiny.De-aged Indy only really bothered me in the shot where he first jumps onto the train, because they also didn't seem to give his hair believable movement (or at least so I thought the one time I saw it), which emphasized how fake everything was. But yes the effectiveness did vary from frame to frame rather than shot to shot. The technology is clearly there enough for the right sparing uses, but not quite up to what they tried to do with it here. At the very least they should have avoided so many close-ups so that they could spend more time on the ones they really needed.</blockquote>