> Actors get paid by the contract, not hourly.  so this argument is invalid.

The contract amount will just be based on the expected amount of work 
(which surely includes some expectation of retakes). If the average 
number of retakes is reduced due to such technology then you can imagine 
the expected amount of work would be less at the star.

Anyway it's not just paying the actor, it's everything else. Paying all 
the other staff, travel/accommodation, creating the set again, etc. If 
there was the requirement/option to just modify the facial expression 
and/or words in a pre-shot sequence, it's going to save a lot of money.

> Crispin Glover sued the makers of BTTF 2 for profiting from his likeness without
> compensation.

Presumably once such technology is established and working well, it will 
be in the contract, that they are allowed to use it if necessary.

> I admit that the dubbing thing is an idea that I didn't consider, but I don't
> think that the benefits outweigh the risks.

The risks don't go away though if you don't use the technology. Someone 
has invented it and made it public.

Post a reply to this message