THIS is the Han Solo You Were Looking For

Since it's Halloween week, it seemed like a great time to do a fun post that looks at both state of the art trickery and role-playing. It seems there's been some really interesting developments and discussion related to the Star Wars franchise. :)

First of all, there was a recent buzz on the io9 site about the "remake" of Solo: A Star Wars Story created by someone with a handle of "derpfakes" (which, apparently, means "deep fakes") using Deep Learning AI to insert Harrison Ford's face into the actual footage.

Check out the clip:

Somewhat convincing, if you ask me, though the voice still needs some work in a few of these scenes. If this technique has a future in Hollywood, it could lead to some fascinating possibilities. But there's a bit of a spin to the story...

Commenters on the article had some gripes. They basically said better casting might have been the key to a more believable young Solo in the first place. They recommended actor Anthony Ingruber as a better fit than the actual man cast in the role, Alden Ehrenreich.

After viewing the example -- no offense to Ehrenreich, who is a fine actor -- but I have to agree. The casting for this particular role was not what it could have been. Not only is Ingruber's appearance much more what I'd expect for a young Han Solo, but his voice and inflections are dead on!

Your mileage may vary.

Watch this clip from Age of Adaline and you be the judge. Please let me know what you think. (Sorry for any ads that might mar the experience. Can't avoid them these days. :( )

[This video link was apparently disabled after I composed the post, but you can click here to see it on YouTube: Anthony Ingruber in Age of Adaline. And again, sorry for the ads.]

The looks, the gestures, the voice... Yes!

After watching the clip, I read several comments that Anthony Ingruber actually auditioned for the role of young Han Solo in the movie, but didn't get it! Some theorized this happened because his competition "had a better agent."

Very sad, if true, because I feel it was a missed opportunity for the film's connection. Although Solo was full of action and an entertaining enough movie, one of the things that really marred the viewing experience for me was that I had a hard time reconciling the young Han Solo portrayed in the film with the character I knew and loved so well. I didn't feel like I was actually seeing a younger Han, but some stranger I couldn't connect with at anywhere near the same level.

But back to the derpfakes/deep fakes subject. Here's one more offering. A very quick glimpse of another re-creation from the closing scene of Rogue One.

Watch closely. The original CGI recreation of Carrie Fisher is in the top pane, and the Deep Fakes version -- which reportedly wasn't high res and was created on a desktop computer -- is at the bottom.

Will the real Princess Leia please stand up?

I'm seeing some real promise for future franchises that do prequels and sequels 40 years (or heck, 20) after the original film.

Can you imagine a new Firefly series or motion picture--with the Deep Learning AI technology used for actors who have aged beyond their roles? (Though certainly not Nathan Fillion, if you've seen him in clips for his latest series, The Rookie. He could still totally play Captain Mal Reynolds. He looks younger now than he did when he played Castle!)

Of course, this and other evolving technology might not be all fun and games. It could also lead to some applications that might bring scarier results--like placing people at scenes where they've never actually been, or depicting words coming out of people's mouths that they never actually said, or people doing things they've never actually done. 

Hmmm... A bit chilling, yes? If you have time to spare, you can view this YouTube video on some of the more dubious uses of this new technology.

Have a great week and enjoy your tricks and treats.

HaPpY HaLlOwEeN WeEk

Where to now for Star Wars?

Well, well. Copies of Solo haven't hit the stores yet, so I haven't seen the movie – but it's interesting that the media has described the film as a 'flop'. Google 'Solo flop' and you'll get everybody (and their dog's) take on the sales and the so-called reasons. Franchise fatigue is one – Solo came out just five months after The Last Jedi, but as the writer of this article from the Daily Express points out, Marvel has churned out a heap of Avengers movies in a short time, so that's not it. And the argument that people got their knickers in a knot over The Last Jedi to the extent they abandoned Star Wars isn't very convincing, either. The fellow at the Express reckons Solo wasn't marketed well, since Alden Ehrenreich had to fill Harrison Ford's larger than life shoes to play the role of Han Solo.

Whatever. All the messing about with the production didn't help. When Ron Howard was hired to replace the original directors, he re-shot 70% of the film so costs soared.

What constitutes a box office flop? This is Variety's take on the matter. "The numbers don’t lie. “Solo” earned a disappointing $103 million in North America over its opening weekend and stalled out with $68.2 million overseas. At this rate, it will fall short of the $1 billion mark that each Disney-released “Star Wars” adventure has managed to fly past. The latest instalment will struggle to make even half that amount globally. Analysts project “Solo” could end its run with approximately $400 million to $450 million in revenues, a dreadful result for a film that cost at least $250 million to produce and $150 million to promote." [Variety]

But that's in the past. Let's move on to the future. We've learned a few things about Star Wars 9.

The first is that it will be directed by J.J. Abrams.  Since he directed The Force Awakens, that bodes ill for me. I thought SW7 was absolutely derivative, so much like A New Hope that I was almost dizzy from rolling my eyes. He also directed Star Trek: Into Darkness, which also had me rolling my eyes (although not quite as much). So I have a bad feeling about this.

Princess Leia was supposed to have been front and center of the last film in this trilogy, but she is no longer with us. I'm glad to say she won't be resurrected in CGI, but the writing elves at Disney will have to come up with something in this movie to bring the trilogy to a satisfying conclusion. (Let's hope Rey kills off that exasperating jerk, Kylo Ren).

It seems Disney (or Abrams) can't help itself with the links to the past, though. Billy Dee Williams will be reprising his role as Lando Calrissian. As Han explains to Leia in Empire, 'He's a card player, a gambler, a scoundrel. You'd like him.'. Oh lordy I do so hope this isn't going to be another eye-rolling episode. Abrams keeps pulling characters out of the past. He reprised a young Khan in ST:Into Darkness. I still can't believe the best he could come up with in TFA was an orphan with strange powers who was abandoned on a desert planet, is caught up in a quest to destroy a super weapon.

Oh, I'll be watching SW9, of course. But I'll have a certain level of trepidation. There's plenty of time for Disney and Abrams to convince me, though. It's due for release in December, 2019.

Fingers firmly crossed.

Will the new Star Wars story make the grade?

Solo: A Star Wars Story is due out in about a week's time. You know me, Star Wars tragic. Sort of. I'm not always starry-eyed about what Disney has produced. (The Force Awakens, anybody?) Yes, I'll certainly watch it, but not at the movies. I'm not that excited. And yes, I have some reservations.

I really liked Rogue One and I think part of that was because it added to the original Star Wars story, and pretty well all of the characters were new. I didn't have to make allowances for different people playing characters we already loved. That's going to be the main challenge for Solo. Harrison Ford did such a great job with the role. Think 'Han' and you see Harrison. The new young actor Alden Ehrenreich has big shoes to fill. We also have had enough hints in the other Star Wars movies to sketch in questions. How did Han meet Chewie? How did he acquire the Millenium Falcon from Lando Calrissian? How come he wears military-style pants?

Naturally, at this stage reviewers have already seen the film. I read one (here's the link) by a person who wasn't impressed. He said the story adds to the canon, but doesn't expand it. And I had to wonder what he expected? Especially for this first movie. I've read the Han Solo trilogy written by Brian Daley, in which Han and Chewie have some brand new adventures which have nothing to do with the original movies. No Leia, no Darth etc. They were fun. But this new movie is all about filling in Han's backstory. Another movie could expand into the Star Wars galaxy talking about the Kessel Run or some such. The reviewer made reference to the end of The Last Jedi, where there are hints at something further, but I do not see how that can be done in a movie about Han Solo, talking about events that took place before A New Hope.

So I think when I see the film, I'll be getting what I expect. Ron Howard is an accomplished director.  He did a great job with Apollo 13 and that great movie, Cocoon. I read an article in the Weekend Australian where he talked about taking over the direction of Solo halfway through. He seems to be well pleased with Ehrenreich's Han. I hope I will be, too. Either way, it'll be fast-paced fun.

And in case you haven't seen it, here's the trailer.

Just a reminder - Pippa, Laurie and I will be donating a portion of our earnings from books sold as part of the push to promote research to find a cure for ALS. Here's the link again. We'd love it if you buy a book.

 

 

http://www.leakirk.com/supporting-als.html