Slashdot Mirror
CG Idols - Human Not Required
greymond sent in a blurb about computer-generated celebrities in Japan. I'm sure a fair number of you have read Idoru... The Final Fantasy movie didn't do well, but I think it's safe to predict that eventually, computer-generated celebrities will be as numerous as live ones. There are so many advantages for the purveyors of pop culture, ranging from "never gets arrested for drunk driving" to "never demands salary increases", that I think it's inevitable.
When I saw Final Fantasy, I thought the graphics were great. However, that feeling went away after 10 minutes, and the characters seemed to be robotic and void of depth. I'm sure this will get better in the future, but we shouldn't say that it will be inevitable that they will be as numerous as real actors.
We've already seen the start of this... anyone remember Max Headroom from the '80s... Started off on a Coke commercial and got his own show...
-- Ed Bugg --You have freedom of choice, but not of consequences.--
Here in America, I imagine that most people would become bored with a "perfect" celeb. I mean, I find Robert Downey Jr more entertaining since he climbed into his neighbor's kid's bed in a drug induced haze... That's entertainment!
--
http://www.trackspace.com
I'd say either PacMan or Mario was first. Pacman had a couple of TV series, a cereal, and a dance(do the PacMan!). Mario had his own feature film and Capt Lou Albano did a pretty good job portraying him on the TV show.
D
The first, last, and only tech news site on the net
Not a troll but a real question... Does the porn industry already have established digital characters like this? They always seem to lead the way in these areas... no CG person would balk at anything asked of them.
And if they do make real digital celebrities, how long until grey/black market pornographic representations get loose?
Moderation: Put your hand inside the puppet head!
This isn't really that huge of a deal--idolizing a person because they aren't actually real. I guess it seems like a bigger deal than it is because they are computer generated images. But think of all the famous "people" we have now that aren't real: Mickey Mouse, Bugs Bunny...even CG like Woody and Buzz. No need to look at Japan for that type of thing.
:)
Maybe because the line between what is real and what is not becomes blurred by CG makes this more of a story. Some could mistake Aki for a real person (in a still picture at least), but I don't think anyone would assume Buzz is real. As we head forward into more and more realistic CG, I think an effort should be made to distinguish what characters are real and what are not when blending them with live action--just for society's sanity
PS - on an unrelated note, I read that George Harrison passed away...RIP to an incredibly talented man.
Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?
The one thing of particular note from my relatively short 23 years so far, is that nothing is inevitable. Things as trivial as this are certainly not inevitable, because things as complex as people with termial diseases do not inevitably die. Some few fortunate souls have had HIV for 25+ years with out ever suffering negative consequences. A guy out in my area several years fell off of the 10th floor of a construction project, and was impaled from his leg through the top of his skull, even through his heart by a lengthy bolt. They removed it and he is having a perfectly normal life, with a few good scars to show for it. People's parachutes fail to open and they walk away from it.
Are computer animated celebrities inevitable? No, I hardly think so. Likely perhaps but not inevitable.
/tangent off
Slay a dragon... over lunch!
Here's Yuki Terai's offical site. Not quite photo-realistic, but pretty good CG. Guys with a thing for little Japanese girls should love it.
www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance
(highly UK specific post....)
There have since been many virtual stars already. Ventriloquist dummies are often stars in their own right, but Basil brush, Emu, and Roland Rat are all virtual characters that have not only had their own shows, but been interviewed as stars and so on.
The move from puppets and models to CGI is not that important.
Roland Rat was especially interesting because he didn't have a clearly identifiable human partner, but was very much a creation of the TV company.
At the end of the day, these things are all fiction. I can't really see people getting more excited about a CGI model than a furry puppet. It's also _much_ harder to use the CGI model. An interview with the virtual star would require weeks of computer work and post processing just to fit the CGI model into the normal studio shot of the interview. Not exactly spontaneous and realistic.
At least with Roland rat the guy operating him could ad-lib.
-----
A quote from Gamastra.com :
"Square's CEO Quits after Poor Showing by Final Fantasy Game software maker Square announced that president and chief executive officer, Hisashi Suzuki would resign after the company reported its worst-ever loss for the first half due to a disappointing showing by its Final Fantasy The Spirits Within mo Square reported a group net loss of $106.8 million for the six months through September 30. The film has generated revenue of about $30 million in the U.S. market, well below the targeted $80 to 90 million, and interest among Japanese consumers has also been weak. The earnings news came as no surprise to the market as the company issued a profit warning last week.
Chief operating officer Yoichi Wada will take the top position on December 1, while Suzuki will remain as the chairman."
from this page.
It's sad to see that people who worked so hard on something that was quite something technically have not succeeded, at least financially.
Computer generated celebrities are fine, I guess,
but are we really that inventive?
Starmakers give us Britney Spears. Worse, they give us Britney clone after clone after clone, at least when they're not cooking up another boy band or Country-Western Hat Act or heavy metal lizard band.
Britney Spears, yes. No Doubt, no.
Do you believe that a million CG monkeys at a million CG terminals would ever come up with a Humphrey Bogart, a Jimmy Stewart? Heck, how about an Arnold Schwartzenegger (Give it up man, with that accent, you'll never make it in movies).
Life is more creative than we are.
Thank God for that. It keeps things interesting.
When you look at how disconnected celebrities are from the reality that their fans' live ... CG characters may be the ultimate in understanding. It's quite possible that CG characters may more down to earth than their hollywood counterparts, as the people creating them and animating them will live lives substantially closer to our own than Julia Roberts ever has.
"Old man yells at systemd"
Are you kidding? You think the artists, let alone the software and hardware manufacturers are going to just stand aside when it starts raining money?
324006
Heh. I saw this photo and couldn't help but think, "Hmm, Real Dolls?"
I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
It's unlikely that CG idols will not be tainted by scandals: I bet lots of popular CG idols will appear in prOn, have afairs with other CG idols, or even real people - they're computer generated, and so they are far more easy to reproducible, duplicate and copy than their flesh-and-bone counterparts.
Scandal and sex sure could sell well, and someone out there is going to try to make money on it, even if it's some CG Idol pirate ripping the Idol copyright owner off.
Salaries. Now, in order to load a film full of stars and make it a high profile deal, one no longer has to fork out obscene amounts of cash to attract big names to take a role in the film.
Versatility. Whereas there are some people we wish we could change, we can't. Pixels on a screen, however, are amazingly easy to change: Directors will be able to create the exact effect they wish, as long as they have the correct software and capable technicians at their disposal. "One Role" actors are definately going to take a hit: when faced with characters who can act whatever their director wishes, they will invariably get the short end of the deal.
While I am definately going to get a lot of people disagreeing with my optimism(?) I think that these actors, in the hands of a good director and staff, will become a cheap and amazingly powerful tool which will produce far better films. However, we'll still see human actors for a very long time, because there's no mistaking that human effect....
What's in a Sig?
At Hammerhead, we have been approached to do a character like this as well, call her Desiree [name changed to protect, well, me :)]. This group of producers wanted to create a pop star that didn't have all of the baggage that real people have; they could then choose the actual voice behind the character strictly on the basis of singing ability. As with these Japanese characters, Desiree would have a biography, would appear on radio interview shows, would endorse products, etc. With the recent advances in skin rendering, one could make a far more compelling image than the plastic-like characters to date.
The producers wanted the character to be 'racy' and 'revealing', like Britney -- something that I consider a tragic mistake. Perhaps as her career evolved over ten years or so I would think that she shoul d go that way, but I feel that flashy but modest clothes would be far more appealing over time than the same old skin. Clothes are adornment, not just censorship.
Personally, I don't see this as very different than Britney Spears. Britney is almost as synthetic as Desiree -- and at least Desiree would lip-synch competently.
This project drifted along for a while and finally died, as do 95% of all proposed projects. Still, it will definitely happen, the economics work. Desiree need only 'live' a few dozen minutes a year; and those appearances could be funded at a pretty reasonable rate.
This contrasts to what the poster above commented about porn stars. He commented that this would be an obvious venue, as you could build perfect bodies that would do anything. It seems to me that porn stars already have next-to-perfect bodies, and from what I can tell, there is very little that they won't do. More importantly, they are cheap. The most expensive full-length porn movies don't cost nearly as much as a synthetic music video would cost, say, $500,000. From what I've read, porn stars make most of their money outside of the films by performing live -- they treat the films as advertising for the live shows. Needless to say, this is beyond the capabilities of synthetic characters to this point.
I love Mondays. On a Monday, anything is possible.
Speaking of digital actors, there is a Bruce Lee movie coming out. The new movie will star a digitized Bruce Lee. They even have people impersonating his voice!
Why aren't we told when editors moderate our posts?
It is a quick way to try to rip of someone the glamour of a well known star.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
god help us.
There are so many advantages for the purveyors of pop culture
Maybe-JUST MAYBE, we could collectively grow up a little and realize that our PRESENT 'pop-stars' may as well be CG. They live scripted, Public-Relations-hyped lives - dating, divorcing, fucking, drinking, clubbing, working, whatever - who cares? Why do I care what Kristina Applegate eats for supper?
The fact that "we" have a pop-culture phenomenon at all is proof of a greater illness in our culture... I am not sure exactly what would cause people to replace a 'real' relationship/knowledge with a real person (family/friend/neighbour) with the 'virtual-reward' of having 'virtual relationships' is mind-numbing.
The 'purveyors of pop culture' are meddling with the human-psyche in a uncontrolled and viscous manner. They purposely seek to build memes and use their vitality for profit, at the expense of the real health of the public, strangers. Like corporate propagandists (marketers and advertisers) these people seek to meddle in your mind, to take advantage of your desires and needs and to give them 'virtual satisfaction' by overwhelming you with a 'reality they create'... this realty is then exploited to create wealth for them. These plutocrats and oligarchies are out of control - I see no difference between the RIAA and Washington in terms of the genuine self-less-ness that would be expected of those who occupy positions of such power.
What does this have to do with CG pop stars? Well, think, what does it mean when people are willing to accept stories - told as fact - about virtual people. What does it say about the overall conditioning of modern people? about their ability to be influenced, as a group, from afar, with motivations completely unknown??? Why would we view a CG 'pop star character' as anything more than a playfull curiosity - why would the scripted existence of such a thing not illicit ire and a sense of being insulted. I can understand small children being mis-lead and accepting the concept of such a thing, but grown people, I believe should be a little more apprehensive to accept a 'CG person-product' in their lives.
Sure, human celebrities are real people, but you'll never actually see the real person unless you happen to be a close family member or friend. What's the point of elevating fake personas to such status?
The two word answer: social control.
If people are engaged with how to look like an icon, or how to live like one, they are less inclined to notice what's really going on in the world.
For example, there are now kangaroo military courts alive and well in America, because it is "at war". It might give one pause to think about the deeper, underlying issues of what is being done here in the name of "freedom" and "security" if we didn't have the Britney Spears of the world tarting around to remind us what's *really* important: just-legal lust (though Bob Dole's dirty-old-man routine in the Burpsi commercials failed in this regard: too openly creepy for me.)
In _The Republic_, Plato wanted to ban artists--actors, singers, etc.--as being dangerous distractions for the people of the polis; he saw entertainers as a bad thing. However, in the inverted polis that is America, the distraction of the manufactured personality is not only a good thing, it is absolutely required to maintain the power structure.
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws."--Tacitus, The Histories