Kevin's Watch

Isnt there limitations .. an estate nor the actor or musician themselves get royalties or payments as a result of using their image or their music .. after 50years deceased isnt it?

And actors dont get royalties or payments akin to musicians anyway do they? I mean the studio pays them for their performance and thats period, no?

I mean I dont know much about acting, movies etc.. but it makes sense that the studio owns the image and could use it at their discretion without future recompense

If Im film a movie .. I dont own the images I shoot the studio who hired me does.

Then film studios could digitally reproduce whatever they are capable of reproducing .. and Id doubt any estate could have a legal financial interest in the use of an image of their relative.

Tis a bold new world free of trailer size demands and snack prescriptions

Actor's contracts are all over the place in this respect. Sometimes they get "residuals", sometimes they don't. Sometimes they can control how their image is used, sometimes they can't.

You can bet the re-amimated actors that we see early on are the ones with the bad contracts.

And you can bet that contracts going forward will take re-animation into account.

Very likely

Its the way of the future thats for sure

I wonder who has control over Stan Lee's image rights now. There was a lot of acrimony and accusations about the way he was being managed in his later years, that people close to him were exploiting his general agreeable disposition to make money. Whichever way that shook out, I wouldn't be entirely surprised if he kept making cameos in Marvel films.

I wonder how long it will be before digitally created characters will be so life like and seamlessly integrated into live action films that famous actors will simply be paid for their image to be used rather than actually having to go to the trouble of turning up on set? Or taken further, whole films, landscape and all, created to perfection digitally mirroring real world locations and performers......?

And now - getting the bit between my teeth and running with it - I'm remembering a section of Yuval Noah Harare's latest book where he tells us that in short order our understanding of human neuroscience and AI will combine such that creative programs will instantly run up musical tracks perfectly tailored to any given listeners particular tastes, and guaranteed to tick the boxes for that person every time a coconut. All such programs will need is for your smart watch, phone or whatever to take your existing playlists, monitor your bioinformatics such as heart rate, ventilation rate and ECG as you listen to a number of tracks and it will tailor make track after track alone for you personally to listen an rock to! (The age of communal music will of course be over, but hey - who needs that prehistoric stuff.)

Well if this can be done with music and books - why not films as well. Each of us having our own absolutely tailored dramas, love story's and chillers or superhero movies, instantly created and every one guaranteed to go immediately into our ten best list surpassing everything that we have seen until that very last creation. No two people ever watching the same film or individually watching the same film twice. You'd never need to because you can always guarantee that the next film created for you will be the best one you have ever seen!



I love this idea - no more crap movies or music........ever!

Seems to be putting a lot of trust in the ability of machines to accurately determine these things...I suspect they will still suck for some time to come...

--A

Agreed Av - but they'd have a hard job to suck as much as most of the stuff I hear and watch these days!

For some reason, both film and music seems to have gone away from a direction that hits the spot for me. I'm sated with the superhero genre and the moment I hear the ubiquitous computer tweaking of modern popular music I'm immediately put off. Guess I just got old while my back was turned!