In late 2019, director Anton Ernst announced he would be producing a new film, Finding Jack, starring James Dean. This seemed odd, however, as James Dean died in a car crash in 1955. To accomplish this miraculous feat, Ernst planned to use computer generated imagery (CGI) as well as recorded footage of Dean to recreate Dean’s image, allowing “him” to play the leading role.

  • Two modern actors, Chris Evans and Elijah Wood, publicly denounced the casting decision. Evans’ tweet on the matter began “I’m sure he’d be thrilled” and compared using a CGI James Dean to having a computer “paint a new Picasso” or “write a couple new John Lennon tunes,” concluding that the “complete lack of understanding here is shameful.”

    The argument is not explicit, but Evans seems to be making two related points: first, this recreation shows a lack of regard for Dean’s consent and his potential interests; second, any generated performance is “inauthentic” – it’s impossible to recreate a true James Dean performance in the same way a computer-generated Picasso would not be a Picasso and a computer-generated Lennon tune wouldn’t be ascribable to Lennon. Trying to recreate such performances is a sort of deception, pretending that the performance is Dean’s when it isn’t.

But supporters of CGI recreation see it as just another form of artistic expression. In the United States one actually owns one’s likeness, so to use his image, Ernst had to obtain approval from Dean’s estate to go forward with the project. As long as Ernst possesses the rights to Dean’s likeness, we can disregard objections about Dean’s hypothetical wishes. Case closed. We don’t actually know Dean would object to this use of his image, and, given the family’s blessing, there’s no sense speculating as to the wishes the dead might have had.

We might also look to more recent examples. In 2016, the Star Wars movie Rogue One featured CGI recreations of actors Peter Cushing (as Grand Moff Tarkin) and a young Carrie Fisher (as Princess Leia). Like Dean, Cushing was dead at the time of his recreation. But Fisher was alive and happy to see herself portrayed, even going so far to say she couldn’t tell it was CGI.

  • Still, the worries about these types of CGI recreations run deeper than merely concern for the actors involved. What about the effects of this practice on the industry as a whole? Many qualified actors without jobs could have taken the role given to CGI-Dean. Perhaps they are harmed by being passed over. What if directors or studios decide it’s easier (or cheaper) to simply manipulate a CGI likeness than hire flesh-and-blood humans? Perhaps acting is the kind of thing that can simply be done by a machine.

–Discussion Questions–

Is it morally permissible for Ernst to cast a CGI version of James Dean as the star of his new film? Why or why not?

What is the reason or origin for respecting the will of the dead? Can dead people be harmed? Should the wishes a person might have had while living matter in ethical decision-making? Should the rights to one’s likeness be automatically inherited by one’s heirs?

Would anything of value be lost if actors were replaced with simulations? Consider the reaction of Carrie Fisher to her CGI double: she assumed the scene was just old footage that she herself had shot. If Fisher could not distinguish her own acting from a simulation, what possible difference could it make to the audience?