The Aging Actor Dilemma: How Hollywood Makes Its Stars Eternal

The Aging Actor Dilemma: How Hollywood Makes Its Stars Eternal

Welcome to MsMojo and today we’re doing a deep dive into the impact of de-aging technology on the film industry. We’ll be discussing the benefits and limitations of keeping Hollywood’s old guard in the spotlight for longer, and how this is changing the landscape of cinema.

Hollywood began to experiment with computer-generated imagery as early as the 1940s. However, it wasn’t until the nineties and early 2000s that CGI, as we think of it today, became such an integral part of the film industry. De-aging technology is a relatively new visual effects technique in which the image of an actor is digitally edited or touched up to make them appear younger, sometimes with the help of stand-ins. Occasionally, the image is even created from scratch.

The first notable use of digital de-aging was in the opening sequence of “X-Men: The Last Stand,” released in 2006. Since then, the technique has mostly been employed for short flashback scenes. However, in the last decade, it’s been cropping up more and more, with the Marvel Cinematic Universe continuing to lead the charge.

So What Are the Pros?

Consistency & Accuracy

In the past, time jumps in films have usually been dealt with in one of two ways. The characters are aged up or down using makeup, or they’re played by more than one actor. Makeup and prosthetics can be very convincing when aging up, but aging down is more of a challenge. It’s often easier to go with a younger actor, but this can be jarring for an audience, especially when we’re dealing with a big star. For example, we know exactly what Bruce Willis looked like as a young man, so we know he looked nothing like Joseph Gordon-Levitt. In “Looper,” prosthetics were used to subtly change Gordon-Levitt’s appearance, but as visual effects technology becomes more advanced, it’s natural for filmmakers to want the younger versions of their characters to resemble their leading actors as much as possible. For a short scene in particular, de-aging technology, when done well, can provide consistency and prevent confusion.

Helping Improve & Better the Technology

Okay, back in “X-Men” days, we might not have been quite so convinced, but the more de-aging technology is used and developed, the better it’s going to get. For “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” in 2008, the digital effects team aged up Brad Pitt using the Mova camera system to log his facial expressions and rebuild them into a new, older face. For 2019’s “Gemini Man,” Will Smith was aged down using facial recognition technology merged with data from his performance in “The Fresh Prince of Bel Air.” There are still some issues to iron out, but soon we might not even be able to tell the difference between old footage of a star in their youth and a digitally altered image. It may be unnerving, but it’s still exciting to see the technology progress.

The Fun/Nostalgia Factor

For now we’re enjoying the de-aging thing mostly as a gimmick. Because, of course, it’s fun to see our favorite stars return to their youth. The brief appearance of a young Michael Douglas in “Ant-Man” had film fans feeling nostalgic, as did the digitally de-aged face of Johnny Depp in “Dead Men Tell No Tales.” The actors themselves have been known to enjoy it too. Samuel L. Jackson took to social media to share his thoughts on his new look in “Captain Marvel,” saying, “Wow, this Marvel de-aging thing is doper than I thought!”

But What’s the Flipside?

The Tech Can’t Really Turn Back the Clock

So yes, Jackson is right - digital de-aging does look pretty dope. But it definitely has its limitations. There’s more to turning back the clock than smoothing out a few forehead wrinkles, and there are other ways an aging actor can give themselves away. Take the most recent “Indiana Jones” as an example. Ford may look like a young Indy. But he still sounds and moves like an eighty-year-old man. In a short flashback scene, this may be barely noticeable. But the intro to “Dial of Destiny” is twenty-five minutes long - long enough for the cracks to begin to show.

For the 2019 film “The Irishman,” visual effects supervisor Pablo Helman spent two years developing new technology that would allow him to de-age a cast of elderly stars, without using motion-capture headgear or facial tracking dots. De Niro and Al Pacino do look younger, facially. But even actors of this calibre are going to find it difficult to recreate the physicality and movement of a young man, once they’ve passed the age of seventy.

Even when the age gap is much smaller, physical differences can come into play. For Peter Jackson’s “Hobbit” trilogy, Orlando Bloom returned as Legolas. As Elves are immortal, and “The Hobbit” takes place decades before “The Lord of the Rings,” Bloom was de-aged for consistency. His face, in the later trilogy, is therefore just as smooth and elf-like, but there’s no hiding that he’s still physically different - a thirty-something man, not a boyish twenty-something-year-old.

Technology Dates

De-aging software continues to improve, but the faster technology moves on, the quicker early trials of the tech become dated. CGI dates a film much quicker than practical effects or makeup, and the first examples of de-aging are beginning to look amateurish, now that we’ve seen better. If we can already pinpoint the limitations of de-aging in certain movies, how are those films going to hold up in a few years?

Does the De-Aging Process Sometimes Go Too Far?

De-aging can also have negative effects on an actor’s performance. De-aged faces sometimes have an overly smooth, animated quality to them, and the natural movement of the face is altered. An actor’s facial expressions are important. When the face is digitally modified - even if it’s just a little touch-up - aspects of their performance may be lost.

When discussing the de-aging technology used in his film “The Irishman,” with British director Joanna Hogg, Martin Scorsese admitted his own concerns, saying, “Does [it] change the eyes at all? If that’s the case, what was in the eyes that I liked? Was it intensity? Was it gravitas? Was it threat? And then how do we get it back? I don’t know.”

The Ethical Dilemma

Less Opportunity for Young Actors

As well as the practical limitations and impact on an actor’s performance, we also have to consider the ethical issues of de-aging. When veteran stars like De Niro and Harrison Ford are still taking the lead in big-budget movies, where does that leave the young (and not so young) up-and-comers? British actor Stephen Graham took his career to a new level with his role in “The Irishman,” but why not cast more relative newbies in key roles? If they’d had the technology to de-age Marlon Brando for “The Godfather Part II,” Robert De Niro might not be the star he is today.

Even a flashback scene or a small part as the younger version of a lead character can be a big opportunity for a young actor. Saoirse Ronan was Oscar-nominated for her performance as young Briony in “Atonement.” More recently, Robert Aramayo, who played the young Ned Stark in “Game of Thrones” and young Elrond in “Rings of Power,” has taken the step up to big-screen leading man.

Why Not Write Age-Appropriate Roles for Older Actors?

With the decline of the mid-budget film and the changing habits of cinemagoers, there seem to be fewer “movie stars” among the younger generation of actors. Therefore, the old-school big names, with their proven talent and ability to pull in audiences, remain a valuable commodity, even into their later years. But what does the de-aging epidemic tell us about Hollywood’s attitude towards these mature movie stars? So far, de-aging technology has mostly been used for flashbacks. As it gets better, will we see more aging stars with digital facelifts shoved into leading roles written for much younger actors? Instead of finding ways to put elderly men or middle-aged female characters centre stage, will writers simply rely on de-aging to keep stars looking fresh-faced, at the point at which they would traditionally begin to age out of the best roles?

Do We Really Need More Airbrushing?

With the rise in the everyday use of social media filters, Photoshop, and AI - not to mention Botox - our perception of how people really look is becoming more and more warped. The stars of the big screen are already kept preternaturally youthful by lifestyle, plastic surgery, personal trainers, and good styling. Do we really need to add digital de-aging to all that? We could also argue that even movie stars should be allowed to grow old gracefully, and not be forced to disguise themselves beneath a digital mask of their own face from twenty years ago.

What Could Be in Store for the Future?

The ethics become even murkier when the tech is used to turn adults back into children or resurrect actors from the dead. In series four of “Stranger Things,” a younger version of Eleven was created, using a body double or “virtual actor” with Millie Bobby Brown’s face added on top in the post-production stages.

Stranger still, over in the “Star Wars” universe, filmmakers made the unusual decision to have the deceased act alongside the living. The late Peter Cushing was digitally recreated for “Rogue One” in 2016, reprising his role from the original movie from 1977. Visual effects supervisor John Knoll told Yahoo Movies, “We weren’t doing anything that I think Peter Cushing would’ve objected to” - but as the actor died in 1994, he couldn’t exactly give his consent. Carrie Fisher also appears in some scenes from 2019’s “The Rise of Skywalker,” which were filmed after she passed. This was made possible using her daughter as a body double, and unused footage shot for “Episode VII.” In both cases, the family gave permission, and perhaps both actors would have approved the choice, given the chance. However, the idea of having access to an actor’s image, when they no longer have any knowledge of or control over how it’s used and distributed, raises a lot of ethical questions.

Alternatives to CGI Aging

Makeup:

So now we come full circle to argue that CGI de-aging - however useful or impressive - is not always necessary. The technology has been progressing in leaps and bounds, but time hasn’t stood still for other areas of the film industry either. Movie makeup, for example, is just getting better and better. From Dick Van Dyke in “Mary Poppins” to the parents in “Back to the Future,” a wig and some skillfully applied prosthetics can be enough to create the desired aging effect when paired with an equally skilled actor. As we said earlier, aging down is trickier, but it can often be achieved sufficiently with the subtle styling of makeup, hair, and clothes. And if aging down is more difficult, why not take a risk on new young stars and use makeup to add a few decades, rather than trying to recapture the youth of an established talent who’s ready to take on more mature roles?

Casting Different Actors for Different Ages

Of course, rather than trying to alter anyone’s age, you could just cast different actors. There have been bad examples of this, of course. But when the casting is spot on, you get real movie magic. A digitally de-aged Harrison Ford is all very well, but a young Anthony Ingruber in “The Age of Adaline” is pretty convincing too - and that smile is so familiar that the nostalgia still hits.

He may not look exactly the same. Just like young “Scrooge” in “A Muppet’s Christmas Carol” looks different from a young Michael Caine, or Romola Garai in “Atonement” looks different from a young Vanessa Redgrave. However, sometimes you have to sacrifice total accuracy for emotional authenticity. It not only gives different actors a chance, but we’d also argue that it produces better performances.

Conclusion

So what do you think? Is digital de-aging a viable future or a slippery slope that erodes the authenticity of the movie industry and crosses lines into unethical territory? We’d argue that it’s still fun for a flashback. However, the potential to preserve the stars in a perpetual state of youth - and even keep their images alive to fill leading roles after death - is more unnerving than entertaining. We think “Jurassic Park’s” Ian Malcolm may have said it best.

Are you excited or unnerved by digital de-aging? And what movie do you think did it best? Let us know in the comments!