[BlackBox]

It wouldn't cost as much to de-age Shat, because he has kept in such great shape. He could probably still do his own action scenes (judo chop!), saving Paramount even more money.

[NCC-73515]

And he wouldn't need any costumes, saving even more...

[kevin]

ooh......I upchucked a bit......

[FireDevlin]

Oh boy . . .

Eh, what the hell. I like Shatner, old fatty and all. There, I said it.

Having said it, they blew their chance at having him in. The medicority of the last script made the scene they HAD written for him at the end totally fine. Bill Shatner/JJ/Orci?Whomevers fault it was . . .

The moment has passed me thinks.

[Saquist]

Originally Posted by martok2112

I think, during the sequences where we saw Clu (as the de-aged Bridges), it's understandable that there's some level of deresolution that takes away from the validity of the imagery....call it: in story computer rendering.

But I think the scenes where we see the Younger Flynn with his 7 year old son, Sam, the effect is quite convincing...especially when Flynn leaves and turns off the porch light. The light sourcing and reflection are really quite good.

Besides, think on it, in X3, the de-aging for Stewart and McKellen was on the order of 20 years...and given their actual ages at the time (easily from their mid-60's), that didn't seem to be too much of a demand.

But with Jeff Bridges and Bruce Boxleitner, taking them back 30 years from their current ages (late 50's early 60's) called for a bit more de-aging...and for the effort, I thought it was pretty considerable.

I thought the Patrick Stewart, Ian deaging was laughable....
I almost threw up.
Flynn was...much much better. (still noticeable.)

[martok2112]

Originally Posted by Saquist

I thought the Patrick Stewart, Ian deaging was laughable....
I almost threw up.
Flynn was...much much better. (still noticeable.)

<------- hands Saquist a barf bag,....just in case.

[Saquist]

It makes you wonder if they actually looked up to see what he looked like back then...
http://www.ioffer.com/i/patrick-stew...aphy-143135589

http://www.tvrage.com/person/id-1099...ry/?view=81722

Doest that really look like a "young" Stewart....

[martok2112]

Indeed.... Stewart seems to have had a little bit more rugged of a look to him in his younger days in the upper pic...they cleaned him up a little too much for the young ProX, unless they wanted the good Professor to have a squeakier clean look.

[kevin]

They probably just figured people were familiar with his appearance in the films and didn't go too far back.

I've never been quite clear on the 'timeline' of the film series, given that they seem to span (not counting X-Men: First Class) from the early 1970s to 'the not too distant future' which is sorta vague. I'm not sure the makers are either, because I can't actually imagine that James McAvoy would go from how he looked in 1962 to looking like Stewart in roughly 1979 in 'X-Men Origins: Wolverine' (assuming the Three Mile Island connection dates the film to roughly that period).

It's pretty fudged.

That aside, I still didn't find the CGI in Tron: Legacy great either.

[I-Am-Zim]

Originally Posted by BlackBox

It wouldn't cost as much to de-age Shat, because he has kept in such great shape. He could probably still do his own action scenes (judo chop!), saving Paramount even more money.

Honestly, I really hope you're kidding. Don't get me wrong, I like The Shat. Always have. And his acting isn't that bad. He just has a unique style that just doesn't resonate with everyone. He made James T. Kirk his own. He defined the character. However, he could in now way, shape, or form play a younger version of himself without some major Tron: Legacy CGI trickery. He's just too old and fat (sorry Shat, but it's true). I would probably actually think about seeing the next movie in the theater if I knew he was in it. But I doubt he is.