4 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2020
    1. These positive aspects of digital resurrection for film competition does not excuse the practice in every circumstance; indeed, a poorly executed posthumous performance can prove disastrous no matter the context.

      I believe this is a subclaim. The author ties the circumstances of needing to digitally resurrect an actor into the ethics of the resurrection itself. I was actually very glad to see this subclaim as I was very much expecting the individual films to have their own reasons for resurrection and I was happy that the author explored this. They did a good job with talking about a multitude of films with plenty of evidence/quotes and transitioning smoothly between them.

    2. As ‘movie magic’ technology has advanced, filmmakers have been determined to showcase its feats in the most astonishing ways possible, many times not taking into account the consequences that may arise.

      I believe this is a subclaim. It draws on the idea of unethical use of digital resurrection while continuing the conversation into what consequences can occur. I think the author addresses this subclaim really well with evidence/quotes.

  2. Oct 2020
    1. There is also another issue that Rogue One presents in its resurrection of Cushing, as touched on by Edwards in an interview with CNN Entertainment:

      I like that the author actually hyperlinked this source. It makes it a lot easier to access the quote they used and be able to verify it. This shows very good ethos!

    2. “Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.” – Ian Malcolm, Jurassic Park.

      I like this use of sources. The quote directly ties into the piece but the author makes sure it stands out. He also properly cites the quote.