How do you like your 'special effects'??
 

Ok, suppose a character in a movie is 'in disguise' as another person, or as an old version of themselves. Which way do you prefer moviemakers 'disguise' or age the character?

1--Use another actor that looks exactly like who they are portraying.

2--Use latex/makeup

examples--Mission impossible -- Tom Cruise 'disguises himself' as a main badguy, they use the actual bad guy actor as the 'disguised' Tom.

OR like Mission impossible-- they make Tom look very old like some senator he's supposed to be imitating.

I much prefer Door Number One, unless the makeup is superbly done. A great example is Saving Private Ryan where they .

(Sort of a minor spoiler, as I doubt there are seven people on the forum who have not seen Saving Private Ryan.)

Contrast that with any movie where they take an older actor and have him playing his younger self. See just about any Robert Redford movie, especially The Natural. They have to put so much vaseline on the lens that everything looks like it's in watercolor.

I'll be number 1.

number 2

I like practical effects with lots of models and makeup. I really am not too big a fan of CGI.

but doesnt it bug some people how they use the ACTUAL actor thats being 'disgised' and then when they 'reveal themselves' and pull up the mask its suddenly the other actor?!

I think option 1 as long as you make the actor as they look now age/looks etc. be the character in the film. Then you only use makeup and plastics to make them look older. That's a lot more plausible than having them "be" younger even though you're just plopping the actor as is down in both roles.

the 80's standard: special makeup effects from the likes of Tom Savini and Rob Bottin. The last film that impressed me was KNB's work on "From Dusk Till Dawn" and the effects work on "Tales of the Crypt: Demon Knight". "Resident Evils" makeup effects merged with CGI, just didnt cut it.

I say #1 if the age difference is great and those scenes aren't too long (ex/ epiloges) Especially if the character is younger. Much harder to make a person look younger.

#2 if the age difference isn't too much. However, if it is a story that covers someone's life, use make up to age the person since they will be on screen much more. Even if a person looks close to the actor, keeping them on screen longer will let the viewer study their face more and the more it makes it obvious the person is a different actor (little things might get distracting with switching actors)

How about the method used in "The Count Of Monte Cristo" (Pearce and Cavaziel version) - do nothing?

For aging, I agree with resinrats... if its a small bit with a great age difference, use another actor.

For disguises, they should always use makeup because you assume the character has to as well. I think it's cheezy when they have a face EXACTLY like another actor, and then they pull off the mask... a ha! It's Tom Cruise! That's just a cheap gimmick designed to fool the audience. Maybe in a far off sci-fi movie I could buy they would have masks that detailed, but not in a modern day spy film.

This also reminds me of the silliness of Charlies Angels... in one Drew (I think) has an intricate mask that makes her look exactly like LL Cool J. In another scene they're wearing terrible disguises trying to look like men... with the phony mustaches and everything. Even by Charlies Angels standards I had to say "Gimme a break!"

This is exactly my point. I cant decide which is the worse of 2 evils.

Rarely are masks done right. The only time i think it was convincing was in the movie "FX" or "Almost an Angel" where Paul Hogan does a VERY CONVINCING Willie Nelson!!!!

I tend to lean toward #1 when there's a big age difference.

I remember reading about Titanic before it came out, and James Cameron talked about why he chose an older actress to play old Rose rather than just putting Kate Winslet in makeup. He said something to the effect that when you make a young person look old you have to add stuff to the face, but in reality when a person ages, it's a reductive process. That's probably the best argument I've heard on that.

On the other hand, there have been some great old-age makeup jobs. Look at Dustin Hoffman in Little Big Man. But then again, he's not on screen much as an old man.

Well, in Charlie's Angels, LL Cool J played Drew Barrymore in a mask. I shudder to think what we would've seen if Drew just used make-up.

http://charliegoose.homestead.com/files/goose.jpg Honk!

How about the Limey? That was the best use of old/young that Ive ever seen.

I'll clock in as #3 on the SPR not-seen list.

Hold the CGI please.

That's a joke right?

They used old footage of Stamp from Poor Cow, a film he did in the sixties.

Uhhh... I believe he grew...a BEARD! ;)

I knew that. But it was more realistic than having Terrence Stamp with hair dye. It suited the movie very well imo.