[inerte]

I usually love rands but first 2 paragraphs were pretty bad, and sadly the "ceci n'est pas une pipe" vibe kept going back to the first image. This IS Leia, and not Carrie Fisher - Leia is a character, and it could be animated afaik.

Also, I mean, "How does our brain know its CGI? It doesn’t." - then it proceeds to list the ways our brain knows it's not a real human.

Point remains, rands is way smarter than I am, but this sounds like a stream of consciousness turned into an article to hit a quota. I also prefer meeting humans IRL than over zoom.

Somehow trying to turn a critical comment into a positive, do watch "VFX Artists React" from Corridor Digital in YouTube (and their own website) where they list the specific oddities of a scene and why our brain can't quite parse CGI as human yet.

[mproud]

I agree. The actor and the character ought to be differentiated.

If you want to argue the CG isn’t good enough, fine, but the actor isn’t the character. Sometimes actors are replaced, but other times, maybe their accent slipped in an episode, or their makeup wasn’t good in season 2, etc. So where do you draw the line?