imagine people can’t afford to watch all the movies produced in a year — crazy supposition I know, but let’s say a ticket has become so expensive people need to pick the film they will watch — would you rather have them pay to see a movie featuring living actors (and while doing so giving those new actors an opportunity to start their career and become the next stars?) or have them pay to watch a product made out of dead actors (and greed) that will only enrich the studios?

Dying is part of the life cycle. Once you’re dead, you’ve become a legit part of the past. And you’re supposed to stay gone, so the younger people have their chance too. Sure, those young will not be a clone of Bogart or Bacall but they could become… themselves. That is, as long as Studios don’t focus their attention (and greed) on dead actors (and AI-powered scenarios, while we’re at it).

Plus, as a 50+ dude myself, imagining an instant I was an actor, I would not want anyone getting the idea that they can inherit my ‘image’ once I’m dead and use it however they fancy. Money and stuff, help yourself but let my image — my effing face — let it disappear with the body it belongs too. I’m not a product, I’m someone — even if I was an actor.

Also, it makes me wonder is their face what people really miss from dead actors? Are Bacall and Bogart just their face?

And then, I imagine neither Bogart and Bacall would smoke in their new movie? Smoking is such a bad habit, we certainly would not want to give kids such a poor example, right? So what the remastered version of Bacall and Bogart would do, instead? I know, stare at their phone screen (and rage on X or share images of their last meal on Instagram), so modern viewers can identify with them even more easily. That sure would be a much better example for kids.