Indiana Jones 5 officially announced

[JoeG]

Why would you need to CGI a young Harrison face on to someone who already has a young Harrison face? Maybe I don't know enough about the process, but that seems to make zero sense. I would think they hired Ingruber so they DON'T have to CGI someones face.

 

[batguy]

Why would you need to CGI a young Harrison face on to someone who already has a young Harrison face? Maybe I don't know enough about the process, but that seems to make zero sense. I would think they hired Ingruber so they DON'T have to CGI someones face.

The whole CGI job is easier when the raw-material double looks more like the original. Human face/head proportions are related to body proportions. If two people have similar head/face shapes then it usually means their body shapes will be similar too.

CGI face replacements are still a hand-done photoshop kind of deal. If there is going to be another raw-material face in the frame then you might as well start with one closer to the intended result. It will block out the background in more of the same places. The positioning of shirt collars & hats will match up better. The double's face can be a good lighting reference when compositing in the CGI face. They might be able to use portions of the double's face in a pinch. Etc.

Anthony Ingruber doesn't come with any star status or high price. Why not hire him for a Harrison double?



From 'Logan' -
Hugh Jackman's driving double on the left, and the CGI final result on the right.

The reference dots (on the stuntman) prove that they were planning to CGI over his face the whole time. But they still used a stuntman with similar face shape and hair/beard.

 

[JoeG]

Your example of using CGI for the stuntman/Jackman swap makes sense because it's a stuntman performing a stunt. Also he can't pass for Jackman and of course they want it to look like it's the actor performing the stunt. Whereas with Ingruber he actually can pass for a young Ford and he's not a stuntman. No need to hire him if you're just going to CGI over his face. So, I still highly doubt he's just some sort of glorified stand in.

 

[Captain Dunsel]

I have never understood the POV of “Ingruber as a Harrison Ford replacement” for Indiana Jones or Han Solo.

Sure, he can ape Harrison’s prior performances—in short vignettes—but I couldn’t watch 2 hours of someone doing “a Harrison Ford impersonation” consisting of an ongoing crooked smirk, raised eyebrows, looking slightly downward, and an artificially lowered timbre of their voice.

In my mind, it would be like hiring Kevin Pollak to play “William Shatner as Captain Kirk” in a Star Trek film.

 

[Wolfsburg]

For me it couldn’t be worse than Alden Ehrenreich. He had the charisma of a shoe. At least Ingruber somewhat looks the part if nothing else.

 

[robn1]

I don't know why some talk about Ingruber as if impressions are all he's capable of. He's an actor, impressions just got him noticed.

 

[Captain Dunsel]

I don't know why some talk about Ingruber as if impressions are all he's capable of. He's an actor, impressions just got him noticed.

I agree. He is capable of not just impressions, but of good impressions.

But—he seriously needs to add “dramatic finger-pointing” to his Harrison Ford bit. I don’t think I saw him extend even one declaratory index finger in the Adeline clip.

(You know I am just being a troll, Rob)

 

[batguy]

Your example of using CGI for the stuntman/Jackman swap makes sense because it's a stuntman performing a stunt. Also he can't pass for Jackman and of course they want it to look like it's the actor performing the stunt. Whereas with Ingruber he actually can pass for a young Ford and he's not a stuntman. No need to hire him if you're just going to CGI over his face. So, I still highly doubt he's just some sort of glorified stand in.

Look at it from the other direction. This is a big tentpole movie and most actors are eager to work in the franchise. Hiring Ingruber is not an "expense."

I'm not saying Ingruber isn't talented. But he is a nobody in Hollywood. He would probably take the job of standing-in for Harrison, gladly, just to get a few months of steady work and have the movie on his IMDb resume.



Even if Ingruber did cost extra (which I doubt), it would probably still be smart money. How many hours of labor will his closer likeness save at the CGI company?

Imagine if Lucasfilm asked the CGI house whether they should pay an extra $10,000 to get a closer Harrison lookalike. The CGI house would probably say, "Oh for the love of God, yes! Have you looked at what you're paying us? If it makes our job easier on a couple of shots then you already broke even."

 

[JoeG]

Regardless of his talent, his clout, or his pay rate, I'm just disagreeing with your assertion that they would hire him just to CGI over his face. There would be no need. If money was any sort of factor, then you would do one or the other. Not both.

 

[robn1]

I'm not saying Ingruber isn't talented. But he is a nobody in Hollywood.

So was Harrison until Star Wars.

 

[Funky]

I have never understood the POV of “Ingruber as a Harrison Ford replacement” for Indiana Jones or Han Solo.

Sure, he can ape Harrison’s prior performances—in short vignettes—but I couldn’t watch 2 hours of someone doing “a Harrison Ford impersonation” consisting of an ongoing crooked smirk, raised eyebrows, and an artificially lowered timbre of their voice.

In my mind, it would be like hiring Kevin Pollak to play “William Shatner as Captain Kirk” in a Star Trek film.

Right on, brother!
ive been saying the same thing when they were casting for Solo and the majority of the RPF screamed that they should cast Inbooger.
He would NOT be able to keep a consistent voice and dialect and nuances of Harrison Ford’s speech pattern. If they used him you would immediately hear something off from scene to scene. Why do you think they haven’t used him? Because Hollywood has some sort of vendetta against Inbooger???

 

[Wolfsburg]

Odd criticism considering Ehrenreich did none of those things either. Even if Ingruber can’t either, at least he actually looks like the guy. Ehrenreich literally just felt like a stand-in or placeholder. I never bought that he was Han Solo. I had heard Ehrenreich’s casting came from his connections to Spielberg and obviously KK is in those same circles. Of course, that can never be proven.

 

[The Goon]

For me it couldn’t be worse than Alden Ehrenreich. He had the charisma of a shoe. At least Ingruber somewhat looks the part if nothing else.

The only thing I'd seen Ehrenreich in before Solo (2018) was the Cohen Brothers' Hail, Caesar! (2016), in which he played a character much like himself--a young actor trying to work his way up the career ladder, but his acting skills are questionable. Watching Solo, I thought his performance might have been okay if this was our introduction to Han Solo and we didn't have Harrison Ford's performances to compare it to. On his own Ehrenreich was fine, but by comparison...well, I mean, it's Harrison Ford and there's a reason his Han Solo is such a favorite.

That being said, Ehrenreich as Indiana Jones? I can't imagine it being much different from his Han Solo.

 

[Wolfsburg]

Oh yeah for sure. He's not inept but he just came across as "generic guy" for me. If that's all Han Solo ever was, it wouldn't have been as noticeable.

 

[batguy]

Regardless of his talent, his clout, or his pay rate, I'm just disagreeing with your assertion that they would hire him just to CGI over his face. There would be no need. If money was any sort of factor, then you would do one or the other. Not both.

But that's just it - Why not do both?

What is the downside to hiring Ingruber and then CGI'ing over his face anyway?

He physically looks like a decent match for Harrison from the neck down. He already has experience playing young Harrison in another movie and he did it well. Harrison's mannerisms, body language, etc. Harrison has already met him & gets along with him. He seems like the most qualified guy for Harrison's double right now.

 

[JoeG]

The downside is what you already said: the cost. It costs money to do a good CGI job. Why spend all that money when you don't have to? Ingruber has already passed for a decent young Ford without it. On the flipside if they were dead set on using CGI, then you can get anyone that resembles Ford from the neck down. Why hire Ingruber specifically? So, again, if cost is a factor, then its one or the other. Not both.

 

[batguy]

The downside is what you already said: the cost. It costs money to do a good CGI job. Why spend all that money when you don't have to? Ingruber has already passed for a decent young Ford without it. On the flipside if they were dead set on using CGI, then you can get anyone that resembles Ford from the neck down. Why hire Ingruber specifically? So, again, if cost is a factor, then its one or the other. Not both.

Okay, so it seems that we disagree about whether Ingruber costs more (in the studio's eyes) than "anyone than resembles Ford from the neck down."

Either way, we don't have enough info to settle the question right now. I suppose we'll find out later this year.

 

[blewis17]

I have never understood the POV of “Ingruber as a Harrison Ford replacement” for Indiana Jones or Han Solo.

Sure, he can ape Harrison’s prior performances—in short vignettes—but I couldn’t watch 2 hours of someone doing “a Harrison Ford impersonation” consisting of an ongoing crooked smirk, raised eyebrows, and an artificially lowered timbre of their voice.

In my mind, it would be like hiring Kevin Pollak to play “William Shatner as Captain Kirk” in a Star Trek film.

Pollak bled his Shatner impression to death in th 80s and 90s. As it was part of a comedy bit, his impression was a parody of Shatner. Don't know that Pollak could pull off a serious, dramatic take on Shatner (but then, that's difficult for the real Shat as well!)

And by the way: people accepted Sean Patrick Flanery and River Phoenix as a young Henry Jones, Jr. Neither of which resemble Ford much, to my eye at least.

 

[blewis17]

Oh yeah for sure. He's not inept but he just came across as "generic guy" for me. If that's all Han Solo ever was, it wouldn't have been as noticeable.

It's interesting to realize that really, that's all that Ford though Han Solo was.

But with Indiana Jones... Ford cares about that character.

 

[HMSwolfe]

Pollak bled his Shatner impression to death in th 80s and 90s. As it was part of a comedy bit, his impression was a parody of Shatner. Don't know that Pollak could pull off a serious, dramatic take on Shatner (but then, that's difficult for the real Shat as well!)

And by the way: people accepted Sean Patrick Flanery and River Phoenix as a young Henry Jones, Jr. Neither of which resemble Ford much, to my eye at least.

View attachment 1534598

View attachment 1534599

Didn’t Harrison suggest River Phoenix himself though? I’d heard that they’d worked together on another film and that Ford felt Phoenix was pretty similar to how he was at that age.

By the way, I personally couldn’t care less about who they get to play a younger Harrison Ford. I actually liked Solo.