Star Wars: Should Carrie Fisher really be published in Episode IX?

After the tragic death of Carrie Fisher in December 2016, Disney is left with a small problem. They could either rebel the last scenes that she was shooting for The Last Jedi and give her character a respectful start early, or they could leave everything alone and worry about it later on. …

to see Fisher with a decent role in the last chapter, his absence now leaves a big Leia-shaped hole in the trilogy closer – one that JJ Abrams recently confirmed that he's going to hook up with pieces of old pictures, re-edited to give posthumous to Fisher's role in episode IX .

"We desperately loved Carrie Fisher," says Abrams. "Finding a really satisfying conclusion to the Skywalker saga without her escaping us, we would never recast, or use a CG character." With the support and blessing of her daughter, Billie, we found a way to Honoring Carrie's legacy and her role as Leia in Episode IX using unpublished images that we filmed together in Episode VII . "

Fast to intervene, Mark Hamill (who also gets a role in the next movie, presumably as a ghost of the blue force), added his support for the idea on Twitter:

Bittersweet is exactly the word. 19659002] On the one hand, there was no way that Abrams could simply write Leia on Star Wars . No one would have been happy if the new movie started with his funeral, or if a silly dialogue line explained it (Rey: "Hey, where is General Leia? I did not see him. for a while, "Anonymous Rebel Leader:" Oh yes, she was called for business, but she left it. "Realistically, Abrams had to use it to 39, one way or another.

On the other hand, using old offsets and taken from Fisher – probably digitally manipulated to add it in a new context and scene, potentially even Mark his mouth to form new lines of dialogue – everything looks a bit … fake.

Rogue One saw Gareth Edwards throw a young Fisher (and a living Peter Cushing) using pretty flawless but still noticeable, CG technology, and the effect was somewhere between awesome and disturbing.

Ab rams said that he did not want to use a CG character, but unless he got to shoot Fisher by saying the exact lines, in the exact place, that 's right. he has in mind, there is necessarily digi work involved. We know that he's pulling unused scenes from The Force Awakens but his scenes in this movie were all turned to Qar, mostly talking to Han, which Of course, it does not make sense anymore.

Abrams has already pointed out that Fisher's daughter, Billie, has given him his "support and blessing" and that the much-loved actor will no doubt be treated with as much respect as possible by the filmmakers. There is also every chance that his role in the new film is severely limited to a few short appearances. But would Fisher herself have wanted that to happen? Would an actor want his unfinished and unpolished exploits to be integrated into a new performance after their death? And what does this mean for the future of other famous stars?

Asking much more important questions about the rights of actors to their own faces and bodies – and the morality of filmmakers who use them without their permission – to be a decisive step in the direction that the wider debate will take. Will we see a new Humphrey Bogart movie soon? Does anyone want to see a sequel to Indiana Jones with a young Harrison Ford? Should modern movie stars think of scanning themselves in a computer so they can continue making movies after their death?