Finally someone who understands that the face in the original was actually really good for that time. The fact that it even looked that good 10 years ago is amazing and like you said, it also shows how far we've progressed.

@@revenge3265 And even now comparing them, it looks fairly good. If the deepfake was given the same amount of resources, it would be even more stark

That's a deceptive 10 years. This isn't an apples to organges comparison, this is comparing a corporate product with millions in R&D behind it in 2010 to a consumer hack that anyone with a decent computer can whip up in a day with literally 0 cost in 2020. The true difference is astounding.

Exactly ....this is good work but based on the technology of ten years ago the FX artist did great work. Imagine what they could have done today . But they did great none the less

Honestly if 10 years later your movie CGI looks like really good modern day game graphics, you did your job well.

I think the same. Fake CLU feels more appropriate to his role in the movies. Same with Scarlett Johannson's weird moves in Ghost in the Shell. She wasn't a human.

Yeah, that one scene at the beginning is the only one to fix. CLU is supposed to be an imperfect copy.

Same here

I agree!

Yeah, it makes sense. Flynn was a real person is the real world. CLU was a digital entity in a digital world. And Jeff Bridges performance was top-notch. It was so funny when I saw how they recorded the scenes, in 2 different way. Once with full set, actors and actresses with proper sets and customes, and double of course. Second time everyone, but especially Bridges dressed like he's at home and his face painted with grid san dpoints the whole facial-capture camera on his face.

Shit if Disney can re-manufacture and re-package the same story 100x over, I'm sure they can re-work Tron legacy using modern software and processes and make it even more of a gem than it already is, the soundtrack alone is enough to make anyone's pants creamy

I mean...ILM recently hired Shamook for the future Star Wars projects, so anything is possible. Though, of course, Disney would have to see some profitability in the venture to even consider doing it. But maybe they will give us a remastered 4K release with deaging improvements around the time that Tron 3 is released.

@@AlasdairGR I'd buy that for sure. I have the 1080p Blu-ray and there are occasional rendering artifacts that are visible, and as this video illustrates, the de-aging CG is bad.

Especially when the dude that made it is working for Disney now ;).

They can still rework the story to make Beck the central protganist in place of Sam. Just like the original Tron, where Flynn was support to Tron.

In my opinion it might be one of the MOST underrated films ever made. My wife saw it for the first time this week and I asked her to be real...fair and honest about the movie.... and she loved it....when I told it gets around a 5-6 / 10...her jaw dropped. I said ya.... its criminally underrated.

I saw this in Imax twice. The sense of giant spaces is unequaled. Phenomonal. A super classic. When people say they want a third, I say, just show this again in Imax. Not even Avatar killed it like this did. Avatar looks better on home big screens than in the giant box. It lost contrast in the throw to the big screen.

@@sclogse1 , you're right. It really was superior to "Avatar".

@Prisoner O. Azkaban who the fuck watch a film nowadays with 3D???

It is.

It's pretty much the limitations of the tech. From a distance it looks great but those little details in human faces were too big to overcome back then.

Yeah there's not much of an objective difference, but the subjective improvement that tiny change makes is *huge*.

Alas the uncanny valley is what you get when you're "almost there"

Cant fix that "same team" scene tho

With DF there's often misses in terms of lighting compared to the rest of the scene, at least in amature production.

YES!!!!

I'd rather see Charles Bronson in Willis's Death wish. That is, if we settle for a bald Bronson. Those beautiful, thick hair would be a real challenge for DF 😋

That would be fascinating.

Great idea.

Thumbs up for that. Great idea.

That is the point, even young flynn in the real world looks like that. So it is pretty clear that this uncanny look of Flynn and Clu was not intent from the makers of the movie. But i can understand that peoples use this to live with that look of Clu. I by myself can live with it, even the first time in the movie it was no problem with me, but i didn't need such an explanation.

@@Hoto74 Yeah, it wasn't intentional, but it TOTALLY works! Changing CLU would kind of lessen his visual appeal.

@@Hoto74 lot of stuff that wasn’t intentional works, silent hill wasn’t intended to have fog but the console couldn’t render far distances.

@@hexogramd8430 So what you wanna say is, that they didn't could do that better at this time? That movie is from 2010, it's not a movie from the 90s. They simply didn't want to spend enough time and money into it to make it better.

@@Hoto74 As a professional visual effects artist myself, this take is just objectively wrong. De-aging is not the same as motion-capture. With one, you can build a fictional creature that has no real point of comparison. There’s no real Navi, so there’s no “real version” to compare them to. But with de-aging, the difference is there’s a real point of comparison. Everyone knows what a young Jeff Bridges looks like. The effect on Clu is just as advanced and detailed as the Navi or Gollum, but the difference is that he’s a thing that actually exists. So now there’s more limitations with 2010s technology, because you can’t just build and design him from scratch like you could a fictional creature. Photorealistic human hair, skin refraction, wrinkles, facial muscles, and texture were impossible to simulate back in 2010. Just take a look at “The Last Stand,” which came out only 4 years before this. That’s why every de-aging effect attempted prior to 2015 looks bad. Modern de-aging doesn’t use motion-capture to do it anymore, like every attempt before had done. That’s the difference. So yes, the real reason this looks bad is in fact because it just wasn’t possible to do good de-aging back then. However, the fact this movie exists is why it’s possible to do good de-aging now; especially when you consider that Clu still looks miles better than any previous de-aging attempt had looked up to that point. They invented new software for this movie in order to do it, which later technicians have been able to advance and improve to do the de-aging we can do now. So without this film, we could never have quality de-aging. Therefore, the film deserves just a little more credit than you’re actually giving it. To suggest the visual effect artists were just “lazy” and “didn’t try” is not only factually wrong, it’s mean-spirited and deeply insulting to the hard work they put in to this effect.

I think they intended Bridges to look the way he did in the movie. His character was supposed to be in a video game, after all.

@@ComedyBros5 Not really. The rest of the programs are human actor that doesn't look like a cgi creation. Young Flynn, at the beginning of the movie also look like poor CGI, and he is not in a virtual world. It is simply that the technology then wasn't advanced enought to make it more realistic.

@@aureliolorenzo9320 Yeah you're right. So much for wishful thinking.

They did. The new 4k IMAX version has enhanced CLU SFX.

@@halexd3017 Really? It is any place where we can see that?

Not for Clu, he's a program that was created to be close from perfection (but perfection is unreachable), so the artificial feel is more than justified for him. But do correct young Kevin Flynn as much as possible. That would be an acceptable change.

@@c0mpu73rguy he is supposed to be close to perfection, so even though we can nudge him closer we shouldn't because he's not as close to perfection as we are?

I'd love a special edition of this film to take advantage of that and make this a reality. Considering the tech in place to do this, it wouldn't even be costly to simply use deepfake tech to improve it significantly.

That would be awesome

@@c0mpu73rguy No, it's not justified for CLU. Every single program in the TRON world looks human (including from the original movie). So, I would be totally fine with them fixing CLU to be more realistic.

10 years isn't a long time ago, CGI wise. it depends on how good your animators are.

@@crapObear2323 ten years is a very long time, especially when it comes to movie tech.

NotAnonymous Yeah especially remembering that transformers was released in 2007. That movie is almost photorealistic

@@smashchachi9047 No it isn't. I can't think of any huge breakthroughs in graphical tech from 2010 to the present. VR already existed. the fundamentals of CGI/CG already existed. today's graphics are just slightly, marginally enhanced.

@@crapObear2323 um, seriously? The whole point of this video is that deep fake tech can improve cgi faces. This IS new tech since 2010. 🙄

I totally agree. Waaaaaay better!

Yep. Top 5 fof sure on my list. Only gets better each time I watch it. Very underrated movie.

I need a full version of the movie with this deepfake :V

Almost any change would make this movie better and this certainly does. Speaking of taking a system to it's maximum potential, there was so much potential for legacy that went wasted. I really hope theres another remake.

A deepfake over already finished cgi will obviously be better

True. The original did look good in dark lighting but it ends up becoming very noticeable in brighter lighting.

Seeing the deepfake next to the original really shows how bad the original is.

I always thought his cg work was intentionally left in the uncanny valley to reinforce the nature of his character.

I feel kind of similar, like the 'uncanny valley' of CLU emphasised the artificiality. It would have fit perfectly within the game world, if they had cut the 'real world' younger version of Flynn with the same CGI de-ageing.

yup, although it would be great to deepfake the scene when the younger kevin flynn leaves the kiddo in the past

@@tunckorap If that had been the case, the flashback at the beginning would have looked much better, but it didn't.

@@Wishbone1977 use your imagination...

I imagine the reason Hollywood aren't using the same Deepfake type technology - yet - is that they haven't got the official rights to enough of the source material films to rip people's faces out of there. I imagine in future people will be getting their heads scanned as young actors as a matter of routine, which can then be included in effects shots or flashback scenes 20+ years from now.

@@bovrilla No the main reason is that it is an unreliable tool. It doesn't work in every shot...especially when parts of the face are occluded, in profile or in very low key light. You get very little control over the result, and every deepfaker here on youtube certainly did hundreds of scenes for testing before and they turned out shit......also this isn't really possible in 4k atm.....deepfakes look sometimes fine in a yt video....but on a big cinemascreen it completely falls apart. But it's getting there in the not too distant future.

@@hyruleorchestra4339 With the best people on it like ILM or Weta Digital, you could combine the CGI with the deepfake technology. That way if the deepfakes look off, they can touch up any problems with digital effects.

Along with a third film..

@@hyruleorchestra4339 To be fair, if they know they'll be deepfaking something they'll just shoot the scenes with that in mind so nothing will be occluded, everything will be perfectly lit, and they can add to- and change those things afterwards instead. But, yeah - as an afterthought for an older movie it's gonna be pretty unreliable.

Wasn't GOTGV2 50% practical and 50% CGI for Kurt?

No, this was bad for the time as well.

@@illustriouschin i can't think of another movie around 2010 that did de-aging at this level

@@illustriouschin HOW? This was probably the very first de-aging CGI ever featured in a movie. There were no standards; IT was THE standard

@@9999AWC X-Men: The Last Stand is one of the first instances of de-aging with Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen. It was worse than this, but it was also several years before.

I didn't expect to see you here

Please crawl back into your hole Memology

@@frankegordon326 and who tf are you? 🤣🤣🤣

@@BlueBolt the names already there, try reading it

@@frankegordon326 that was such a lame comeback

It would actually have been cool to make all the programs within Tron look more like CGI, giving them the fake uncanny look, all while making the users and ISOs look real. But of course fixing the real life Flynn in the scenes where he's young in the real world.

Unless the real world was, like, a simulation, man. - The Dude

@@ErebosGR Plot twist, that was CLU in the real world. That's how he knew everyone could leave.

@@ClockworkGearhead Wow, I've never thought of that! Makes sense.

despite cgi bridges being in the opening scene that’s how i like to think of it. he’s in a simulated world so he looks fake. makes the bad cgi a bit more tolerable.

They're already making one with Jared Leto as the lead

@@BrieoRobino really? Don't tease me.

What about getting out of the grid!!!!! 🙀🙀🙀🙀

All I know is if they finally make another sequel, they better bring Daft Punk back to do the soundtrack. Edit: just found out that the 3rd Tron film is well underway at Disney and that Daft Punk is definitely coming back for the soundtrack as that was one of their prerequisites for getting the film greenlighted so I'm a happy man officially, can't wait. 😁

Flynn Lives would have been epic

Imagine if Disney’s top class animators did this

Just like FF with Alita

No. It is the area around the mouth, that makes the difference. Look at 0:27 s.

@@verzinker It's because they put the deepfake face over the CGI motion capture face. The CGI face was incapable of truly mimicking the movement of Jeff Bridges face even though it was motion capture. If they had put the deepfake face over an un-motion captured face, then this would have looked amazing.

And the darker eyebrows

also @0:44 look ath their noses.

@@daviddarko5837 I know.

“Man that’s some bullshit.” - Clu’s inner monologue

Nice quote for this video!

Clu was actually done by Digital Domain not ILM (but no biggie). DD worked really hard on it and some of the original shots look great, but back then (we're talking 2009/2010) the machine learning tech just wasn't around and with time constraints being an issue yeah, some of the shots didn't look as good as they might. But its still a great movie!

@@deanuuuuuu They didn't do AI Deep Fakes back then, did they? I thought it was just a CG recreation of his face.

And he just got hired to work for ILM!! His great work has paid off!!

A simple app against a pioneering digital effects studio can't compete. Deep-fake is the easy solution today. It would take a mix to have something of good quality

@@deanuuuuuu Yeah, building a full 3D face is a horrible technique that has always looked like utter dogsh*t (terminator salvation arnie, grand moff tarkin)....Deep fakes are the way to go, maybe leaving in the eyes alone

It didn't look bad for it's time. But it certainly wasn't perfect. If anything it could be argued as intentional to show that Clu is the digital version of Flynn.

I watched it back in 2010 and a lot of people complained about the wooden fake face.

It was on par with video game cutscenes at that time

@@S3SSioN_Solaris as time passes so too does the memory of events when people thought the cgi in films from over 10 years ago wasn't convincing. Spiderman 2 aged like fine wine. Spiderman 3 aged like soda. Tron Legacy was great but it was universally agreed the constant close ups on cgi de-aged Jeff Bridges was 9 levels of hell dumb. It's extremely convincing from a distance, except when they unironically put the camera on his face. Which I feel is an issue we still haven't avoided in modern Marvel films. In those films its almost as if the actors hairline is fake or their skin is too perfect but the intended effect is there. But we still notice something isn't completely there. I'm saying half the issue is the cameras point of focus. It caused majority of the harm. The CGI was just the nail in the coffin.

the fine details really bring it around

Classical RT/PT based CG and machine learning based techniques like deep fakes are definitely going to start merging more in the future, it's a guarantee. There's plenty of places in the CG pipeline for ML/AI software to take some of the burden from us too, sadly it may mean less jobs on the whole, but it will make some of the work simpler.

calm down, Ziggy

@ziggy bean nah... they'll be the ones with gpu farms making these things like candy presses. we'll still be stuck for 24 hours with 400k iterations and crap data sets that leave us with keaunu reeves on george bushes head....

I can imagine... "Thank God, I don't have to model real faces anymore!"

Even the original looks not bad for such an old movie. It is the simple artstyle that let it age well.

Yeah, sometimes AI is amazing. I hope people will use it more in the future.

I disagree kind of. Better yes but not by much. Actually a couple of scenes look better in the original. Just goes to show you what a good job they did back then.

Definitely. It makes the original look like a PS4 version.

Better in the sense that it's probably boatloads cheaper to produce. Some scenes are noticeably better, some are not. A few original scenes look better.

NO it's not good, if that was their goal, the actor himself would have played it. They NEEDED him to look fake!

@@Kinseliplier you must be blind... IT IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE!!

@@Duderino27 ikr...

@@Kinseliplier Ya need to get a new monitor ! The detail in facial lines and the lighting on the face that helps bring that out are very evident. The Deep Fake is a Superior product.

@@MatthewPettyST1300 deep fake wisdomm

Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

it was 2010!

@@Kinseliplier ye but human face is next level

The thing was, the story, characters, music, acting, and effects were all so amazing to me that I didn't mind that Clu looked terrible.

@@LevCallahan True its a movie you can rewatch anytime

@@olboe2008 the effects looked amazing by 2010 cgi standards

No, it was f'n abysmal, even for the time.

The original was beyond EPIC for the time...you have no idea.

No, just low standards like most people

@@matrixate If I can tell you for a fact that when I watched the very first thought I had was "My God, that cgi is f'n abysmal", then I think maybe it's you who was blinded by some shiny lights or something. It looked terrible then and it still looks terrible now--only now you can see it too, just as easily as I saw it then.

@@inceptional let the man have an opinion

​@Adam Akmal Tron: Ares coming in 2025

please do. I need it

Absolutely, in a freeze frame the deepfake is very convincing, much more than the film’s original CGI. But damn some of the motion looks weird af - the original CGI’s head bobbling, mouth and cheek movements all stand out with the deepfake.

It's almost always the motion that betrays the realism, even with amazing textures and lighting

the eyes bro

THIS.

100%. Even with an almost perfect Jeff Bridges, the mouth and head motion is still off.

THIS!

And Leia

Someone already did.

@@elveganocordobes6708 Someone did this already as well.

@@elveganocordobes6708 ...that was my first thought too

I was thinking the exact same thing

Hell yes. I've always thought that. Jeff Bridges performance in this Tron movie was absolutely chilling. He can portray such a cunning, intimidating dude with such ease!

Antony Starr

It's the hair

@@paulmichaelfreedman8334 and the mannerisms

they need to throw put a remaster sometime soon. The Tron franchise is one of my favourites

This was the sequel haha.

Part 3 is in the works again apparently.

Tron Uprising started to get there but that didn't finish either. Still watchable on disney +

Was that a Red vs Blue reference you just made?

They have a new TRON ride to plug at WDW, so I imagine that a new movie must be under consideration.

They should hire this guy and use this, sorted

They already rereleased the vinyl soundtrack via Mondo.

The will probably shove some SJW into it.

@@geoffreyoltmans4356 Google Tron three, several months ago they dropped huge info about a third Tron movie and, from what we know, it seems to be in the works. A good place to keep up with Tron is r/Tron on Reddit

All we need now is someone with the movie, to splice these scenes in, and ... shall I say, profit?

I think the symbolism, music, visuals, and cinematography were immaculate. Only thing I found lacking was the story, characters, and de-aging CGI on Tron and Flynn/Clu.

Man, I have such nostalgia for this film it's crazy.

@@JetBalrog Same. I remember getting the toys from Christmas 2010 when I was younger, and seeing all the commercials for this film on TV.

Daft Punk should definitely do more movie soundtracks

For sure, if we could get 4K exports of the scenes and splice them in that would be awesome

It's definitely is better but, I honestly never thought the original looked bad.

It looked bad even at the time.

@@Mr.Nyongo it was supposed to, he was deadass a video game clone version of a human, what do you expect?

@@randomuser2409 in the flashback to when Sam was a kid? It didn't look good at the time either.

@@Trevdawg48 true that part you can’t defend that it hasn’t aged well but at the time deadass nobody noticed because tron was one of the first movies to take a go at face deaging technology. So say what you want about the mans fake face but it’s still dope just like the rest of the movie regardless 🤷🏽‍♂️

And what she can do in our World, knowledge, medicine, philosophy 😲

@@sleon7 probably playing beat sabre.

@@XellithUS nah she answers questions online

That's mostly because it's mimicking the stiff animations of the original CG, unfortunately. Still looks more like Jeff Bridges in the broad strokes, though.

Nothing wrong about emotions!! CLU was meant to be exactly what it is ...emotionless ! he´s just a puppet moving towards delusions of grandeur just like his creator ! so far His digital imperfection symbolizes it perfectly.

@@renatovarnariano2233 No, he was meant to be a copy. The CGI is meant to represent a physical state of Flynn that hasn't changed over the years. The skin elasticity is the problem. Older skin droops - smoothing the wrinkles doesn't improve the elastic look and CGI can't counter for it - making it look plastic.

@@michaelm7186 How could that be possible? "being a copy" if they are still looking for the creation of a perfect System??? Everything concerning the grid is still in a making. Clu is still reshaping itself..learning ..evolving both digitally and its own A.I to be as similar as its own creator in time. even better. Skin estasticity ? in a virtual world? lol lol lol I bet you meant Digital self image .Its digital skin imperfection adds up to me !

@@renatovarnariano2233 Yes, CLU was a copy of Flynn. Did you watch the movies? Do you even understand the TRON concept? Skin elasticity of Jeff Bridges you f'n numbskull, not digital self image. Seems like you are confusing this franchise with The Matrix. They CGI'd old Bridges face onto another actor and smoothed out the wrinkles. Unfortunately it doesn't account for 30 years of gravity and aging when the end result is supposed to look like Flynn from 30 years ago.

same. thou the diference is very noticeable, i wouldnt call it necessarilly an "improvement" because the original work well for me too

I think it's nothing but an improvement for any scene involving Flynn himself. CLU can stay the way he is and I'm fine with that.

@@JETZcorp Just fix the young Flynn bit at the start.

Yeahh I was bout to say that, it is kinda of a narrative element that helps to fill the whole aesthetic of the world

@@creepermanzombie24 I feel like a solution to the whole thing would be to make all of the other program characters have the same "uncanny valley" look as CLU. Sure, it would be way more expensive, but maybe they could save money by just doing slight digital touch-ups on the faces of the actors instead of fully replacing their heads (well, except for CLU because of the de-aging thing). It would create some visual consistency and pretty much excuse the limits of technology as an artistic choice.

CLU, yes, but the scenes with young Kevin Flynn definitely needed the improvements

If we are to accept that as an explanation then why didn't all of the other programs have the same clunkiness?

@@notahotshot I haven't watched the movie in a while, so I may be wrong here, but isn't every Grid dweller a human? CLU is an AI Computer Clone of Kevin, which can justify his video-gamey look

Disregard what I said, I forgot the whole "User" thing when Sam bled and everyone was shocked

However, CLU was created by Kevin to help him operate the Grid, meaning that CLU has to be one of the first "Bots" in the grid. The others are newer and realistic looking, but CLU looks clunky because he's an old bot

They already have with Rogue One, Peter Cushing "reprising" his role as Grand Moff Tarkin and a very younger aged Carrie Fisher as Princess Leia. Albeit, at the time it was still new, so it's not 100% convincing like it is today, but that was definitely Peter Cushing standing on the Death Star.

@@cujoedaman I’m pretty sure that was just CG and not a deep fake. They used the body of another actor and replaced his face with a digital version of Peter. Not the same as a deep fake face replacement

Yeah, I believe with Rogue One it was CGI. I do want to see filmmakers use deep fake because I think it's cheaper than creating a 3d model of a person.

@@flvx4693 not only cheaper but more convincing too!