Z dweller said:
I'm not sure, I don't think we're quite there yet.
In my opinion, both Princess Leia in "Rogue One" and the Rachael replica in "BR 2049" look puffy faced and patently fake, despite using the latest technology.
And those were brief and very static scenes.
A whole action movie? Forget it.
Plus, I really doubt Ford would go for it - particularly with Spielberg at the helm.
Comprehension, please. Note what Raiders112390 actually requested. It was *not* a full digital recreation of an actor akin to Tarkin/Leia/Rachael, but merely using CGI post-processing to add some color and make away with a few crinkles here and there.
If they try to make an actor look decades younger and run with it for an entire movie - yeah, the tech's not there yet. But Raiders112390 didn't say that they should use CGI to bring Mr. Ford back to his heyday. What he suggested - right in that post above yours - is to simply shave off a decade or fifteen years max, to make him look roughly as he did in KotCS... and, well, that's doable. Mostly. Especially because there'll be scenes that require only minimal touch-ups because a lot can achieved by using clever lighting alone.
What I must say though is that I mostly agree with this because the target is appropriate for these kind of tricks. This is in the range of plausible because Ford does look good for his age. So a general rule this is not, that I'll give to the dissenters.
The real issue is that from a studio exec's POV, it's still going to be a heckuva lot of work to appease a small demographic of navel-gazing Ford fetishists who consider his performance sacrosanct. The movie's still going to rake in millions even if you just recast and limit Ford's role to scenes where he plays Indy closer to his actual age. Not that I'm going to complain if they go for the former option.