In the closing hours of the 2012 Coachella music festival last Sunday, rappers Snoop Dogg and Dr. Dre did the impossible: they brought fellow hip-hop legend Tupac back to life… as a hologram. Videos of the stunning, high-tech reincarnation skyrocketed to viral status, and the show has become a controversial conversation centerpiece for, well, anyone with an Internet connection.
In this latest edition of DT Debates, staff writer Molly McHugh and associate editor Nick Mokey battle it out over the ethics of bring the dead back into the temporal realm with the use of holographic technology.
Molly |
Holograms are right up there with flying cars and personal robots – things I was told I was going to have in the future. Of course, the second we get them, we have to first freak out over everything wrong with them instead of marvel at this incredible technology and its possibilities. How many sci-fi movies did you watch growing up where seeing someone was as easy as waiting for their projection? Too many not to think this is awesome, if you’re me.
I never got to see Tupac perform, and as a huge hip hop fan, that sucks. The opportunity to see the closest thing to it is amazing, and something I’d be both stunned and awed by.
When people first had the technology to layer old tracks from musicians who had passed onto current releases, audiences were probably shocked. They may have said it was tacky or wrong. So this isn’t the first time this kind of thing has happened; it’s just adding a visual element to it. Now, no one bats an eye to these recordings. Natalie Cole recorded a duet with her father, the late Nat King Cole, and it was applauded. And music videos even feature artists that have passed away collaborating with the living performer – all thanks to technology.
This is the next leap: reimaging performers via holograms. Go ahead and scoff and cry at how “creepy” it is, and then in 10 years think about how silly you’ve been when you’re projecting your image to conference with me in my mansion and tell me how right I was.
Nick |
You won’t be hearing me complain that holograms are anything but badass, but let’s be clear about the technology: This isn’t Obi Wan Kenobi projected by R2D2. It’s a flat, 2D image projected on a sheet of mylar. The same trick has been making the rounds in venues like haunted houses since 1862, and the Gorillaz used it to appear on stage with Madonna in 2006. What’s new here is that we’re using it to resurrect a dead guy and make his corpse tap dance for money.
Tupac is dead. His body was cremated, rolled into a joint with some pot and smoked. True story. If you want to experience Tupac, listen to any of the six albums he produced before he died, or search YouTube for some of his live performances. The ones where a living, breathing Tupac stood on a stage, interacted with the crowd and other rappers, and put on a show. You might not be in the audience, but you’re experiencing the real creative talent of the guy as he once actually existed.
What we saw at Coachella was fabricated. Synthesized. Entirely fake. Sadder than a RealDoll.
Tupac never stood on stage and barked “What’s up Coachella?!” or bantered with Snoop and Dre. A team of computer graphics artists went through great pains to make it look like he did with the goal of making a lot of promoters a lot of money. If that’s not wrong, I don’t know what is.
Molly |
This hologram wasn’t like other holograms we’ve seen before – it was better. The people behind it used better materials to make it more realistic. And the performance wasn’t old footage – it was all new. So again, this is new technology in motion we’re witnessing, and you won’t be able to convince me that isn’t cool.
To your point that it isn’t honoring Shakur, that’s probably too opinion-based to prove either way so it’s almost moot. But I’m sure there are plenty of fans out there like me who think it’s great how well everyone behind this were able to capture his mannerisms and movement and look. Now if they’d done a bad job, I’d be more apt to find it tacky – but they didn’t. This wasn’t some fly-by-night stunt that some guys at Coachella put together to get some hype a few weeks before the concert: the people at Digital Domain and AV Concepts have been working on this for months, using footage and recordings to piece together an incredibly realistic experience for a crowd that loves, but was never able to see, Tupac.
Can it replace the actual person? No. But is anyone out there actually stupid enough to think this is a viable way to replace dead performers… or dead people in general? No way. It’s simply an impressive new technology giving as a new, sensory way to experience a performance. And if you’re going to argue that the money made from this is lining the wrong pockets, if they are still using his voice and music then his estate will still benefit off the rights.
Nick |
To your point that no one is stupid enough to think that this can replace live performers: apparently Dr. Dre is that person. He was the one who originally approached Digital Domain and AV Concepts with the idea of reincarnating Tupac, and (surprise, surprise) he’s not done making money off it yet. Dre and Snoop are considering “touring” with their bandaged-up buddy in the near future. Nothing says “desperate cash grab from an artist in the twilight of his career” like slapping your name all over a line of overpriced headphones, and touring with holograms, right?
Look, whether you’re twenty-something or sixty-something, we’ve all missed performances we would give our left arms to see. The Beatles at Candlestick Park in ’66. Jimi Hendrix at Woodstock in ’69. Hell, for me personally, the Smashing Pumpkins at The Metro in 2000.
Recordings exist that allow us to experience these in a limited capacity and imagine what it must have been like to have been there, but recreating dead performers with holograms in front of a live audience indulges nostalgia in such a contrived, artificial way, it’s just sad. It’s the difference between remembering a lost loved one by watching old home videos of them… or using their clothes and hair vacuumed out of the carpet to build a photorealistic doll, propping it up at the dinner table, and having tea with it. The first is benign, the second is insane. Start charging other people money to money to have tea with your “reincarnated” friend, and I would call that disgusting.
Forgot about Dre? By the time Dre’s done driving his name into the ground by pimping out his dead friend, he should be so lucky.
Molly |
Well with your analogy about stuffing a doll with vaccuum hair, I can see you’ve spiraled generously away from the actual issue. Again, Tupac’s estate — or any artists’ for that matter — will benefit from their music being used with their hologram at performances. So while Dre’s going to make money off the tickets he sells (that he sells to people that clearly agree with me, so if you truly think he’s going to make a substantial amount you must also believe I’m in the majority), so is Tupac’s family. Oh, and for the record, Tupac’s mother Afeni Shakur, gave the hologram and performance her blessing. If she’s okay with it, I think it’s safe to say you can lighten up. I mean, it’s clear you were a huge Tupac fan (is my sarcasm heavy enough?), but that should help you rest easier. If you want to accuse Tupac’s mom of stuffing a doll with vaccuum hair and charging guests to see him, be my guest. I don’t see it going well.
Oh, and to further assauge your money-grubbing fears, Dre made a sizable donation to the Tupac Amaru Shakur Foundation. He’s also worth approximately $260 million, so I’m not so certain he needs to pull a desperation cash move.
Once again, it can’t be ingored that concerts and performance moments have been tying in beyond-the-grave elements for years –montages with people who have passed on, duet recordings, videos intersplicing performances to look like they are happening at the same time. Again, no one complains — or they do and quickly get over it. But once it’s something that pops into the third dimension, we have to be freaked out by it or we’re soulless people. I’m just going to skip the forced guilt thing and go straight to appreciating the next step in performance technology. I’ll see you in five years when you’re done playing catch up.
Nick |
Now that you’ve outed me for not being a Tupac fan (how could you tell?), I suppose it’s worth spelling out that I would have the same sympathy for anyone with the misfortune of dying young, only to have their likeness dredged up as a hologram and puppeteered for money. If anything, the fact that it’s Tupac probably muffled the uproar we would usually hear over something like this, since we’ve been conditioned to accept his post-mortem career over the course of half a dozen albums released after his death. I want to see Yoko Ono reanimate John Lennon to sing with Paul McCartney and see how that goes over. Bring back George and we can reunite the Beatles, whether they wanted to in life or not! I’m going to stake out a spot to be first in line for tickets.
I certainly won’t refute that you’re in the majority on this one, although I fail to see how that would make you right. And as for Dre’s sizable cash reserves, you don’t get $260 mil in the bank without stepping on a few heads on the way up the ladder. Or over a few bodies, as the case may be.
You were right about one thing: This is definitely the best “hologram” we’ve ever seen done, even if the same trick has made the rounds before. I tip my hat to the ace CGI artists who made it happen. But just because the technology exists to make a dead person seem realer than ever before doesn’t mean we should indulge ourselves. Life-like hologram, like-life doll, same difference. Regardless of the medium, pretending to interact with the deceased for fun, nostalgia – or money – is just kinda sad.
Check out the video below (Warning: Video contains strong language)



$$$
@Molly “This is the next leap: reimaging performers via holograms.”
DJs of the future will not only remix sounds, but holograms as well
To be fair…the majority (if not all) of the Coachella tickets were long sold out before the Tupac announcement was made. So it’s a little difficult to call this one a cash grab, now the tour they are talking about? I’m with you on that, that’s a little too much for me to swallow.
However, in the grand scheme of things I am a fan of these virtual resurrections when used in moderation. But when it’s done to have Fred Astaire sell vacuum cleaners, that I have a big problem with.
Also, don’t know if you guys saw this Coachella Hologram Lineup, but it’s pretty awesome.
http://media.heavy.com/media/2012/04/hologram.jpg
Though, no way in hell GG Allin would get such a high billing. Not even for the irony.
OMG, GG Allin hologram? Why oh why… Are they gonna show him in the holographic form doing the stuff he did on stage in real life? If so, leave me out of it.. yikes.
It would certainly limit performance footage to use for the holograms, that’s for sure.
As long as the estate is ok with it, and their likeliness isn’t used for product advertisements, and only concerts only. I see no problem with this. This is a way for people to experience something they would never have before. I was only 15 when Pac died. I would have loved to see a show of his. Yeah, I know, it’s not the real thing. But it’s still cool. Ever since this story came out, I’ve been bumpin nothing but Pac in my car. Overall, this is a great thing. It is the future. I mean, no one complained about it happening in Star Trek ;) lol
wow, I really wish I could type…
One more point. I do mostly agree with Nick that it’s completely ridiculous. However, this debate made me remember a recent Radiolab podcast I listened to. They talked about the blues singer Robert Johnson. Surprisingly, though many of us have heard his music, much of it covered by artists, the first time his music was ever played in front of a large live audience was after his death, when a phonograph recording was played for an auditorium filled with people (in the 1930s, I believe). Decades later, he has become a legend.
In a way, that is also creepy, but in one small defense of this holographic recreation of artists, I think anyone who records, writes, or creates something for mass audiences does want to live forever in a way. They want their music or creations to live on after they are gone. So in that sense, maybe Tupac would be happy that his corpse is being puppeted because it means even 16 years after his death, people still want to experience his music so bad that they are willing to create an entirely fake version of him to do it.
http://www.radiolab.org/blogs/radiolab-blog/2012/apr/16/crossroads/
If this DT Debate becomes famous enough, I cannot wait to see the live holographic performance of it when you two are long dead. I will still be around, because I’m going to figure out a way to get my brain inside a holograph. Or maybe a robot.
Nick, how do you feel about Wax sculptures of dead people?
Of course he would be happy. He laid down hundreds of tracks that were never put to print. Saved to be released, just for when he died. He knew it was going to happen, and it’s what he wanted. The way I look at it, I don’t see any difference from a hologram to a movie or an album. Just because they died, means they shouldn’t have their creations replayed in public? Or is it the fact that you can see them standing there right in front of you? Regardless, as long as you don’t put words in their mouth (like advertisements) and keep it about the performance, I really don’t see how this is a bad thing whatsoever. Yes, he said “whats up Coachella”, but I would imagine he would have said that in a live concert. It’s the future of entertainment. We wanted holograms, now we have them (or something like them). But all of a sudden, it’s some major moral issue? Well, the artists died. Lets destroy all pictures/videos/recordings so we can’t “exploit” their likeness.
Besides, Tupac never died. He’s still alive in Cuba. I imagine he made this recording himself. ;)
Wax sculptures are a pretty grey area, good question. On one hand, it’s just like creating a portrait of someone in watercolor or pencil, but it’s wax. Just another medium. On the other hand, the intention is to make them so realistic that you feel like they’re right in front of you, which treads into the same make-believe land as the hologram.
Ultimately, I would have to say it boils down to how you treat them. For as vast majority of people, a wax museum is a fun opportunity for a gag photo. Nobody feels like they’ve experienced the “presence” of Abraham Lincoln after walking past a static sculpture of him at Madame Tussaud’s. They just aren’t close enough to pretend. However, for any big Lincoln buffs who are really amped to make a pilgrimage to his wax likeness and feel like they’re getting the closest thing possible to the greatness of a living Lincoln… well, I’m going to call that sad, too.
Well isn’t a “hologram” just another medium to witness a performance? It’s just like watching a video. Except the video is without a screen (least not in the traditional sense).
It is inevitable. Not so much as the PERSON as the roles or music they have played before they died or when they were younger. A younger, walking Xavious appeared in the 3rd X Men movie but there was no outrage over this. A still buffed Arnold was used in the last Terminator movie but no one complained. A suave Cary Grant or a stoned out John Belushi are icons of film and will be used again, no questions asked.
This has been done, is done, and will be done. There is no try.
Having seen “Elvis on Tour” at MSG 6 or 7 year ago (he was a projection, his real 70′s band was on stage) I can tell you it’s awesome. I am Team Molly.
James where you going with this?
$$$
novelty.
I do so like this debate. I side with Nick!
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it, it was nice seeing him perform.. but Tupac on tour? That’s just boring… any dead musician on tour is boring without audience interaction
who says technology couldn’t allow there to be audience interaction?
While it was great to see tha late great 2Pac come back to life. I pretty sure there’s a better way to use such technology. I just hope they don’t go overboard with it, and next thing you know “Breaking news 2Pac, Biggie, Frank Sinatra, and Elvis Presley are touring together in late 2012.” lol
I’d see it.
Amazed at how many “tech” sites think the Tupac stunt was a hologram.
He does look good for having lived on an island with Elvis and Big Foot for almost 2 decades.
I actually agree with both of you. But Nick wins for being hilarious.