Chris Farley Resurrected In DirecTV Commercial

zz21972010

What are the ethical boundaries when it comes to a celebrity or movie star after the person in question is dead? Obviously, Sony has no problem releasing an unfinished concert film for the recently departed king of pop Michael Jackson. And judging from the projected box office tracking, people are interested in paying for the chance to see Jackson dance and sing on the big screen, for one last time. But what about commercials? There is certainly a difference between releasing an unfinished performance of a dead star and altering a dead actor’s performance for use in a television commercial.

FilmJunk points us towards this new DirecTV advertisement which features the late comedian Chris Farley’s performance from Tommy Boy, with David Spade’s performance digitally altered to promote satellite television. Some might recall that DirecTV went under fire last year for a similar ad altering Poltergeist, featuring Heather O’Rourke, an actress who died tragically in 1988 at age 12. Check out the Tommy Boy advertisement for yourself after the jump, and please chime in: Is this wrong?

And if so, who is to blame? David Spade is getting a lot of flack for supposedly cashing in on his dead friend, but one must assume that Paramount granted permission to alter the video footage, and that Farley’s family must have received a paycheck as well.


  • Alek
    Everyone certainly has their bit of responsibility for this, but I'm especially disappointed with Spade. I don't see how he could have agreed to it
  • presto117
    seriously? farley doesn't do shit in the commericial. they don't alter him in any way. he's just there. and it makes sense. lots of people like tommy boy and spade's character was sarcastic and it makes perfect sense that his character would be the one to say something like this. This is no different than me popping in tommy boy right now and watching it. does that offend you? oh no! dead actor on screen doing something he's remembered for! get over it.
  • mangoshakes
    maybe spade saw this as a way for newer viewers to see chris farley? if it gets a few more kids to see tommy boy then i have no issues. but i definitely see where the issue could be.
  • mondo182
    I don't think it's a big deal. That commercial was better than the entirety of 'Almost Heroes'. Farley's family gets a paycheck and his legacy is hardly tarnished. Just a cute little commercial that will quickly be forgotten. ...Don't see how this is Spade's fault either. He's only one third of the equation, Paramount or Farley's family could have said 'no'.
  • thrillhouse
    It was kind of shocking the first time I saw it, but I wasn't really bothered by it.
  • starscream9289
    I just saw it last night and I was like "What the hell? I have to Twitt about this!"
  • Talking_Lizard
    I thought it was hilarious. It reminded me of the movie, of Chris Farley, and after seeing it this weekend, I pulled out my copy of Tommy Boy and watched. I don't believe there is anything morally wrong about it. Not like the Coors Light commercial several years back featuring John Wayne, anyway.
  • connorf
    I just think it's too bad that Spade sat there while they used a body double for the back shot of Farley, I wonder what Spade's feelings on it were? Everyone's got a price...
  • I am deeply offended. Chris Farley was a hero in my family. How could such a scumbag company do such a thing? And David Spade... how could HE do it? Maybe we should show him how it feels do die prematurely!

    Actually, to be completely honest, who cares about the commercial? It's not distasteful at all. All they were doing was recreating a scene. They were using a famous scene from a hilarious movie. This campaign works. I love their campaign!
  • No biggie. I would have been a little irked if they'd digitally altered to appear as if Farley was trying to sell the company, but as it is now, I take no issue with it.
  • fortissima3
    Honestly, I'm not offended by this at all. Watching that scene again only served to remind me how funny Chris Farley was and how much I loved his stuff when I was younger. Growing up Tommy Boy was, like, THE movie with me and my friends, and this actually brought back some good memories. I can understand where the hesitancy is coming from here but, really, are celebrities supposed to be off-limits forever if they suffer untimely deaths? Their images are already built-in parts of the public consciousness, why not celebrate that?
  • Would Farley care? I don't think he would and I'm sure Spade thought +10 years is enough to not care about something like this. He was a good friend but this obviously didn't affect him in any way, he still made the commercial.
  • r_esco
    I think its ok, its been at least ten years. Yes Spade, calls him ''tons of fun'' but he is saying it about his friend as if he were still here, he also says something like ''this never gets old'' it was obviously done in a good nature, not to spoof on Farley being dead.
  • SgtDoakes
    It's not like they altered anything Farley did, or made him look bad in anyway. This commercial is seriously harmless, just something for people to go apeshit over for no reason again.
  • Questionable, yes. DirectTV has done this before with the little girl from Poltergeist.
  • windmillninja
    As was stated in the OP. Thanks for the insight.
  • Jaxin
    I was visiting with my 67 year old mother when I first saw this commercial. Her reaction? "Isn't that guy dead? KELLY!! I THOUGHT THAT GUY WAS DEAD!!?" O_O

    My mother is a few steps behind television "technology". ;)
  • JoeViturbo
    I figured if David Spade was okay with it then I am too
  • zebrat
    oh man, fucking kids these days.
  • Teeg
    Chris Farley was first and foremost a comedian, he'd be laughing his ass off over it. People seriously need to stop looking for reasons to be offended. Sheesh.
  • quintushalls
    It reminds people that Chris Farley is funny and who he is. I see no problems with it.
  • Guest
    Maybe at the end they should have had Spade pull out Farley's skull from behind the sofa and then do one of his Hollywood Minute jokes.

    If you're going to do something this creepy, why not go all the way.
  • vva
    This reminds me of The Simpsons Halloween Special that aired last year. Eventually, they'll end up killing celebrities so they can use them for free in commercials.
  • Shawnab
    I LOVED it, brought back some sweet Farley memories, loved that scene too.. Spade just made it so fricking perfect..

    And in the end, if Spade is OK with it, then I'm OK with it.. You should be too, stop pretending you knew or respected Farley more then Spade did.
  • joshknepper
    If David signed off on it I'm sure that Chris would have done the same if Spade were gone. If my best friend was dead and I had a chance to do one more "gig" with him I'd jump at the chance.
  • presto117
    agreed. it's not offensive. if it were a body double with farley's face and voice super-imposed over it talking about direct tv, THEN that'd be offensive.
  • greggorybasore
    Wow that was... really tasteless. I can only hope that David Spade and Chris Farley's family got serious bank off that.
  • presto117
    how so? it's not more tasteless than if i popped in tommy boy right now and watch chris farley. they don't alter him in any way. please explain.
  • zebrat
    well the difference there is that farley was alive when he made tommy boy. did farley agree to be in an ad for direct tv? no. possibly he would have, but we just don't know for sure cuz the man's dead. you see it's tasteless cuz the man is dead. dead. dead. traditionally humanity likes to respect the dead. that's where the tasteless part comes in. it's tacky to exploit the dead for financial gain. it simply is. it shouldn't need an explanation.
  • Talking_Lizard
    They still air Billy Mays commercials... is that any less morally offensive to you than this? To your logic, he was still alive when he made them, so it's "okay" to air them, despite that he's dead. And in those ads, Billy Mays is actually the one selling the stuff, so someone's actually reaping profit from his posthumous work. Still think this DirecTV ad is all that bad?
  • Name
    This was absolutly wrong. you people wh osaw this as just another advertisment obviously have little to no morals. God rest Farely's soul for one of his best friends and family cashing in on his legacy just to make a cheezy commercial. There are ways to keep the legacy going,but this isint one of them.
  • mondo182
    Nah, it isn't. What was so wrong? Farley isn't shilling for Direct TV, Spade is. Farley's performance is the same one you get from watching Tommy Boy. No difference. And heck, if Farley was still alive he'd probably do the commercial anyway. His family signing off on it in the first place is quite telling. He was pretty close to them and I think they know him better than you, me or anyone else giving their input on this "issue".
  • Guest
    If you watch the original and compare it, they are almost indistinguishable.
  • presto117
    if anything, this makes me want to watch Tommy Boy again. haven't seen it in years.
  • Octoberist
    it's kinda harmless. actually i agree with Presto117: it makes me wanna see Tommy Boy again.
  • jeremy
    I don't see an ethical problem with this commercial. it's not like Farley's death is fresh in our minds. It happened what, half a decade ago or more?A lot of late stars pop up in commercials all the time and I never see posts about that. Also, had it been Tommy that was pushing a Direct TV membership I might have been weirded out, but it wasn't.
  • topheavy
    Nothings sacred.
  • Name
    I don't think it's a big deal. I think what people should do when stuff like this happens is ask yourself if that actor would have cared. Heck no he wouldn't have cared. He was a comedian and loved to make people laugh. The commercial is cute and I enjoyed seeing Chris. If he was altered in any way, then it may be something to question. He's not though.
    It's like in the movie Forrest Gump. All of those people are put in that movie.. Tom Hanks moons the president!! They alter those people to say and do different things. Was THAT something that got everyone twisted? Nope.

    Why do people need something to complain about?
  • Casey
    Also don't forget the Coors Light commercials where they digitally inserted John Wayne into them from a few years back.
  • Bobby S.
    Nobody cared when they resurrected King Kong for the ad with Naomi Watts. What's the bid deal?
  • oh the humanity
    "I feel like David Spade without Chris Farley... alone and useless."
  • Name
    i personally like the fact that i get to see farley again in a "new" commercial even though its old footage. they got a check, i get to check out chris farley again, everyone wins
  • Rob0729
    The only problem I have with this commercial is now I have Chris Farley singing "Fat guy in a little coat" in my head all day. Other companies have had long dead actors from the 40s, 50s, and 60s in their commericials in the past and no one complained. Natalie Cole had a Grammy winning song with a duet with her dead father long after he past. I don't see the problem.

    People are just taking it too personally since they watched Tommy Boy when Farley was alive. The same people who question these ethics probably had no problem with Gene Kelly or Groucho Marx being in a CocaCola commerical after they past or John Wayne in a Coors commericial or Audrey Hepburn in a Gap ad two years ago or Steve McQueen in a Ford commericial. Dead celebrities have been popping up in commericials for decades. Why now is there a problem?
  • thorloth
    I miss him.
  • Name
    thats fine ,directv did the one with king kong and he's been dead longer.
  • not offensive at all. he was in show business.
  • I have no problem with that or the Poltergeist one, its not like they are making fun of him or anything...
  • charlesm1
    i think its ok. its not bad taste, chris farley made his career on bad taste and his fattness , this is not half bad compared to his skit on s.n.l. with patrick swayzee.
  • I think it's ridiculous for people to be up in arms about it. Just because an artist dies, doesn't mean people shouldn't be able to still enjoy and appreciate their work. That is a classic scene from a classic comedy, and if the studios, Spade, and the family support it, who are we to make a big deal of it.

    It's not like DirectTV is making fun of Farley or altering him in any way. So what's the big deal? I guess I don't get it.
  • brother in arms
    durr durr durrrrrr. me no get either.
blog comments powered by Disqus