Featured Post






Tampilkan postingan dengan label cinema. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label cinema. Tampilkan semua postingan

Selasa, 19 April 2011

8 Movie Special Effects You Won't Believe Aren't CGI

We mean no disrespect to the digital effects artists working in Hollywood, but sometimes it feels like computer-generated (CG) effects haven't improved in 10 years. Every blockbuster seems to have at least one big effects scene that looks like it was lifted from a PS3.
So maybe we need to stop and appreciate the mind-blowing scenes that were done the old-fashioned way -- with stunts, models and borderline insanity.
#8. The Dark Knight -- The Big Chase Scene
It was a chase that destroyed the Batmobile, a Joker-themed semi, a dump truck, a paddy wagon, multiple cop cars and God knows how many bystander vehicles. And that shit was worth it.

Batman on a motorcycle. This should win Best Picture every year.
Two specific points during the insane car chase at the halfway point of The Dark Knight are so over-the-top they seem like they would have had to be computer-generated, if for no other reason than they would have killed the stunt drivers.
The first is when the Batmobile first shows up to take out the Joker's convoy. It speeds in ...
... and offers what equates to a vehicular uppercut to a garbage truck.
The scene ended up in the trailer and inadvertently encouraged a bloat of fanboys to flock to their keyboards and pound out protests against the fake-looking CGI in the movie. But as Christopher Nolan has proved time and again, he doesn't mess with that shit if he doesn't have to.
No, what you are actually seeing there is a complete one-third-scale model of the Batmobile, the garbage truck and a large section of lower Wacker Drive in Chicago.
They stuck the two vehicles on a guide and smashed those mothers together. What you see in the film is the result.
Even the damn 180-degree move that the Batmobile pulls off at the end was done by a radio-controlled model.
So what about the climactic moment in that scene when they flip the Joker's 18-wheeler after Batman clotheslines it with a grappling hook? If that was a model, it was pretty goddamned convincing.
The flipping of the semi was accomplished with a technique known in Hollywood as flipping a real goddamned semi. To get the mind-boggling amount of upward force needed to lift the big bastard head over heels, the FX crew built a huge steam-piston mechanism in the trailer.

Wait, why can't that shit come standard in cars now?
Of course, then the challenge was to make it look like this insane stunt was occurring right in the middle of the banking district in Gotham. So how the hell do you pull that off? Build a miniature city and edit in the truck somehow? Film the truck out on an open course and use CGI to fill in the background? Shit, no! They just went to downtown Chicago, closed off a street and flipped their goddamned semi.
Why? Because that's how Batman would do it.

CGI is for squares.
#7.
Independence Day -- The Wall of Flames
You can mock its many plot holes if you want, but we're pretty sure the reason Independence Day dominated the box office in 1996 was because millions of people thought that seeing New York slowly enveloped by a gargantuan ball of fire was worth every cent of the ticket price. The ad campaign sold the film on that image -- the fire rolling down between New York skyscrapers. And by God, we lined up on opening night.

Seriously, you can leave after this scene.
And even if you watch it today, there's something oddly realistic about it, especially when compared with more recent Roland Emmerich stuff like 2012, which made the destruction of L.A. look like a very expensive video game cut-scene:
The difference, of course, is that the fire in the streets in ID4 is not CGI. It's real fire.
That sort of thing isn't easy to do in real life -- after all, how do you make the fire go sideways? Fire doesn't normally plume horizontally, which is a good thing most of the time, but the whole point of the aliens' city-destroying weapon was the unearthly way the blaze would slowly spill outward and engulf the city.
For the effects team, the solution to this shot was relatively simple.
Can you tell what you're looking at? That's a model city on its side. You'd probably recognize it better like this:
They called it the death chimney. Just turn the city model sideways, put the pyrotechnics at the bottom and put the camera at the top. Then they shot the explosion at a high shutter speed so that when the film was slowed down, they got their horrific, creeping wall of unstoppable fire.
See, this is how destruction used to be filmed back in the day. Someone spent weeks making a detailed model of New York, then you set it on fire and hoped to hell you didn't screw it up so they'd have to build it all over again (because then the model builder would find you in the parking lot and beat your ass).

"Roland Emmerich is a dick."
#6.
The Lord Of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring -- Little Hobbit, Big Gandalf
Here's an effect so seamless that you probably never gave it a second thought during the 27-hour runtime of the Lord of the Rings trilogy: the fact that Elijah Wood and the other actors playing hobbits are not in fact three feet tall.

The camera takes off ... a few feet.
Ah, but who cares, right? With CGI, you can probably just click on an actor and tell the computer to shrink him by 50 percent and you're done. Right?

"Bam. Hobbits. Give me 20 minutes and a chimp and I'll give you King Kong."
Not if you don't want it to look like shit. It's one thing if the actor is just standing next to the normal-size characters in a field, but at various points in the trilogy, you see Gandalf grab the tiny Frodo, hug him, ride on the same carriage with him and sit down at the same table. To pull that off Peter Jackson, needed a buffet of effects techniques ranging from simple to insane.
Sometimes it was as easy as using a child in a Frodo wig shot from behind ...
... or just compositing the actors together from different shots, or digitally sticking Frodo's face onto a tiny double. But the coolest effects didn't involve any computers or green-screen trickery at all. It's called "forced perspective."

Or Hobbitvision.
The idea is that you put one actor really far from the camera and the other one really close to the camera, then shoot at such an angle that it appears they are next to each other and that one of them is really big and the other really small. Which sounds simple, until you realize that you need to build everything on the set so that the actors can interact with it at the same time while hiding the fact that they're far away from each other.
The simplest example is with Gandalf's cart. In the movie, you see them sitting side by side ...
... but the real cart is built so that if the camera is stuck in that spot, it hides the fact that Frodo is actually sitting about four feet behind Gandalf, with Ian McKellen's body hiding where the bench is split:
But the complication comes when you realize that this works only if the camera remains perfectly still. So any shot where the camera moves around has to involve a computer, right? Nope. In scenes like this one, where they share a table ...
... they are actually sitting at two different tables, one human-sized and one hobbit-sized ...
... that are made in such a way that each piece slowly turns with the camera, so that the whole time, they appear to be one simple table, shifting with the perspective of the viewer. This required that the camera be put on a motion-control rig and half of the set be put on another rig that completely counteracted the movement of the camera. So when the shot moved, the set, props and even the actors moved accordingly (yes, while McKellen was trying to stay in character as Gandalf, he was on a stool that was slowly scooting him around the room).

"It's a little bit trippy when you've had too much pipe weed."
Take a moment to think about the crew that put that together, knowing the final goal was for you to never notice it.
#5.
Terminator 2: Judgment Day -- Digging Into the Terminator's Brain
We have previously pointed out how few of the effects in Terminator 2 were CGI, even though the computer-generated morphing of the T-1000 from liquid metal to Robert Patrick is all anyone talked about at the time. The vast majority of what you saw on the screen involved good old-fashioned makeup, models and trickery by FX wizard Stan Winston.

Linda Hamilton's biceps also played a substantial role in the magic.
Maybe the best example of the mind-boggling ingenuity that goes into any "I can't believe it's not CGI" scene is one that was cut from this film (a scene which, as we explained in the past, fills in a pretty big plot hole). The scene shows Sarah and John Connor opening up the Terminator's head to extract and reboot his CPU, giving him the ability to learn and adapt easier.
Here's the scene.
In a single take, we see the back of the Terminator's head in the foreground and his face reflected in the mirror in the background, clearly showing Arnold's un-animatronic likeness talking and emoting.

As much as one expects Arnold Schwarzenegger to emote ...
As they unscrew his dome, the camera moves around until the shot finally ends on the top of the non-reflected Terminator head, which is opened up like a damn pickle jar.
Now those of you who are experts in Arnold Schwarzenegger trivia already know that the man does not have a giant hole in his brain. So, what, they just had a fake head in the foreground and used CGI to put a fake reflection in the mirror? Easy!
Uh, no. There is no mirror. It's a window. On opposite sides are two John and Sarah Connors, and two Terminators miming each other's movements exactly so that they would appear to be reflected in a mirror.
But wait -- something doesn't quite add up. That's clearly Sarah Connor in both the foreground and the reflection ... what gives? It's not like there are two Linda Hamiltons out there.

Oh.
Meet Leslie Hamilton, Linda's identical twin sister. She came in quite handy during the making of this film, especially when the T-1000 took on Sarah Connor's form.
Yep, for all that you heard about the groundbreaking CGI, it all came down to identical-twin shenanigans. Basically, a special effects version of The Parent Trap.

Rabu, 06 April 2011

New 'Hangover 2' Trailer Is Too Hot For MPAA

Like many, we were a bit concerned about the first extended trailer for this summer's "The Hangover Part II," not because it didn't look funny, exactly, but because it looked so much like the original film that the mystery -- one of the best parts of the first film -- would be gone. Director Todd Phillips must have seen some of the reaction, because he made sure everyone knew that the trailer was too PG-13 to show what the movie was really about.
But it must not have been PG-13 enough. The MPAA and Warner Bros have demanded that the trailer be pulled from all theaters.
Slashfilm obtained a copy of the letter sent to theaters, which states (emphasis theirs):
"Warner Bros. and the M.P.A.A. have instructed all theatres to remove The Hangover Part II trailer #2 from Source Code and any other placements. These #2 trailers need to be DELETED FROM YOUR SERVER." adding: "We greatly appreciate your immediate cooperation on this matter."
So, what's the issue? The trailer doesn't strike us as particularly offensive, but we do not have delicate sensibilities. Also: Why "Source Code," specifically? Did Summit just want the film as far away from "Hangover" as possible? Why? Is it the coarse language? Was Jake Gyllenhaal offended? (You do not want to offend Jake Gyllenhaal.) We are so full of questions. We asked the MPAA for comment, and they referred us to Warner Bros, who, of course, aren't commenting on the matter. (A Warner Bros rep hasn't responded to our request for comment.)
UPDATE: Warner Bros issued a statement to The Hollywood Reporter regarding the trailer's hasty removal from theaters: "In our haste to meet the placement schedule for this trailer, we failed to properly vet the final version with the MPAA. We acted immediately to correct the mistake and removed the trailer from screens."
The only other time we can recall something like this happening was when the "Paranormal Activity 2" trailer was pulled from theaters after "numerous complaints" that the 72-second preview was too scary for the general public. Of course, many suspected that was a stunt intended to generate press for the film -- and this latest development certainly hasn't stopped people from talking about "The Hangover Part II."

CinemaCon Exclusive: Todd Phillips Talks The Hangover Part II

One of the more exciting aspects of last week's CinemaCon was the return of prodigal son Todd Phillips, whose trailer for The Hangover debuted there two years ago to huge acclaim. The prolific comedy director was there to present the first full trailer for The Hangover Part II, which appeared almost simultaneously online, as part of Warner Bros.' The Big Picture 2011. The anticipated sequel has the characters played by Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms and Zach Galifianakis traveling to Bangkok in Thailand for another bachelor party (this time for Helms' Stu) and waking up the next morning after blacking out everything that happened the night before.

Phillips is clearly exhausted after making three back-to-back movies with no break in between, but he's also fairly anxious about letting too many of the surprises for the sequel get out before people have had a chance to see the full movie for themselves. Even so, ComingSoon.net had two chances to talk to Phillips briefly, once before the presentation and once after, so we mostly talked to him about how making the sequel compared to the original and a similar line of questioning.

ComingSoon.net: One thing I'm really impressed by is how fast you make movies. I noticed that with the first "Hangover" and then "Due Date" came out pretty quickly, but I noticed that there's a lot more action in the trailer and you mentioned earlier the difficulties with shooting in Bangkok.
Todd Phillips:
Here's the thing. The thing is, I don't have a life, I really don't, maybe on the first "Hangover." Since the first "Hangover," there hasn't been a day I've had off. I'm physically exhausted. (Laughs) It's crazy. It is, because I don't make movies that look they were shot in a room, like a TV show. You see movies that look like TV shows, and you go, "What the f*ck is this, it looks like it was shot in three sets and what the f*ck?" We try to make epic films. I think "The Hangover" and I think "Due Date" and I know "The Hangover 2" have a real cinematic scale to them that I take really seriously as a filmmaker. I'm honored to be able to do it. I want to make movies. I meant what I said up there when I was like, "If I wanted to make TV I'd be making TV." I love making movies. A, I appreciate you noticing because it has been a bit of a ridiculous schedule to do three movies in three years - I don't know that anybody has been doing that a lot, and I don't recommend it and I'm definitely going to take some downtime. (Laughs)

CS: The trailer looked really stylish, and I don't know if it's the same DP you've used in the other films...
Phillips:
Yeah, it is. He's always my guy, yeah. I have had the same team of everybody since almost the beginning. We all make movies together, and I just love the family vibe of making a movie. It's the best part about it.

CS: What was cool about the first "Hangover" is that you wrote it for your friends with them in mind. I've talked to Ed and Bradley in the last couple of months, and I was curious whether there was a very different vibe making the sequel and was it harder?
Phillips:
It was crazy. I don't know what they said, but for me, day one of shooting "The Hangover Part II" was like we never stopped shooting the other movie. Surely, Zach and I had just done "Due Date" together and that came out six months ago, but everyone just fell into their thing, and there wasn't the nervousness that you always have at the beginning of your movie of like, "Where is this character coming from? What am I doing?" Everybody was so informed as to what they were playing, and I was informed as to what movie I was making. The cameraman was informed. It was just sort of was, in a weird way, so easy. The difficult part was just being in Bangkok and just being disconnected from everything else. It's not a very film-friendly culture, you know? So that part was difficult and the language and all that stuff, crews, it's harder, but the movie was just such a fun time because we all just sort of knew our roles.

CS: I think the first movie, you found the script and you developed it for them. This one, you obviously developed from the very beginning, so in the two years since the last movie, had you talked to any of those guys about where they wanted their character to go?
Phillips:
; I would pitch them ideas as I saw them around and we all stayed in touch because we're friends. Even when we were shooting "Due Date" I was like, "Do you think Alan, dah, dah, dah, dah?" and he'd laugh or not, but they also let me make the movie, which is super-great. I definitely--just because I trust them and because it's their movie as much as mine--involved them in it, just updating them. Ed'll send an email, "Where's the script at? Dah, dah, dah," and I'll give him like bullet points of what it is. He'll be like, "That sounds great," or "Why?" So yeah, in some ways just a little bit just out of just the normal just staying in touch communication.

CS: I know you're busy, but have you had a chance to keep up with what they've been doing in other movies?
Phillips:
I've seen "Limitless" and I've seen "Cedar Rapids." I actually see all their movies, yes, and I saw "It's Kind of a Funny Story," and I liked all the movies. I really loved "Cedar Rapids" and I thought Bradley is just a f**king movie star now. I mean, I just think he's going to crush it.

CS: Oh yeah, having "Limitless" open at number one, that was great for him.
Phillips:
It's great, yeah.

CS: I asked you this before "The Hangover" with taking on Will Ferrell and "Land of the Lost," so how do you feel about taking on Jack Black Memorial Day weekend?
Phillips:
Why? What's Jack Black in?

CS: "Kung Fu Panda 2."
Phillips:
Right, but that's a kids' movie.

CS: It's a kids' movie, I know, but that's the weekend everyone is watching this summer.
Phillips:
Is it?

CS: It's gonna be the weekend everyone thinks is going to have two $80 million movies.
Phillips:
Oh my God. I don't know that there'll be an R-rated movie that's $80 million, there hasn't been, but I just see that not as a competition. I think this summer is gonna be a blood battle all around. I think there's a lotta big movies coming out. I mean, it's scary. I don't think anything's a sure thing, even "Kung Fu Panda 2" or "Hangover 2." It's just like, who knows what's gonna happen? But it's fun, it's part of the fun.

CS: One thing I realized that you don't have to show much from this movie in advance because people will want to see it regardless, and I think the teaser was cool for that reason.
Phillips:
I agree with you on that.

CS: You don't have to show anything because you can just say, "These guys are back."
Phillips:
I like that. I cut that teaser where they're just walking, it's just like confidence like, "Hey, you're either with us or you're not. We don't care. Come or don't. Here's the f**king thing." (Laughs)

CS: Do you know what you're going to do for the commercials so they don't give away too much?
Phillips:
Well, I mean, the truth is we're constrained by the fact that we're R-rated, so you can't give - even the trailer you just saw, that's a PG-13 trailer, so by the nature of the movie, we're holding so much stuff back just because you can't show it. So believe me, you won't believe the R-rated surprises that exist in "The Hangover" that you won't see touched on in commercials or trailers, really.


MPAA Pulls ‘The Hangover: Part II’ Trailer From Movie Theaters?

This week, movie theaters across the country received a notice asking them to remove the movie  for The Hangover Part II from Source Code and to delete the digital trailer files from their servers. /Film reader Chris sent us a photograph of the notice, which was sent out by Warner Bros Pictures but specifically mentions the MPAA. No reason for the removal is listed on the notice. We contacted Warner Bros for clarification and they responded with “No Comment”.

Selasa, 29 Maret 2011

Chris Hemsworth Bulked Up Too Much for His 'Thor' Costume

Here's a problem most people will never have to deal with: being too buff to play a god.Chris Hemsworth did, though, as he prepared to play the title character in Thor, the next movie adaptation of a Marvel comic book character. The 27-year-old Australian actor had to get into serious shape to play the hero inspired by Norse mythology. But went a little too far.
In an interview with the Los Angeles Times at CinemaCon in Las Vegas, Hemsworth revealed that he bulked up so much to prepare for the role that he couldn't fit into his costume. When he tried on Thor's armor for a final camera test right before shooting was to begin, it was way too tight.
Hemsworth said that while wearing the restrictive, long-sleeved costume, "[My] hands started going numb... And I started getting pins and needles and you'd touch the skin and the blood wouldn't return to the area so quick." Apparently, in the three months between being measured for the costume and the final test, his added muscle made the suit so tight it cut off circulation.
Thor (Hemsworth) in less formal attire Marvel/Paramount After that, Hemsworth said that the costume was altered along with his exercise plan. He said director Kenneth Branagh told him, "Let's try to pull it back just a little bit, otherwise it's too blocky." Hemsworth subsequently changed his diet and his workout routine, focusing more on cardio exercises instead of weight training.
Last July at ComicCon, Hemsworth told BuzzSugar that he packed on 20 pounds in preparation for the role. He said, "It was purely eating, eating, eating, working out and working out, trying to sleep as much as you can -- that's the other third of the equation." Back then, Hemsworth said that he cut down on the eating and subsequently dropped about 15 extra pounds. But he told the L.A. Times that, "I'm putting it back on now for The Avengers."  That movie -- which will team Thor up with Iron Man, Captain America, and the Hulk -- is reported to begin filming next month for a summer 2012 release.
Hemsworth is at CinemaCon, the annual gathering of movie exhibitors, to receive the "Male Star of Tomorrow" award on Thursday. The convention also featured a presentation Monday night of scenes from both Thor and Captain America, the two Marvel movies coming this summer. ComingSoon.net wrote, "Overall, the footage we were shown was terrific... we think both movies are looking to be on par with the first 'Iron Man.'"

Contact