Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Note: this post will not display until it has been approved by a moderator.
Other options
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by The Cruentus
 - Mar 09, 2015, 01:45:03 PM
Thats film-making for you, somewhere somehow, someone is getting screwed over.
Posted by shakermakerman
 - Mar 09, 2015, 10:25:19 AM
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Mar 06, 2015, 01:33:46 PM
Yeah, I don't get the hate for ADI. Sure there Aliens looked crap, but how much of that was down to the design they were told to produce?

From a technical standpoint, their work is great.
loved their work on alien 3 and can't believe how they got screwed over on the thing.
Posted by Nightmare Asylum
 - Mar 08, 2015, 06:26:33 PM
That's what I figured (and those practical robot chassis looked fantastic). Just played it safe when I noticed that Chappie wasn't listed on WETA Workshop's site, for some reason.
Posted by OmegaZilla
 - Mar 08, 2015, 06:21:43 PM
Think WETA Workshop did the background TetraVaal Robots in some of the scenes in Chappie. The full scale MOOSE was definitely theirs too.
Posted by Nightmare Asylum
 - Mar 08, 2015, 06:18:09 PM
Quote from: CainsSon on Mar 08, 2015, 02:34:01 PM
Incidently, does anyone know what's up with the new egg and face hugger in Blomkamp's concet art?
Someone mentioned, that this was actually from Prometheus' unused concept art.

Can someone confirm this?

Artist Doug Williams runs runs a blog pleaselookatmeneillblomkamp.blogspot.com, and when Prometheus's trailer came out he posted a piece of art speculating on the Hammerpede based on the glimpses seen in the trailer. That piece wound up getting republished online on Blomkamp's Instagram when he published all of the concept art that he had commissioned for his Alien project, so I"m hoping that means that, while the Hammerpede piece likely won't be used in the film, Williams himself might be involved. He does some great work (he recently worked as a concept artist for Pacific Rim, and has done some great Space Jockey pieces).

Quote from: The Cruentus on Mar 08, 2015, 03:24:50 PM
Well if WETA can do practical effects too that is good. CGI is not bad but if you can do something practically and it looks better, then it should be done that way.

That'd be WETA Workshop (they're a separate entity than WETA Digital). Blomkamp usually works with both of them in tandem (he did on District 9 and Elysium for sure, not sure if WETA Workshop did anything for Chappie though).
Posted by Murfy426
 - Mar 08, 2015, 05:22:34 PM
sorry cruentus should of specified with alien 3 the couple scenes when it was just seemed to take the horror away from me when I watched it as a kid, part of me is just worried that with fox's influence in the franchise the recent films have just been alien porn with the xenos been shown too much, take for instance my fiancĂ©e's brother, hes 14 and he and his friends have seen the avp movies a couple of times and just recently I handed him the first three movies thinking that this will show him the same feelings we felt when we watched them, he just handed me them back and was like "yeah they were okay" I was shocked beyond belief, at his age i had watched the movies countless times and they still stirred the same feelings of terror when I watched them as a kid, maybe its his generation having call of duty lol but im straying off subject  I just hope that blokamp as a director and fan will try and keep a slight bit of mystery to the creatures and give back a hint of the horror and tension from so long ago
Posted by HuDaFuK
 - Mar 08, 2015, 05:11:33 PM
Quote from: Murfy426 on Mar 08, 2015, 04:41:37 PMthe worst example of cgi was in alien 3

That Alien wasn't CGI at all. It was a rod puppet. It was badly composited into the live-action footage which is why it looks so bad.
Posted by Immortan Jonesy
 - Mar 08, 2015, 05:11:10 PM
You two have shared interesting points, but I do not think the new film will be a cheap production. I know that money does not guarantee the quality of a movie, but it certainly helps. And Neill Blomkamp seems to be a perfectionist in terms of special effects (a bit like Cameron).
Posted by The Cruentus
 - Mar 08, 2015, 05:07:25 PM
Quote from: Murfy426 on Mar 08, 2015, 04:41:37 PM
Its always came down to the balance between animatronics and cgi, partly the reason that the first two films captured so many peoples imaginations was the fact that cgi pretty much didn't exist then but the directors knew how to show just enough of the aliens in camera to make the suits seem so real, to be honest the worst example of cgi was in alien 3, granted cgi had just really began but they overexposed the alien way too much and the bad example of animatronics and suits was avp r it seemed like the actors were just going through the ropes there was no sense of actual alien movement they just moved like guys in suits or focused on close ups of the head area.
Alien 3 didn't use much CGI, the Alien was a rod puppet.
A lack of CGI allows creativity, CGI no matter how good, is often used to cut corners.
Posted by Murfy426
 - Mar 08, 2015, 04:41:37 PM
Its always came down to the balance between animatronics and cgi, partly the reason that the first two films captured so many peoples imaginations was the fact that cgi pretty much didn't exist then but the directors knew how to show just enough of the aliens in camera to make the suits seem so real, to be honest the worst example of cgi was in alien 3, granted cgi had just really began but they overexposed the alien way too much and the bad example of animatronics and suits was avp r it seemed like the actors were just going through the ropes there was no sense of actual alien movement they just moved like guys in suits or focused on close ups of the head area.
Posted by The Cruentus
 - Mar 08, 2015, 04:22:21 PM
That depends, the CGI Aliens in AVP looked bad, not because it didn't look realistic but because it made them look squashed, they barely had any shoulders. the CGI made them look so compact, it took away their stature.
Posted by Immortan Jonesy
 - Mar 08, 2015, 03:39:08 PM
When the CGI is well done you hardly notice the difference between practical effects and digital animation. I think it should be a mixture of both techniques and WETA is the right candidate for the job. So I guess people want to see this iconic monster being portrayed in the best way, right?
Posted by The Cruentus
 - Mar 08, 2015, 03:24:50 PM
Well if WETA can do practical effects too that is good. CGI is not bad but if you can do something practically and it looks better, then it should be done that way.
Posted by Son Of Kane
 - Mar 08, 2015, 03:22:56 PM
Quote from: CainsSon on Mar 08, 2015, 02:34:01 PM
I go with WETA. I've liked their sensibilities since their roots in the early Peter Jackson films...

They need to bring something new to the Alien. I think Blomkamp will be smart enough to know that and his style and a new effects team will be wise to do just that. They need to shoot it differently, block it differently, design it differently.

Incidently, does anyone know what's up with the new egg and face hugger in Blomkamp's concet art?
Someone mentioned, that this was actually from Prometheus' unused concept art.

Can someone confirm this?


That isn't actually Blomkamp's art- it's fan art someone sent to him.
Posted by OmegaZilla
 - Mar 08, 2015, 03:05:17 PM
WETA Digital does digital effects. WETA Workshop does practical effects.
AvPGalaxy: About | Contact | Cookie Policy | Manage Cookie Settings | Privacy Policy | Legal Info
Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube Patreon RSS Feed
Contact: General Queries | Submit News