Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Jun 08, 2022, 09:21:41 PMQuote from: SiL on Jun 08, 2022, 08:15:38 PMQuoteWhat I mean and always mean is the directors do not ask for mandibles bending in odd unnatural directions simultaneously nor direct ADI to implement excess skin flaps in unnatural twists and rolls in strange ways...
They could ask for the mandibles to be in a specific configuration and move a certain way if they wanted - like they can direct any other performance. They don't ask for skin flaps, but they do ask for over extending the mandibles - which means excess material to accommodate the full range of motion. Silicone and latex can only stretch so much.
My emoji;
https://i.ibb.co/LvswsVp/IMG-20190916-160417.jpg
My response:
So you're saying this was all on the director and unavoidable by ADI. Anderson blame: 100% / ADI blame: 0%
https://64.media.tumblr.com/0a1771ca992104d6dd71567ee4de7a43/tumblr_pmylellN1r1xuau3co1_500.gif
I get the people who have have personal relationships with ADI, but after three movies, it seems some just bend over backwards to lay absolutely zero blame at their feet and 100% at the directors. I read Stan Winston's book and he acknowledges plenty of their FX mistakes and details them - just the film Congo alone - but to some here it seems like ADI makes no errors apparently, even when it's visibly and logically undeniable to many with their Predators. It's just as nonsensical as laying 100% of the blame always on ADI's feet and 0% on the director. It's always such a bizarre world in these forums for me.
I mean, rarely do you ever say it is any of the directors fault most times. The blame is mostly thrown at ADI. And if you do say it is director, or even producer choices, I can't recall it.
We hear your frustrations and complaints, many of us share those, even while being friends with the ADI guys. But often we've heard that some of these issues are caused by a directors ask; like the mandibles in AvP being wider thanks to Anderson wanting them to go bigger, being one example.
We also never seem to talk about the time they don't have to work on the films. Often they have to scramble because they've been given little time, or are asked to completely redesign last minute like the Predalien because of some comment a producers kid made. The time factor is a huge part of the situation and it rarely feels acknowledged when you or some others are speaking about ADI. It's a nightmare having to change work that was good until someone unrelated comes around and changes the situation.
Personally, I hate the look of the unmasked Predators in PREDATORS, but I understand a lot of that is due to things like lack of time or budget, which is why Crucified's mouth and jaw just stick hung open. But I still would have faith in them as creature designers and wouldn't make it almost my own life mission, or base my personality around it, to call out their work at any chance I get.
I get that it usually is only involving the Predator and it's face when it comes to the criticisms, but it almost seems like a lot of people hear the name ADI and immediately lose their faith. I feel that if you have to point out that you've praised them in the past, it means that people might be used to hearing the complaints over the praise.
Having worked with Mike Dougherty, I'd talked to him about his favorite sfx companies he's worked with. ADI was his first and most talked about, he also almost had them on Krampus but they lost the bid. He said he's always got them as a first choice. ADI is highly respected and loved in the industry. They are absolutely not above critique, and I don't love all of their Predator work myself. But let's maybe wait and see before we get our panties in a bunch? While I want Stan designs too, he's gone, and his art along with it. I understand that. But what happens if ADI makes something different with the Predator, and it's f**king amazing? Will the tune change?
Not trying to be a huge defender here, just maybe giving a different perspective on how to view the films and their designs. Context helps me view the final product sometimes, but not always.
