User Information

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: The Predator Teaser Trailer Now Online!  (Read 45377 times)

SiL
May 18, 2018, 12:07:58 AM
Reply #660 on: May 18, 2018, 12:07:58 AM
They wanted the animatronic face to get more detail in the closeups, but it just didn't work well. The head that Kevin wore has very twitchy mandibles that almost look broken (the mechanism, not the mandibles) in some shots.


azamultic
May 18, 2018, 12:23:13 AM
Reply #661 on: May 18, 2018, 12:23:13 AM
They wanted the animatronic face to get more detail in the closeups, but it just didn't work well. The head that Kevin wore has very twitchy mandibles that almost look broken (the mechanism, not the mandibles) in some shots.

What I tried to say earlier in the post, that production quality is the same or even better, later you used the example of cartoony animatronic face. To which I said that yeh it looks cartoony but the first one didn't even have, or needed, so this comparising is not valid. Because if first one had the fully animatronic puppet then we can claim that production quality of the first one is better than the second. Now second point was made that when they noticed that puppet looked cartoony, director could reshoot with the mask, or not make a such a close up. Where I puting responsibility on the director (Even though I love these close ups)   ;)
  Now the animation mechanics are twitchy I agree with that. Not sure whose responsibility is that, puppeteer, or mechanics themselves.


SiL
May 18, 2018, 01:00:46 AM
Reply #662 on: May 18, 2018, 01:00:46 AM
The point I was making was that more sophisticated techniques doesn't mean it's better. When it comes to special effects if it doesn't work, then it's worse. One movie could have a hand puppet and the other the most high-tech animatronic you've ever seen. If the hand puppet looks more convincing, then the animatronic isn't better.

As Stan Winston himself said, a guy in a suit is just a technology to create an effect like any other. It's low-tech to be sure, but if it works, that doesn't matter. All that matters is the result.


azamultic
May 18, 2018, 01:27:40 AM
Reply #663 on: May 18, 2018, 01:27:40 AM
Sil
I get what you are saying, and you have a point, we are going through the loops on this debate. What I am saying if take Stan Winston of 1980 and bring him to 2020 he would make much better effects (Generalising, and exception do happenes, but I am talking about percentage).
Also the main point of my debate was , that the final look of believability going to be also in the hands of director. Not expirineced director(not talking about McT) wouldn't be able to pull of hand puppet and high tech animatronics not going to help. But the expirineced director going to make even a socks the monster of nightmares (exaggeration)

Now my original point was that production of prostetics and special effects not getting worse, and in general getting better( if you don't like my quote "Impossible" I am taking it back) and generally people don't like Design (which is very subjective) or the way it looks fake (because of direction, not the castume its self) ;)

« Last Edit: May 18, 2018, 01:29:43 AM by azamultic »

SiL
May 18, 2018, 01:52:41 AM
Reply #664 on: May 18, 2018, 01:52:41 AM
Everyone agrees the techniques and technologies are getting better, but they're not being used to create realistic effects.

The direction can only do so much. Hopkins created some beautiful shots of the Predator, but the closeup mask was goofy looking and the wide shot head mask didn't move properly. Those were effects problems outside of Hopkins' control. How could his direction fix a broken effect?

In Predators they did an OK job of recreating the original Predator in their sculpt of the "Classic Predator", but the movement it had was limp and unconvincing. Again, not much the director could do if the effect he's given to work with isn't done well to begin with.

Bad direction has veeeery little to do with what people don't like about Predators lately. Except for AvP, because it was Paul Anderson specifically asking for "heroic" looking Predators that basically screwed everything up on that one :P


azamultic
May 18, 2018, 02:20:59 AM
Reply #665 on: May 18, 2018, 02:20:59 AM
SiL
Oh man I am getting lazy ;D
Okay I love the second movoe and don't want nothing to be changed, but just for the sake of debate, isnt job of director problem solving, if scene doesnt work well find a way to show not perfect effect in better way or dont show it at all? The twichy mandibles on the mask i agree Winston team did messed up there, I cant defened them. But the puppet face could have been avoided or shot diffeferently(i am not sure about the last). Therefore if we didnt see the puppet face, we would have same effect as the original movie except for the twiching mandibles.
  I can't defend Predators because I didn't watch it enough to debate about it.
  I think direction and design is the main problems for the fans. I am really not fan of every new design they got for the last 30 years, but I do think if movies were really good,we would start growing to like new designs, or at least enjoy thrill or action with our favourite alien hunter. But until then we didn't have much to enjoy therefore we getting even angry on the costumes, which in my thoughts are well crafted.


PredBabe
May 18, 2018, 02:48:52 AM
Reply #666 on: May 18, 2018, 02:48:52 AM
Maybe it’s just me but I can’t imagine Stan Winston’s original design in place of Scar’s design. For better or worse, the predator design that they used fit the style and tone of AVP more than the original would have... though that isn’t exactly saying much for the movie itself seeing as it’s pretty mediocre even though it’s one of Anderson’s stronger movies.

« Last Edit: May 18, 2018, 02:54:41 AM by PredBabe »

Scorpio
May 18, 2018, 03:28:53 AM
Reply #667 on: May 18, 2018, 03:28:53 AM
Maybe it’s just me but I can’t imagine Stan Winston’s original design in place of Scar’s design. For better or worse, the predator design that they used fit the style and tone of AVP more than the original would have...

That's because the original design looked like he wanted to rip her head off rather than luvey duvey stuff.


PredBabe
May 18, 2018, 04:08:19 AM
Reply #668 on: May 18, 2018, 04:08:19 AM
Maybe it’s just me but I can’t imagine Stan Winston’s original design in place of Scar’s design. For better or worse, the predator design that they used fit the style and tone of AVP more than the original would have...

That's because the original design looked like he wanted to rip her head off rather than luvey duvey stuff.

 Pretty much! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 


Wysps
May 18, 2018, 04:31:22 AM
Reply #669 on: May 18, 2018, 04:31:22 AM
Somebody mentioned increasing emphasis on facial expressions earlier, and I think that is one of the fault points in the suit development going forward.  The classic predator was more about body language.  I liked that original concept.  It fits with the character, rather than the bells and whistles that go with giving them human-like facial expressions.  Giving them human characteristics like that kind of makes them less interesting IMO.  Less facial expressions, more body language keeps that air of mystery about them.  Sticking with that original concept would make all these janky mandible features a moot point. 


SiL
May 18, 2018, 04:35:37 AM
Reply #670 on: May 18, 2018, 04:35:37 AM
The original actually has an incredibly expressive face, particularly the eyebrows. That brow lift when he spots the spikes in Dutch's trap is golden, or the slight scowl when it roars at Dutch after taking off its mask. It's just that the expressions are subtle and realistic, not cartoonishly exaggerated like Predator 2 or AvP, or stiff like Predators and AvPR.

I think that's the issue with basically all of the faces since the original. Look at the eyebrows: they either skyrocket up the forehead like a Looney Tunes character or are fixed in place. Gotta get that balance.


Wysps
May 18, 2018, 04:40:01 AM
Reply #671 on: May 18, 2018, 04:40:01 AM
The original actually has an incredibly expressive face, particularly the eyebrows. That brow lift when he spots the spikes in Dutch's trap is golden, or the slight scowl when it roars at Dutch after taking off its mask. It's just that the expressions are subtle and realistic, not cartoonishly exaggerated like Predator 2 or AvP, or stiff like Predators and AvPR.

I think that's the issue with basically all of the faces since the original. Look at the eyebrows: they either skyrocket up the forehead like a Looney Tunes character or are fixed in place. Gotta get that balance.

True.  So maybe the argument is, "subtle" versus "in your face".


SiL
May 18, 2018, 04:43:40 AM
Reply #672 on: May 18, 2018, 04:43:40 AM
I think so. Little movements to accentuate the expression rather than overacting. We wouldn't accept it from a human actor; why accept it from a mechanical one?


Scorpio
May 18, 2018, 04:55:38 AM
Reply #673 on: May 18, 2018, 04:55:38 AM
The original predator didn't have to express as much.  You're probably reading too much into it, Sil.  Most of the expression came from Kevin Peter Hall.


OpenMaw
May 18, 2018, 05:03:51 AM
Reply #674 on: May 18, 2018, 05:03:51 AM
The original predator didn't have to express as much.  You're probably reading too much into it, Sil.  Most of the expression came from Kevin Peter Hall.

No, he isn't.

Just watching the BTS footage of the head mechanisms being designed by ADI you can see they were pushing those flexers to extremes, and for testing the mechanism that's fine, but they actually did it in both AVP and AVPR. A slight rise is all you need, a slight tilt.

Jungle Hunter had a lot to express from the time he takes his mask off to the time he dies. There are a lot of subtle cues in there. A lot of it is Kevin Peter Hall and his body language, but a number of the big moments in there are on the face, and what sells it is that it isn't over played. It feels genuine.


Maybe it’s just me but I can’t imagine Stan Winston’s original design in place of Scar’s design. For better or worse, the predator design that they used fit the style and tone of AVP more than the original would have... though that isn’t exactly saying much for the movie itself seeing as it’s pretty mediocre even though it’s one of Anderson’s stronger movies.

Which is the biggest failing of AVP. The tone is wrong. The concept art for the film actually depicted much more classic looking Predators and much more gigeresque Aliens.

Something went horribly wrong from concept to realization.


 

Facebook Twitter Instagram Steam RSS Feed