Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Feb 24, 2021, 03:49:35 AM
To be fair, who wouldn't trust what Stan Winston
someone who's done research on a subject that's common domain at this point
see
my coverageQuote from: Voodoo Magic on Feb 24, 2021, 03:49:35 AM
It be fair to suggest that not many general fans that go beyond the movies and supplementals would know the real story. There hasn't been a Predator book published containing that info...
don't care doesn't justify
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Feb 24, 2021, 03:49:35 AMdoesn't take away from being able to view and be critical of various practical effect results in a franchise
it's okay to be critical as long as a. you recognize that criticism is based on a subjective paradigm and b. you don't confuse that paradigm for the objective truth
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Feb 24, 2021, 03:49:35 AM
I don't know. This seems excessive for 10 seconds on Predator 2 and I adore Predator 2. All the content creator mentioned was it started to stray with needing a little more cheek skin, but then quickly followed it up that it still properly maintains the closed mandible look of the Jungle Hunter. I'm not sure I even agree with the tiny criticism, but it feels like you're perhaps having a slight overreaction to it.
there's an entire subsection in the video dedicated to P2
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Feb 24, 2021, 03:49:35 AM
I highly doubt Anderson instructed ADI to make sure Scar's excess skin roll and fold in odd, peculiar, seemingly unnatural ways... "It better not appear elastic and realistic ADI! And make sure his mandible teeth point in odd weird directions too!!!!"
if you read what I said a. Anderson WANTED the hero look, WANTED the human-like face because Scar was the hero of the story. This is documented in multiple places and has never once been contradicted and b. AvP's shooting schedule was super tight, they had three months of production which in filmmaking terms is HELLA tight, and they had a production budget that was too low for what they wanted to do and YET AvP looks far more expensive than $60m, there are things that of course are going to slip in all this - and Scar's floppy mandible-membrane is an example of that
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Feb 24, 2021, 03:49:35 AM
Yet dog mouths, their jaw bones, are all structured in the same way, where some of ADIs Predators appear to have broken jaws.
"appear to have" is correct as we know absolutely zero of the intraspecific variation that happens endoskeletally between predator individuals since you know they're aliens. See SiL's photo comparison
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Feb 24, 2021, 03:49:35 AM
Tortured? How so? You knock this guy for making an assumption here and there, yet to be fair, you're doing it too.
yeah cause the scientists absolutely know how to take care of an ALIEN CREATURE don't they? That's why they keep it SEDATED WITH IMPROPER DOSAGES they couldn't possibly know? That's why upon awakening the pred is so goddamn PISSED that he decides to wreak COMPLETE HAVOC in a place filled with the species he wants to HELP? It clearly wasn't being properly treated and this is something the movie flat out visually implies - unlike the guy's assumptions, which stem from personal aesthetic taste
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Feb 24, 2021, 03:49:35 AM
Look, full disclosure here, I loathe the ADI Predators
which is why your arguments aren't all that
I loathe wolf's face - doesn't mean I will in any way call it an invalid design. Used to do that, but then I grew up. There's lots of people who like it, to the point where wolf's their fave!
Who am I to say they're wrong?Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Feb 24, 2021, 03:49:35 AM
Or even KNB again.
KNB, the guys who gave you the "crabator" and the pisspoor (following your line of reasoning) classic predator with floppity flop flop mandible membranes and lockjaw? At that point, I'd also say "no thanks" to KNB returning (if I were you)
I'm not mad or pissed mind you, just tired of these arguments being recycled over and over and over again
Quote from: SiL on Feb 24, 2021, 05:56:02 AM
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Feb 24, 2021, 04:23:46 AM
Come on now, it's only natural to believe Stan Winston. And the video is not called "Who came up with the idea of the mandibles?" but rather Why Predator sequels get the face wrong.
It's also natural to research a topic.
QuoteThey all close the same way. They don't appear broken.
https://64.media.tumblr.com/15299ef5590833f74cd83d17d67f6ba0/tumblr_o41g4lNsBl1tw36nao6_250.jpg
The jaw of the Shih Tzu very, very clearly does not close the same way as the husky. The maxilla of the husky (and most of the others) extends further than the mandible -- it's the opposite on the Shih Tzu, which has a distinct underbite. The pug also has an underbite, and a highly recessed nose.
Let's put some skin on them.
https://www.purina.com.au/-/media/project/purina/main/breeds/dog/dog_siberian-husky_desktop.jpg?h=475&la=en&w=825&hash=B2B86CD3D2D85392DB3948A07E63FB09
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e0/Pug_in_Tallinn.JPG/220px-Pug_in_Tallinn.JPG
If dogs were movie monsters, this would get the same kind of ridicule ADI's Predators get.
Thank you this 500%
Quote from: BigDaddyJohn on Feb 24, 2021, 11:01:12 AM
How do we know for sure the plane anecdote is fake ?
Because the mandibles and the rastafarian look had already been established as key traits BEFORE Winston's involvement. Shannon Shea -- who was involved in the original movie -- even commented on the dubious veridicity of that anecdote. The classic documentary "If it bleeds we can kill it" is pure sensationalistic bullshit with VERY LITTLE true information regarding what happened behind the scenes (even regarding the insect Predator XFX did). This is testified by MULTIPLE people
What Winston and Wang did was based on Munro and Short's efforts and can in essence be seen as refining or honing in. See my coverage I linked above
Quote from: SiL on Feb 24, 2021, 11:33:11 AM
It's possible the anecdote happened, but the mandibles were in the redesign before Winston was coming on board. Maybe Winston was thinking of getting rid of them and Cameron's comment convinced him otherwise?
Shea seemed to say in-between the lines that the anecdote was fake... but this could be the case, and if so, Winston should've said that instead of making it look like a completely different course of events
Quote from: 426Buddy on Feb 24, 2021, 11:44:32 AM
A bad effect is a bad effect and that's what ADI pred faces are. Bad effects.
You not liking those effects does not in any way establish them as bad effects, sorry mate