SFX - debate over old school vs. new school
POSTED BY: reginaroadie
UPDATED: Thursday, November 22, 2007 13:53
VIEWED: 3622
PAGE 3 of 4
Originally posted by reginaroadie:
Quote:
Thanks. I brought up puppetteering and make-up, because I think those are example of what I think motion capture is, which is basically performance enhancements (of the legal kind, that is). They are tools that are used to enhance an actor's performance. If Boris Karloff didn't have all that make-up on him, then he wouldn't be a very convincing Frankenstein, would he? And although Lon Chaney is the Man of a Thousand Faces, he still needs help getting the other 999 of them to work.
That's maybe where Zemeckis is coming from with Beowulf
Quote:
You asked the question of "If Ray Winstone didn't meet the physical requirements of the character, then why couldn't they hire someone that did meet them?" Because you're typical 30/40 something bodybuilding actor probably wouldn't have been able to deliver a nuanced and emotional performance.
Well that's up for debate. There may well be a bodybuilding actor out there that could deliver were they given the chance. Fact is those actors are established and aside from being accomplished too, they are a huge draw at the box office and that's a factor in a film being given the green light. And I still say it's questionable, if the actors are altered significantly that it is indeed still them up there on the screen. If you are drawing in the crowds wih big named actors you want to know it is them you are seeing and not some cgi immitation. Motion captured exquisitely or not.
Quote:
You compare the cast of BEOWULF (Ray Winstone, Anthony Hopkins, Brendan Gleeson, John Malkovich, Crispin Glover, Robin Wright Penn, Alison Lohman, Angelina Jolie) to the cast of 300 (Gerard Butler, Lena Hedley, David Wenham, the guy that played Paulo on LOST), you automatically respond more to the former cast because they're all heavy hitters, as opposed to the cast of 300, where the best guy was the guy that played the Friar in VAN HELSING.
I actually think Gerard Butler was fantastic in that film. It's very easy to slate the muscle type actors. I actually think they are always given a very raw deal. Being physical as an actor aint easy, they're very rarely given the roles to show off they're abilities. Now without sounding trite, I have to say I've never been able to take Anthony Hopikins seriously after his dreadful performance in Legends of the Fall, (which I must start to put down in my top 10 of worst films)
But you know enhancements may be fine in having your Hoffman's doing physical things they can no longer do due to old age, but really there is something great about casting the right person for the right role. Imagine if motion capture were around in the eighties and you'd have Al Pacino play the part of The Terminator. Thereby eliminating Arnie in the role. That would be just plain wrong. CGI or not. Arnie was the Terminator, and his physical build was what help 'create' that entity on screen, and that organic connection is what rounds off a character.
Quote:
So yes, you have all these great actors. But put them in front of a camera and have them act it out in real life, most likely it would not work. But with motion capture, their bodies and facial features could be changed so that they actually fit the character and properly inhabit the world that they are in.
Any other motion capture issues you'd like to debate?
:D I had this thought last night. There is also the possibility of people who cannot act, (take a bow Miss Hilton) being given the 'treatment' in post production. Animators may be called upon to make a particularly wooden actor appear, well less wooden, thereby allowing a greater number of 'eye candy' to take the major roles and seemingly appear to able to act. Just a thought.
Quote:
Just to change the subject slightly. One movie from the 30's that blows my mind in terms of FX is the original THE INVISIBLE MAN with Claude Raines. Invisible fx are done regularly now, so we kinda take them for granted. But to be able to do it convincingly in the 30's, when AFX in genNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Imagine CGing Chris Reeve in Superman The Movie so that he looks all comic book muscle-y...or CGing Brandon Routh so that he appears just like Chris Reeve in Superman Returns...the possibilities are endless (for losing the organic connection to our characters).
In X-3 they CGed Xavier and Magneato to lose twenty years (with mixed results), and they made Juggernaut super-muscled (too solid and unmoving, but it worked for that particular character)- this was just the tip of the CG iceberg. I for one am getting tired of the idea that they can do 'anything' with it. It's just a tool; when the tool BECOMES the movie, the movie becomes a ride, not a character-driven story (see: Sky Captain).
Integrated Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
There is also the possibility of people who cannot act, (take a bow Miss Hilton) being given the 'treatment' in post production. Animators may be called upon to make a particularly wooden actor appear, well less wooden, thereby allowing a greater number of 'eye candy' to take the major roles and seemingly appear to able to act. Just a thought.
Maybe. But again, it goes back to the whole thing of the actor behind the role. You could have Frank and Ollie of Disney's Nine Old Men brought in to spiff up Paris Hilton's performance. It still wouldn't change the fact that she has less talent and chemistry than a block of wood and that it's a literally dead performance.
Ray Winstone gave this really great interview where he talks about the benefits of motion capture over at Dark Horizons.
Quote:
At 50, Ray Winstone has discovered the fountain of youth, cinematically speaking. In the CGI technologically advanced Beowulf, the British actor takes on a role over two decades his junior. On paper, the Nordic Viking warrior has little in common with the much shorter older actor, so he does concede surprise that director Bob Zemeckis even cast him, "because he's a six-foot-six, 20-year-old warrior, I'm 50 years of age, and I'm five foot ten."
So the actor adds, reflectively, that this new technology "kind of changes the game a little bit, because sometimes it's about the way you look, rather than the way you perform, so it's quite flattering, because it's about performance." The actor, who was hired on the strength of his voice, happily admits that "it does open doors for other things, as there are parts that you might have bypassed because you're too old."...
Yet Winstone has now embraced the technology that has afforded him the unique opportunity to play characters younger than himself. "Things like Henry the Fifth. You know, he's a young man, but by the time you're 50, you know how to play him. I wasn't clever enough when I was supposed to be his age to play that, and I'd like to think I was now. So this opens the doors for everyone and I think it ups the stakes."
Just that last bit about Henry the Fifth to me reinforces the argument that you can now hire an actor who spiritually is perfect but who physically isn't. Now in the case of Arnie playing the Terminator, yes it is a bit of iconic casting that should never be touched. And with the exception of Marlon Brando in SUPERMAN RETURNS (which was more of a case of Singer using stuff that Donner had planned for SUPERMAN II but was scrapped), I don't like the idea of dead actors being brought back to life digitally.
But in the case of getting an older actor to effectively play a more youthful character and imbibe it with the gravitas of a more experienced individual, I say go for it. Now when a thirty something actor plays a high school student, you'd actually buy it.
**************************************************
"And it starts with a sentence that might last a lifetime, or it all might just go down in flames. If I let you know me, then why would you want me? Each day I don't is a shame. Each day I don't is a great shame."
Loudon Wainwright III - "Strange Weirdos" off the "Knocked Up" soundtrack
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So, can you buy an actress being CGed to look more like Marylin Monroe in a movie about her? What if they tweak the voice a bit too? What if they composite bits digitally lifted from one of her movies? What if they don't even use the actress at all, except as a stand-in?
You see where I'm going with this....
Slippery slope Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Chrisiall wrote:
Quote:
I for one am getting tired of the idea that they can do 'anything' with it. It's just a tool; when the tool BECOMES the movie, the movie becomes a ride, not a character-driven story (see: Sky Captain).
Very good example. That film looked great, but lacked ANY kind of soul!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Originally posted by reginaroadie:
Quote:
Just that last bit about Henry the Fifth to me reinforces the argument that you can now hire an actor who spiritually is perfect but who physically isn't. Now in the case of Arnie playing the Terminator, yes it is a bit of iconic casting that should never be touched. And with the exception of Marlon Brando in SUPERMAN RETURNS (which was more of a case of Singer using stuff that Donner had planned for SUPERMAN II but was scrapped), I don't like the idea of dead actors being brought back to life digitally.
Well yeah, it's great for Winstone of course, but I'm not sure its great for the story. That role should be played by a younger actor as should Romeo and Juliet. Or else you end up with a very dispassionate performance. Having an experienced actor works to a point but with certain roles that lack of knowing is what makes the role. I think the actors need that connection to a character. That is what makes great performances. That invisible link between actor and part. It's essential. Easy to overlook but I think ultimately it is what seperates good acting from great acting.
Similarly you can't have the entire cast of Macbeth being played by the stars of Saved by the Bell... Well actually you can but y'know it'd be lame....
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:
But then if you do that - it surely is no longer the actor. Thereby raising the point of what is the purpose of having the actor at all? If it is for reference then surely any individual would do.
Of course, back in the real world you have to sell films, and Stars Sell Films (or maybe they just convince marketing departments to promote the films - but the effect is the same). The same holds true for (non- motion capture) animations - I'm sure that there is plenty of voice talent around that is as good as (e.g.) Cameron Diaz in Shrek, but they're not called Cameron Diaz...
Maybe, in time, more star "motion capture artists" will appear to join Andy "Gollum" Serkis?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think it's already happening. You got Andy Serkis, but you also have Doug Jones whose probably more associated with the Silver Surfer than Laurence Fishburne. Not to mention all the monster's he plays in Guierremo (sp?) Del Toro's movies.
And I'm sure with BEOWULF that Crispin Glover will be known just as much for Grendel and his fucked up personality as he is with George McFly.
**************************************************
"And it starts with a sentence that might last a lifetime, or it all might just go down in flames. If I let you know me, then why would you want me? Each day I don't is a shame. Each day I don't is a great shame."
Loudon Wainwright III - "Strange Weirdos" off the "Knocked Up" soundtrack
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
CGI could also be used to add a few inches to Sean Maher's height, making him a perfect Superman. . .
Or for the much-dreamed of live-action Gargoyles movie; to get Keith David, Marina Sirtis, Jeff Bennett and others to be able to hang onto pre-established roles that don't necessarily look like them in makeup/costume (to say nothing of heavyset John Rhys Davies playing athletic action-villain Macbeth).
-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Hold the phone- didn't Crispin SUE Zemeckis for using footage of him in Back To The Future 2???
Originally posted by reginaroadie:
And I'm sure with BEOWULF that Crispin Glover will be known just as much for Grendel and his fucked up personality as he is with George McFly.
I guess all was forgiven, eh Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME