Zoic Studios Aboard Joss Whedon's Serenity

POSTED BY: mo1962
UPDATED: Monday, May 3, 2004 19:03
VIEWED: 7854
PAGE 2 of 3

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 NEXT PAGE

ORANGERFUL

Saturday, May 1, 2004 4:36 PM

I think as long as they are consistent, the camera style will not be a problem.

I was aware of it while watching my DVDs, but I didn't really take note of it until I listened to the commentaries and then it clicked. In my mind, it was how Firefly always was. Other movies that toss it in at random intervals when the rest of the film has been normal *coughAttackoftheClonescough* are the ones that draw unwanted attention to the effect.

GHOULMAN

Saturday, May 1, 2004 5:27 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by mo1962:
I took a look at their website ( http://www.zoicstudios.com/) and most of the stuff they've done is TV...Firefly, Buffy and some neat looking commericals.

^^^ Thanx for the link!

These fellows did that fantstic Battlestar Galactica remake as well ... truly the best SPFX seen onscreen since 2001 A Space Odyssey.

Sure, you might think that recent FX in movies are terrific - glossy and slick. Often I hear the word 'cool' as if that's a descriptive adjective. But that's all these FX are really; toys floating about in space shooting disco lights at one another. It always looks like another Star Trek/B5/SG-1 episode. Yuck.

Zoic has has given us the most artistically challenging and exciting FX seen in a good decade. Frellin' shiny stuff Zoic. I am a big, big fan.

QUICKSAND

Sunday, May 2, 2004 6:47 AM

Chapter the First:

- Excellent news. It's consisent with Joss's quirk of pulling people from relative obscurity and making them famous, or at least, an integral part of his Dominion... like actors Sarah Michelle Gellar, or David Boreanaz... or even David Boyd, the Cinematographer for the TV show and now the movie, too. Heck, any of the actors who did all three of his TV shows.

I did not, until it was posted above, realize Zoic also did "BattleStar Galactica." I should have guessed, though, as it was a little too (Read: Exact) similar to the "Firefly" FX shots. I was hella cynical going in... but "BG" was INCREDIBLE, from the acting on down to the special FX shots... and yes, it was quite cinematic all by itself, so I don't think we need to worry about guessing if Zoic can hang. Word.

Chapter the Second:

- Dude, did someone just say these are the best since "2001: A Space Odyssey?" Bite your tongue. It's been 36 years, I'm pretty sure something has had As Good, or Better special FX since then. Star Wars, Empire, Alien, Aliens and any Matrix movie just being a few that come to mind.

Also, is anyone with me that models can be as cool as, if not cooler than, CGI? Compare Star Wars IV-VI vs. The Phantom Menace. I mean, seriously.

___\_o_/___
--------------- (Qs)

LIVIDLIQUID

Sunday, May 2, 2004 7:56 AM

"Also, is anyone with me that models can be as cool as, if not cooler than, CGI? Compare Star Wars IV-VI vs. The Phantom Menace. I mean, seriously."

Are you friggin' KIDDING me? It looked like a cartoon! It had no weight!

GHOULMAN

Sunday, May 2, 2004 5:22 PM

^^^ I'm right there with you. It's interesting to me that OLD special effects were just that... special! Now, CGI has given lots of artistically untalented boobs the chance to make fools of themselves. Remember the Trek movie Nemesis? Yeeeucko!

Which is why I love Zoic... they seem to be the only CGI people around who use CGI as it was ment to be used. And I think they have trancended even that! Trash is such a fantastic FX ep of Firefly for Zoic. It really looked sexy, not to mention the entire Reaver chase in Serenity. The battles in Battlestar Galactica were ... just... breathtaking.

GHOULMAN

Sunday, May 2, 2004 5:32 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Quicksand:
SNIP!...

Chapter the Second:

- Dude, did someone just say these are the best since "2001: A Space Odyssey?" Bite your tongue. It's been 36 years, I'm pretty sure something has had As Good, or Better special FX since then. Star Wars, Empire, Alien, Aliens and any Matrix movie just being a few that come to mind.

Also, is anyone with me that models can be as cool as, if not cooler than, CGI? Compare Star Wars IV-VI vs. The Phantom Menace. I mean, seriously.

___\_o_/___
--------------- (Qs)

And I'm talking specifically about 'ships in space' as opposed to makeup or production design. I'm zeroing in on the FX application of depicting objects in space (*chuckle*) in an artistically successful way.

Well, certainly I'm making a blanket statement and you could punch holes into it... but basically all FX since 2001 are variations. Now, you can get into ILM and thier 'continuing' of these artistic FX crafts and techniquies, etc. and you certainly can pin me down with exceptions and all that. But exceptions are just that. What I'm on about is a fundemental shift in artistic quality. I believe Zoic is setting a standard not seen SINCE 2001.

Now, I see Firefly as a major artistic mile-stone in CGI space FX film. Nothing has been this exciting, jazzy, and realistic onscreen... ever. I'm of the opinion that Zoic has accomplished something truly special. Certainly, they deserve an Emmy. Someone get on that!!!

ECGORDON

Sunday, May 2, 2004 6:39 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
I'm of the opinion that Zoic has accomplished something truly special. Certainly, they deserve an Emmy. Someone get on that!!!

They already did win an Emmy, last year for Firefly of course.

I agree with you totally about 2001 being the benchmark in SFX. Even the tremendous work in the original Star Wars Trilogy was just an adaptation of it, mainly in the use of computer controlled cameras to capture the "actions" of the models.

But Zoic has taken the next step I think, in making CGI look like models, something no one else has been able to do in my opinion. It is very hard to believe there was not one miniature model of Serenity used in the entire production, and the Reaver chase in "Serenity" made me think they had built these ships for real and actually flew them.

wo men ren ran zai fei xing.

PEACE

Sunday, May 2, 2004 8:07 PM

What impressed me when I looked at ZOIC's site was that these seem to be people who understand industrial design-- both form and function combining into something that is esthetic and functional. Serenity as a ship damn well looks like it would work, as well as being something that fits into it's environment, not like some of the stuff you see stuffed into, oh, say, The Phantom Menace or Attack of the Clones.

Which brings up the point I think someone else has mentioned-- ZOIC also seems to understand that CGI is a tool, not an end in itself. A lot of filmmakers seem to be tacking on CGI shots just as decoration. ZOIC's stuff is aimed at bring a world to life. The only other special effect group that seems to understand this is the group (forget the name at the moment) that worked with Peter Jackson on LOTR.

I'd forgotten ZOIC had done a lot of stuff on Buffy and Angel; and superior stuff it was.

I feel very good with them doing the effects for the movie.

Oh, bugger! Now I have to wait for someone to wake up!

GHOULMAN

Sunday, May 2, 2004 9:21 PM

^^^ the Lord of The Rings SPFX shop in New Zealand is called WETA ( www.wetadigital.com ... but it's down!). They developed the software for those huge battle scenes and created Golem.

I still watch the Golem scenes in amazement. Glad it got the Oscar! And thanks ecgordon for the Emmy info! You are on the ball brother.

QUICKSAND

Sunday, May 2, 2004 11:05 PM

I'd like to respond to the chap above who thinks models look like a "cartoon."

NOT EVEN. And this corresponds to other responses, too-- I'll take the Original Star Wars trilogy over the new films, ANY DAY of the WEEK. CGI isn't tangible, I'm watching Attack of the Clones, and I KNOW it's all fake, because... well, look at it! Star Wars sold a billion dollars worth of merchandise because the toys were copies of the models... not approximations of a special effect.

Maybe the problem with the 2001/FX arguement is that while *I* think strides have been made since 1968, you think those strides are actually variations on the same theme. We're both right.

What bugs me about SW Episodes I&II is that, while Eps 4-6 were groundbreaking, 1&2 are just one more Special-FX clogged movie, where the CGI is the star of the show, and the actors are just set dressing. There's nothing to differentiate "Attack of the Clones" from something like "I, Robot," or "Titanic" or "Armageddon." Except I'm vaguely aware one of those had to do with water.

We're in agreement, though, that with Joss Whedon's universe, it's the STORY, the CHARACTERS that are the show, and the CGI is just a tool for telling the story. In "2001," the FX were so incredible, they became the story, themselves... so it's either a blessing or a curse.

You decide.

\ o /
------------ (Qs)

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 NEXT PAGE