Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Entertainment › Movies (Theatrical) › It's official -- Peter Jackson's next film: King Kong
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

It's official -- Peter Jackson's next film: King Kong - Page 23  

post #661 of 814
12/10/05 at 11:48am
About seven FX houses handled the varying shots in 'Narnia'. Among them ILM, Rythem & Hues, Sony Pictures Imageworks, and Weta.

When studios go this route, sometimes the final look of the movie suffers because there some of the FX shots aren't consistant with one another. Some end up looking great, while others look just ok.
post #662 of 814
12/10/05 at 12:19pm
Quote:
2) Is Sideshow WETA doing some Kong maquettes? I know they are doing a reproduction of the armature...but I want the new KONG. I never bought any of the LOTR stuff (though I was sorely tempted over and over), but I want a KONG.

Weta didn't partner with Sideshow for Kong (not sure why)...instead they started their own "Weta Collectibles" company.



That't the biggest one...Kong vs. V-Rex and it's about 2 feet tall.

I highly recommend Fireside Collectibles for buying this stuff - http://www.firesidecollectibles.com/...TS&Category=50
Bob there will take care of ya

BTW this lithograph is stunning http://www.firesidecollectibles.com/...ROD&ProdID=561 signed by Peter Jackson, Richard Taylor and the Artist. Limited to 500.
post #663 of 814
12/10/05 at 12:30pm
Quote:
Assuming Kong got higher up the mountain than ANYTHING, isn't that more impressive than being consistently good across a bunch of digital backgrounds, foregrounds, and 5 minutes of Yoda?
Not to me. If the majority of the effects are shoddy to make one element spectacular, than the overall presence still pulls me out. I personally thought the trailers were laughably awful. I've seen video games with better graphics. In the latest trailer, I will agree that Kong was executed well. But the backgrounds are still off in many shots and in one of the NYC shots the background still becomes flat a certain ways back.
Yoda meanwhile emoted the whole range of the human experience over that movie, even with limited run time. War of the Worlds set the world alight with stories-tall tripods that were never less than perfect. Little details like the aliens looking through photographs in one scene sell them in a very huge way.
Rephrasing the question then, it's not "Best Visual Effect." It's "Best Visual EffectS"!

post #664 of 814
12/10/05 at 1:02pm
Quote:
I thought this *was* a WETA film. I remember seeing an online documentary a long time ago showing them making physical creatures and weapons.
Assuming you are talking about Narnia...
It's not a Weta Digital film. Digital may have done a few effects shots, but not many - I believe Rhythm and Hues were the main company behind Narnia's digital effects.

Weta's involvement in Narnia was in the practical side of the film - costumes, armour, weapons, monsters, etc.
post #665 of 814
12/10/05 at 1:20pm
Sorry, Kevin. I was responding to the quoted material in Chris Will's post more than anything. And, yes, I meant Narnia.

To tell the truth, I had both a Narnia and a Kong thread open in different tabs, and I wasn't really paying attention to which I was in.
post #666 of 814
12/10/05 at 2:07pm
Kami, is there a better pic of the lithograph somewhere? Its hard to get a feel for it from the one on the web. BTW, the text doesn't mention its signed by Peter Jackson, though you can see 3 sigs.
post #667 of 814
12/10/05 at 2:18pm
Quote:
I've seen video games with better graphics.

You could say the same thing about Star Wars, really.
post #668 of 814
12/10/05 at 2:23pm
Quote:
Kami, is there a better pic of the lithograph somewhere? Its hard to get a feel for it from the one on the web. BTW, the text doesn't mention its signed by Peter Jackson, though you can see 3 sigs.

Yep, found one:



Yeah the text omits PJ for some reason but you can clearly see his signature in the middle.
post #669 of 814
12/10/05 at 2:30pm
Quote:
Yep, found one:

What took you so long?:b

Oh, I wish you hadn't shown me those items. I really like the Kong vs V-Rex (while holding Ann) and that lithograph. BTW, I presume the polystone is a cast artificial stone?

And the lithograph includes an artifact from the movie. Farout.
post #670 of 814
12/10/05 at 2:47pm
Quote:
Oh, I wish you hadn't shown me those items. I really like the Kong vs V-Rex (while holding Ann) and that lithograph. BTW, I presume the polystone is a cast artificial stone?

And the lithograph includes an artifact from the movie. Farout.

Kinda...here is a description from Sideshow Collectibles:
Quote:
Polystone is a compound made up largely of polyurethane resin mixed with powdered stone additives that give it added weight and the porcelain or "stone-like" feel that resulted in the materials name itself. Polystone is durable and highly effective at maintaining a sharp paint finish. Unlike porcelain which is fired in an oven, Polystone is a cold-cast material in which no heat is used in the manufacturing process, resulting in much greater variations of paint finish.

I own quite a few of the LOTR ones. To maintain it all you really need to do is keep it out of direct sunlight for extended periods (not good for the paint) and dust it every once in a while.
post #671 of 814
12/10/05 at 2:56pm
Quote:
I own quite a few of the LOTR ones. To maintain it all you really need to do is keep it out of direct sunlight for extended periods (not good for the paint) and dust it every once in a while.

Thanks, Kami, I'm going to be drooling over those Kong items for a while.
post #672 of 814
12/10/05 at 3:02pm
Quote:
Rephrasing the question then, it's not "Best Visual Effect." It's "Best Visual EffectS"!
...in a motion picture. If KONG WOWS, there you go. You can't take away the visceral human reaction. WETA knows that, and their films go for that. And it works, as the three Oscars in three tries shows. Yoda was emotive across a full spectrum. Assuming Kong will be so for far more screentime, who cares if some background plates aren't perfect? Most in the audience don't...my guess is they'll remember KONG.

Take care,
Chuck
post #673 of 814
12/10/05 at 3:04pm
Some For Your Consideration ads



More here:
http://www.theonering.net/scrapbook/group/1836/
post #674 of 814
12/10/05 at 3:13pm
Kami,
Many thanks! Are they making any more designs? I like those, but I'm hoping for a KONG only figure.

Awesome,
Chuck
post #675 of 814
12/10/05 at 3:30pm
Wow! They are pushing for Jack Black!

http://www.theonering.net/scrapbook/...836/view/17155
post #676 of 814
12/10/05 at 3:31pm
I'm sure they will. They'll probably try to promote Andy Serkis like they did for Gollum.

I like getting the 11x14 ones and framing them, I have a few of the better LOTR ones. The FYC ads usually have images you won't find anywhere else.
post #677 of 814
12/10/05 at 3:40pm
Yes but when was the last time that you heard Jack Black could get an Oscar nomination?
post #678 of 814
12/10/05 at 3:57pm
I was talking to Chuck, Sam.

But you are right it's shocking to see Black on on a FYC ad. PJ saw the potential though and wanted him from the get-go. The only sad part will be the amount of people who won't be able to let go of the typical Jack Black and will probably laugh at half the stuff he says, funny or not. From what I've heard you want to hate him in this movie, not laugh with him!
post #679 of 814
12/10/05 at 4:01pm
Ah OK! :b
post #680 of 814
12/10/05 at 4:20pm
BTW, the '76 version of KONG won the Oscar for visual effects that year {tied with Logans Run).


Technically speaking, neither film "won" the Oscar for visual effects. After Bedknobs And Broomsticks beat When Dinosaurs Ruled The Earth for visual effects of 1971 (awarded in March of '72) the category become a non-competitive honorary award given out when merited. This happened because there were so few films being made with large amounts of visual effects. The ironic part of this was that the first film to receive this honorary version of the FX Oscar was The Poseidon Adventure, the film that would give new life to special effects departments via the disaster movie craze. In March of 1978, Star Wars was the first film to "win" the FX Oscar after it was reverted back to a competitive category.

I remember a LOT of talk at the time that something was wrong when two films with such bad FX work as King Kong (1976) and Logan's Run were given honorary FX Oscars.
post #681 of 814
12/10/05 at 4:22pm
Are these FYC posters for sale? As I look at that website I don't see that they are.
post #682 of 814
12/10/05 at 5:15pm
Jack Black is a classically trained actor. He's a hell of a funny guy, but he'll KILL in the right (dramatic) roles. I could see Black winning an Oscar at some point in his career.

But not yet. Like Kami, I have a few LOTR FYC ads...they usually pick very striking imagery. There is a Fellowship one (and Kami already knows exactly which one I am talking about) that is still my single favorite LOTR image...Aragorn kissing the forehead of Boromir after his passing. And not just LOTR (obviously), but most FYC ads are awesome. Try ebay or Variety magazine.

I might wait for the right Kong figure. Pose and image are very important considerations. I don't want a battle KONG!

Take care,
Chuck
post #683 of 814
12/10/05 at 5:20pm
Quote:
Assuming Kong will be so for far more screentime, who cares if some background plates aren't perfect?


But, the award is based on how well the effects serve the story. If it looks like the actors are in front of a blue screen, that takes me out of the story.

I have to admit that, when I was watching the trailers for Kong, some of the non-KONG work was so spotty that I WAS taken out of a focus on what was going on in the trailer.

KONG can emote across a range of spectrums and be absolutely photorealistic, but if other effects in the picture take me out of the film, then the effects are not serving the story.
post #684 of 814
12/10/05 at 5:58pm
Quote:
Yes but when was the last time that you heard Jack Black could get an Oscar nomination?


How about last year for School Of Rock?
post #685 of 814
12/10/05 at 6:35pm
Quote:
I personally thought the trailers were laughably awful.
I thought we were beyond that. Judging a finished movie's SFX on the basis of an Internet trailer is akin to judging how beautiful a six month old fetus will turn out. At that point you can only go by its pedigree. Considering Kong's 'parents' one would be well advised to reserve any final judegment until then. The WETA track record for LOTR speaks for itself.

The matchup of TPM and the Matrix is a prime example of how SFX are evaluated when voting for the Oscars. You would get no argument from me that the volume and quality of TPM was considered superior to those of the Matrix. Where dissension will arise is on which movie's SFX served the story better. The SFX of the Matrix were used to reinforce and serve the story line. Many moments in TPM were busy for busy sakes and JarJar, however well he was created, as a story device was terribly miscalculated, Lucas's Bay of Pigs in my mind, and most importantly - detracted from the drama of the storyline.

If one is pulled out of a movie because of bad background plates then the movie has failed in its primary goal which is to have your attention on the story.
post #686 of 814
12/10/05 at 6:49pm
Chuck, in response to your requests for a Kong figure - I know you are looking for a solo figure, I do know (or have heard) that Mezco will be doing an 18 inch Kong early next year - Will probably be in the 40-50 dollar range.
post #687 of 814
12/10/05 at 7:02pm
Quote:
Try ebay or Variety magazine.

Well ebay doesn' have (or I didn't see) the fyc pair of Kong and the v-rex. They did have the pair of Kong and Ann sharing a quiet moment on top of the ESB.

I'll have to keep my eyes peeled for the v-rex pairing. What did you mean by "try Variety magazine?" Do they sell the fyc's?
post #688 of 814
12/10/05 at 7:22pm
Quote:
I thought we were beyond that. Judging a finished movie's SFX on the basis of an Internet trailer is akin to judging how beautiful a six month old fetus will turn out. At that point you can only go by its pedigree. Considering Kong's 'parents' one would be well advised to reserve any final judegment until then. The WETA track record for LOTR speaks for itself.
Indeed it does, and that's where most of my concern comes from. I will of course withold final judgment until I have seen the finished film — if I think the effects look award-worthy in theaters, then most of my argument will of course be moot — but many of the problems in the trailers problems I also found in the finished products of the Rings films. The impact was far less because LOTR relied far more on practicular locations than Kong did. There is no real world substitute for Skull Island. The New York City of the 30's doesn't exist.
Some things have improved astonishingly from the first trailer; Kong went from Mighty Joe Young to KONG, for example. Other things, like the wide landscape shots, have not.
post #689 of 814
12/10/05 at 10:32pm
Johnny, late year Variety magazines are full of FYC ads. They are never sold as posters. You have to get the ads themselves.

Chris, if the poor plates take you out they aren't doing their job, I agree. I am merely pointing out that if KONG makes you truly feel the story, then that is worth more than seamless digital backgrounds.

If it comes down to straight up perfect photorealism, ROTS (and Kong I am certain) would lose anyway. ILM wouldn't, of course, as War of the Worlds compacts their effects budget into some tightly managed flawless sequences. But it doesn't really come down to that. We can reasonably guess which three films will be voted on. We know the voters. And we know what makes them vote for the Oscar VFX winners. If the work on Kong himself is what Ebert, Poland, and quite a few others are saying, you can be certain KONG will be nominated. If the Oscars think of a special award for Kong (incorporating Serkis), then the other nominees have a much better chance. If not, they'll probably use VFX to recognize Kong.
post #690 of 814
12/10/05 at 11:40pm
Quote:
How about last year for School Of Rock?

Really? Nice.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Movies (Theatrical)
This thread is locked  
Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Entertainment › Movies (Theatrical) › It's official -- Peter Jackson's next film: King Kong