Cool News
Fascinating Article Online About Zemeckis And THE POLAR EXPRESS!!
Hey, everyone. "Moriarty" here with some Rumblings From The Lab.
If you aren’t currently registered to be able to read stories on the LA TIMES website, then go do so. Trust me... it’s worth it.
Now, once you’ve done that, you need to go check out a story by P.J. Huffstutter about the work that Robert Zemeckis is currently doing on THE POLAR EXPRESS, his adaptation of Chris Van Allsburg’s book about a train that takes people to the North Pole, where Santa is.
CLICK HERE FOR PROOF THAT ZEMECKIS ISN’T HAPPY UNLESS HE’S TRYING SOMETHING IMPOSSIBLE!!
Time and time again, Zemeckis has pushed the envelope of what visual effects can do in service of story, and time and time again, he manages to pull off things that no other director would be capable of.
Here’s a brief excerpt from the story:
”All of the scenes in THE POLAR EXPRESS will be shot with digital cameras in front of a blank screen, with sets to be filled in later by computers. The actors will be covered in motion-capture sensors so that each move of an arm, each flicker of an eyelid and each wrinkle of a lip will be stored on a computer and used as guide for the digital animators who will create the actual movie footage.”
And I know... you’re thinking, But what about TOY STORY and SHRECK and FINAL FANTASY and all of those? Aren’t they completely computer created?
This is different, though, stranger. I’m not sure I totally get what he’s up to. Hell, I’m not even sure the writer of that article totally gets what Zemeckis is up to. The point is, he seems determined to push himself to do something new again, as always.
Here’s another brief excerpt:
”Some of those roles will be filled by actual child actors. But others will be completely virtual, including one who represents Hanks' conductor character as a boy. The crew has spent nearly a year experimenting on ways to map Hanks' current facial and muscle structure. They plan to mix that data with photographs of the actor in his youth and backward engineer a virtual child that will resemble the adult Hanks.”
There’s all sorts of material in the piece about the impact of a film like this on the industry and the film’s potential budget. It’s a great read, so get moving.
"Moriarty" out.
-
+ Expand All
-
UncleFucka, you are not alone... Gump is a pile of smoldering shite!
-
Did anybody read the book? Please God, no more sentimental Zemeckis crap. Let me guess, Hanks will be the slighty wacky conductor who will help a little boy learn the true meaning of Christmas. Sure this isn't Santa Clause 3?
-
But I do understand "Zemeckis being hacked to pieces by irate Teamsters and placed in several different barrels on different continents." And I have an active disdain for Forrest Gump, easily the worst movie to win an Oscar (except for "How Green Was My Valley" and "Gladiator"). But Zemeckis' "Contact" was amazing--- in that it made me temporarily question Jodie Foster's intelligence in selecting movies. Most of his stuff is tripe, except for Used Cars and Back to the Future 2.
-
Oh boy. Can you say, "Waterworld of children's films"?
-
It is an absolutely charming tale. Sentimental? Hell, yes, but it's a CHILDREN'S CHRISTMAS BOOK for Santa's sake. It is WONDERFULLY sentimental, and a heck of a lot better than "Jumanji" for that very reason. "Jumanji" had no heart whatsoever. I can't wait to see this--Bob Z. is exactly the right guy for it. You can dismiss it as not being your type of story, but you're only revealing your inner Grinch if you do.
-
Dec 03, 2002 10:38:34 AM CST
I don't understand all the slagging that geeks give Gump...so Pu
by minderbinder
This sounds a bit odd, but I'm still interested in seeing what they end up with.
-
Dec 03, 2002 2:31:57 PM CST
I think the sequel should be called The Forrest Express with Hul
by chaffro
"We get all sorts of snow here, brother, we get big old fat snow..."
-
This is one of the quotes from the article:
"This is an ambitious, exciting project for us. We've seen the early tests, and it's like nothing I've ever seen," said Martin Shafer, chairman and chief executive of Castle Rock.
Isn't that what they ALWAYS say about hyped FX movies? Wasn't Jar-Jar binks the "next revolutionary step" in digital technology?
The only true, major influences during the past 20 years in terms of visual effects have been Terminator 2, Jurassic Park, and The Matrix.
So, until this film comes out. Or better yet, until I see a trailer, I'm not gonna believe all the hype their starting to build. -
And for a lot less money? It says in the article this movie is going to cost north of 150 million dollars. I bet fifty of that is going to Hanks and fifty to Zemeckis. Way to hose the studios Rob!
-
I've never seen Zemekes do sentimental. hen it comes to sappy and superficial, however, he's a master.
-
And for a lot less money? It says in the article this movie is going to cost north of 150 million dollars. I bet fifty of that is going to Hanks and fifty to Zemeckis. Note to studios -- five talented guys with Macs could make this movie for what the catering is going to cost.
-
Zemeckis has an extremely spotty record. When he is bad, he is very very bad, such as GUMP, BACK TO THE FUTURE II and WHAT LIES BENEATH. When he is good, we get BACK TO THE FUTURE I and III. He strikes me as a filmmaker fascinated with new technology at the expense of the human heart. JUMANJI anyone? What he envisions is a live-and-animated combo which is exactly what he did in ROGER RABBITT. No big surprise. let's hope he hires a good director.
-
Zemeckis didn't make Jumanji.
-
There's a reason why the labor unions are scared. This could represent a change in the way film and television is done. Yeah, maybe it'll take longer before the technology gets cheap enough afterwards; but what's it going to be like when any independant film producer off the street can cast Julia Roberts or Tom Hanks, or at least their images ? What happens when all you need in terms of a set is a bluescreen in the back of your garage and a decent desktop ? Christ, think before you post.
-
I cannot believe you people dont like forrest gump, a little bitter are we. That movie kicks ass and i cant believe all you nerds say you dont like it to try and be cool. YOU ARE THE UNCOOL. also how the fuck can you say back to the future 3 is good but 2 is crap or whatever you guys need to chill the fuck out try smoking weed before going to the movies a couple three foot roors and maybe you wont bitch as much. In conclusion Forrest Gump rules and you guys suck
-
anybody else check out this plot line for the spongebob movie they're planning? http://www.comingsoon.net/cgi-bin/archive/fullnews.cgi?newsid1038938606,66378,
-
He is probably the least-known director of some of the best-known movies ever made. Forrest Gump, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Contact, Back to the Future - all classics. And let's not forget he produced The Frighteners. He is one of the great directors working today.
-
I don't care how "cool" or "great" Forrest Gump was... it NEVER should have won Best Picture/Director/Actor.
Those honors should have gone to Pulp Fiction. Look at cinema now. How the hell did Forrest Gump change movies? How has it influenced film fron a narrative point of view? IT HASN'T. So what if it ushered new technological achievements by blending Forrest with JFK? Sooner or later, a different movie would have done the exact same thing. Technology will always advance because it's in our nature to build better, faster, cameras and design better, cooler special FX.
Look at "Toy Story" when it came out... how "innovative" it was. Then "Antz" came out and blew it away. Then "Shrek" came out. Then "Monster's Inc" came out with even better animation.
Technology just gets better. It must move forward. It has nothing to do with Zemeckis or his "genius."
Now look at Pulp Fiction. Look at the IMPACT it has had on cinema. Look at how it revived the independent film genre. Look at how it placed Miramax as a serious Oscar powerhouse. Look at how it revived Travolta's career and made a star out of Samuel L. Look at how it spawned ENDLESS shitty little "crime" films ("Go," "2 Days in the Valley") that tried to unsuccessfully replicate that success by using quirky characters and snappy dialogue.
Zemeckis is overrated. And I think "Gump" is a decent flick. But I can't get over the fact that it stole the Oscar gold from Pulp Fiction... a film that has changed cinema in SIGNIFICANT ways.
So... go ahead and get all excited about this Polar Express movie. -
"I cannot believe you people dont like forrest gump...also how the fuck can you say back to the future 3 is good but 2 is crap."
Spoken like a true 12 year old! GUMP is a badly made and uncredited remake of a 1979 black comedy masterpiece called BEING THERE. That's wny not everyone likes GUMP. A little of Hanks as GUMP goes a very long way, too. That's why not everyone like GUMP. And FUTURE 2 is indeed terrible. It is mean spirited, badly plotted and totally unconvincing. As is often the case with Zemekis he let himself get carried away with the technical aspects over the human aspects. By the way, the exact same problem occurs with RAIDERS 2. It is mean spirited, poorly plotted and concerned more with special effects than its characters. FUTURE 3 and RAIDERS 3 both got back on track by focusing on the human story. -
Dec 03, 2002 10:25:40 PM CST
Well, all right. See this as a variation on the Waking Life tech
by spacephil
Was it seven years ? Either that or five, can't remember. Anyway, you're right though; that movie kicked ass.
-
animation and live action are 2 different beasts. they both have advantages and disadvantages and abilities, but the point is that they are 2 different things, allowing 2 different ways to portray stuff. understand? no? i'm needed in the basement...
-
That maded me blowed soda out mah nose. It stings. "Ah know all there is to know about the eggnog business, brother. Eggnog creole, eggnog gumbo..."
-
I felt it stood well off from Being There, even with it's comparatively over-the-top moments. Though I'll agree with Gump's over-rated placement. But no way can you give BttF 3 any higher billing than 2. They were BOTH milkwagons for the very reason you gave the second film, the human interest angle was just as formulaic and sloppy in each. The last few minutes in the 3rd film alone, with the flying train, matched the entire campy technology message in the 2nd by far. And that was after a few years to get the bad taste of 2 out before 3 appeared. IMO.
-
...except for all the disconcerting remakes you made against it. As a BTTF fan, I don't go around defending the movies, and then picking them apart at the same time. Also, as a BTTF fan, I understand that not everyone likes or gets all three movies, but that I do, and that's what's important. Some people like the first one and not the second one, some people like the second one and not the thrid one, and some people like the third onw and not the second one. What that shows is that, through all different types of people, BTTF, in some way, strikes a cord. BTW, on December 17th, at midnight...I'll be at the DVD Release party!!! Have fun at Wal-Mart.
-
Dec 04, 2002 10:26:19 AM CST
Sure Pulp Fiction changed the whole movie scene...but for the wo
by minderbinder
Yahoo, we get a bunch of shitty ripoffs of PF, did that movie do anything positive for the movie scene? Can't think of anything. And just for the record, GO was NOT one of the crappy knockoffs, it's probably one of the most underrated and overlooked movies of the last few years. (Oh, and What Lies Beneath would have been a much more effective movie if they hadn't given away the entire plot in the trailers...same goes for the way overrated Cast Away)
-
ever see The Fast Show's Forrest Gump parody, "Cute Disabled Man?" Fucking hilarious. Doc out.
-
Personally, it just seems like whatifs to me, I'd say that there are more indie films (Fight Club an indie? Huh?) just because it's become cheaper to make them.
-
I can't believe that Robert Zemeckis is going to do this. Why spend 150 million dollars to use CGI to make a film look like reality? Why not just use reality? Plus it won't work. I just don't believe that the technology is EVER going to fool us entirely. Star Wars is a good example: The sets in the OT looked real because they actually were built. Most the sets on the PT look digital because they were. Even someone who isn't looking for CGI sets can spot them. A CGI set just doesn't look right, and CGI people will be a hell of a lot harder than a set.
-
Because he does shit like this. He doesn't use the special effects as the story, but he uses it to assist the story.
The special effects in his movies are almost characters in themselves.
He's also my favorite because he takes risks and tears open the envelope. -
I can't believe it. I am WAY with you Badass and other fellow Gump dissenters. I was always uninterested in Hanks one note performance and Zemeckis's stillborn story. Special effects have never dazzled me. I love special effects movies but frankly CGI is the worst thing ever. It NEVER looks right. I'll take The Thing anyday. But that's another rant. It was painfully obvious to me as a 20 year old in 1995 that Gump was gonna win and completely did not deserve it. Hanks especially did not deserve the Oscar over Travolta's amazing nuanced performance. Landau as great as he was in Ed Wood will never be remembered the way Jackson was. We all recognized him from other movies. Sure. But when he gave that speech at the end...please. the whole world stopped. As for Clark's rebuttal that we couldn't have known...we ALL knew. I walked out of that theatre thinking I hadn't seen anything like that since Star Wars or Raiders. This was a MOVIE! This wasn't some sentimental Hanks movie. This was pop culture like nothing else. And this was opening day. Before Tarantinomania. I had only seen True Romance and Reservoir Dogs and was already a fan...The Cannes Jury knew that year. They knew. And they seized that moment. I knew too. It was like a fucking 10 on the Richter scale. That was a great year for movies. Gump was far from one of them. It's a cliche to love Tarantino now. I usually avoid him in film conversations since its a given. And it is sad he caused more harm then good but thats a testament to his influence as well. What do you expect from the Academy anyway? They liked Silence of the Lambs. Now there is a hack movie. Yuck. Can I get some amens on that?? Doubtful. They always miss their chance. Why didn't Memento get the nod either? By the way...after reading the Kill Bill script it's gonna be amazing. This thing with Zemeckis sounds dull. Look, I really don't get into an ooo ahh factor. It's not cause I hate popcorn movies. its because I love them. Try and write a great script. That blows me away. Any studio can buy great effects for a crappy movie.
-
Polar Express is a real dissappointment in terms of creative animation. It will be a nicely rendered film that will be promoted heavily by the studio with big industry names like Zemekis, Hanks and Ralston attached to the film. However, this film absolutely is not an 'animated' film. The animators on the film creatively have their hands tied, because the powers that be are desperate to able to claim they have produced the world's first 'all motion capture" film. So it'd be more accurate to say "Polar" is a live action film rendered to look like animation utilizing motion capture technolgy. The human characters are all motion captured and the animals are all rotoscoped. Will it be a good movie? Sure. I just feel it is mis-represented as animation and feel bad for those who were hired as 'animators.' Why hire a specialist you have no intention of using? Why call a movie 'animated' when there is no animation involved? There should be some other term invented to accurately describe this film.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 419 total posts 209 posts
- WTF HOLLYWOOD: SOLARBABIES -- 131 total posts 129 posts
- Herc’s Seen Tonight’s Return Of THE WALKING DEAD!! Discuss Also DOWNTON ABBEY, FEAR FACTOR, PAN AM, ONCE, SIMPSONS, DYNAMITE, LUCK, SHAMELESS, BAIT CAR, THE GRAMMYS And More!! Sunday Is Sweeps Day 11!! -- 123 total posts 122 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 124 total posts 58 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 191 total posts 47 posts
- Avid Comic Reader Hercules Does Battle With Tedium During Kevin Smith’s COMIC BOOK MEN! -- 43 total posts 43 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 60 total posts 42 posts
- I am The Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day! No, I’m the Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day! -- 27 total posts 27 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 506 total posts 26 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 77 total posts 24 posts