Logo

Cool News

What's Stan Winston Studio Doing On James Cameron's AVATAR?

Published at:  Sep 10, 2008 5:09:23 PM CDT

Beaks here...

I just returned from my first ever visit to Stan Winston Studio, where key artist Christopher Swift and model shop supervisor David Merritt gave a handful of online outlets an in-depth talkin' to about the design and creation of the Mark I, II and III suits for IRON MAN. It was amazing. I got to cower under the full-scale Iron Monger, marvel at a trio of unused models for HOWARD THE DUCK and tear up a little at the sight of A.I.'s Teddy sitting all by his lonesome in Stan's director's chair. And that's the thing: while Swift and Merritt were gracious, engaging guides, I regret that I never made it over to the studio while the master was still with us.

But as Swift and Merritt were quick to point out, Stan's influence lives on in their work, which you loved in IRON MAN and will soon see to some extent in James Cameron's AVATAR (due out December 18, 2009). After twenty minutes of talking IRON MAN (more on that next week), Swift began discussing the future of practical f/x in an increasingly digital world. That led to a question about the all-CG AVATAR, which yielded an interesting answer. Here's the exchange:





Chris Swift: Everybody loves practical. I mean, it just looks right and looks real. Even digital loves it because it makes their job easier. I think it'll be around for a while.



Beaks: We know you're working on Avatar with James Cameron, who's been leading the drive into digital filmmaking. But the fact that he's still integrating practical effects must be a [vindication].



Swift: Yeah... I worked, as well as Dave... heavily on doing design work and everything for AVATAR. Neither one of us can talk much about it (Laughter), but I will say this about it: obviously being a digital movie and going after it as a digital movie, we ended up doing a lot of practical f/x for it - and a lot of practical things that Jim didn't even know we were building. When Jim kind of brought us on board for that, it was the idea that we were brought on mostly as a design phase. And, look, Jim Cameron is Jim Cameron. He goes all the way back to being a special effects guy, so you can't fool him and you can't pull wool over his eyes. So if he's not getting it from one direction, he'll go another direction. Being a practical guy, he's not against a practical sense, so we ended up doing a lot of maquettes and... doing practical versions of sculptures of the characters. That's what he ended up being sold on, was those versions.



When CHUD's Devin Faraci asked if there were indeed practical elements on Cameron's sets, Merritt gently declined comment. We were told all further questions should be directed to John Rosengrant, who's serving as the "Character Effects Coordinator" on AVATAR. Interestingly, after we finished our tour, we learned that Rosengrant had gone to lunch. Damn.



    + Expand All

    Readers Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 5:08:32 PM CDT

    Sweet

    by bmocbull

    This movie is gonna be fricking amazing.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 5:09:17 PM CDT

    First real test after the passing of Winston?

    by heckles

    Hope the high quality of work can live on.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 5:13:40 PM CDT

    "Practical" effects?

    by worldofwarcraft

    Godzilla > Cloverfield

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 5:14:09 PM CDT

    Stan Winston did not rape my childhood

    by nomihs

    SWS has produced some of the greatest emotions from films that I have ever felt. Any project they are involved in will be missing a key ingredient. However, in the end, his legacy will continue. Unfortunatly without Mr. Winston to guide them, I hope it can still stand up on it's own.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 5:14:45 PM CDT

    this film sounds amazing

    by fineus fog

    Ive got friends here who work at WETA and what very little they've told me sounds fucking amazing

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 5:23:23 PM CDT

    I hope Stan comes back as SkyNet!

    by kravmaguffin

    Stan you will always be the man!

    We miss you.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 5:53:04 PM CDT

    octagonproplex

    by dasmagnus

    > is a mathmatic term meaning "greater than"
    < is a mathmatic term meaning "less than"

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 5:54:28 PM CDT

    octagonproplex

    by kwisatzhaderach

    I saw it too. It was a lousy post, hopefully one of the mods deleted it.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 5:57:28 PM CDT

    I Got Rid Of It

    by mrbeaks

    And if you think wishing death on someone isn't rude, you're fucked in the head.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 6:09:03 PM CDT

    It's gonna be a happy day

    by kwisatzhaderach

    the day we see the first footage of this. The Hack Pack will be out of their jobs.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 6:11:53 PM CDT

    more Avatar non-news

    by rupee88

    yeah I'm curious too but this is a non story

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 6:14:26 PM CDT

    What the shit just happened?

    by jackbauer24

    AICN just went psychotic. On the homepage there were about thirty very short news links with ridiculous titles and spelling errors (like 'Lucas and Sike Jonze') and all of them had about a paragraph of text in them in a strange font by god-knows-who (no 'Harry here' or anything) and about three comments each. Then everything went back to normal. That was weird.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 6:14:34 PM CDT

    Damn You Michael Bay

    by mcmlxxvi

    Damn You Michael Bay

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 6:37:43 PM CDT

    MCMLXXVI

    by metalmickey

    Now THAT'S commitment to a joke. Keep it up, buddy! I actually hope you make a few bucks selling your post as a t-shirt next summer when TINO2 comes out.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 6:46:00 PM CDT

    octagon

    by mrbeaks

    This is uncivil: "The gayest, gossip mongering, Knownothing that's ever written for this site (and that's saying something). All this little twat can do to try and "show his street cred", is make snide little comments about other movies and actors (Tom Cruise). It's not working, and I'm on to your charade. You're a fake ass pompous bitch without one original thought. Get a damn clue!"Look familiar? That was you slamming me in my HANCOCK review because I said uncomplimentary things about LAST ACTION HERO. Now would be an excellent time to drop the indignation. Also wouldn't be a bad idea to stop posting in this thread unless you've something to add re: AVATAR. Just sayin'...

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 6:50:25 PM CDT

    If FriendlyEddie (or whover)...

    by the eskimo

    ...can get away with bad racist and revisionist humor on the Will Smith as Cap talk back...I don't see why the quick delete on a death to Georgie-boy. But it's your post you make the rules. Still my favorite columnist.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 6:52:38 PM CDT

    That Wasn't My Article, Eskimo

    by mrbeaks

    I might've handled that nonsense a little differently.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 6:53:36 PM CDT

    Nuff said Beaks...

    by the eskimo

    ...disregard my above post. Not defending that! As for Avatar it has had a lot of hype but I am totally unfamiliar with the source material. Was this a graphic novel?

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 6:56:56 PM CDT

    Right, D.Vader

    by mrbeaks

    That's precisely the way I put it.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 7:10:14 PM CDT

    the teddy got you to tear up?

    by amy chasing

    dude, it was A.I. I got more fond memories of the teddy from Mr Bean.

    Reply to Talkback

  • They are fucking confident they have a winner on their hand. They don't have to put out photos (T4 example)to gauge the Internet response. They know that what they have will blow us all away. And I know it too since I actually know some stuff about that production that none of you geeks know ;-)

    Reply to Talkback

  • The only reason for making this incredibly C.G. heavy is because there is no way on earth you could do the effects any other way. So the whole planet, not just the creatures, must be pretty unbelievable.
    Because Alien managed a completely alien (albiet far simpler)planet decades ago with a completely alien construct and creatures. While Aliens showed, via Mr Winstons godlike powers, that even a massive inhuman creature could be done without recourse to C.G.
    I think what we are looking at is a planet as strange as or stranger than those featured in the "Revenge of the Sith" montage of the death of the Jedi by the clone troopers. But hopefully looking far more real as Sith still had the computer game sheen that infects far too much C.G.
    I also hope Cameron doesn't overdo the Bioluminescence in the main creatures. I could see a good reason for having it like communication such as cuttlefish employ but the danger is they just look like his Abyss type aliens.
    Still definitely looking forward to this even if some are in danger of killing it with hype.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 7:24:03 PM CDT

    i still dont like the title

    by jimmyjoe redsky

    sorry - but youd think the "film of the decade" would have a more original title - especially considering the existence and popularity of a certain "air bender"

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 7:39:23 PM CDT

    its funny how much hype this is getting...

    by jimmyjoe redsky

    and no one knows or has seen anything of it - it might be lame - who knows? - i doubt it will "destroy" all other genre movies or "put the hacks outta work" as so many cameron worshipers think - based on t2, aliens, the abyss and titanic and the fact that camerons been mia for yrs, my expectations are luke warm at best - i know it will be all cgi except for some actors and some makeup fx and it will be in 3d (bad idea) - beyond that i dont know squat about this except the title - which doesnt excite me - if anyone else was making a similar movie (as described) no one would care - remember what rampant hype did to "the phantom menace"? - like it or not, it was fan hype that turned so many against it - on 3d - im sure this new tech is cool, but lets face it - its a gimmick - a movie should stand on its own - from what ive read i gather it was this new 3d tech that got the ball rolling on this 15 yr old script - if its so balls, why wait for 3d implementation to produce this> - all of camerons other films were in 2d and did very well - my point is, this looks more and more like its about the 3d venue rather than the movie itself (journey to the center of the earth)

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 7:44:27 PM CDT

    Piltdown Joey

    by jimmyjoe redsky

    right - and if lucas was making this, all of this hype would be replaced by bashing - this is basically "sky captain" or "300" (both of which i like) but on a giant mega budget scale - it seems all the cgi haters sing a different tune when James Cameron is at the helm - ya know what other movies were nearly all cgi except for the actors and some practical fx? the sw prequels - and, i hope the poster above was misinformed on the "glowing cat people" - that sounds silly - the aliens should be at least as original as the ones in "The Abyss" - which come to think of it were glowing too

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 7:59:48 PM CDT

    This just in: they are going to reshoot the entirety of AVATAR..

    by pirateemery

    ...using Stan Winston's Studio rather than WETA. Set to debut: December 2019!

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 8:18:55 PM CDT

    octagonproplex

    by long live the new chris

    who gives a shit if you and beaks are cool? you aren't gonna be buds. just admit you got owned and quit sucking him off. and seriously, how did you not know what meant?

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 8:33:10 PM CDT

    A taste of Avatar before the end of the year?

    by performingmonkey

    I would love a little preview, even if it's just a second of dialogue or whatever, just SOMETHING to get everyone thinking. Attached to Quantum of Solace, perhaps. As for movie of the decade, personally I think we've already had it - The Dark Knight. Or Snakes On A Plane. No no wait it's definitely Mamma Mia!

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 8:43:14 PM CDT

    Certain movies change things

    by dirtsandwich

    The Exorcist, Jaws, and even TDK. I think some movies from now on because of TDK will put the ratings board member's panty hoses in a bind. Pressure from the studio to keep it PG-13 and pressure from the film makers to keep the stronger content in.

    I would assume that the studio is going to aim for a PG-13 for Avatar to make their $300+ mil back. Not sure where JC stands on this. I don't remember anything in the scriptment to rough to give it a R.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 9:05:19 PM CDT

    Superbowl-

    by dirtsandwich

    would be a good time for a teaser for Avatar. Then they could put the first trailer for Avatar in front of the sequel for The Hottie & the Nottie 2, and Hottie 2 would gross a $100mil because of it.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 9:06:32 PM CDT

    and there you have it

    by badmrwonka

    35 posts in, octagon finally mentions Avatar...dingbat...

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 9:06:43 PM CDT

    So this is basically

    by melvin_pelvis

    Dances With Wolves, only in non-terran setting?

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 9:14:04 PM CDT

    Nolan doesn't

    by dirtsandwich

    usually have a director's cut. I think he's whatcha see is whatcha get. And he's not into 3D either. I'm hoping though that after Avatar that he'll consider it. No movie in history is going to have a bigger plow on the front of it then Avatar. Nothing we'll be the same after it. I just hope the story and characters is as good as the imagery. Well even half as good would be awesome.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 9:55:25 PM CDT

    mrbeaks > octagonproplex

    by gringostar

    That is all I have to say.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 10:05:36 PM CDT

    I don't think you can compare Beaks to Ben Lyons

    by industrykiller!

    Beaks wrote what may have been the single best review of Indiana Jones 4 in the entirety of the internet. Ben Lyons is an idiot douche bag that you hate talking to because his idiot douche bag opinions on film are so infuriatingly uninsightful that you can't help but want to punch him. The fact that the only reason he has his job is because of his father makes it even harder to listen to his idiocy.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 10:08:08 PM CDT

    GL would piss his pants after that Chris Swift quote.

    by ricarleite

    If he still had a dick, that is.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 10:19:38 PM CDT

    Yes, don't talk down Lucas.

    by amy chasing

    Just his recent films.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 10:20:08 PM CDT

    DROP THE BAN HAMMER!

    by whinynegativebitch

    Anyway, I think Winston studios has a no discussion deal with Cameron in regards to practical onset effects, for the same reason Cameron is casting some unknowns...Claim em as CGI! Thats what I would do. Check out my photo realistic shit nizzle here. Some Australian dude! Like Max Headroom.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 10:40:47 PM CDT

    "Film of the decade".... yeah ok..more like

    by dirtsandwich

    "The fuck of the century". This movie will be better then getting a blowjob from Sarah Palin's whore daughter even if at the same time she can spin 3 marbles on the head of your dick.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 10, 2008 11:32:05 PM CDT

    Teaser on Day The Earth Stood Still?

    by rindain

    It would make sense for Fox to debut something one year before the release.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 11, 2008 12:00:01 AM CDT

    UnknownUser

    by jimmyjoe redsky

    the fallout between lucas and this site is unfixable - lucas frouns on 2 things most of all - 1. fucking around in his office without permission when he isnt around 2. accepting illegally obtained copies of his scripts then posting reviews of them online - this site is guilty of one of these 2 things - at the risk of sounding corny or preachy, im an artist of sorts by trade - and im very protective of my work - especially the work that pays my bills - ask any artist and theyll tell you, they dont like their shit being taken without their permission - taken then shown to the world and judged long before it was meant to be - having said that, i like this site and moriarty (as an internet personality anyway, i dont know him) - but hey man, accepting stolen property for the bragging rights to an early "script review" is well... what did you expect - studios yank teasers if theyre posted early

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 11, 2008 12:06:04 AM CDT

    on practial fx vs. cgi

    by jimmyjoe redsky

    using the "cgi sucks" argument, which was better - the briefly glimpsed life size animatronic kong in the 1975 version or peter jackson's cgi kong - i watched kong (2005) again recently - and like the movie or not, the fx (even the hated bronto stampede) pretty much wins the argument for me - amazing stuff and all cgi

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 11, 2008 12:13:56 AM CDT

    Except that Kong looked like shit.

    by whinynegativebitch

    Yeah, it was all Cgi, and yeah, it all looked Cgi.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 11, 2008 12:15:05 AM CDT

    Not hating on CGI by the way...

    by whinynegativebitch

    ...But alot of filmmakers can't seem to figure out how to use a bit of CG and a bit of practical to make a wholy convincing effect. It just seems to be one or the other. Thats why I was waiting on Wild Things, but it sounds like thats gone down the toilet.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 11, 2008 12:30:35 AM CDT

    WhinyNegativeBitch

    by jimmyjoe redsky

    kong looked like shit? - really? - compared to what? - a real gorilla? - it sounds like knowing going into the movie that the pay off (kong) was going to be cgi is what killed it for you - suspension of disbelief is half the trick - kong looked like shit, huh? - thats why Cameron went after the same team behind kong for "avatar" - because kong looked like shit, right? - Cameron wants his glowing cat people to look fake like kong, right? - your username is perfect

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 11, 2008 12:36:37 AM CDT

    kong looked as real as cgi can get

    by jimmyjoe redsky

    and anyone that cant see it is either too dumb or too uptight to enjoy a good monster movie - you want to see some kick ass fx, check out "planet of dinosaurs" (1978) - a real gem of drive-in cinema - poorly shot and acted (pornstar level acting) - but full of some incredible stop motion dinosaurs that would do ray harryhausen proud

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 11, 2008 3:11:21 AM CDT

    AVATAR - Fucking our eyeballs in 2009!!!

    by motoko kusanagi

    nothing else matters

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 11, 2008 8:37:06 AM CDT

    Mr_Saxon

    by kwisatzhaderach

    Nope. I'm pretty sure it's just 'Avatar'.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 11, 2008 10:33:32 AM CDT

    they should release Avatar same weekend as Terminator Salvation

    by burgerking

    Just so James Cameron can shit on those who took his franchise and pooped on it.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 11, 2008 12:05:36 PM CDT

    Just because practical elements are there on set

    by pmsc

    In no way guarantees they'll end up in the final print. Practical effects suck ass yet those guys still get paid even when we have to go in and completely replace their shitty animatronic with a cg version

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 11, 2008 1:05:31 PM CDT

    It makes sense Cameron would use practical effects

    by photoboy

    He's always said that you should never use just one type of effect in a shot. By combining live elements with models with CGI you prevent the viewer from being able to easily recognise what sort of effect is being used.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 11, 2008 1:21:00 PM CDT

    Marketsaw has first blurry picture of a Na'vi...

    by rindain

    http://tinyurl.com/5k88m2

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 11, 2008 2:20:35 PM CDT

    Thanks for the link, unknownuser...and Kong's Cgi

    by rameses

    That ZBrush Winston tribute, is awesome!!!!!As for Kong's cgi I too was watching it the other day and noticed that it kept going from ultra photo real to obvious cgi , from one scene to the next.It seemed to be all down to how a scene was lit, Kong often looked a little flat and overlit , compared to his surroundings , but every now and then it all came together perfectly.I think Cgi can already *Do* anything in a totally real way.It's just that it's down to how it's used.Plus a convincing T-Rex seems easier than a Gorilla..everyone knows what a big ape would actually look like if it was in front of you.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 11, 2008 3:21:04 PM CDT

    JimmyJoe!!!

    by thewaqman

    Lucas deserves the bashing. So quit saying such bullshit like "James Cameron gets hype and Lucas gets bashed?". The asshole hasn't done anything good since...well ever. His shitty Star Wars series isn't even respectable any more. He's milked the shit out of it, 3 games every year, countless novels and books, crappy CGI movies and TV shows etc.
    However, James Cameron's Avatar is a completely original property. One that will probably have no sequels or maybe only one sequel. AND James Cameron is capable of blowing us away visually BUT also making it a good movie too that doesn't completely rely on eye candy.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 11, 2008 3:24:52 PM CDT

    Oh AND Kong's Dinosaurs looked like shit...

    by thewaqman

    The movie was good (at least I enjoyed it...although there were length issues). But the ONLY good CGI was in the bugs and Kong himself. The bronchiosaurus (whatever the fuck their names are) the long necked ones they looked like garbage. Aswell as the T-Rex. Avatar will make fucktard Transformer fanboys wet their pants and worship the alter of Cameron!

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 11, 2008 4:10:00 PM CDT

    Jimmy Joe Redsky

    by turdontherun

    "based on T2, Aliens, the Abyss, and Titanic..my expectations are lukewarm at best" Is that supoosed to be a fucking joke? based on a slew of exceptional films your expectations are low? or do you live in a different universe than the rest of us where aliens, t2 and the abyss were shit? cameron has proved himself OVER and OVER again - that is why those of us looking forward to this give him the benefit of the doubt. and anyone else bashing this, please do some research before mouthing off. all those whose who say 3d is just a gimmick or a 'bad idea', or heavy digital work is going to mis-step, etc. - it amazes me the amount of ignorance I read here sometimes. on what evidence do you base these claims? absolutely none.there's a reason why cameron is a visionary, ground-breaking and hugely successful director, and why some of the negative wannabes here are reduced to working at the local drive-thru and whining on forums - because he KNOWS stuff you don't.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 11, 2008 7:05:25 PM CDT

    TheWaqman and TurdontheRun

    by jimmyjoe redsky

    "Avatar will make fucktard Transformer fanboys wet their pants and worship the alter of Cameron!" well put, so this movie is for "fucktard Transformer fanboys" - great - but too bad for me - and TurdontheRun, yes - based on those movies and the gaps between jc's camera time - my expectations are lukewarm - t2 feels dated and heavy handed - what it did on arrival was help revolutionize fx and tentpole movies - the acting and dialog makes me cringe - furlong was that movies jake lloyd - aliens? i liked alien 3 more - jc again here really put on a big cool looking show but he didnt improve upon the first (alien) and his space marine machismo was juvenile and annoying - the abyss - great fucking movie - my favorite of his and his best to date (terminator 1 being a close second as my fave) - titanic? - not my cup of tea - but millions of teen girls loved it - his undersea docs are great - i admire his pushing the tech forward - but now im like "ok, avatar what?" - like someone else said, dances with wolves on an alien planet - when did cameron become some cinema god beyond reproach? - i assume most of his rabid fans here grew up watching aliens t2 etc on cable in the 80s 90s - so that makes sense - his big movies were a steady diet for young viewers and helped shape theri definition of cool genre cinema - but not me - i saw t2 when i was an adult and wasnt blown away by it - i didnt cry when arnie became furlongs dad and melted himself at the end - oh, i forgot, true lies is pretty good - i liked it

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 11, 2008 7:10:44 PM CDT

    oh and TheWaqman

    by jimmyjoe redsky

    good fx - digital or practical - arent always measured by how real they look - it depends on the intent of the effect - the movie or story - the period in which they are produced (available tech) and most importantly the viewer's perception - all of ray harryhausens stuff doesnt look real but it is masterful none the less - as is the original kong (1933) by willis obrien - nowadays the more fx strive for photo realness the more obvious it is that theyre fx

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 11, 2008 7:15:53 PM CDT

    also TurdontheRun

    by jimmyjoe redsky

    i dont doubt jc's abilities - but his driving force for this movie seems to be his desire to push the current tech - not the movie itself - remember, him and lucas are pals - they both want everything in the vein of sw and terminator etc to be in 3d - thats the real point of this movie - 3d - not a groundbreaking 15 yr old story - which has a less than eye brow raising title - "avatar"? - and features a main locale/planet called "pandora"? - c'mon - will it have cyborgs and space marines too?

    Reply to Talkback

  • Sep 12, 2008 2:17:11 AM CDT

    Yeah

    by melvin_pelvis

    this is Dances with Wolves in a different setting and crazy amounts of cgi

    Reply to Talkback

User Login

Forgot password? Retrieve it here

or register as new user

Quick Talkback Form

Please login to post talkback