Cool News
WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE...New Pic (?) + New Poster = New Cool...
Merrick here...
A new poster has been issued for WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE, along with a new(?) promotional image. Both are EMBIGGENABLE!
-
+ Expand All
-
Picture is old. That poster is awesome though. I liked the first more.
-
...even if the one in the poster is trying to hide. I see you, wild thing!
-
This looks like a great adaption from the illustrations in the book.
-
I like it a lot *sniffle*
-
came out with the USA today stills a couple of weeks ago, just not this high quality.
-
Apparently, where the Wild Things actually are is my local dog park. What is with the cheesy forest/park? I thought it was a child's imagination?
-
Now get back to Twittering
-
automatically plays a loud annoying ad just to see an article with one sentence and 2 pictures. Don't know if this helps or if you care but this irritates me as a user of this site.
-
...I should sue your fat asses for emotional distress.
-
We've all heard that this was a very difficult film to make, and there's no telling who was right, WB or Jonze, until the film comes out, but. I was reading an interview with Howard Berger, genius make-up FX artist (ED trilogy, Narnia...) He claimed that Jonze tried to get KNB to work on this flick four times and he said no four times, despite the fact that the book made him get into monstermaking, he was so dissapointed in the film's direction that he wanted nothing to do with it because he thought it would be a disaster. Of course, the trailer does look great, but Berger is a man who knows his stuff, and if he said no, I don't know, that to me is a pretty strong strike against the movie. Considering there is only ten sentences in the book I am more than a little interested in seeing who's right, and who's wrong. But I'll still be buying a ticket, regardless of word of mouth.
Here's the address for that interview
http://www.wtwta.com/2008/11/25/why-howard-berger-turned-down-vfx-work/ -
Get them the fuck off aicn! Plus, there is a button to disable sound, but it magically doesn't work?! BULLSHIT
-
This is about some pervy voyeur stalking Denise Richards and Neve Campbell, right? I've got my ticket booked already.
-
What did it for you, was it the Giants or the kids...
-
use adblock plus and quieten down, i'm trying to look at the pretty poster
-
but definitely a good burn.
-
Good boy!
-
Aint-it-cool-slashfilm-posted-this-info-two-days-ago.. catchy name
-
That's what I'm talking about
-
Don't they know that October belongs to Saw.
-
Apparently LOTR was also in someones backyard Dog PArk, get over it, trees are everywhere, all sorts, all kinds
-
slone13 - you make it look easy. Fair play
-
AdBlock won't let me hear them. :)
-
The LOTR movies portrayed Middle Earth the way it was in the books- and I would hardly call the vast panes of New Zeland a dog park anyway. But the world in which the Wild Things live in the book is fantastic, full of imagination. A CHILD'S version of a forest inhabited by wild beasts. It appears the movie has aced that idea from the movie. You are completely correct, and you must agree with me by making my point for me, when you say "trees are everywhere, all sorts, all kinds". Looking at this movie there are only one KIND of trees: one's from our world. I am still looking forward to the movie because I love the book and its illustrations so much and it will be great to see the Wild Things come to life but it still strikes me odd how they nailed the look of the Wild Things from the book, then dropped them into a world we all recognize. It just looks odd to me. And a bit chincy.
-
they auto play and you can't disable audio even though theres a button for it
-
And, like other people mentioned, old pic.
-
just wanted to mention i dont hear anything and i didnt have to turn anything off. maybe its just a browswer issue in those cases where they seem automatic.
-
Get Firefox + Adblock. I'm not trying to be a zealot software pusher, but it really does make browsing far less annoying. I'm kind of shocked whenever I hear that somebody is still using Internet Explorer.
-
Audiences will never believe in these so-called "Wild Things". They should all be wearing black leather, and the film should mostly be set in the dark/at night. It should be moody and dark. This film is totally unrealistic.
-
...all you losers who have dismissed this already are going to be missing out on a family movie that hasn't been done like this since E.T..
-
why not use backwards "R"s just to make it complete?
-
Except that you admitted (by proxy) to actually watching Bridge to Tarabithia.
-
Apr 08, 2009 1:49:53 PM CDT
Join free millionaire dating club richpassion.com to find hot gi
by emilygirl
It is the best site for men to search for beautiful, sophisticated women, you will receive much more attention and get many more emails than other sites. And women will be very safe to meet talented and successful men because of our verification system.
-
People who are praising this movie like the second coming are just as stupid as the ones putting it down. Yes, I liked the book, and yes, the trailer was awesome, but we still need to be cautious about our hopes. Like many have said the book is about 10 sentences long. This will be Spike's 'vision' of the book, and who's to say we're all gonna like that vision?
-
The forest in the book looked the same as max and the wild things, in other words, real. It's an illustrated book in two dimensions, there was nothing overly fantastic about the appearance of the forest that would suggest to make it appear less real than Max and the wild things. Not to mention, if there is no sense of realism, then there can't really be a sense of danger either, so everything has to be on the same level. If Max is real, then the wild things have to appear real and so does the forest, hence puppets and real forest instead of shitty CG. Jonze made the right choice and anybody saying otherwise has nothing to ground their complaints on other than "I wanted a fantasy forest" preferrential conplaining, which has nothing to do with the argument that Jonze went against the source material per se. Of course we'll have to see how the puppets mix with the forest to say for sure, but so far it looks great.
-
...saw this on a bunch of sites a couple of days ago. http://tinyurl.com/d3nxek
-
Apr 08, 2009 2:20:26 PM CDT
Although you are anal bitches for whining about the fucking tree
by white_vader
I must admit that yes I was (where are the fucking italics Harry?!) a bit taken aback by the Aussie gum trees in the very Aussie looking bushland in the trailer. It looked like my back yard.
Actually fuck it. It would be COOL if there were wild things in my back yard...
And that poster is better than the last one, where the tagline made it sound like there's a kid in everyone's tummy... and I like the big bite out of the tree. Whether it's a "wild thing" tree or not. -
The Wild Things were filmed with generic heads with no expression and the faces done in CG in post. It's not like nobody knows or that they've been shouting about being fucking old-school or anything. And the fact that you didn't even notice means you just embarrassed yourself.
-
or more accurately classic designer Pablo Ferro. ;)
-
hope we have a cool movie I'm starting to get my hopes up for this one.
-
So in the book everything is real in its own universe. I buy that. It looks the way it looks because everything looks the same. Fine. But then why in the movie do the Wild Things look as they do in the book? As "cartoony" as they do in the book? Can't have it both ways. Cartoon world, cartoon characters and creatures in a a cartoon book- fine. Realistic world, realistic characters and creatures in a realistic world- fine. Realistic world, cartoon creatures? Doesn't mix. Look, all I am saying is that they are doing a movie of a book that is popular and loved in great part to its LOOK. So why not give us that look? All the way? Movie makers would rather change things to make themselves look more like artists rather than keeping the integrity of the original artists. I am sick of it.
-
The faces are CG, while the bodies, heads, etc are guys in puppet suits. In other words havint men in puppet suits and using practicle effects that have the appearence of actually being there adds to the realism, while a shitty little forest sets like the crap Tim Burton uses would subtract from it. The post was in referrence to people bitching about them using a real forest tgat doesnt look fantastical enough. I'm sorry if referring to the suits as "puppets" has offended your delicate sensibilities, but you should try to understand the argument being made before you comment on it.
-
I see where you're coming from and I'm glad you got the point I was making unlike Vader there. I just know that even my dreams, however fantastic they are, are still grounded in reality and there were still plenty of fantastic elements in the trailer mixed in with the real forestry that it actually looks like something from a childs imagination. Plus, it's not like every forest you see looks like those you find in Austrailia, do they? Now, if they filmed this in upstate New York or Washington state, I would be more inclined to agree, but they picked a beautiful and wild looking place to film and it looks great.
-
Hands down.
-
What it comes down to is this: Doing the monsters practically, even though they are fantasy creatures, grounds them in reality because that's the only way they will ever exist alongside real living people, so having fantasy creatures in a real setting is not the problem, just like it hasn't been a problem for countless movies (well-made ones, anyway). A forest on the other hand, is much harder to recreate because we have all seen forests. Everytime I see a fake forest in a movie it pulls me out of it. Not to mention there aren't many pics in the book that really focus on the setting enough to create the sets for the whole film, so no matter what, the production crew would have to make it up, which wouldn't respect the Authors vision too much either. Either you do as much practically as possible, or you let it look like a set or a computer game and possibly ruin the movie. I say they made the right choice.
-
Sorry. But I can't think of a more appropriate word.
-
What you got against Washington State? Good enough for Bigfoot = wild.
-
Easy enough, I live there. Although I live in Seattle, the forests here are all pine trees and look as far removed from "exotic" as you can get.
-
I live here, too. That is to say, the same state as you. When I lived in Mexico they thought that Olympic rainforests seemed exotic. Of course if you don't like pine trees in your wild, you could go to the middle of the state. Point being that exotic wild is dependent on perspective. It 'aint just the jungle that makes something exotic.
-
Pine trees definitely aren't my kind of exotic, and probably not for anybody who celebrates Christmas either.
-
Jewish folk? (OK, now I'm just being an ass.) I'm off to the wilds of Ellensburg! (not really)
-
It's entirely reasonable to assume you were inferring that CG is shitty in general and relating it to both the puppets/suits and the forest. There's nothing wrong with my comprehension, fuckwit. You need to work on your writing. AND comprehension actually - while I had a friendly TB dig at the anal-retentiveness of people basically saying "the trees are shit", I admitted I was taken aback myself. Sorry you can't deal with two concepts at once.
As far as the "realistic" setting, I'm going to wait and see how it is in context. I agree Shran, one man's Australian bush is another man's Washington State. The Wild Things ARE realistically treated in their detail, while the overall form is still stylised. I mean, they've got realistic fur instead of cross-hatching, don't they? Likewise there are strange structures in the real-world but colour-graded to high heaven setting. And all those naysayers crawling out to say he's fucked the book like Emperor should realise he worked with Sendak for years on this, has his blessing, and Sendak told Jonze to make it his own. Sendak WANTED him to have some latitude/take some licence. Here's a mindblowing concept - film-makers (a filmmaker isn't just the director) are artists too. That's why they have guys called CONCEPT-ARTISTS, illustrators and sculptors. They decided to go live-action. Not to fuck Sendak's shit up. For storytelling/character reasons, and therefore the drawings need to be reinterpreted. Again, they had MS's blessing. What don't you fucking understand?
That "interview" with Berger was a waste of time (a shame, because KNB are great). Both from the fan site and the Sci-fi.com article they took it from. He doesn't like the approach, but they didn't think to ask him WHY. Or didn't say he wasn't allowed to relate it... what a waste of time. ANYONE who works in the biz but doesn't direct the movie themselves runs a pretty great chance of hating something they've been invested in since childhood... -
I was just saying Trees native to certain people dont always look familiar to others, like when the Kiwis i met talked about LOTR they all said like Ohh there's that one forrest. I know LOTR was filmed in vast open areas far outside of most of the towns, i love lotr and know a lot about the making of them, however, there were a few Scenes that were infact filmed in walking trails, one of which is close to a small town. Anywho, New Zealand offers lots of variety so its hard to tell, but i do understand what u mean by chiky.
-
nuff said
-
in deciduous trees. The trees around here did indeed look exotic to me, like the way Tolkien draws coniferous trees in his watercolors. Before Penna, I grew up in Georgia, where the pine trees aren't conical. Forests look radically different, everywhere.
-
I cant believe you cunts are arguing about how trees look.
-
is getting pistolwhipped.
-
Interesting that people who live in NZ see LOTR that way. I never really thought of it like that. Well even though I am not really struck by the visual style of Wild Things- at least at this point- I have high hopes for the movie and realize that the script is KING. If the scrip tis good, the story is good then that will trump much of the visual style. A good movie is a good movie no matter what. So I look forward to the movie no matter what!
-
If I am a cunt, prepare to be bitch-slapped. Nobody is arguing you ignorant fool. We are discussing. And doing it civilly. This may be a foriegn concept to an uneducated knuckle-dragger such as yourself, so let me be the first to welcome you to the human race. You know, the one where we TALK to each other on a TALKBACK. AWW, just kidding. We luvz ya', ya' damned dirty ape.
-
Apr 09, 2009 4:25:29 PM CDT
This is the only flick I'm looking forward to this year.
by alienindisguise
The Wild Things are gonna eat Avatar's ass for breakfast!
-
You say that I need to work on my writing and comprehension, yet emperor was able to understand exactly the point I was making, while you don't seem to understand that my post was a direct response to one of his and decided to act like a pompous ass instead of articulate an intelligent disagreement/correction. It's too bad too, since I prefer to have a friendly discussion rather than have some jackass insult my intelligence over improper wording. I also agree with your last post except for the first paragraph, but let's face it, cg has fucked up countless creature effects, which is why so many people prefer practical effects, while keeping cg to a minimum.
-
If I recall I only called you a dolt originally, and I stand by my assertion that my misreading of your intention is completely understandable. But I guess it makes sense that Emperor understood you as he made his own inane comments about "artists" that could be easily misinterpreted too. You yourself completely overreacted - and if you want to get across a LACK of comprehension a subject line like "what the fuck are you talking about" is a pretty good way to go, but I guess it's all academic now, and we both see it subjectively. You'll also see on reading my posts closer I'm not just a pompous arse, give credit where it's due and I'd reiterate my point about being able to comprehend to concepts at the same time. Which brings us to the point about your post being a direct response. I understand/understood
Anyway now I've had my little say let me add that everything both you AND Emperor have said since has been measured and friendly and I'm just sorry you couldn't afford me the same and explained yourself cordially rather than start off with a WTF reaction. Yes I admit you've made some great points though, and while you might not have been here as long, all my previous posts over the years have proved I can be civil and respectful while disagreeing in principal. "Improper wording" is actually a crucial point here, and I'm sure that in retrospect you can see that.
A big thing on these boards is ignorant fools spouting off about CG being crap when they were generally of viewing age in the DIGITAL era (89 on if you go by Abyss as a rough starting point) and don't know what the fuck ( ;) ) they're talking about. They generally have an uninformed (well fair enough not everyone puts their money where their mouth is and gets into the biz) and rose-tinted view of the old practical stuff. The percentage of good to crap VFX is the same now as it ever was. They both have advantages AND disadvantages compared to each other. So yes I play Devil's advocate when I hear stuff like that but it's only to dispel a lopsided and ignorant argument. The main thing is that we need to move PAST babyish CG vs practical arguments and consider the story first and THEN what technique suits it best. And fanboys also need to understand that sometimes economy of scale counts and often a technique that's less than ideal is used for boring reasons like budget, existing assets and actually being able to get the thing MADE that way versus not at all (prac OR cg). And of course fanboys infer there's more suspension of disbelief required with "shitty" CG. Which is a disingenuous fucking lie. Oh yes. Yoda was more REAL before they say! Yep sure. I didn't think he was bouncy-eared, non-lipsyncing rubber before either! And yeah the 'weight' was more believable (completely ignoring the fact he was rooted to the fucking spot/Frank Oz's arm and the hole he stuck out of.
Of course there's the bigger argument which is that it's all redundant - the whole thing is ludicrous! Of COURSE he looks 'fake'! Who's seen a 'real' Yoda? Prac OR cg?! I'm sure you see how this all applies to Wild Things. Which is why Berger's comments (at least the inept way they were related) are pointless. When Steven Speilberg says old school fx ftw on Indy (and then buckles) or "film forever", HE'S being a fucking 5 year-old too. That doesn't STOP him being one of the greatest directors ever, but it's sad PRECISELY because you'd hope at this point he would be past all that to some stage of complete zen objectivity about fx. Ah well. Getting back to Yoda, having a writer hobble themselves because the fucking puppet is bolted to the spot and simply cannot do what they want without building 20 specific versions and disrupting editing flow and shot choice is stupid. But that's what comes with the territory, as do compromises like switching to a little person in a suit whose body language is completely different from the puppeteers and RC guys and who takes you straight out of the movie is also "less than ideal". This of course doesn't mean that letting him jump around like an idiot in the new films just 'cause you've got cg now isn't moronic. It IS! It's not the tool. It's what you do with it.
Animatronics, suits and puppets have ALSO fucked up countless creature effects, let's be honest. And if you're going to excuse their shortcomings, afford CG the SAME apologies. Like I said, Devil's advocate. I adore good oldschool stuff, it's what I grew up with and ironically with help from computer tech it's better than ever. I also love good newschool/cg because of how it's freed writers and robbed them of their "but we can't DO that so we'll not bother" crutch. It's always been a cruel irony that outside of a few matte paintings old fx techniques actually forced stories to become SMALLER in scope! Unfortunately now outside of Charlie Kaufman there aren't really any writers using VFX to expand upon character and narrative. It's obvious why the last decade has been saturated with Superhero flicks. Comic books = writing tied with visuals. Screenwriters aren't up to their newfound digital freedom so didn't producers just jump up and down with joy when they discovered Comics had already done the job for them, and had been doing it for decades!
So finally. getting back to Wild Things, I love that they went with the best of both worlds approach. Animatronics would have bulked up the head, added weight, reduced mobility and on and on but using cg for that fees up the suit to be the best it can be. Like I said, I'm on the fence about the forests because we have no idea yet of the tone or specifics of the story and character. Also the 'default' heads make the cg even better because there's always great plate reference for lighting on the same features. So let's agree we're all excited. I'm with you on that, and happy to let bygones be bygones. And sorry for the rant, but hopefully you can see why (subjectively) sloppy wordplay on that subject gets my goat. Or Goatboy, as the case may be. And of all of us, Ye Not Guilty made the best point about realism so far. Cheers. -
...understand/undertood, but still didn't think that clarified the words themselves. We disagree on that.
Serves me right for droning on so long eh Smatt?!
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 273 total posts 271 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 92 total posts 92 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 160 total posts 69 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 151 total posts 63 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 67 total posts 59 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 60 total posts 57 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 484 total posts 49 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 69 total posts 42 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 120 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 183 total posts 24 posts