A good start - now if you could replace the actors as well....
A good start - now if you could replace the actors as well....
Well if you can accomplish that shot - then you it may not be as difficult as the others.
Wow - some prime 70's era Doug McClure cheese I had nevr seen before!! Looks like he's well past his prime in that one, and it looks like an even lower-budget ripoff of his Burroughs vehicles, featuring undaunted mail carrier Cliff Claven from Cheers. The movie could only benefit from retrofitting the effects.
Why not the octopus? Because it's not too bad, or because it would require a detailed miniature ship model? (or both?)
Here's a very entertaining review:
The octopus comes into contact with far to many areas in a shot, also some of the shots are hand held. Things can be tracked. but painting out every frame would take months.
I dunno guys, like the guy who reviewed this film... I kinda like the original effects just the way they were and remain. I'm not a fan of remakes or redos, I hated when Lucas replaced the effects in Star Wars (the original before 'A New Hope' was added to the title) because I don't approve of people going around and mucking up history.
Looking to "upgrade" the effects in this film changes what it originally was and I'd rather never see that happen. I never want to see the original 'Bruce' the shark replaced digitally at the end of JAWS for the very same reason... LEAVE IT ALONE AND GO MAKE YOUR OWN MOVIE!!!
Peter, you know I consider you a friend and respect your work but, I also respect the work of the people who labored to create the effects in this film too and would never want to see their work disrespected by being replaced. Love it for what it is and move on.
Oh ok, after seeing a couple of your posts on Youtube, now I understand this thread - you're literally asking for discussion on how difficult it would be to replace the creatures using only consumer-level software. When the thread first came up I thought this was a project you were undertaking and the title was just rhetorical. As in "well it can't be that hard right, so I'm going to do it".
Ron, you know I feel exactly the same about what Lucas did to the original trilogy - but it would be completely different if he had only included the originals in their theatrical format along with the retouched versions. Instead what he did feels more like revising history and then trying to destroy all traces of how it actually used to be. Creating a new version of something isn't a bad thing, as long as the original is still available. So as long as Peter has no plans to get ahold of every copy of the original film and burn them, then I'm totally cool with it (if he does plan to do this).
I have mixed feelings about going back and polishing old films. George lucas has shown what a disaster that can be. There are cases where I think it would be ok but only IF the original flmmaker approved. One case is The Golden Voyage of Sinbad, a film that I consider Ray's technical peak. I would like to see the floor around Kali's feet corrected as well as the out of scale flame in the temple scene. I digress. The point of this point was to share this incredible, dare I say CG, shark footage. After seeing this I have to say I would love to see Jaws with shark effects by these folks. No changes to the original, no additional scenesl other than the shark. The shark would not leap the boat! Take a look at this it is incredible.
Hey, this is interesting to me 'cause I thought "Warlords" was better than "At The Earths Core" or "Land That Time Forgot" in it's monster puppetry...But also now I've always wondered why you don't see stop motion in "Piranha" anymore? Was I dreaming that I saw that movie with all the stop motion taken out?, or did they completely re-make the whole movie? I was pissed!
So I wouldn't mess with someone elses original version...I'm just looking forward to YOUR movie Peter!
I just know where this line of thinking leads, you inevitably end up with the version of The 7th Voyage of Sinbad with all of Ray's stuff taken out and replaced by CGI and there will be a younger generation watching it who say "Dude, why not? It's just another tool dude."
The farthest I've ever been willing to go in this regard is by remastering things to correct colors, clean up blue screen lines, lock down jumpy live action plates in matte paintings or even to go as far as to add motion blur to animation that never had it. But not only does none of that change what was there originally, but would probably be appreciated by those who created it in the first place.
But to remove and replace someone's work is a slap in the face to the artist(s) who created the original and I just don't think it's right to do so. The visual effects that replaced the well worn and time honored shots we knew and loved from the original Star Trek TV series (a series that was loved and adored by countless numbers of people which inspired several generations for decades) were suddenly deemed to be 'unworthy' of any future audiences and have been removed and replaced by the Scifi Channel... DISGRACEFUL!!!
It may not be the main motive for artists when they create their works but, there is something to be said for the quest for immortality the world of art bestows on some of the most talented people. The idea that long after you've passed away from this world, your work will remain and continue to entertain, inspire and be witnessed by future generations... When works are cut out of a film and replaced by a newer version, it is an act which serves only to erase the product of that soul.
In a world over-saturated with remakes and updated versions of films and TV shows, it speaks very poorly of the latter couple of generations of creative people... it says that we ourselves have lost the ability to have an original product of our own to offer to the world and we've apparently given up even trying. Creating something new and original is difficult and you have a high risk of never becoming successful on your own. It's so much easier to reach back into the past, find something that has already been successful, recreate it and slap your own name emblazoned on the title.
Now before people jump all over me and beat me up and down for being a hypocrite because I've worked on a SINBAD film and because I've said in the past that there are indeed remakes that I did in fact enjoy. Please don't take what I've said here as 'blanket statements' that are chiseled into stone tablets as commandments I myself have been guilty of breaking. (in that regard, I too am a sinner!) All I'm saying is that these are things that DO require some serious thoughtful considering and soul searching to be done, before pulling out the scalpels and performing yet another act of cosmetic surgery on yet another classic film.
Absolutely Ron. For that natter what if they took the stop mo out of the original Kong and put in CGI? That would be the worst example of re-writing history...And these works are historical documents of the time frame in which they were produced.
Stan - You don't even have to go as far as switching to CGI for any replacement for the effects in either Kong or 7th Voyage... even if you were to replace them with new and improved stop motion, I would still disapprove strongly.