STACK Aug #154

OPINION

visit stack.com.au

The VISUAL EFFECTS (R)EVOLUTION

PIECE MIND OF

1933

From stop-motion and green screens to CGI and motion-capture, VFX have come a long way. But good old fashioned prosthetics and practical effects still rule. Words Scott Hocking A recent visit to the Weta Workshop in Wellington got me to thinking about special effects – as it would – and how

1963

Which brings me back to what the next big quantum leap in VFX might be. When I put this question to Weta Workshop’s Rob Gillies, he cited 3D printers and CNC milling technology as revolutionising the manufacturing process. The key word there is ‘manufacturing’ – Weta Workshop are the industry benchmark when it comes to creating practical effects, with the Weta Digital division the icing on the physical cake. We might be living in a digital world, but nothing beats the real and tangible. If you’re old enough to have first seen Star Wars in 1977, before Lucas

1968

far we’ve come since a rocket was fired into the eye of our celestial neighbour in Georges Méliés’ A Trip to the Moon (1902). King Kong (1933) and Ray Harryhausen’s stop-motion creations (as well as his Dynamation process) were the next step, followed by the groundbreaking achievements of Kubrick’s 2001 and Lucas’s Star Wars . Then Industrial Light and Magic changed the game

1977

forever with CGI ( T2 and Jurassic Park ), and the aforementioned Weta perfected motion-capture technology ( The Lord of the Rings ). So what’s next? CGI has pretty much lost its ‘wow’ factor through

tinkered with it, you’ll agree that the model Falcon and Star Destroyers can’t be beaten. The same goes for monsters and gore effects – prosthetics

We might be living in a digital world, but nothing beats the real and tangible. Watch John Carpenter's The Thing if you don't believe me.

1991

beat pixels every time. Watch John Carpenter’s The Thing if you don’t believe me. It’s comforting to know that companies like Weta and their peers continue to champion

overkill, but every now and then a blockbuster comes along that makes you sit up in your cinema seat in

1993

excitement, because you know you’ve just seen the next level in the evolution of VFX.

practical effects, and I’ll let Lucasfilm’s production designer Doug Chiang have the final say on the subject: “I see the whole industry swinging back in terms of a technology pendulum. Because computer graphics allow you to create anything, there was a tendency to overindulge yourself. What we’ve discovered now is it’s better to show restraint. CGI, after all, is just a tool. Whether you’re using plywood and paint or pixels, ultimately it has to be informed by the story and has to service the film itself. For me, the fine balance is to open it up enough so that it feels real, grounding it in reality. That’s why we try and build as much as possible, but knowing at the end we do have the license to expand it in post-production.”

I had that feeling watching Avatar and then Dawn of the Planet of the Apes , both of which advanced MoCap from the Gollum days. Then Warcraft came along last year – the movie wasn’t great but the Orcs were! I’m sure War for the Planet of the Apes this month will ramp it up another notch, too. But while sentient monkeys and fantasy creatures have become photorealistic, the creation of lifelike human beings hasn’t. They still look like video game characters, with that creepy, waxy animated mannequin look. The CGI recreations of Peter Cushing and youthful Princess Leia in Rogue One were better, but you could still see through the illusion (the whole “Uncanny Valley” debate on resurrecting deceased actors is another article entirely).

2001-03

2009

2011

052

AUGUST 2017

jbhifi.com.au

st154_052_OpinionPiece.indd 1

21/7/17 1:57 pm