Have you been reading your Cinefex this year? If so, you’ll have no trouble with our fun end-of year quiz. There’s one question for each film we’ve covered during 2017 – that’s a grand total of 27 movies, no less! How many will you get right? Find out right now with the Cinefex Quiz 2017!
In the run-up to the 90th Oscars, The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has just announced the 20 films competing in the Visual Effects category. Later this month, the list will be halved ready for the famous ‘bake-off,’ in which voters view 10-minute reels presenting shots from the qualifying films. Congratulations to the visual teams on all the films that made the list!
Feel like reading up on the movies in question? Well, we’re proud to say that Cinefex covered – or is in the process of covering – 18 out of the 20 films on the list.
In our April 2017 issue, Cinefex 152, we published articles by Graham Edwards on Kong: Skull Island and Logan. Check out Cinefex 153 for Graham’s story on Alien: Covenant, Joe Fordham’s articles on Ghost in the Shell and Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, and Jody Duncan’s coverage of Life. In June, we covered Okja in a Q&A on our blog.
Jody wrote our Spider-Man: Homecoming article for Cinefex 154, which also contains Joe’s story on War for the Planet of the Apes, and Graham’s articles on Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets and Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales. This issue also wins our special prize for Longest Movie Titles of the Year!
In October we published Cinefex 155, with Joe’s articles on Blade Runner 2049 and Dunkirk. Our latest issue, Cinefex 156, contains Graham’s coverage of Thor: Ragnarok and The Shape of Water, plus Joe’s story on Wonder Woman. If you’re wondering what happened to Star Wars: The Last Jedi and Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle, we’re hard at work preparing those articles for our February 2018 issue.
The only two films we missed out on this year were Beauty and the Beast and Justice League. Sorry, folks, we can’t catch ’em all!
Few films have been more eagerly anticipated by sci-fi film fans than Blade Runner 2049. By Cinefex readers too – we know that this is the movie you really wanted us to cover this year. That’s why we’re delighted not only to be launching our brand new fall edition to coincide with the film’s theatrical release, but also to be featuring it on the front cover.
Inside Cinefex 155, you’ll find Joe Fordham’s spectacular article on the making of Blade Runner 2049. But that’s not all. We’ve also delved into our archives to create a special Blade Runner portfolio, in which we look back at some of the stunning images that graced our classic article on the original Blade Runner back in 1982, in Cinefex 9.
Here’s Cinefex editor-in-chief Jody Duncan to reflect on these and all the other goodies to be found in our 2017 fall edition:
Jody Duncan – From the Editor’s Desk
Cinefex was in its infancy when we covered the first Blade Runner in 1982. That issue #9 became one of our best selling issues, and it quickly sold out. (If you are fortunate enough to own a #9, keep it away from babies, drooling dogs and fire-prone electrical appliances!)
So, now, here we are, 146 issues later, covering the long awaited sequel, Blade Runner 2049. ‘Coming full circle’ is a phrase that keeps popping into our minds, unbidden. Joe Fordham did his usual excellent detective work in uncovering the behind-the-scenes story of this film, and Ryan Gosling graces our #155 cover.
Joe also offers the visual effects story behind Christopher Nolan’s Dunkirk. (As much as I love covering Nolan projects – I’ve hogged most of them over the years – this Yankee felt it was only fitting to assign this one to one of our two British writers.) What is always fascinating about a Nolan project is his commitment to in-camera solutions, be they miniature aircraft or ‘fences’ of soldiers planted on the beach to fill out crowds. For all the readers who ask us, ‘Why don’t you cover more practical effects?’, this is the story for you.
Filling out the issue is Graham Edwards’ story on The Dark Tower, mine on Kingsman: The Golden Circle – and, a special treat, a retrospective portfolio on the original Blade Runner.
Have a spooky Halloween, Fellow Replicants!
Cinefex 155 is on newsstands now, and available to order at our online store. If you’re a subscriber, your copy will be spinning into your airspace very soon. And don’t forget our enhanced iPad edition, featuring tons more photographs – many of them exclusive to Cinefex – and stunning video content.
Andrew Finch’s short film Others Will Follow tells the story of a doomed mission to Mars. However, far from being a lament on failure, the film is ultimately about the innate determination of humans to pass on their legacy to the next generation. After its Vimeo release on 16 October 2017, Others Will Follow swiftly gained a place in the video channel’s Short of the Week online film festival.
Visual effects enhance almost every shot in the film. Many combine traditional spacecraft miniatures and digital effects, with physical models sitting alongside CG assets animated in Autodesk Maya, rendered with Solid Angle Arnold, and composited in The Foundry Nuke. Others you won’t even know are there.
Watch the 9-minute short film Others Will Follow:
To introduce this visual guide to the making of Other’s Will Follow, here’s what Finch has to say about its creation:
“Others Will Follow was inspired by a speech written for President Nixon to give in the event that the Apollo 11 astronauts were stranded on the moon. The Apollo program was an unprecedented exchange of inspiration, and I wanted to illustrate the mechanism by which manned space exploration can motivate entire generations.
I spent four and a half years making this short and attempted to do every aspect of its creation myself, from pyrotechnics to music composition. I had a lot of help from generous friends and cast during shoot-days, but beyond that it was very much a one-man labor of love.
Many of the disciplines were completely new to me like designing and building the space ship and constructing the space suit, others like VFX and cinematography I had a background in. This unique opportunity to understand the process as a whole has been invaluable, and I hope the end product feels authentic.”
Watch a short video on the making of Others Will Follow:
Here’s the full text of the speech that inspired the film, never delivered, but written for use in the event of an Apollo moon mission disaster:
“In ancient days, men looked at stars and saw their heroes in the constellations. In modern times, we do much the same, but our heroes are epic men of flesh and blood.
Others will follow, and surely find their way home. Man’s search will not be denied. But these men were the first, and they will remain the foremost in our hearts.
For every human being who looks up at the moon in the nights to come will know that there is some corner of another world that is forever.”
How do you put a robot up on the silver screen? It’s a question that’s taxed filmmakers throughout the years – today more than ever, with science fiction being as hot a Hollywood property as it’s ever been.
Here at Cinefex, we’ve written an awful lot about droid manufacture over the years. But let’s for a moment imagine that there’s such a thing as a definitive handbook called The Manual of How to Make a Movie Robot. Now wouldn’t that be a useful thing?
Imagine further – if such a handbook existed, what might you find if you started leafing through its pages?
The first chapter of our imaginary manual would probably be called Stick Your Actor in a Shiny Suit. It’s an approach that worked well for Fritz Lang when he made his 1927 sci-fi classic Metropolis. Brigitte Helm played the Maschinenmensch automaton wearing a costume designed by sculptor and artist Walter Schulze-Mittendorff, who abandoned early plans to manufacture the suit from copper in favor of a pliable ‘plastic wood’ that hardened on exposure to air.
Fifty years later, George Lucas followed in Lang’s footsteps when he introduced the world to the bumbling protocol droid C-3PO in Star Wars. This time the actor in the suit was Anthony Daniels, and the artist who refined the robot’s features – under the supervision of production designer John Barry – was sculptor Liz Moore, who also modeled the Star Child seen at the end of 2001: A Space Odyssey.
Robot suits come in all shapes and sizes. Accompanying C-3PO on his adventures is the diminutive astromech droid R2-D2, who was frequently portrayed by actor Kenny Baker while squeezed into a tight-fitting mechanical can.
Just as squashed were Larry Whisenhunt, Mark Persons, Cheryl Sparks and Steve Brown, all of whom had underdeveloped or missing legs, and who shared the roles of the three robots Huey, Dewey and Louie in Douglas Trumbull’s futuristic eco-fable Silent Running. Locked inside vacuum-formed shells, the agile quartet went through their robot routine whilst walking on their hands.
Rods and Cables
When James Cameron made The Terminator and its sequel Terminator 2: Judgment Day, he used every trick in the manual – and invented a few new ones to boot. At the purely practical level, he found countless ways of energizing his cyborg characters live on set, right in front of the camera lens.
Artists at Stan Winston Studios applied metallic makeup effects to Arnold Schwarzenegger to support his role as the unstoppable T-800 assassin. The same team created animatronic replicas of the actor that revealed a chrome endoskeleton beneath the robot’s human flesh, and deployed a dazzling range of puppets and mobile rigs to bring the metal machine to life.
Here’s Stan Winston talking in Cinefex 21 about the design of the original T-800 endoskeleton:
“I wanted to retain Arnold’s form in building the robot. Not only is the robot the same height as Arnold, but all of its proportions are scaled down from and matched to fit his. The robot is anatomically correct, and could literally fit inside Arnold’s body. Even the robot’s skull was scaled down from a clay duplicate of Arnold’s head; and its teeth are duplicates of Arnold’s.”
Stop and Go
Our theoretical handbook wouldn’t be complete without a chapter on stop-motion animation – another technique used by James Cameron to bring his relentless robot to life in The Terminator. For wide shots of the T-800, animators moved a miniature cyborg constructed by Doug Beswick one frame at a time.
Stop-motion also features in RoboCop (1987), for which animators Phil Tippett and Randy Dutra shared duties activating the malevolent ED 209 enforcement droid. In one shot, the film’s hero is seen grappling at close quarters with the mechanical sentry – for this, a nine-inch stop-motion puppet RoboCop stood in for actor Peter Weller.
Less is More
Sometimes, creating a great movie robot isn’t about what you see. It’s about what you don’t see. Steven Spielberg explored this notion in A.I. Artificial Intelligence. For a startling shot of a broken-down FemMecha Nanny robot – whose face is intact but backed only by a mechanical underskull – Stan Winston Studios fashioned a puppet head with an articulated silicone face. For closeups, Industrial Light & Magic tracked the face of actor Clara Bellar onto a digital replica of the Winston animatronic.
To create Ava, the sophisticated android in Alex Garland’s Ex Machina, Double Negative composited CG robot components into live-action of Alicia Vikander’s on-set performance, artfully subtracting elements of her human form to create a delicately remodeled robot silhouette.
Here’s Ex Machina visual effects supervisor Andrew Whitehurst discussing the ‘less is more’ approach in Cinefex 145:
“We worked hard to make sure that we designed something which could work practically, which looked like it had the right weight distribution, and which still had ‘form follows function’ beauty. We continually removed pieces that seemed superfluous. The great industrial designer, Dieter Rams, has a motto: ‘Less, but better.’ We constantly kept that in mind. In fact, when the design was 3D-printed for the laboratory set, it did all fit together beautifully. That was a proud moment!”
To explore human performance in more depth, our handbook is going to need a whole section on motion capture. Neill Blomkamp used this technique to great effect in Chappie, capturing the on-set performance of Sharlto Copley and translating it onto the film’s titular robot character. Artists at Image Engine developed a highly realistic CG robot based on designs by Weta Workshop, and seamlessly replaced the human actor with his mechanical avatar.
Interviewed in Cinefex 141, Neill Blomkamp had this to say about the creation of his robot star:
“We modeled every twist of the wrist, and every movement of the ankle, all so that Chappie would be able to mimic a human’s motion. We kept refining the three-dimensional model, and then sending that back to the designers so they could tweak the design. Then it would go back to 3D. By going back and forth like that, we got to a place where every detail of the robot moved correctly.”
Despite Yoda’s assertion that size matters not, there are some filmmakers who might disagree. They’ll be the ones poring over our imaginary handbook’s chapter on super-sized robots.
Few robots come bigger than the mechanical stars of Michael Bay’s Transformers movies. Industrial Light & Magic constructed fantastically elaborate digital rigs, modeling each metamorphosing robot character first in standing form, then working backward with animated movements that took it to a crouch, before devising folding actions that would slide limbs and other body parts into place on the vehicle that was its Earthly disguise.
Talking to us in Cinefex 111 about the very first Transformers film, visual effects supervisor Scott Farrar remarked on the levels of detail required truly enormous robots to the screen:
“You’d think that hard-body surfaces, as compared to furry animals, would be easier in CG, but there is a basic rule in movies: if it isn’t complex, it doesn’t look complex. To make them look like real, complex characters and to give them the appropriate razzle-dazzle, every robot had to have thousands of articulated pieces and complex connections, plus layers of paint to look like car paint finishes. The swirl of the brush marks on the metal had to be there; the grease had to be there; the torch marks had to be there. Each of these robot characters needed layer upon layer of bump, texture, dirt, scratches and color.”
There are undoubtedly many other chapters to explore in The Manual of How to Make a Movie Robot, but we’ve got time for just one more. Having focused on robots based more or less on the human form, let’s briefly consider those that don’t look like people at all. Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar features a pair of blocky droids called TARS and CASE, represented on set by pneumatically assisted bunraku-style puppets manufactured by special effects supervisor Scott Fisher. For a handful of shots showing the robots unfolding themselves into distinctly inhuman forms, Double Negative took over with animated CG versions.
In Cinefex 140, animation supervisor David Lowry explained how practical experiments helped his team to devise the tricky CG robot rig required for Interstellar:
“I drilled holes into [wooden] blocks and used barbeque skewers as the joints. By playing with that, it became apparent how many different kinds of shapes you could create from just four basic blocks that have three joints each. Although it was simple, it became incredibly complicated very quickly.”
So, if there really were such a book as The Manual of How to Make a Movie Robot, which other cinematic cyborgs do you think it should include?
The Terminator photograph copyright © 1985 by Orion Pictures Corporation. RoboCop photograph copyright © 2087 by Orion Pictures Corporation. Ex Machina photographs copyright © 2015 by DNA Films and Universal Pictures. Chappie photographs copyright © 2015 by Sony Pictures Entertainment and Columbia Pictures Inc., LSC Film Corporation and MRC II Distribution Company LP. Interstellar photograph copyright © 2014 by Paramount Pictures.
Who’s your favourite king of the swingers? Is it Caesar or Spider-Man? To help you decide, the new edition of Cinefex comes with two spectacular cover options. Subscribers will get Weta Digital’s brooding portrait of the unforgettable ape hero of War for the Planet of the Apes, while newsstand editions feature a dynamic action shot from Spider-Man: Homecoming, courtesy of Digital Domain. Order online and you get to make the choice yourself!
Whichever cover you select, the contents of Cinefex 154 bring you our renowned in-depth coverage of five of this summer’s hottest movies: Spider-Man: Homecoming, War for the Planet of the Apes, Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets, The Mummy and Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales.
Here’s Cinefex editor-in-chief Jody Duncan to reflect on our August 2017 edition:
Jody Duncan – From the Editor’s Desk
We revisit a lot of old friends in this issue of Cinefex – characters and franchises we’ve covered many times before. But as I read through issue 154, I was struck by how significantly those characters and franchises have evolved through the years. Spider-Man: Homecoming is nothing less than a total reboot of the Spider-Man franchise, and the film boasts an entirely new look, tone and feeling.
We’ve followed the Planet of the Apes saga since Tim Burton’s 2001 remake; and yet, Joe Fordham’s coverage of War for the Planet of the Apes illustrates the leaps and bounds achieved in the creation of ape performances during those 16 years.
We weren’t around to cover the original Universal Mummy pictures, of course, but we were there for the 1999 Brendan Fraser version and its sequels. There, too, the advancements in technology and artistry have ensured that the most recent The Mummy, starring Tom Cruise, has a fresh behind-the-scenes story to tell.
And Graham Edwards’ coverage of Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales celebrates the visual effects heights that have been reached since the franchise began in 2003.
This issue features an off-the-beaten path newcomer, as well – Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets, from the visionary Luc Besson.
Happy end of summer, everyone. I hope your Spider-Man lunchboxes are filled with your favorite sandwiches, chips and Moon Pies as you head back into the school year!
Cinefex 154 is on newsstands now, and available to order at our online store. If you’re a subscriber, your copy will be swinging into your mailbox very soon. And don’t forget our enhanced iPad edition, featuring tons more photographs – many of them exclusive to Cinefex – and stunning video content.
The SIGGRAPH 2017 Production Sessions program provides a platform for creative professionals to explain their processes and techniques in the fields of computer animation, visual effects, games, virtual reality, themed entertainment, and the software applications used by the artists who create them. Each presentation ends with a Q&A session that allows attendees to quiz the experts.
New in 2017 is the Production Gallery, featuring motion picture and games artifacts from major studios. Check out the pitch boards from Moana, concept art and maquettes from Cars 3 and costumes from Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2. The gallery will also showcase a 25th Anniversary exhibition from Sony Pictures Imageworks,’ with items from films including Spider-Man, Ghost Rider, Men in Black, Ghostbusters and Stuart Little.
Watch the SIGGRAPH 2017 Conference Overview trailer:
Emily Hsu, SIGGRAPH 2017 Production Sessions Chair, commented:
“Since the Production Sessions program began, it has grown and evolved to become an attendee favorite with universal appeal. I am proud to be part of that tradition and to continue expanding the scope of Production Sessions content as well as initiating the all-new Production Gallery. While we have an amazing lineup that retains strong animation and VFX, we are also featuring a VR panel with Google Spotlight Stories and Oculus Story Studio and presenting a look at Blizzard’s trans-media approach in creating Overwatch. Plus, for the first time, we are bringing a live-action TV series to the SIGGRAPH stage.”
Highlights from the 11 SIGGRAPH 2017 Production Sessions include:
Victoria Alonso, executive vice president of physical production at Marvel Studios, swings into action to explore the visual effects of Peter Parker’s newest adventure. Edwin Rivera, additional visual effects supervisor at Marvel Studios, presents alongside Method Studios second unit supervisor and visual effects supervisor Matt Dessaro, Digital Domain visual effects supervisor Lou Pecora and Sony Pictures Imageworks visual effects supervisor Theo Bialek.
The visual effects team from Industrial Light & Magic discusses the effects work of the latest Star Wars epic centered on the theft of the Death Star plans by a small team of rebel infiltrators. John Knoll, ILM’s chief creative officer and senior visual effects supervisor, joins forces with lighting technical director supervisor Vick Schutz, CG supervisor Stephen Ellis, digital supervisor Russell Paul and layout supervisor John Levin.
Victoria Alonso returns with a team of intergalactic effects experts to discuss the dazzling visuals of the second chapter in Peter Quill’s cosmic odyssey. Visual effects producer Damien Carr and visual effects supervisor Christopher Townsend explore a universe of wisecracking aliens and sentient worlds together with Weta Digital visual effects supervisor Guy Williams, Framestore visual effects supervisor Jonathan Fawkner and Method Studios visual effects supervisor Nordin Rahhali.
Sophie Leclerc, visual effect producer of Luc Besson’s epic new space adventure, explores the technologies deployed to create the fabulous universe adapted from the comic books by Pierre Christin and Jean-Claude Mézières. Joining her are Weta Digital visual effects supervisor Martin Hill, ILM CG supervisor Jose Burgos, ILM visual effects art director Christian Alzmann, Rodeo FX associate visual effects supervisor Peter Nofz and Rodeo FX concept artist Olivier Martin.
The annual SIGGRAPH conference is a five-day interdisciplinary educational experience in the latest computer graphics and interactive techniques, including a three-day commercial exhibition that attracts hundreds of companies from around the world. The conference also hosts the international SIGGRAPH Computer Animation Festival, showcasing works from the world’s most innovative and accomplished digital film and video creators. Juried and curated content includes outstanding achievements in time-based art, scientific visualization, visual effects, real-time graphics, and narrative shorts. SIGGRAPH 2017 will take place from 30 July–3 August 2017 in Los Angeles. Visit the SIGGRAPH 2017 website or follow SIGGRAPH on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, or Instagram for more detailed information.
In the genre-bending animal adventure Okja, a young girl called Mija (An Seo Hyun) helps her grandfather Hee Bong (Byun Heebong) to raise a gigantic super-pig in the wilds of South Korea. When Lucy Mirando (Tilda Swinton), head of the multinational Mirando Corporation, reclaims the genetically-engineered creature for her own self-serving ends, Mija embarks on an epic adventure to rescue her beloved Okja from the conglomerate’s sinister clutches.
Directed by Bong Joon Ho, Okja relies on visual effects to bring its super-sized animal star to life. Visual effects supervisor Erik-Jan de Boer led a team at Deluxe’s Method Studios in Vancouver to create Okja as a living, breathing presence in environments ranging from lush mountain forests to the sunlit streets of New York City and the grim bunkers of the Mirando Corporation’s meat-producing production line. South Korea’s 4th Creative Party delivered additional visual effects, overseen by visual effects supervisor Lee Jeon Hyoung.
Cinefex spoke with Erik-Jan de Boer – who in 2013 won an Academy Award for his work on Life of Pi – about what it took to put Okja on the screen, and how the team helped the cast to bond with a creature whose performance would only be completed months later in post-production.
The design of Okja is central to the film. How did her appearance develop from the original concepts through to how she actually looks on screen?
When Bong and I first met at the end of 2014, he had some really detailed concept work of Okja, but he wasn’t ready to share his script yet. So I found myself looking at this weird creature, but not knowing what the story was going to be about. The script followed up pretty soon and so then we got a good idea of what she had to do.
Hee Chul Jang was the creature designer. He designed the initial concept and also sculpted a 3D model of Okja – it was a posed, asymmetrical maquette, only about 5 inches long. We used that as an initial object to scan, and then once she was in our virtural world we built in the symmetry and started to play a little bit more with her proportions and her features.
What were some of the specific design details that you worked on?
We did some rounds on the size of the ears. We played around with the toes, so that we could have some good excuses to see shape changes and really sell the contact with the ground. In the original design she had some pretty well-defined lips, but we found that the way they would pick up the lighting made her too cartoonish. So we went to a more canine, jowly setup. Inside of the mouth we did quite a lot of work to make the teeth more appealing.
The main thing that we added was short fuzz and hair that made her softer and more feminine – not full fur, but we definitely wanted some excuse to break up the highlights and get some nice rim lighting on her.
You can see that in the closeups, especially when the various characters are touching Okja.
Exactly. We really needed that as an additional tool to sell that connection and that physicality. Also, if we didn’t have that hair, the renders that we did on the big closeups were plasticky, or too nude.
In the film, Okja is described as a ‘super-pig.’ Did you use one particular animal for design reference?
She’s a hybrid animal in the movie, and a hybrid animal in our production process as well. We used elephants, pigs, hippos. Bong had a fascination with manatees for the skin qualities, so we used that in look development, and also in terms of the sadness in the face.
Okja is constantly interacting with the people around her – especially Mija. Was that close contact important to help audiences buy into her reality?
When I read the script, I realised that the only way for us to sell the relationship that Mija and Okja have was to not avoid the notoriously difficult work in CG, but to just embrace it. We had the normal ground contact – brushing against bushes and all that stuff – but in almost every shot we had someone put their hands on Okja, whether it was tender contact from Mija like a soft tug on her ear or the hand sliding over her skin, or really violent pushing and shoving by six team members at a time. All of that had to be choreographed and designed in such a way that we could put our CG pig underneath that.
So how did you simulate Okja’s presence on set?
Before we started shooting, I realised that aspect of the project was something where we could really add to the storytelling. I wanted to make sure that you really believed that Mija and Okja were there in that same space. So we built a series of props or ‘stuffies’ – at the end we had about 25 of them. We designed them in Maya, and then the low resolution models were shipped to a company in Seoul called Cell – they unfolded them and laser cut them out of flat sheets of EVA foam. When they got these huge panels back to their workshop they glued them together to match our 3D models. That gave us a great fidelity between our model and the final props that we used on set, but also a way to quickly prototype things and make sure that we got them right. We started with a warehouse full of Okja pieces all looking pristine and pretty, and then by the end of the trip when these stuffies had traveled from Korea to New York to Vancouver, they were beaten up pieces of crap!
Did you have different stuffies to represent different parts of Okja’s body?
Some of the stuffies were very generic and were our go-to props for a lot of the work. One of our workhorses was a piece of chest connected with a metal spine to a piece of the butt. That allowed us to pull at the neck and push at the butt – we called it the ‘push-pull’ rig. Then we had several versions of the head – one was more built-out and had velcro ears that we could attach and detach, while another was heavier so we could apply proper forces banging into people and objects. Other stuffies were really light so we could run around with them for choreography. Some were one-offs, custom built, like for the shot where Mija is inside Okja’s mouth brushing her teeth, or sleeping on top of her.
Who puppeteered the stuffies on set?
I really wanted us to be there as acting partners for An Seo Hyun, and to help her deliver the best performance possible. So I brought on set my animation supervisor from Method Studios, Stephen Clee. He’s a great animator, and he’s also a kick-boxer and the sweetest guy you can meet. By putting him always in front of the camera with Mija, we built the relationship there between her and the stuffy and Steve that allowed them to get in the zone – really to get to a level that I have never seen before. Of course, she’s a great actress and did an amazing job, but I feel that by always explaining to her what we were trying to do and what Okja was feeling, and building a trust with her by always rehearsing the more tricky stuff, we built a strong workflow that really shows up in the final product.
All of that must have made for some memorable moments.
At one stage, we were rehearsing at the special effects company’s courtyard a few miles from the North Korean border. I was watching Stephen stick his hand up an Okja tongue glove that we had designed, and he was using it to lick Mija’s stunt double, while American F-16s were busting overhead because there was heightened tension with the North Koreans. It was probably the most surreal situation I’ve ever found myself in professionally!
Did you use a greenscreen stage for any of the Okja scenes?
We shot as much as possible in situ. We didn’t do any greenscreen work, except for one element that was shot for Mija riding on Okja in the traffic tunnel. That was shot on a huge pogo stick that we built. We didn’t go for a motion base because I really wanted the right hang time and momentum. I wanted the physicality and the percussiveness of that to be as strong as possible.
There are scenes where Okja has a big physical impact on the environment around her, like the chase through the underground shopping mall.
Yeah, that was spectacular filmmaking. It was a night shoot with hundreds of extras in this underground mall. We had to make sure that everybody was looking in the right direction, that whatever we broke was rigged to be reset and done again. Then we went to a stage where we rebuilt some of that shopping mall to do the final crash where Okja slides into one of the stores and comes to a halt.
How did that work? Did the special effects team smash up the set ready for you to add your CG Okja?
Well, the special effects department kept asking me what I needed for that shot of the crash. I said, “That’s up to you guys – it just needs to look like this six-ton animal is sliding into it.” We showed them previs of how we envisioned her rolling over and what angle she was coming into the store, but again they came back and asked what we needed. I said, “What you should probably do is just drive a minivan into the store and spin it round.” Two days later, they came to me and asked me what colour I wanted the minivan! So that’s what we did. We actually drove a small minivan into the store and replaced it with Okja. Stuff like that was just hilarious to do.
When the time came to add your CG Okja to the live-action, what sort of movement reference did the animators use?
From an emotional point of view – or even intellectually – dogs were our best source for the performance. Specifically, there was a beagle that we have around our house a lot – it’s the animal of a friend of ours – and for me beagles were the perfect translation of that huge pig, proportionally and for the ears and the big, droopy eyes. I had a lot of fun studying him, and applying on to Okja the small traits and animalistic behaviours that I picked up.
Technically speaking, how did the digital Okja asset function?
We took the usual approach where you get your skeleton, your muscles, you do your cloth simulations, and you build a hybrid of all these sims into a final skin product. Edy Susanto Lim, our creature supervisor, built a very efficient rig that had a lot of really advanced technology in it. If you look at Okja’s armpit and groin, for instance, those areas are better resolved than I’ve seen on any other CG animal. It’s really due to his work that it looks so sophisticated.
But the main difference – and this was a mandate from the start – was that we built in a level of art directability. It was really important for me to be able to look at the final animation, and then buy ourselves enough iterations in the tech animation stage to make the skin look as good as possible. Because we were dealing with an animal that was engineered to produce a lot of pork, I wanted to make the musculature as luxurious as possible. I’m very proud of the tech animation work – there’s a reality or an organic expressive quality to Okja’s skin that I do think is pushing the state of CG work further along.
How did the animators work with the Okja asset?
It’s all keyframe animation because you cannot motion capture an animal like that – well, I guess you could do some fun stuff with a hippo, but I don’t think anybody has ever done it, and with the scenes being so specific you wouldn’t get much mileage out of it anyway. We had a team of about 25 animators, and we created about 40 minutes of total Okja screen time. Our average shot length was well over nine seconds. We had shots that were close to a minute long, and a lot of them that were 30 seconds. With all the contact and physicality that we had in these shots, it was a tough nut to crack for our animators, and they did a great job.
On top of the character animation, you talked about art directing the actual muscle movements. How did you do that?
We used an approach that I have used before, where we run a script to do the initial flexing on all the muscles – like a procedural way of getting the initial firing going. Then, both in animation and tech animation, we had the ability to put multipliers on specific muscles or muscle groups – we could vary the timing and the flexing pattern of them as well. So we could go in and multiply and offset and tweak to get it the way that we really liked it.
In real animals, muscles fire before the limbs actually start to move, don’t they?
Yes, and our flexing script took all of that into account, in our more procedural initial pass. The main choreography would be dialled in pretty early in the animation stage, so very often we would start running some sims just to see how the rig would respond to a specific action. We had a very robust rig – the first sim passes were always pretty successful from the start – and that put us in a position to really fine-tune it. With shots that are on the screen for a minute long, your eye just starts enjoying the flexing and the spasms and all the small little accidents that happen underneath the skin.
There’s plenty of broad action in the film, but also a lot of extremely subtle character animation. Some of Okja’s movements are almost imperceptible, yet she always feels alive.
Well, very often subtler is better. The animation team went to the zoo in Vancouver and had an opportunity to touch real hippos. I asked them to focus on the tension that the ribcage and the organs put on the skin, and how little deformation and friction you get when you touch a tense skin like that. We did the same with pigs. It showed us that you get very little compression on the skin unless you push really hard. Most of that contact we had to sell with shadow and lighting integration. I think that’s why some of those more intimate moments worked – because we restrained ourselves.
During the film’s final act, the tone gets quite dark as we see the facility where thousands of super-pigs like Okja are being corralled ready for slaughter. Did visual effects create that whole environment?
Yeah, I would say that most of those shots are 90 percent CG. Bong and Darius Khondji, the director of photography, found a location in the middle of Korea, but really it was just a sloping field. We built the ramp that led up to the slaughterhouse and used a piece of the road. We had six to eight fence pillars, but all the wires and signage and everything else was extended. That could have been built on any stage, really, but what we did get was a grittiness and a mood – an emotional connection to those shots that helped bring it to where it needed to be.
Bong gave me some reference frames of a herd of hippos standing in a wide river with caked mud on their backs. Some were wet, some had dried out, and the light was playing on their backs like a sort of hilly terrain. The graphic nature of that was something that really appealed to him. I told the animators that this was a Sophie’s Choice moment, and that we were really looking for that sort of concentration camp feel. I’m proud of the fact that the end result has an organic feel to it, and really feels painterly.
How did you go about filling all the pens with super-pigs?
We didn’t use any off-the-shelf crowd systems because I felt that would just overcomplicate us. We also needed to render at 4k. So, we built this little parallel pipeline that allowed us to use vrmesh files and leverage V-Ray’s ability to handle a lot of these objects efficiently. That worked out really successfully, but at 4k some of the render times were still crazy long and really filled our render farm.
How many pigs did you squeeze into those big wide shots?
I think the maximum was 16,000.
That’s a whole lotta of pigs.
Yeah! We could have pushed number that technically, but the hilly slope helped us keep it down to that level. That was good!
What are your final thoughts on the film, now that the world has finally been introduced to Okja.
Well, it was just a blast, really. I had a great team at Method Studios in Vancouver – everybody’s heart was really into this project and I think that shows in the work. And working with Bong was just such a pleasure. He had great respect for us in visual effects – the trust that we had from the start created the perfect workflow in terms of building this creature. I’d love to do it again!
Watch a trailer for Okja:
Okja is a Plan B Entertainment, Lewis Pictures and Kate Street Picture Company production in association with Netflix. Okja is currently on release in selected US theaters, and available to stream on Netflix.
Like many industries in the 21st century, visual effects is a worldwide operation. Pick any populated spot on the globe and chances are you’ll find a visual effects facility somewhere in the same latitude. The biggest companies of all maintain offices right across the planet.
But while crossing timezones delivers some amazing efficiencies – and allows productions to access lucrative subsidies – the distances involved are daunting. How do directors critique shots with visual effects supervisors when they’re on opposite sides of the world? And how do the supervisors then communicate notes to multiple vendors scattered across many continents?
At its simplest, the answer is video conferencing. But the very specific demands of motion picture visual effects mean that it’s not enough just to dial up your colleagues on Skype. High on the list of preferred alternatives is Cospective cineSync, which allows remote participants to watch high resolution video in perfect sync, and includes a range of drawing tools that allow notes to be drawn directly onto individual film frames. Robust encryption ensures the whole process conforms to strict studio security rules.
Recent multi-vendor productions that used cineSync include Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 and The Fate of the Furious, both of which are covered in-depth in our June issue, Cinefex 153. The same software facilitated the visual effects work on Warner Brothers Pictures’ King Arthur: Legend of the Sword. Directed by Guy Ritchie, the film stars the young Arthur (Charlie Hunnam) as a streetwise monarch-on-the-rise, fighting to save Dark Ages Britain from the evil Vortigern (Jude Law) and a host of fantastical foes.
“I came onto King Arthur in 2014, working with visual effects producer Alex Bicknell and visual effects supervisor Nick Davis, who I’d worked with on Edge of Tomorrow,” said visual effects production supervisor Gavin Round. “Thanks to that experience, we had an established, effective workflow in place. My duties involved managing vendors, and making sure that the shots came in on time and that the vendors had everything they need. cineSync enabled us to review the material constantly, so we were always aware of the status of any given shot. We could see it in real-time to discuss with the vendors.”
The London and Montreal teams at Framestore led the visual effects charge on King Arthur: Legend of the Sword, supported by a horde of vendors that included MPC, Method Studios, Scanline VFX, Nvizible and One of Us. For sequences that required Framestore and MPC to share shots portraying a particularly menacing digital character, access to a global roundtable proved essential.
“It was a delicate process, as we had to maintain continuity between the two vendors, who were essentially building different parts of the same being,” Round noted. “We needed to constantly review and check the material back-to-back to ensure everything transitioned correctly, no matter which vendor it came from. Nick liked to do cineSync sessions because he could pull up a shot, make marks on it, draw on it and tell the artists exactly where he wanted a creature to walk.”
Watch the trailer for King Arthur: Legend of the Sword:
Adelaide-based Cospective – originally known as Rising Sun Research – was founded in 2000 as a spin-off from visual effects studio Rising Sun Pictures. Developers Tony Clark, Alan Rogers, Neil Wilson and Rory McGregor received a Technical Achievement Award for cineSync at the 2010 Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences SciTech Awards.
Steven Spielberg’s tense 1975 thriller Jaws has a lot to answer for. Not only did it help set the mold for the summer blockbuster, but it also secured the place of the great white shark as cinema’s greatest underwater nemesis.
Jaws featured a notoriously temperamental mechanical shark built by special effects expert Robert A. Mattey – plus a handful of real critters photographed by shark experts and filmmakers Ron and Valerie Taylor. Sharks splashed back onto the big screen in 1999 with Renny Harlin’s Deep Blue Sea, for which Walt Conti fashioned three full-size animatronic beasts and visual effects supervisor Jeffrey A. Okun and Hammerhead Productions led the push to realize the film’s genetically-enhanced predators in digital form.
More recently, Stockholm-based Important Looking Pirates created the voracious sharks seen in Joachim Rønning’s and Espen Sandberg’s Kon-Tiki, and worked alongside a host of other visual effects vendors to bring to life the relentless Carcharodon carcharias of Jaume Collet-Serra’s The Shallows.
The newest sharks on the block are those seen in 47 Meters Down, in which hordes of great whites attempt to wrap their teeth around sisters Lisa (Mandy Moore) and Kate (Claire Holt). Trapped in an underwater cage with only one hour of oxygen left, the siblings engage in a battle for survival as the sharks lays siege to their fragile aquatic fortress.
Watch a video of Outpost VFX’s work on 47 Meters Down:
Outpost VFX was sole visual effects vendor on 47 Meters Down. Director Johannes Roberts worked with Outpost’s on-set visual effects supervisor Sean Mathieson, and visual effects supervisor Mark Gregory oversaw 426 shots at the company’s seafront offices on the UK’s south coast. The work included simulating ocean environments in Side Effects Houdini and tracking them to live-action plates, deploying digi-doubles of the main actors, a CG cage and – of course – creating the all-important school of digital great white sharks, sculpted in Pixologic ZBrush and animated in Autodesk Maya.
Outpost VFX owner Duncan McWilliam, who was also executive producer on the film, commented:
“47 Meters Down was a real breakthrough opportunity for Outpost VFX to show what we are capable of producing. Being the sole vendor on the show across such a broad range of VFX disciplines was fantastic for our team to really flex their creative and technical muscle. This show really accelerated the development of our in-house proprietary tools and pipeline and now gives us a great calling card for creature and environment work across VFX-heavy shows.”
Outpost VFX recently worked on shots for Daniel Espinosa’s Life, covered in-depth in Cinefex 153, out now.