The Polar Express: A Virtual Train Wreck
A wonderful two-part article on what works in computer animation and what does not. The Zemeckis film: "The Polar Express" was supposed to work. It did not. Ward Jenkins at the Ward-O-Matic explains why
here and
here. From the first article:
bq. That's my main question. Why, with all the millions pumped into the production of this technological "masterpiece," do all the children still look so creepy? It's ironic, don't you think? I mean, you read
Newsweek's article on the film and you'd believe that this was the second coming of filmmaking. But after reading about 500 visual-effects specialists working for three years, and about 72 cameras capturing Tom Hanks' movements, 194 "jewels" on the actor's body for recording thus movements into the computer (152 on the face alone), and $164 million spent on the movie, I just have to say: SO WHAT? So what if you spent so much on the technology for this film. If you can't make believable characters and put them in a likable story, it's like putting paint on poo. You can't hide the stink.
bq. So, what's going on here? Motion-capture is what the big hub-bub is all about. And guess what? It's nothing new. But don't tell the promotional department at Warner Bros. They want you to think that what Zemeckis & Co. are creating here is the next level in motion picture making, that this is where's it's heading to. Not so. This technology has been used before in other movies, most recently in the entire LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy, and even going back as far as 1997's TITANIC, for all the little crewmen and passengers on that doomed ship. Actors in the latter film were recorded doing basic movements like walking, picking things up, waving, talking, etc. In the LOTR movies, the technique was ramped up and utilized the best most notably with the full-fledged digital character of Gollum. It's also used extensively in the gaming industry, capturing movements for characters fighting, hitting, dodging, blocking, all sorts of moves.
Ward also mentions that Zemeckis was also responsible for: "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" which is a classic in animation. He then goes on with
part two.
In this article, he dissects the motion-capture frames of actors and shows them alongside the final movie frames illustrating where the emotion was lost (the acting). He also talks about Gollum in The Lord of the Rings Trilogy and how his character was done. Much more attention to detail.
If you are into film making, this is an excellent read.
His blog has been added to my blogroll...
Posted by DaveH at January 23, 2005 10:00 PM