Whimsical idea...but

[Gruson]

For anyone who wants to read more about the early days of ILM, I highly recommend the book Industrial Light & Magic: The Art of Special Effects.

It was released in 1986, back when ILM was king and were behind all of those "magical" special effects.

Great book. A friend borrowed my copy years ago and never returned it. I need to get it again.

Amazon link with reviews:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345322630/sr=8-11/qid=1144812954/ref=sr_1_11/103-3053798-5177411?%5Fencoding=UTF8

 

[darthviper107]

Well, in the 70's when ILM was first made--it was the only visual effects studio around (Maybe that's why other movies had really bad effects).

The only real problem I have with ILM is that there isn't a level consistancy quality from movie to movie. Some movies by them have good effects while others are just plain horrible (The Mummy Returns comes to mind, The Rock as the Scorpion King in that movie was the absolutely worst CG character I have ever seen). But in other movies the effects are awesome. I have to say that the Artists of ILM are way better than any other effects studio (This is just the people who draw stuff on the video) But some of their CG is rather lacking.

In Narnia, ILM was a part of the people doing the effects, they contributed to do all of the matte paintings required by that movie. Those artists are so good, they can do extremely good about painting stuff out on video. For instance, in LOTR at the end of the first one, where Frodo and Sam are going off to Mordor, the bluescreen doesn't look that good, and in King Kong, at some of the parts where Ann is telling Kong how beautiful the Island is, the bluescreen is pretty bad there also. This has never been an issue with ILM, they allways have perfect bluescreen.

You guys are right about the talent of ILM moving off to other studios though, but that's just a part of the industry, it's basically freelance, the people are possibly offered a job for a particular movie and they can choose to accept it or not, although at ILM you pretty much have a steady job. I also think I remember that one of the Visual Effects Supervisors on the prequels went over to WETA to work on King Kong, which is kinda cool.

 

[Mini-Rock]

Really? Hmm, that isn't something I could imagine anyone saying esp after some really noticeable flaws in their work. Notably the Clones without their helmets, that would certainly stick out on the larger screens, and the overall "haze" that seems to plague many of the shots, and to me at least almost gives the films a video game like appearance.

That said the CG work in Kong was not at all flawless, notably the Bronto chase.

I prefer the theory behind Weta's work however, and think that for overall realism a miniature ought to be preferred over complete blue/green screen.

I guess I could think the same thing about many of the noticable flaws in WETA's work; notably, WETA trying to get the scale right from hobbits to dwarfs to man. Not only that, but also getting the texture right between CG and real life. Still, these are things I over look because I really enjoy the movies for what they are. Nothing annoyed me more than listening to some knucklehead in the theater who said, "That looks fake" 100 times during fellowship. What did they expect for it not to be packed with CG? Anyway, I like the theory behind WETA's work as well, but I have really enjoyed, too many times to count, the end result of the kings at ILM.

 

[Mini-Rock]

Weta done a pretty good job on Gollum dont you think? I'd say Gollum was the best piece of CG I've ever seen. I think ILM and Weta are both amazing and each has its strengths and weaknesses.

I think ILM like to say "look what we can do" and the effects take centre stage but with WETA there are things in LOTR that look so real you dont even know they are there which is the hallmark of a great special effect.

ILM is where modern special effects was born and there would be no WETA if it wasn't for them but I think WETA are now on a par with them. Both companys are at the cutting edge.

I absolutely think WETA did a good job on Gollum. In fact, I think they did a great job. Remember, I'm not saying WETA visuals suck...they don't. I'm saying they aren't to the level of ILM yet. They do great work, no doubt, but they still have a ways to go. With ILM artists there, WETA will be doing even greater work in the future.

Also, I'm not going to argue that there are those who perfer "the look" of Gollum compared to Yoda, but, from a technical point, Yoda, Jar Jar, and the Clones were far superior to Gollum. While ILM did pave the way for Gollum, with Jar Jar, WETA just couldn't achieve the same level of realism.

By the way, welcome back Gaz! Haven't seen you in the forums for a while.

 

[Agent0028]

I always thought Jar Jar looked a little cartoonish, maybe because he acted that way, but I never felt like I could walk down the street and see a Gungan. Yoda and Gollum, I can picture them as being real.

I don't really know about special effects and stuff, and I don't know much about ILM or WETA. But my theory was that some stuff in the prequels wasn't that good because ILM is always trying to develop new things and when you make new things and try new techniques and stuff some things don't look good. Whereas if you stick with old tried and true techniques you get things that look good, but little improvement.

Whether any of that pertains to WETA vs. ILM I don't know, but its my two lincolns.

 

[BDboystoys]

Well imo, Ive always thought ILM effects on SW looked incredibley cartoony. Where as Weta's are just phenomenal, realistic and engrossing.
Just my 2 cents tho!

 

[LOTRFan]

I always thought Jar Jar looked a little cartoonish, maybe because he acted that way, but I never felt like I could walk down the street and see a Gungan. Yoda and Gollum, I can picture them as being real.

And I think that is precisely why he was hard to grasp, the walk. His walk was so unique that it looked quite fake, the stride and stutter; given that movement, it is hard to make it look real.

 

[Protozaius]

I always thought that the "life" of a character is in the eyes. From an animator's perpective, one of the problems with Jar Jar is a design flaw: his eyes are too small to get any really expression out of them. Plus, being so high, it is hard to have the others actors eyes line up with them when they talk to him.

Comparatively, Gollum's are HUGE and easier to manipulate expression.

Sy Snoodles (both the original and the CG version) have the same small expressionless eyes.

 

[Gazmog]

Well, after watching Kong on DVD last night I was once again left dumbfounded...and blown away...by Kong's fight on Skull Island, not to mention his 'Last Stand'. If WETA is light years from ILM, as some have suggested...I can't wait to see WETA at its best. They have my vote: ILM has been disappointing of late.

 

[wookilar8]

For my money ILM is still the best at what they do. The best comparison I can think of is to compare the battle on Geonosis to the large battle in ROTK. I thought the clone troopers battle in Clones is incredible work. In WETA's corner though King Kong is much better than Gollum. Kong is by far the best CGI character brought to life on screen. However the chase sceen with the dinos on Skull island just looks terrible.

 

[Protozaius]

For my money ILM is still the best at what they do. The best comparison I can think of is to compare the battle on Geonosis to the large battle in ROTK.

Yeah, that Geonosis Battle is a stunner. While I ADORE all of the LOTR films, nothing in that trilogy ignites my imagination quite the way that THAT battle does.

But I know we all have different tastes... Lucas just pushed all my geek buttons on that one!

 

[DarkArtist81]

I will have to say that Geonosis was pretty awe-inspiring. And on many occasions, when GL dropped the ball a bit... ILM picked up the slack BIG TIME. That moment was a huge saving grace to that film and one of my favorite bits of the trilogy.

I'm a fan of both companies really, so it's kinda hard for me to pick one that is "better". They both have traits that I find admirable, and I love all of their work.

Really, in ILM's favor... the "Jedi Purge" scene in ROTS was done exceptionally well, especially considering that several of the worlds in that sequence would only be seen for a few seconds in the film. And the troopers never felt like they were not really there fighting alongside the Jedi. ILM's non-Star Wars work can sometimes be horrible, but I'm sure if WETA did not have Jackson pushing their buttons.... the work would suffer a bit too.

 

[darthviper107]

I wouldn't say that ILM is lightyears ahead of WETA, because I would have to say that WETA is the #2 visual effects studio in the world, and they've only done LOTR and King Kong (just effects, because they did contribute to Narnia in the prop making department but not to visual effects). The one thing that I must say that WETA does better than ILM is full environments of real places, like jungle or a plain or something, those are just magnificent. And I really think that the character of King Kong was MUCH better than Gollum was, they thought of everything when they did that character, it'd be cool to have a 1/6th scale King Kong figure, that'd be like 3' 2" tall, and completely worth it.

 

[Gazmog]

DarthV, I totally agree with you. The phenomenal achievements in SFX, for me, that emerged out of WETA have been: Shelob, Kong, Gollum, MASSIVE and as you say, the environments (bigatures).

Oh, I wonder what effect having Frank Oz go through the motion capture process would have had on Yoda's 'expressive' performance, if any.

 

[darthviper107]

I think Frank Oz doing motion capture would kill him---In fact, that would be really hard even for Andy Serkis to do.

 

[Customikey]

I think Frank Oz doing motion capture would kill him---In fact, that would be really hard even for Andy Serkis to do.

I love that Andy has become the Poster Boy for mo-cap...

I think oth effects houses are amazing. They have both pioneered somem incredible inovations. I also think that you can't judge the capabilities and limitations of either on the work done in just two projects (LOTR and SW, respectively). For both effects houses, the approach to the work changes based on the nature of the project. And they are constantly learning from each other.

I'd be very happy to see either house's name attached to any project.

Having said that, I only want to see WETA attached to The Hobbit. Their passion should be rewarded again and again.

 

[Mini-Rock]

I'd be very happy to see either house's name attached to any project.

I couldn't agree more.