.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
"It was mainly all Adobe. So it was edited on Premier, the visual effects were all composited on After Effects, and most of it was painted using Photoshop. But for ... the creature stuff, I mainly used 3ds Max. The platform used to create them, as well, is one accessible to ordinary people. They were all just done on a regular - well, a fast - PC. My background is computer graphics. I got frustrated with filmmaking at film school. There's just a huge sense of compromise when you try to make a film properly. Computers promised for a long time that you could go off and make a movie on your own, so I just sort of learned how to use a computer and how to do it in the hope that in six months I could go and make a movie. It actually took me about a decade to work it out."
-Gareth Edwards on Monsters, SciFiNow #47, p.30-
Now about that compromise, what can we expect from Edwards with Godzilla (2014)? Something tells me it's on a completely other level and scale. Maybe he used two computers to recreate the carnage and the apocalypse. We know he can do it. The images selected give you a sense of Edwards' vision as there are both images from Monsters (2010) and Godzilla.
For more on Monsters, in anticipation of the greatest monster of them all through the eyes of Edwards, click here.
4 comments:
Monsters was fine for me, but that's about it. I know it would probably fit in the low budget cinema category and at least showed what can be done on a lean budget, but the plot wasn't that original, so for that reason, didn't rise above a three star film for me.
I have no idea about Godzilla. Again, not that original--at least Pacific Rim did have a better edge on the giant creature story. So it remains to be seen. Maybe if he pulls something new out of the hat it might be worthwhile. Wait and see.
El Vox- I think your summation is completely fair regarding Monsters.
It is exactly that. Three stars. It's a terrific looking film on a shoestring but suffers from the lack of originality or thoroughly compelling story. Totally fair assessment there.
And, yet again, I agree with you.
Pacific Rim was inventive as a visual aesthetic and definitely thrilled within the genre of the monster movie. Though I loved it. It probably is more likely a 4 out of five star film.
I'm not sure how original we can get with a Godzilla film at this point, but I'm hoping for four or five stars. I'd like a visually compelling film. Credible within the world of a Godzilla picture. A strong story may be where it falls down. Characters looks interesting based on the trailer and less silly than the Emmerich picture. So, I'm still optimistic.
I also don't care about the toy releases. I also doubt they are accurate representations of the creature on the screen.
I expect this to be pretty impressive overall.
Yeah, I think they are going to have to add a surprise somewhere in the storytelling, and not just re-hash another origin Godzilla film. Maybe add in an alien invasion or throw in a Mothra (or some other menace) about midway thru, and that might help to elevate it.
I know what you mean. The origin films tend to be a touch on the tedious side. We shall see how this goes.
I think there is an interest to bring the monsters into a second film. Time will tell how this one does. But, something tells me it will be more of a contemporary origin story.
Like I said, I'm not expecting too many surprises but I hope it delivers.
Post a Comment