FA+
Shop
1836
Views
Views
14
Favorites
Favorites
Category
All / Fantasy
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 1280 x 1089
File Size 188.5 kB
Report this content
More from lionus
WAR MACHINE work sketch
George Pal’s movie “The War of the Worlds” (1953) was nominated for three Academy Awards (winning an Oscar for its special effects) and was later selected for inclusion in the National Film Registry of the Library of Congress.
Back then, special effects were achieved not by gazillion-byte computers and 3-D, but by hands-on finely-crafted models, colored lights, shadows, camera-handling, skillful directing and good acting. I still think that Ann Robinson’s response as Sylvia Van Buren to the unexpected feel of the Martian’s “hand” on her shoulder was brilliant. That and Gene Barry’s scientist character, Dr. Clayton Forester’s almost child-like delight, “This is amazing!”, as he watches the first of the emerging invaders’ machine’s walking on three magnetic “legs”.
So, last night I caught the film being shown in prime time cable TV and was again delightfully pulled into watching it. And, by way of just capturing what the real “stars” of the movie were, I quick-sketched one of the war machines with color notes for a possible future picture. I’ve left my notes in the sketch (with misspellings) just to let you see what one of my “work/idea sketches” really looks like.
But remember, “Keep watching the skies”.
George Pal’s movie “The War of the Worlds” (1953) was nominated for three Academy Awards (winning an Oscar for its special effects) and was later selected for inclusion in the National Film Registry of the Library of Congress.
Back then, special effects were achieved not by gazillion-byte computers and 3-D, but by hands-on finely-crafted models, colored lights, shadows, camera-handling, skillful directing and good acting. I still think that Ann Robinson’s response as Sylvia Van Buren to the unexpected feel of the Martian’s “hand” on her shoulder was brilliant. That and Gene Barry’s scientist character, Dr. Clayton Forester’s almost child-like delight, “This is amazing!”, as he watches the first of the emerging invaders’ machine’s walking on three magnetic “legs”.
So, last night I caught the film being shown in prime time cable TV and was again delightfully pulled into watching it. And, by way of just capturing what the real “stars” of the movie were, I quick-sketched one of the war machines with color notes for a possible future picture. I’ve left my notes in the sketch (with misspellings) just to let you see what one of my “work/idea sketches” really looks like.
But remember, “Keep watching the skies”.
Category All / Fantasy
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 1280 x 1089px
File Size 188.5 kB
Yes, the Eiffel Tower pic was suppossedly the last picture received from Europe before the continent went "silent".
There were so many little things in the movie, from the forest ranger cheating at cards with his partner, to a kid's brightly colored ball bouncing down the stairs as Los Angeles was being evacuated.
It was directing like that made War of the Worlds still an enjoyable movie.
There were so many little things in the movie, from the forest ranger cheating at cards with his partner, to a kid's brightly colored ball bouncing down the stairs as Los Angeles was being evacuated.
It was directing like that made War of the Worlds still an enjoyable movie.
"In 1953, Earth experienced a ‘War of the Worlds’. Common bacteria stopped the aliens, but it didn't kill them; instead, the aliens lapsed into a state of deep hibernation. Now the aliens have been resurrected, more terrifying than before. In 1953, the aliens started taking over the world. Today, they're taking over our bodies!" - Doctor Harrison Blackwood
The 80's War of the Worlds tv series. A direct continuation of the 53 movie. Harrision is the adopted son of the original characters who is the only one who believes that the aliens are back waging a terrorist war to prepare the earth before the new invasion force arrives.
Very good very gory at times.
Very good very gory at times.
"Plots"? What's that?
As a member of the "modern" movie audience, you are supposed to be satisfied with cinematic servings explosions, car chases, colorful gutter swearing, anti-authority hero figures, heroines (depending on the crowd) blessed with a mammoth “rack”, and the gratuitous display of dysfunctional family members all served up in 3-D.
Besides, what current Hollywood acting “celebrity” would know what to do with a plot if they found themselves inexplicably in the same room with one?
As a member of the "modern" movie audience, you are supposed to be satisfied with cinematic servings explosions, car chases, colorful gutter swearing, anti-authority hero figures, heroines (depending on the crowd) blessed with a mammoth “rack”, and the gratuitous display of dysfunctional family members all served up in 3-D.
Besides, what current Hollywood acting “celebrity” would know what to do with a plot if they found themselves inexplicably in the same room with one?
Oh that model would be so cool to see, GoldFox!
The closest I hawe come to one is a model kit that sells for $35. (But I am still considering buying it.)
Sadly, all the props from the movie were "cleaned out" years after the movie was made when the studio moved to newer storage facilities.
The closest I hawe come to one is a model kit that sells for $35. (But I am still considering buying it.)
Sadly, all the props from the movie were "cleaned out" years after the movie was made when the studio moved to newer storage facilities.
This reminds me of the scene from "Apocalypse Now" with all the real-life helicopters that have "Ride of the Valkyries" blasting from their loudspeakers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gz3Cc7wlfkI
P.S. If I were leading a battle charge, I'd have this song blasting too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gz3Cc7wlfkI
P.S. If I were leading a battle charge, I'd have this song blasting too.
I think I love you even more. So few know the real good like...shit 1962? was 52? damn...i used to remember. War of the worlds I was getting at. that movie scared me so much, old b horror from that era, great. I still love the Deadly Mantis, it has been ages since last seeing it.
*grins* Well thank you, Hellkitty. “War” was made away back in 1953. Yeah, there is some sort of scariness to the movie even now. Maybe that is why it is still enjoyed today. And the design of those Martian War Machines … have never seen anything that looks as “alien” and downright scary as they still do.
Haven't seen it in ages? Do yourself a favor and rent a copy of it and ENJOY.
Haven't seen it in ages? Do yourself a favor and rent a copy of it and ENJOY.
Thinking over Wells’ story (I’ve read the book at least ten or more times) and the 53’ movie, I realize that H.G. and George Pal skillfully maneuvered us into anthropomorphizing the Martian war machines in much the same way as small animals probably do when confronted with a bulldozer or automobile.
In the movie we do see a frail Martian mid-way through the story when Doctor Forster and Sylvia are trapped in the farmhouse, but it is their undefeatable war machines that we helplessly watch destroying our world for the other 97% of the story/movie. To me, that is brilliant story-telling.
BTW, Amazon.com has the 53' original along with the newer versions of the story.
In the movie we do see a frail Martian mid-way through the story when Doctor Forster and Sylvia are trapped in the farmhouse, but it is their undefeatable war machines that we helplessly watch destroying our world for the other 97% of the story/movie. To me, that is brilliant story-telling.
BTW, Amazon.com has the 53' original along with the newer versions of the story.
There was the 3-lensed remote “eye” that the Martians use to look into the farmhouse, but a moment or two later, we briefly get to see a Martian itself.
Check out the two pictures on this site:
http://www.cedmagic.com/featured/wa.....he-worlds.html
Check out the two pictures on this site:
http://www.cedmagic.com/featured/wa.....he-worlds.html
Heh, I have the movie on DVD and yet I still sit down and watch it when it comes on TV "live".
Thank you for the very nice compliment, VARMENT. I really wanted to capture the shape and colors of the war machines as I watched the movie since some time in the furture I want to do an full picture of a scene.
Hey, we were watching the movie at the same time!!!
Thank you for the very nice compliment, VARMENT. I really wanted to capture the shape and colors of the war machines as I watched the movie since some time in the furture I want to do an full picture of a scene.
Hey, we were watching the movie at the same time!!!
I've always wanted to see that movie, and I was going to tape it, last night,
but missed the beginning both times. because I was distracted. I'm really
hoping it's on again, because the snippet I did see, looked very creative
and very well done, given what they had to work with at the time. And I'd
love to see the finished version of your particular take one one of those
war machines.
but missed the beginning both times. because I was distracted. I'm really
hoping it's on again, because the snippet I did see, looked very creative
and very well done, given what they had to work with at the time. And I'd
love to see the finished version of your particular take one one of those
war machines.
Ever since I was a cub and first saw the original movie I have been fascinated by it. The book, placed as it was in the latter part of the non-technology laden 19th century and in England, is still equally enjoyable at the slower pace of reading.
There is a high four-legged water tower on a nearby hill that I can see over the tops of a line of trees. Every time I see it the remembered image of a Martian war machine from Wells' story is reawakened in me. I am not likely to forget it.
Doing this work sketch is my first step in ultimately producing an homage picture of the movie and the original book.
Hmmmm, maybe I should target my posting of the picture for Halloween night to commemorate Orson Well’s famous “War of the Worlds” radio broadcast (1938).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zl_J4J2mQpQ
There is a high four-legged water tower on a nearby hill that I can see over the tops of a line of trees. Every time I see it the remembered image of a Martian war machine from Wells' story is reawakened in me. I am not likely to forget it.
Doing this work sketch is my first step in ultimately producing an homage picture of the movie and the original book.
Hmmmm, maybe I should target my posting of the picture for Halloween night to commemorate Orson Well’s famous “War of the Worlds” radio broadcast (1938).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zl_J4J2mQpQ
That thing was awesome! I've seen some of the recent remake but it was just so much grimdark, and it just didn't grab me.
When you're a small child growing up in rural yecccch, Martians on TV zapping stuff is so utterly cool. It's sort of like the way I loved Gort zapping stuff in The Day the Earth Stood Still. For all I know, part of the problem with CGI extravaganzas might be people who also, as small children, went "that was awesome! Movies should have more aliens zapping stuff!"
When you're a small child growing up in rural yecccch, Martians on TV zapping stuff is so utterly cool. It's sort of like the way I loved Gort zapping stuff in The Day the Earth Stood Still. For all I know, part of the problem with CGI extravaganzas might be people who also, as small children, went "that was awesome! Movies should have more aliens zapping stuff!"
I’m not sure that the modern remakes can ever re-capture what we experienced when we first saw that long snake-like neck of the Martian war machine rising up out of the impact pit. Oh, the special effects are much much better today, but they can never send us, the audience, back to our pre-technology innocent states of mind so that we experience what we see with amazement and fear.
I suspect every small kid is in secret a little monster that gleefully cheers on any cinema “thing” that wreaks havoc on the restrictive world of the Grown Ups.
I suspect every small kid is in secret a little monster that gleefully cheers on any cinema “thing” that wreaks havoc on the restrictive world of the Grown Ups.
Call me daft, but as far as modern movies go in this vein, I thought "Signs" with Mel Gibson and Joaquin Phoenix was quite good. The fact that seeing a "full frontal" of the alien at the end of the film aside, I think the set up with the characters being in an isolated area alone, to only catching fleeting glimpses of the aliens, to centering on what the family was going through and their story rather than the boom boom special effects was awesome. And the fact that there was IMO some actual good acting present there. Don't get me wrong, I'm a sucker for good special effects, but I loves me a good story anyday. XD
I agree. While special effects are the “eye candy” of a movie, drawing large audiences (as in “Avatar” or any of the early 3-D films), what elevates a film to classic status is good actors, believable story & dialogue, especially when the bulk of the movie is relatively fixed to one limited “boring” physical location. Gibson, Phoenix, and surprisingly the little girl in “Signs“ did excellent acting jobs in the film, confined as they were to the farmhouse. Likewise Roy Scheider, Richard Dreyfuss and Robert Shaw put in first-class acting performances playing opposite “Bruce” the shark in “Jaws”.
An audience wants to see the alien or monster right away to alieviate their anxiety of having to vicariously deal with a threatening “unknown”. The skillful movie-maker holds back on satisfying that need till the end of the movie, heightening the effect with the merest of glimpses of that unknown before hand. So we, the audience, collectively associate with the main characters of the movie in their quest to discover what it is in the night that goes “bump” -- and ate the town.
An audience wants to see the alien or monster right away to alieviate their anxiety of having to vicariously deal with a threatening “unknown”. The skillful movie-maker holds back on satisfying that need till the end of the movie, heightening the effect with the merest of glimpses of that unknown before hand. So we, the audience, collectively associate with the main characters of the movie in their quest to discover what it is in the night that goes “bump” -- and ate the town.
Maybe I seem to carry this trait to adulthood; I certainly cheered on enough of Leon and The Matrix, and keep cheering for Magneto during the X-films.
I think being an artist has helped me still think of older material with less polished special effects as awesome; after all, I've accepted that stuff I did years ago, which looks pretty terrible now, was still pretty darn good for what I could make at the time, and I think I can generalize that to stuff other people make as well.
I think being an artist has helped me still think of older material with less polished special effects as awesome; after all, I've accepted that stuff I did years ago, which looks pretty terrible now, was still pretty darn good for what I could make at the time, and I think I can generalize that to stuff other people make as well.
All good artists have to voluntarily slip into that state of “suspension of disbelief“ as they are putting down pencil lines or dabbing globs of color on a canvas in order to produce that fleeting “this is reality” effect for others.
Because of this I think artists possess a heightened capacity for accepting others’ attempts at make-believe such as in movies for example than do non-artists. But beyond just creating a make-believe reality, artists and movie-makers have to have as their true goal the emotional response that the inclusion of a special effect is to produce in the viewer. Producing a really nifty special effect in a picture or motion picture just to display one’s capacity of doing so is not story-telling.
The older film-makers knew that, perhaps because special effect were less polished in their day, that the effects were only supports for the story, not the story existing as a shadowy framework for displaying dazzling special effects as we tend to see today.
Because of this I think artists possess a heightened capacity for accepting others’ attempts at make-believe such as in movies for example than do non-artists. But beyond just creating a make-believe reality, artists and movie-makers have to have as their true goal the emotional response that the inclusion of a special effect is to produce in the viewer. Producing a really nifty special effect in a picture or motion picture just to display one’s capacity of doing so is not story-telling.
The older film-makers knew that, perhaps because special effect were less polished in their day, that the effects were only supports for the story, not the story existing as a shadowy framework for displaying dazzling special effects as we tend to see today.
I think the people making special effects extravaganzas in the 50s through 70s knew that some of their models/puppets/stop motion didn't look great, so they engineered their scripts accordingly. With CGI getting constantly better and better filmmakers aren't as limited and there is a certain joyful abandon at putting in this huge junk really blatantly. At some point I hope it'll even out; I think the decline of physical moviegoing sort of pushes people to go for bigger and bigger effects, because hey, that's why you're at the theater (instead of at home surfing internet art archives or playing games). Sort of like an early 2000s equivalent to films in the 30s, where the filmmakers are trying to make sure you really feel like you can go out and spend money on this movie because it has comedy and musical numbers and exotic animals and romance... that sort of thing.
Thank you, Lionbreed!!! I had never heard of the “Horrible” series. After quickly Googling it I see that I need to do more personal research on the series since it seems to have a very interesting viewpoint on science and history.
All motion pictures succeed if the audience can ‘suspend their disbelief’ while watching it. However if we are shown beforehand how the special effects were made and that the room that the characters are in only has three walls with cameramen and crew standing just outside the bright lights of the set, we have a very difficult time believing what we see as anything more than paid actors, false props, and small models of “large” space ships.
Sometimes remaining ignorant of something protects the make-believes of our enjoyment.
All motion pictures succeed if the audience can ‘suspend their disbelief’ while watching it. However if we are shown beforehand how the special effects were made and that the room that the characters are in only has three walls with cameramen and crew standing just outside the bright lights of the set, we have a very difficult time believing what we see as anything more than paid actors, false props, and small models of “large” space ships.
Sometimes remaining ignorant of something protects the make-believes of our enjoyment.
No problem, heh heh! if you want to look up the Horrible series I'd recommend beginning with the Horrible Histories collection by Terry Deary. I remember having a few books signed by him when I was still in secondary school! With a little bit of bias in mind, I'm very fond of his second title on the Romans, where he tells brief histories of the different Emperors and retells an eyewitness account of a lion who befriends a man in the arena as a children's story. (In fact he says nothing bad about lions in any of the books, and even slips them into the World War titles if memory serves!)
A good book can help get past all of those barriers and problems you mentionned. Not to beat the bush again, but just ask Terry Pratchett. (Now reading Jingo btw XD)
A good book can help get past all of those barriers and problems you mentionned. Not to beat the bush again, but just ask Terry Pratchett. (Now reading Jingo btw XD)
That children’s story is quite old (circa 2nd Century) and perhaps may be rooted in actual fact:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androcles
The Horrible History series sounds perfect for learning as a young student. I wish I had had them.
Heh, I think a tongue-in-cheek world history written by Terry would be hilarious.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androcles
The Horrible History series sounds perfect for learning as a young student. I wish I had had them.
Heh, I think a tongue-in-cheek world history written by Terry would be hilarious.
There have been quite a few film versions of “War of the Worlds”. I do not believe that in the 1953 original we got to see the Martians taking anyone captive. However in the 2005 Spielberg version (with Tom Cruise) humans were taken captive, caged, and then pulled into the Martian war machine’s interior through a sphincter appearing orifice where the Martians fed on them as was indicated in an earlier scene.
The bit about the invaders using humans as food was closer to the HG Wells novel (and the 1938 radio broadcast) in that the Martians had a use for humans which other film makers replaced with simple extermination.
The bit about the invaders using humans as food was closer to the HG Wells novel (and the 1938 radio broadcast) in that the Martians had a use for humans which other film makers replaced with simple extermination.
Comments