Harryhausen Monsters

[Raven_Crowking]

http://ravencrowking.blogspot.ca/2013/0 ... crawl.html

In memoriam of the great Ray Harryhausen, why not throw some of these into your game this weekend?

[Skars]

Utter and complete win, thanks RC! I think these would be a great article for crawl! a little tribute to the man that embodied the way I visualized mythology throughout my childhood.

[reverenddak]

YEAH! RAD, TOTALLY RAD in the Southern California, Totally Awesome way...

[ctaylor]

Pure dead brilliant. Thanks for sharing.

I'm going to toss a couple skeletons in the next adventure and play the fight from Jason and the Argonauts...

[finarvyn]

Very well done!

I have a boxed set of Harryhousen movies (Argonots and the three Sinbad flicks) and now I feel inspired to dust it off and watch!

[Skyscraper]

http://ravencrowking.blogspot.ca/2013/0 ... crawl.html

In memoriam of the great Ray Harryhausen, why not throw some of these into your game this weekend?

I like that in the pic with the 6-armed animated statue, the evil mage looks like he's next to the two heroes, sorta contemplating his work with them.

- So, waddaya think?
- Not bad, man, not bad at all.

It's like, kill the mage and see if the statue will fall to the floor: simpler than battling this thing.

Hehe.

Good movies, good stuff. I used to love those movies as a kid.

[Raven_Crowking]

That "evil mage" is Tom Baker, the 4th Doctor in Doctor Who!

[Karaptis]

You continue to rule RC!

[Skyscraper]

That "evil mage" is Tom Baker, the 4th Doctor in Doctor Who!

Didn't know that, interestint anecdote.

[Karaptis]

Patrick Troughton was in one of the Sinbads or maybe Jason and the Argonauts.

[Raven_Crowking]

Yes he was. Eye of the Tiger, baby!

[Karaptis]

I have also seen him in a number of Hammer flicks as well.

[GnomeBoy]

Patrick Troughton was in one of the Sinbads or maybe Jason and the Argonauts.

He was the blind dude trapped by the harpies, wasn't he?

[Raven_Crowking]

Patrick Troughton played Melanthius.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinbad_and ... _the_Tiger

[GnomeBoy]

Ooo, but he also played the blind dude harassed by harpies...

http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0074884/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rJjjIuUAjM

[Raven_Crowking]

Very cool! I didn't realize that.

[Karaptis]

The Hammer flicks I know of were Viking Queen and Scars of Dracula. I think my favorite Dr Who episode was Invasion.

[Karaptis]

sorry for turning this into a Patrick Troughton is awesome thread!

[Raven_Crowking]

No worries. Patrick Troughton is awesome. I wish more of his Doctor Who stories had survived intact.

[Skyscraper]

So inspired by this thread, yesterday I decide to show one of the Sinbad movies to my eldest 7-year old son. He says, I've already seen Sinbad. I'm like, no way, that's not possible, you can't have seen the "real" Sinbad! He insists, so I jump on YouTube where I find that at least a couple are available and as I browse over a couple of scenes to show him. After having admitted that he had not seen these movies, he says, dad, this is lame, look how the monsters move, this is just too weird. I'm like, yeah, but forget about that, it's still pretty good no? Hmm, he says as he considers the movie a bit more, this is an old movie right? (He was being polite.) Yeah, I concede. He asks, as he watches the giant horned prehistoric man, why does he talk so weird? He does talk weird, I must admit. I jump to the battle with the tiger - vague interest on his part. I jump to another movie and we see the battle with the giant warlus. Haha, I'm slapping my hand on my tigh, this is too funny, I think, the special effects really sucked. Plus the creature looks so slow my 2 year old could outrun it. My son finds the movie mildly amusing. So, he concludes, stop kidding now, what will we really watch?

Thus endeth my Sinbad incursion with my offspring after 5 minutes of scene skimming. Reminds me when I had to watch black and white movies as a kid.

[Raven_Crowking]

That reminds me of when my son was younger, and they had him watch Tora! Tora! Tora! for school. He is honestly only mildly interested, even as Pearl Harbor is being bombed, until I causally mention that this had been filmed in 1970, and there were no computer effects then. It changes kids opinions, sometimes, when they know how something is done.

In the case of the Sinbad movies, the live action and the creature affects were not put together with a computer. The live action was shot, and then projected frame-by-frame behind the stop-motion, with the artist careful adjusting each frame to make the creature(s) therein seem to react to the live action. In some cases, there is a cunning use of puppetry as well, so that the live actors have real "creature parts" to interact with.

Also, take a look at the credits some time. See just how many people are creating the modern effects you are seeing on a modern "monster flick" like Jurassic Park. Then go back and look at the credits on One Million BC. When your son realizes that these creature effects are the result of mostly one man's efforts, he may be more impressed.

(Also, frankly, these scenes are a lot better in context of the film than just shown in bits and pieces on YouTube.)

[Karaptis]

My son is liking the old Dr Whos. He has been on Herc and Xena kick lately because I got him into Army of Darkness which wasn't too scary for an 8 year old.

[Skyscraper]

That reminds me of when my son was younger, and they had him watch Tora! Tora! Tora! for school. He is honestly only mildly interested, even as Pearl Harbor is being bombed, until I causally mention that this had been filmed in 1970, and there were no computer effects then. It changes kids opinions, sometimes, when they know how something is done.

In the case of the Sinbad movies, the live action and the creature affects were not put together with a computer. The live action was shot, and then projected frame-by-frame behind the stop-motion, with the artist careful adjusting each frame to make the creature(s) therein seem to react to the live action. In some cases, there is a cunning use of puppetry as well, so that the live actors have real "creature parts" to interact with.

Also, take a look at the credits some time. See just how many people are creating the modern effects you are seeing on a modern "monster flick" like Jurassic Park. Then go back and look at the credits on One Million BC. When your son realizes that these creature effects are the result of mostly one man's efforts, he may be more impressed.

(Also, frankly, these scenes are a lot better in context of the film than just shown in bits and pieces on YouTube.)

Talking only to special effects, I used to like these movies as a kid a lot, and I suspect that having nothing else plays an important role in that. Crappy effects remain crappy effects, with all due respect to those that singlehandedly put countless hours of their time to accomplish them with limited means. I used to film starwars remakes with my friend's 8 mm camera and our action figures as a kid, it took us days to get, like, 1 minute of film at most. A good tap on the shoulder for the effort; is it worth showing in a theatre for a public audience? I don't think so. Likewise, although the old movies were nice efforts for their time, the effects are poor.

Now some might still be worthwhile to watch considering the story or mood of the movie. That's another question, of course.

[Raven_Crowking]

A matter of opinion, of course, but if your 8 mm efforts rivalled those of Mr. Harryhausen, then maybe they should be shown in theatres. I continue to find these films perfectly enjoyable. Part of that is, of course, that I understand the art behind it to some degree.

I guess, by way of analogy, that while Van Gough is not photo-realistic, that doesn't render his paintings valueless. I have seen many well-executed realistic paintings, on the other hand, which are devoid of emotional impact and "voice". Likewise, the impact and "voice" of Mr. Harryhausen's work remains as vital, to me, as it ever was, whereas some technically great computer work I have seen simply lacks the same punch.

A matter of perspective, I suppose.

[GnomeBoy]

...although the old movies were nice efforts for their time, the effects are poor...

I would argue that it's the imaginations that are poor (or not) of the viewers, if they let cutting edge craft of any Age get in the way of a good experience. If we're talking Harryhausen, those skeletons rising from the ground will always work for me, because I want to believe (cue X-Files theme). I could look at them and say, "oh look, the color timing and the shadows are off, they couldn't possibly exist in the same space as the flesh and blood people." Or I can say, "geez! they've got to fight skeletons! With swords! And they're outnumbered!" and roll along with the movie's intent.

On a stage, you can't have life-size buildings blowing up (can't much have life-size buildings at all), but you can still tell a war story or a monster story or whatever story... It takes work from the audience to make any story succeed. Give me any movie you are insanely impressed by, and I'm sure there are holes to be punched in it, waiting to be pointed out. Or they already have been pointed out by someone. But you still love that movie and can overlook the flaws and not have them tarnish your love of it. I could get more and more philosophical, but I'm sure you can see where I'm coming from here...

And yes, there are movies out there with poor effects, but poor stagecraft is just a fact in any day and age. I can't include any Harryhausen stuff that I know in that category.


Also, even without seeing them, I'm pretty sure your Star Wars toy remakes are better than the remastered versions.