Along with these changes will it include making Thing look right?

[Wilhelm-Scream]

 

[The Thing 2005]

The ONLY way you would get that look would either make The Thing completly cg, or do a heck of a lot of work in post production. So lets face it. Chilkis will in the suit, therefore I can guarantee, he won't look like that. They may indeed do some redesigning, but forget that look. Allthough I love that look of The Thing ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[The Thing 2005]

If they can make The Thing look like this with low budget make-up

Than they should have enough do the same with a bigger budget.

Looks like something dug up from the bottom of the ocean.

 

[Agent 194]

Well, despite what the general consensus is-I think they can and should make him look more like the Thing. Why not improve the recipe of what I thought was not that well done as it could have been? I still say if they can make that Hellboy look good then do it for the Thing. I think his rock hand looked better than the Thing's prosthetic suit.

And still I say,...I think more of the way to bring the FF we all grew up reading. . .in all it's incarnations....even the Ultimate which I disagree with....but any version could benefit from having a Sky Captain World of Tomorrow approach. I was aware that every frame in that movie was CGI but man what a cool movie that totally sucked me in.

Blip of a nose, heavy brow, more articulated hands,flatter looking feet (look at what they got away with Nightcrawler--you hardly saw his feet). . .I think his height is fine....the Thing I love was never 9 feet tall.

 

[Agent 194]

Wow, thanks for posting the shot of the Corman Thing, I had forgotten how horrible that looked, and proves that a mechanical mask is NOT the way to go.

Hellboy showed us that a true comic to film make-up can be done, the Grinch photo is a good example of the smaller nose working, and there have been lots of make-up with heavy brows that worked fine. It can be done, it's just a matter of the studio and M.C. letting the make-up guys do it.

And PLEASE stop falling back on the lame "lack of expression" excuse. Hollywood has been gluing rubber on actors faces for over 60 years with NO loss of expression [look at everything from the Wizard of Oz to the examples above].

You go boy-ee...I'm with you all the way.

 

[terry78]

The Thing is not a scarecrow or a lion.

 

[Agent 194]

God, do you people just enjoy living in denial so much?

Things can be done.

Those ^ are not normal human facial proportions and his face was plenty expressive.

and I'm with you too brother.

 

[Agent 194]

The Thing is not a scarecrow or a lion.

Agreed. Still can be done though. Don't care what anyone says.

 

[Kelly]

Sure I'd love to see the Fantasti-Car and all the Kirby-esque machinery we were promised but wasn't delivered. I'd love to see it really put in that world that Kirby and Lee created. And for the record I'm really not convinced it can be done unless they go the Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow route. (Has anyone watched that and not imagined what Marvel could co differently/better besides me?)

But at any rate, as I've exhaustively complained and explained many times in the past--why not this time around, make the Thing look the way he's suposed to look like? With the heavy brow, make his nose dissapear to just a little blip, and round out the corners of his eyes. All of these things are possible and go a long way to making it not look like another Howard the Duck movie.

Please do this one right Fox execs. You vetoed these good changes to the last one. Listen to somebody who knows now.

Your post sounds like the entire movie hinges on Things nose and brow....

i have a list of things they need to work on and change, and noses and brows are at the bottom at the moment...

http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showthread.php?t=218962&page=5

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

There seem to be three primary reasons not to have the traditional brow/nose:

1. MC couldn't breath in such a mask.

2. MC's acting won't come through.

3. It looks too "cartoony".


1. MC couldn't breath in such a mask. The Grinch, Planet of the apes, Chewbacca

and others have shown it can be done. You can just route breathing holes through the mouth.


2. MC's acting won't come through. I'm not convinced this is a bad thing. I thought his face was, if anything, too expressive in the first film. The hard, rocky plates shouldn't bend so easily, and his expressions should be limited. That's part of the character. He's trapped behind a rocky mask. Again using the example of Chewbacca, Peter Mayhew couldn't do much more than open and close his mouth and move his eyes. Yet, without any dialogue, the character expressed a great deal of emotion.


3. It looks too "cartoony". This is the "official" reason they they didn't use a larger brow. I can see the point to some extent. A difficult task of the first film was to convince a skeptical audience that these characters could actually be real. The lack of a brow also makes him look more human and more tragic. Those factors work for the first film, but can be re-worked for the second film.

In the second film, we already know and believe in the characters. Ben should also be getting used to himself and be more fun and less tragic than he was in the first film.



Considering these points, I don't see any reason why they can't give us a look more conistant with all but a few issues. It's purely a matter of choice.

 

[Dope Nose]

From Sideshow Collectibles -

 

[Casius--J]

I didnt really have a prob with his look in the first film i thought it was a good way of translating a cartoony character into live action. Although i dont think a bigger brow would do too much harm, and like everyones said it can be explained through him still evolving.

 

[Kelly]

There seem to be three primary reasons not to have the traditional brow/nose:

1. MC couldn't breath in such a mask.

2. MC's acting won't come through.

3. It looks too "cartoony".


1. MC couldn't breath in such a mask. The Grinch, Planet of the apes, Chewbacca

and others have shown it can be done. You can just route breathing holes through the mouth.


2. MC's acting won't come through. I'm not convinced this is a bad thing. I thought his face was, if anything, too expressive in the first film. The hard, rocky plates shouldn't bend so easily, and his expressions should be limited. That's part of the character. He's trapped behind a rocky mask. Again using the example of Chewbacca, Peter Mayhew couldn't do much more than open and close his mouth and move his eyes. Yet, without any dialogue, the character expressed a great deal of emotion.


3. It looks too "cartoony". This is the "official" reason they they didn't use a larger brow. I can see the point to some extent. A difficult task of the first film was to convince a skeptical audience that these characters could actually be real. The lack of a brow also makes him look more human and more tragic. Those factors work for the first film, but can be re-worked for the second film.

In the second film, we already know and believe in the characters. Ben should also be getting used to himself and be more fun and less tragic than he was in the first film.



Considering these points, I don't see any reason why they can't give us a look more conistant with all but a few issues. It's purely a matter of choice.

According to Spectral they are making changes to the suit as we speak, and some of those changes may be what ya'll are asking for....

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

According to Spectral they are making changes to the suit as we speak, and some of those changes may be what ya'll are asking for....

Where did you see that? Any more info.?

 

[The Thing 2005]

According to Spectral they are making changes to the suit as we speak, and some of those changes may be what ya'll are asking for....

They may make changes to the suit and hands but not the head. If they did, as I said before you would lose much of the expression, which is what made Chilkis's performance so awsome. And he'll do better this time, because he's had practice . They can't make the head with the big brow, and button nose.

 

[Kelly]

They may make changes to the suit and hands but not the head. If they did, as I said before you would lose much of the expression, which is what made Chilkis's performance so awsome. And he'll do better this time, because he's had practice . They can't make the head with the big brow, and button nose.

We don't know that Thingy...we aren't the experts here....I'll wait and say what changes are made AFTER THE EXPERTS have made the changes.

 

[The Thing 2005]

We don't know that Thingy...we aren't the experts here....I'll wait and say what changes are made AFTER THE EXPERTS have made the changes.

One major change I would make would be his hands, they were too big and awkard. He couldn't make a fist with them, they were so big. They were too big for the rest of his body. The scene at the end when he comes busting thru the wall and clobbers Doom, he had his hand in a fist. Don't know how they did that. Mabey post production. I still feel more could have been done in post production with the suit. When he was pulling the fire truck, his right arm looked so skinny. So yes, the suit needs to be worked on. Mabey for the DC. Story said they we're finishing up for the DVD.

 

[Kelly]

One major change I would make would be his hands, they were too big and awkard. He couldn't make a fist with them, they were so big. They were too big for the rest of his body. The scene at the end when he comes busting thru the wall and clobbers Doom, he had his hand in a fist. Don't know how they did that. Mabey post production. I still feel more could have been done in post production with the suit. When he was pulling the fire truck, his arms looked so skinny. So yes, the suit needs to be worked on. Mabey for the DC. Story said they we're finishing up for the DVD.

Hands....I agree...

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

I thought the hands should have been bigger.

But you're right, they didn't work. I'd make the hands a little bigger and try to come up with better actuators to move them. With some time, effort and MONEY, they can also clean up spots where the hands don't look right with CGI.

 

[The Thing 2005]

I thought the hands should have been bigger.

But you're right, they didn't work. I'd make the hands a little bigger and try to come up with better actuators to move them. With some time, effort and MONEY, they can also clean up spots where the hands don't look right with CGI.

That's what I said, more could have and should have been done in post production. Bigger ? They were too big as it was. lol. On a side note. Saw Ice Age 2 yesterday. Been a long time since i've laughed that hard. It was great.

 

[Kelly]

That's what I said, more could have and should have been done in post production. Bigger ? They were too big as is lol.

They didn't give themselves enough time.....when you are filming a portion of the bridge scene in April theres a problem...thats why I'm not happy with the time schedule this time either....but when you are having to work with people and their TV schedule I guess you have to make due with what ya got...

 

[The Thing 2005]

They didn't give themselves enough time.....when you are filming a portion of the bridge scene in April theres a problem...thats why I'm not happy with the time schedule this time either....but when you are having to work with people and their TV schedule I guess you have to make due with what ya got...

Don't think it will be as much of an issue this time. The software is complete, the've worked with it thru 1 movie, and that will make a difference. I'm sure the've been tinkering and refining it all this time.

 

[Kelly]

Don't think it will be as much of an issue this time. The software is complete, the've worked with it thru 1 movie, and that will make a difference. I'm sure the've been tinkering and refining it all this time.

I think they've been spending all their time on X-men 3....Ralph Winters is the one in charge of all of that....and he's been working on X-men 3, not worrying about the F4 sequel. Also, the same people that worked on some of the cgi are not the same people this time around.

 

[The Thing 2005]

I think they've been spending all their time on X-men 3....Ralph Winters is the one in charge of all of that....and he's been working on X-men 3, not worrying about the F4 sequel. Also, the same people that worked on some of the cgi are not the same people this time around.

Guess we'll just have to wait till it all falls out, and keep out fingers crossed that it all goes well.

 

[Kelly]

Guess we'll just have to wait till it all falls out, and keep out fingers crossed that it all goes well.

Thats my usual stand on things...