A Christmas Carol: The Performance Capture Experience
When asked about performing with the markers, Jim Carrey, who plays Scrooge and the three Christmas ghosts, said, "There are certain aspects of the technology that are so exciting and amazing creatively that you can't wait to see what it turns into. Certain aspects of the technology make things easier, to get a lot of scenes done, to do a lot of material at once. There are a lot of aspects that allow [Bob] to create the world that he wants."
"For an actor, there are extra challenges. You have to create the ambiance and the belief in your surroundings in your head," Carrey added. "You can use everything you got. The fingers turn into these long spindly looking things. It's like puppeteering in a way."
Colin Firth, who plays Scrooge's nephew Fred, was only on-set for two days. For his experience, he said when your performing the challenge is that it's "a whole run, a whole scene with no reason to stop. You're never off camera. If you stumble it's in the movie. In some ways you had to rise to the occasion of having all that freedom. There is no proscenium. There's no camera to play to. But having said all that, it's fantastic. It's even more authentic than doing theater because there is no imaginary fourth wall. Or even if you're doing theater in the round, you have to worry about the people in the gallery. Or you have to worry about the marking or blocking. You can do exactly what you want at any time."
Robin Wright Penn, who plays two roles in the film, is a vet of performance capture, having worked on Beowulf. As for the advancement of the technology, she marked, "Even more so with this one, our eyes, every movement and the minutia of the acting that we all did, you see on the screen. And yet, we could change the size of the eyes with the animation. I said at one point, what if I could look like one of those Whoville girls with those big ole blue eyes. And [Robert] said, 'We can do that.' Your every movement is captured and it's fascinating to watch. It really comes through. It's so moving."
As for the stereoscopic 3-D elements, she commented, "It's like watching a 2D performance, but you feel like you can reach out and grab Jim's hand and feel the snow falling at the same time. You're actually in the environment. That's what's so incredible about it."
Bob Hoskins, who plays Scrooge's former employer Fezziwig, worked with Zemeckis on the revolutionary Who Framed Roger Rabbit? Commenting on the difference between that film and this one, he said, "Before everything had to be dressed and we shot the film and then they blew up the frames and painted on the characters. With this they shot all the performances and then they paint the background, put on the costumes, and do everything. So it was the complete reverse. And what was extraordinary was the fact that once you're covered in all this stuff you got nothing else to do but to concentrate on your performance. They've taken all responsibility from you. It's extraordinary."
Carrey added, "There were times when as film actors, you're use to having the proscenium in your head somewhere and there are boundaries, but in this there are no boundaries anymore. It's odd not to have any boundaries. Once in awhile, I'd say to Bob, 'Can you just stick a camera there? Just so I can feel someone, because I'm use to having someone.'"
On that Zemeckis said, "I learned this early on. I put a marker on the camera and then it becomes a character, and immediately I'm creating shots in the virtual world, but what it also does for the performances [is that] the camera [becomes] a dance partner. The camera is another performer, so the camera creates rhythm, so the actor feels the camera moving from here to here so he knows when to deliver the line. So that is a very helpful tool because we've all been trained in having that camera as a partner."
Printer-friendly version
You say:
"The purpose of animation is to create a representation of life. Animation is supposed to make the characters move and react naturally. The animator uses expressive poses, exaggerated expressions and dynamic actions to give personality to the characters. Mocap does the complete opposite of what it's supposed to do."
Well, if that's true, which I think it is, by the way, then there'll be a place for keyframe animators.
Gollumn in LOTR was captured for a large part by mocap, but it was the artists that made it lifelike by manipulating the mocap data by keyframing. I hope you agree that Golumn and even more so King Kong where very lifelike?
And stuff like the Incredibles (which is supposed to be cartoony, whereas Beowulf, Polar Express etc is decidedly not) is all keyframed and it shows, so what's your fear?
If people want to make movies using mocap it's their right. If it turns out lifeless than that's their problem.
And what is wrong with puppets on a string? Tell that to Geppetto :)
I agree that I would like to see Zemeckis do another 'normal' movie, but if he wants to make mocap movies (which IS an exiting technique, although maybe not fully fledged out) it is his right. He raises the money for it, he makes money of it and there's nothing you can do about that. That's just the way the world works. Deal with it.
Dear Jasper,
I see your point, but I do not agree at all. The point I was making is that motion capture has it's place in other aspects of film making (stunts), video games, etc. Yes, using motion capture is a tool and it may be easier, cheaper and faster, but you get a poor quality "animation". The purpose of animation is to create a representation of life. Animation is supposed to make the characters move and react naturally. The animator uses expressive poses, exaggerated expressions and dynamic actions to give personality to the characters. Mocap does the complete opposite of what it's supposed to do. Rather than making the character move realistically, the characters look robotic, lifeless, like puppets on strings. The proof is in the films, compare Polar Express to The Incredibles. The humans are more believable and accepted in The Incredibles. We as an audience connect more with The Incredibles than with Polar Express. The Uncanny Valley is in effect. It's doesn't make sense to me that movie makers would rather use realistic CG characters and use motion capture to copy human movement instead of using humans!
You said that you can't blame technology for problems... well tell that to millions of people who have lost their jobs to a easier, cheaper, faster machine that has replaced them.
Just because mocap is a tool, it doesn't mean it's the right tool for the job.
I understand what you're saying. While I don't think motion capturing will replace keyframe animation and it will have it's own funtion next to mo cap, I think you cannot blame a new technology for your problems.
That's like saying bread machines are putting bakers out of business. When bakers make better bread then machines, they will have their place.
If mo cap delivers the same results as your work for a fraction of the price and effort, then yes, it will affect you. But if you are good, you have tons of experience and insight to movement and emotion that mo cap machines will NEVER have.
Listen to Phill Tippet's reaction to the arrival of computer animation when Jurassic Park came about in this clip:
Start at around 8.00 min:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6WpgosOXNs
and then part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdNy5MeMWFA
Interesting, no?
I agree with Juan. Motion capture has taken the place of animators' work. And I've been studying animation for 8 years. I've gone to school for it, I've paid thousands of dollars to earn a degree in it and I'm still trying to pay it all back. All of sudden this technology begins to take out the "hard working" individual (almost like a worker on an essembly line who has put in 20 years only to be replaced by a computer) who create performance for a film, game, commercial, whatever. You just don't understand the impact this has to artists in this field. YOU REALLY DON'T!!
Dear Juan,
You are of the opinion that the way you should make an animated movie, is that you should make it in a specific way and using specific tools. This of course, is nonsense.
Any tool, be it mo cap, or keyframing, can be used to make wonderful films. It is not the tool that makes a performance of a character great, it's the use of that tool.
So if you don't like the result of Zemeckis's films and find them lifeless, you should attribute that to his USE of the tools.
You are being dogmatic. It's like saying that color photography doesn't have a place, and everything should be in black and white.
Mr Zemeckis,
Stop! Please stop your mad obsession with motion capture. You are misguided with placement of motion capture. While I agree with the usefulness of motion capture in other mediums, it does not belong or should be categorized with animation. Animation is the illusion of life, not a copy. Animation is created by highly skilled and talented animators, who create a unique and personality driven character. Animation is key framed, not an actor in a suit with dots all over it. Motion capture is what it is, capture motion - it is not performance. I am an animator, I feel that you are spitting on my art form by using motion capture. How would you like if someone invented a computer program that automatically would direct an entire film?
I have seen all the movies you have been involved with the use motion capture. I leave with the same feeling, the feeling of disgust and that my soul has been ripped from my body. I look at the screen and I see a lifeless and soulless moving corpse trying to tell me a story. Motion capture has it's place in video games, simulations, and in movies that have stunts too dangerous for a normal stunt person. Please stop, stop, STOP making mocap movies. You made wonderful movies in the past. Back to Future and Forrest Gump to name a few. Make more of those, the world will love you for it.
Before I finish, do not make a Roger Rabbit sequel! Thank you
This movie has been out for ages and there is always someone doing their own version of this timeless classic. Each one has done it justice as well. They don't tear it up too much. casino online
Post new comment