• Re: FORBIDDEN PLANET (1956) (film retrospective by Mark R. Leeper)

    From Jack Bohn@jack.bohn64@gmail.com to rec.arts.sf.movies on Sun Oct 31 16:36:59 2021
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.movies

    Among the things Mark Leeper wrote:
    when seen in its widescreen format, much of it still looks very
    good sixty-five years later. The beautiful planet-scapes and
    space-scapes would not be surpassed until STAR WARS. For the pre-
    digital age, the effects are very impressive. And the scenes are
    all the more impressive in widescreen format.
    2001 says, "Am I a joke to you?"
    Just a side-mention of the TV cropped version. Back when I was looking for the special effects tricks, this showed the tiger on a rise of ground, then Adams having to shoot it as it leapt for Altaira, but the tiger only entered the frame when it had already been replaced by animated dissipating clouds, making it look like they had cheated more than they actually did.
    MGM was not able to do themselves all the effects for FORBIDDEN
    PLANET and got some technical aid from Disney Studios. The result
    is that several of the scenes have the unmistakable feel of Disney animation. When we see sparks in Robby's dome, or long arcs of
    electricity, they look like Disney animation. When walking to the
    reactor, we see a scene in the power shaft that looks very much
    like Disney animation. I assume they also did the rays coming out
    of the blasters, but not very well. The line of the blast remains
    steady even though the gun is shaking around.
    Not the first time MGM favored Disney over their own animators!
    "Anchors Aweigh" (1945) featured a fantasy segment of Gene Kelly dancing with a cartoon. He originally wanted Mickey Mouse. It was when Disney turned down the request that they went with Jerry Mouse. This was while Tom & Jerry were in the midst of a four-year run of Academy Award wins, in a nine-year run of nominations! (I think I read that at the time nominations were not competitive, a few titles were submitted by each studio, in most cases by the executive in charge of keeping the animators from running amuck around the real studio.)
    I tell myself it was justified by getting an "effects animator": Disney could specialize, having someone special to do all the water and wave effects for The Sorcerer's Apprentice in "Fantasia," while the others basically had everyone as basically character animation, and made do with their water seeming to have intelligence and purpose.
    --
    -Jack
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Jack Bohn@jack.bohn64@gmail.com to rec.arts.sf.movies on Sun Oct 31 16:53:29 2021
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.movies

    Paul S Person wrote:
    Robbie returned in (and was used to attract customers to) /The
    Invisible Boy/, which, when I saw it, turned out to have rather too
    much boy, who was visible rather too much of the time.
    A model kit was made of Robbie. They produced a second version to replicate the movie poster, with Robbie's legs dramatically spread in a way the actor would have probably found hazardous, and a few alterations as the physical model could not hold a three-dimensional Altera in the way the 2-D artist had painted. I've wondered about building a representation of the "Invisible Boy" poster, with its even more dramatic stance.
    --
    -Jack
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From T987654321@qwrtz123@gmail.com to rec.arts.sf.movies on Fri Nov 5 10:17:29 2021
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.movies

    In my top 50 all time favorites.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2