Ken Ralston

David Schaub

In the beginning of the month, Disney released their latest spin on Lewis Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland on Blu-Ray and DVD. Pop Culture Shock is excited to bring to you an extensive Q/A session with Alice in Wonderland’s Animation Director David Schaub and Senior Visual Effects Supervisor Ken Ralston. Schaub has been in the industry for more than 15 years and has worked on I am Legend, The Polar Express, Cast Away, Stuart Little and The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. Ralston is an industry pioneer and has five Academy Awards for visual effects technology while working at Sony Pictures Imagesworks and Industrial Light and Magic. Some of his credits include Contact, the Back to the Future trilogy, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Return of the Jedi and Star Wars. Together they answer questions about Alice in Wonderland, 3D technology, and the animation industry.

THE GREENPRINT FOR EFFECTING ALICE

The first question on everyone’s mind is, what’s it’s like to work with Tim Burton?

David Schaub: Tim was absolutely great. He is such a visionary and an absolute pleasure to work with. He has an incredible visual sense, and any time that we got stuck in any way he would always have great ideas that would steer us in new and interesting directions. That vision took us places I never imagined we would go. He has great respect for all of his actors and artists, and truly manages to bring out the best of everyone involved. Because of Tim’s involvement, I would have to say that it was one of the most rewarding shows I have ever been a part of.

Ken Ralston: Working with Tim Burton was wonderful, one of the best experiences of my career. We both have a passion for the art of moviemaking and shared an artist vision for ALICE.

How much leeway were you given to add your and your staff’s own personal style of animation when there was also the look and visual style of Tim Burton that was being presented?

DS: Tim was great at giving us lots of creative license to try lots of different things. He would always steer the work toward his particular sensibilities, and rather than completely scrap a performance that was working well in it’s own way – he would always find a way to make the most of the elements that worked and steer the ship forward without completely turning the ship around. I think it was a very rewarding experience for the animators.

What was the storyboard process like? Were the boards very detailed and specific? Or were they more loose and gestural, focusing on mood and general blocking?

DS: Tim is a very visceral filmmaker… and does not like working with storyboards. It is a very interactive process when it comes to animation, and a lot of our performance cues were taken from how he directed the actors on set. When it came to the animation process, it was the typical round of blocking, primary and secondary animation approvals.

For Tweedeldee and Tweedledum you combined footage from faces of a real actor with CG-figures. Who came up with the idea for that and how difficult was it to animate, control and combine the facial expressions?

DS: That was Tim’s idea, and it is something that Ken Ralston always wanted to do; that is, combining live action elements of a face in the render.

One of the more intriguing facets of the animation in Alice in Wonderland were the hybrid characters, like the Tweedles. Many questions were asked about the involvement of motion capture, the challenges of this hybrid process.

KR: To be clear, there are no motion capture characters in the film. They are all animated. As protection, we did capture motion, which was useful as a guide for the animators. For the hybrid characters, such as the Tweedles, we wanted to maintain the brilliant facial performance of our actor, which could never be duplicated by a CG interpretation.

DS: Motion capture became a point-of-reference for us in the end. If you watch the performances of the actors on set – often on stilts (and moving that way), you will see that the essence of movement in the final scene is very different. That is because the performances were animated. We went into this shoot not knowing all the details of how it would shake down, so we covered ourselves by acquiring motion capture, as well as optical data (that’s what those big white/black targets are on their suits). The actors are directed on set to hit their marks, moving from A-to-B and delivering a performance that we ultimately used as reference for animation. If you look at the way the Tweedles move, it is indeed the essence of Matt Lucas’ performance – but it is also stylized in a way that is very different than the way they moved on set. This was a deliberate style choice that evolved once we got into animation. The faces were also fully animated with animation controls, but for an extra level of realism, the eyes and often the mouth were tracked back into the final render. We had to nail those facial performances precisely.

With regards to body replacement, the trick was to stabilize the head (on a card), attach that card to the animated body, and then we were free to move the character anywhere we needed to within the scene. It proved too limiting to leave the head locked in it’s photographed location in the plate.

David, how many man-hours are added with the hybrid characters as opposed to having either live action or fully animated characters?

DS: The hybrid characters were particularly tricky – mostly from a technical point of view. We did not have to make a huge creative leap regarding performances because the essence of the performance is precisely how the actors performed their parts. Stayne was probably the trickiest in that regard because of his proportions. The trick was to replicate the essence of those performances – precisely as Crispin Glover performed – but also imparting a level of gracefulness to his moves which were often difficult to accomplish on stilts. Hours? Many hours! It is just another one of the many animation challenges that we were presented with.

Ken, the film was filmed using green screen. Was it particularly difficult to recreate all the environments with CGI, taking into account the style of Tim Burton that is so overloaded with details? What kind of challenges did you find in this regard?

KR: It was very difficult. Every shot in every scene has many details and textures in the environments. The real difficulty is the size of the data and the rendering of the shot – and the time it takes to do all of that – had to be calculated to take that into account in our schedule.

Does working with a green screen change how you approach things?

KR: Green screen or blue screen is basically the same idea for compositing live action into visual effects. But the green screen color, after long periods of time, seems to create a certain aggravation and irritation after staring at it for a long period. It is effective for compositing, but visually and psychologically exhausting to be surrounded by it for extended periods of time. The overall concept of shooting against green screen enabled us to design our sets and environments after the live action shoot. So it gave us great flexibility.

Its easy to think ‘oh it’s all green screen’ but how complicated were the physical green screen sets you built?

KR: They are deceivingly simple looking but the placement of all of the green props and elements were lined up exactly to the detailed CG designed sets developed by production designer Rob Stomberg. We also had to clothe stunt people, technicians, mechanical effects crew and anyone who was visible in frame but not a principal cast member in green. We shot on 2 large sound stages where portions of sets were constructed. And the green screen also had extensive reference markers so we could track the cameras and know where we were in space.

Dave, were there any traditional camera tricks that helped as shortcuts in the animation process?

DS: There weren’t really any camera tricks that we could get away with on a film like this. The typical tricks that you could pull off in 2D would be revealed in 3D. For example, if you discover that a character is floating off the ground in your render, you could always cheat that contact with a contact shadow in the final comp. Since we are dealing with stereo cameras, all of those cheats reveal themselves in 3D; so we can’t get away with too many camera “tricks.”

THE FACES AND PERFORMERS OF UNDERLAND

DS: In addition to the obvious “fanciful” characters, we also animated all of the animals – really all the “non-human” characters in the film. While we have a lot of creative freedom for the “fanciful” characters (like the Cheshire Cat, March Hare, Caterpillar), animating realistic animals always presents a challenge since everyone knows precisely how a horse, or a dog moves… There is less wiggle room for a creative stretch and if it isn’t right, the animation stands out like a sore-thumb.

Which character was the most difficult to animate?

DS: Each character had it’s own unique challenge. From a technical perspective, Stayne was incredibly tricky, since every shot required an animated CG body underneath a photographic element of Crispin Glover’s head. Creative challenges were the Cheshire Cat and getting the essence of the “creepy” nature of a cat and what that all meant from Tim Burton’s perspective. “Creepy, quiet and …STILLNESS (not over-animated)” was the directive.

Could you explain the technical challenges regarding the animation process of the “staring”, Cheshire Cat?

DS: The eyes and mouth were certainly the biggest challenges. The eyes are so prominent, and we were able to control all of the dilation attributes to make them as real as possible. Also, the smile was a challenge since it spanned from ear-to-ear. The inner palette had to deform as well so that the teeth tracked along with the mouth through it’s full arc.

What about the concept behind the Blue Caterpillar? What was the overall goal for animators with that character? Were there any early ideas that were axed?

DS: The caterpillar performance was truly dictated by how Alan Rickman voiced the character. You don’t even need to see the reference of his performance to feel the disdain in his voice. As with all of the animated characters, the goal was to tone the “animation-knob” way down. Tim wanted to impart an extreme level of subtlety in the performances so that the characters reside in the same world as their live-action counterparts. Again, we took our cues from how Tim directed his actors on set. Nothing is over-dramatized, and if a performance can be sold with absolute “stillness”, with a perfectly timed little dart of the eyes, that’s exactly what Tim wanted to capitalize on. That was a common theme for all of these characters – and the frogs come to mind in that regard as well.

The animation of Bloodhound is incredible and realistic, did you use any special technique or is it just the talent and rigging magic of the animation artists?

DS: Rigging talent and magic of the animators! Indeed, the realistic characters and real animals are surprisingly the most challenging. It needs to be loaded with subtlety and nuance in order for the performances to ring true. Once the animators delivered the performance, the shots went through a “shot-finaling” process where a skin-simulation (including ears and jowls) was applied that gave him that extra level of believability with his saggy, baggy Bloodhound skin.

How much training was involved in putting the actors on stilts?

DS: They spent several days hobbling around the set trying to get the hang of it. The primary reason for putting them on stilts was to get the eye line right on set. You’ll notice that the movement of an actor on stilts LOOKS like an actor on stilts, so those performances were really used as a point-of-reference for animation. The animated version of the Tweedles for example has a different feel about them than what was actually shot. That was a stylistic choice that evolved with Tim over the course of the show.

Ken, which of the actors was presented with the greatest challenge to achieve an effect, over the course of the shoot?

KR: Mia (Alice) probably was presented with the greatest challenge. Mia had to carry the weight of performing opposite many, many characters that were not at all visible on the set as you see them in the movie. It was also her first film like this, so she had a huge learning curve. She did fantastically.

What all went into the epic climax of Alice in Wonderland?

KR: The end battle was shot entirely on green screen. We designed the Jabberwocky as an homage to Ray Harryhausen’s work. There is a tremendous amount of animation and compositing. The sequence is full of many effects and animation tricks – fog, dust, debris – many, many small details that blend together to add a reality to the scene.

David, Could you please name your favorite wonderland inhabitant, maybe one that matches your own character.

DS: My favorites changed through the entire process. You develop close attachments to characters as they develop, but it seemed like each sequence brought new and different challenges and new favorites. Cheshire Cat was probably the first favorite that I could identify with. By the end of the show I was clearly the March Hare – completely frazzled!

Ken, Alice came up with more than 1.700 VFX-Shots! How important was the whole pre-visualization process to cope that massive project?

KR: There wasn’t as much pre-visualization of the project as you might expect. Only the action sequences, like the Bandersnatch chasing Alice, and sequences with less actor input were the ones that could be pre-visualized. The nature of this project was that we had simple versions of the environments available on the set, which allowed Tim and the actors to have the flexibility to create the scenes and action on set.

THIS THING CALLED 3D

Ken, this project mixes old and new techniques. Are there any new filmmaking technologies on the horizon that you’re excited about or that you think will change the game in a big way?

KR: I don’t know there is something on the horizon that will change the game as much as it is about applying the best technique to get the director’s vision onto the screen. Thank you for recognizing that we used a great variety of techniques. Change actually happens somewhat slowly in visual effects. Each film builds on what we learn from the last. While it may seem that certain films are a stunning breakthrough, the imagery is often the result of a steady progression accomplished over many years and through many films. Our technologies are continuously evolving.

Alice was filmed in 2D and then post-produced in 3D… and that this was Burton’s idea from the beginning… Where do you stand in all that controversy between movies filmed in real 3D and those that aren’t?

KR: To me, the style of the movie dictates the approach that you take. It is not so much one or the other. It is what is right for the movie and the director’s style and intention. In the case of ALICE, shooting in 2D facilitated our CG post-production.

David, did the decision to take the film 3D in post take you back to square one in terms of your preparations?

DS: No. We always knew that this film would be done in 3D, so preparations were made to accommodate that from the beginning. In essence, it is only the live action characters that need to be “photographically” converted to stereo. Everything else in Underland is CG (characters and environments), so most of that could be rendered in stereo from our synthetic 3D world. We did not have to make a lot of concessions for the 3D aspect, and really focused on making the story and characters hold up as a 2D film… then the 3D was icing on the cake at the back-end.

Could you explain the 3D animation process a bit for those who may not know that there are animators who add that 3D element to the experience? And how happy are you with the 2D version of the film even though there was that effort done by your 3D team?

DS: When we are inside of our CG world – and if all of our characters were CG, then the process of animating in 3D is really no different than it would be on a 2D film. In the end, the scene is rendered through a left-and right-eye camera. It is a virtual world and everything is already set up with depth relationships. The tricky part is when we integrate live-action elements into that world – like Alice, for example. Before the CG characters can be animated in a scene with her, Alice must first be given “volume” so that the other characters can interact in a believable depth-relationship with her. Basically, a stunt-double version of Alice must be created and animated to match the performance as seen from the camera, then the photography is projected back on to that geometry to give her depth. With regard to “making” a 3D movie, we really only think in terms of 2D (for the most part), and make it the best 2D movie that it can possibly be. The 3D aspect adds depth and places Alice inside this weird and wacky world of Underland… but hopefully people aren’t thinking too much about the effect, but enjoying the ride instead. The goal is to make everything blend seamlessly.

Have the animations been created for 2D and then taken to 3D with the whole movie process, or have they created directly for 3D?

DS: The live-action characters (like Alice, the Red Queen, Mad Hatter) were converted to 3D, while the CG character were native 3D in our virtual worlds. From an animation perspective they were animated like any other CG character then rendered through left-and right-eye cameras. The tricky part comes into play when a CG character is interacting with a live-action character. The photographic element of the live action character must first be “rotomated” in the scene (essentially a CG stunt-double) so that photography can be projected back onto that character. Once a 3D representation of that character is in the scene, the CG characters can interact with that live-action character – keeping depth registration in mind. We now need to take into account the Z axis – not just X and Y like in a 2D film.

Ken, which cameras have been used and which is the source, digital only or also 35mm negative?

KR: It was the Genesis camera, digital only, for any of the Wonderland sequences. And the live action bookends were shot on film.

The Genesis Camera used for Alice In Wonderland has a CCD with a resolution higher than 4K, do you think a 4K 2D re-release of the movie could be possible in future?

KR: While I can’t comment on any release plans, technically, it is possible. Everyone is always advancing the technology to get the best image possible.

Were you satisfied with the use of 3D in the film? What was your favorite scene?

KR: I was very satisfied with how 3D helped us immerse Alice into the world of Wonderland. As for a favorite scene, I love when Alice meets the Cheshire Cat. It works on so many levels.

Have you been surprised by the speed with which 3D has become the norm for blockbuster releases?

KR: Maybe a little surprised but it has been clear for some time that there was a growing appetite. The success of AVATAR really demonstrated the potential of 3D and also accelerated the availability of 3D equipped theaters.

David, you’ve mentioned the small tricks you couldn’t get away with. Do you find it frustrating as an audience member then to see the films that are converting to 3D with far less attention to detail?

DS: Sure. I would hate for the quick-conversions to give the stereo medium a bad wrap. If the audiences get turned off by the experience of a few poorly executed conversions that could be enough to change the course of the future of 3D (stereo).

Alice has – possibly unjustly – been lumped in with a number of other blockbusters that have ‘upscaled’ to 3D in post. How do you feel about the rush to the new technology? Do you feel some of the other films undermined what you had achieved?

DS: We can always hope that the standards remain high. Of course there is always the possibility that the work turned out over the next couple of years will dictate how the industry goes as a direct result of how audience react to the 3D conversions currently underway.

THE ANIMATION INDUSTRY AND CAREER PATHS

Ken, you post quite the impressive resume, a lot of these being American classics. Could you tell me a little bit about your involvement or what you had a hand in with the Back to the Future and Star Wars franchises?

KR: Star Wars was my first feature film and I did motion control camera work on the first film. Ultimately, I became visual effects supervisor, one of 3, on Return of the Jedi. I was visual effects supervisor on all of the Back to the Future films and they were the first times I worked with Bob Zemeckis.

Having worked with Zemeckis, how successful do think mo-cap is as a solution to animation problems, and are you happy with the speed at which it’s growing use in the industry?

KR: Motion capture has a place in specific types of movies. It is one of many available tools. On Alice, we only used motion capture as a reference. All of the characters and animation were actually done through traditional key frame techniques.

Was there ever a moment where you couldn’t achieve what was being asked for, or is that a thing of the past?

KR: Sure – for a variety of reasons, there are always shots that either don’t live up to the initial intent or due to schedule, physical resources or cost have to be re-envisioned. But overall, on this film, what you see on the screen came together even more robust than we first imagined.

David, I know the L.A. area is considered to be the heart of American animation, are there any other U.S. cities that are doing interesting things in animation?

DS: Albuquerque, NM! I’m not kidding. Sony Imageworks has a facility out there, and a large chunk of this work was done out there. We are all connected via video conferencing, and remote desk-top dailies. We have also opened up an office in Vancouver that will operate in the same way – using ABQ as the model since it worked so well. More and more studios are going this way to take advantage of the tax
incentives that are being offered. I love the idea – and I look forward to the day when animators can work remotely from anywhere. And as for LA… yeah, that would get the traffic off the freeways!

Ken, where are the best visual effects companies in the world? Is all the best work done in the US, or are there great boutique effects houses elsewhere?

KR: A lot of the best are in California. However, there is great work being done all over the world. There is a fabulous global community of visual effects and animation artists.

David, how did you first get interested in animation generally and what do you recommend for students looking to begin a career in your area of expertise?

DS: I’ve always had an interest in animation – for as far back as I can remember. Originally it was Saturday morning cartoons, but later it became the Disney classics. I was the kid that drew flip-books in the corner margin of my math book and was always doodling or fiddling with 8mm film projects of my own. My advice to any aspiring animator is to dive in head-first and get involved. There is really no better way to get good at this than to do it. Take every opportunity and make the most of it. There are some great schools out there, and we are seeing a lot of great talent coming our way as a result. In the end it really is about your reel, and a demonstration of your talent that makes an impression. The artistry is what matters, regardless of your particular education. But all that education certainly helps.

Many colleges still offer traditional 2D animation degrees, is there any place for 2D animators in today’s studios or should they go back and study CG?

DS: When it comes to animation, it is the performance that reins supreme – whether it is pencil on paper or hand on a mouse! The VFX world (and films like this) is certainly dependent on CG tools and if that is the realm that a student is interested in, then it is best to focus in that area. But in the end, all of these tools are exactly that – just tools. Choose your medium.

Ken, there is seemingly more work out there with so many films that up the ante as far as fantasy and fan boy movies continue to roll out of Hollywood, but in reality studios keep closing, how tough is it really out there for animation and FX houses?

KR: It is challenging business. The effects films that do well support the idea of these kinds of big movies. And you are right, the ante is continually upped. We are all very conscious of economics and delivering a quality product within the limitations of schedules and budgets.

As technology has advanced to the point where basically anything you can think of can be created on screen, do you think audiences are suffering from “CGI fatigue?” How do you continue to wow audiences who have, in some ways, seen everything already??

KR: CG is a tool like any other tool in making a movie. It can be used correctly or abused. When used correctly, it can enhance the film’s illusion and the audience experience. It is less about the technique and much more about how it is used. When used effectively to enhance a story, stunning visuals and the opportunity to explore something you have not seen is a rewarding experience.

DS: The most important thing is to wow audiences with great stories and great performances. Yes, if a film hinges on spectacular VFX in order to keep the audience’s attention, then it is very easy to get “CGI-fatigue” on a grand scale. Everything we did in this film was in support of the story, and bringing Tim’s vision to life. It was never about creating some spectacular effect that no one had seen before… but the upside is that I think we ended up with some pretty unique things in the film that audiences have in fact not seen before!

Ken, has the Blu-ray image quality forced you to be more meticulous with visual effects in any way?

KR: The Blu-ray image is actually equal to the resolution at which we work. So what you see on Blu-ray is the same as what you see on the big screen and the same as what we see here at Imageworks when we are viewing dailies and making the shots. We are trying to produce the most perfect image and Blu-ray maintains that image quality.

David, Blu-ray technology can bring to new life the old masterpieces of the past, do you think old Disney classics will look as exciting in 2K resolution as to be appreciated as much as new animation movies?

DS: I think the remastered Disney classics look AMAZING on Blu-ray! The level of detail that you see on the old cels is phenomenal – you can even see the shadow of the cel against the background. It brings you up-close and personal to that amazing artwork that has been so hidden in low-resolution renditions.

What’s more satisfying for you Ken, working on a film that makes a Visual FX leap in advancement, or working on something with a such a distinct visual style that defines the overall impression left by the film? I think Alice achieved both of these in spades (pun intended).

KR: It is both. First comes the look of the movie and the requirements of the story. If that leads us to a technical advancement, that is a bonus. But it takes terrific films like ALICE to do all that.

What’s the best visual effect you ever did that no one realizes was a visual effect?

KR: There are many. CONTACT was a movie that had many of these kinds of invisible shots. For example, the mirror shot, in which Jodie Foster as a child runs up the stairs, down a hallway and reaches into a medicine cabinet, is a complicated blending of elements that you have to look hard at to realize that what has occurred is impossible.

What’s your favorite visual effect of all time, one that you did not do, but really admire?

KR: Excellent question. The Skeleton Fight by Ray Harryhausen seen in “Jason and the Argonauts” is my favorite visual effects sequence. This scene, more than any other, stands out as one of the greats of all time.

Did you learn anything unexpected during the massive production-process?

KR: Nothing was really unexpected. After doing these kinds of movies for so long, I was able to anticipate many things and be prepared. It is great when a plan, especially a big complicated plan like this, comes together. I had a great team of super geniuses backing me up at every turn.

Any final thoughts on Alice?

KR: Alice was definitely one of the best experiences I have ever had in my career. Working creatively with Tim Burton was incredibly satisfying. There were many challenges and we had a brilliant team that worked well together. I am very proud of the work and most importantly, it was fun.

DS: This experience on Alice was truly the most creatively fulfilling experiences of my career. It was a huge pleasure to work with Tim Burton, and an amazing opportunity to give life to the characters of Underland. It was also a crew of the most talented animators that I ever had the pleasure to work with – professional and talented on every level. While the schedule was grueling – 9 months in animation from start-to finish, we all realized we were a part of something special. You don’t get such wonderful opportunities very often, so everyone pulled together and gave it everything they had to make the best of this special time that we had. It was great to see the work pan out the way it did, and great to see audiences enjoying the wild and wacky world of Underland!

And be sure to check out the Alice in Wonderland blu-ray and my review to see both Ken and David’s work on the film. If you haven’t already, make sure you visit the big round table interviews with Alice in Wonderland’s costume designer Colleen Atwood and conceptual artist Dermot Power. Click Here for that article.

Year: 2009
Running Time: 162 Minutes
Rated: PG-13
SRP: $39.99
Studio(s): 20th Century Fox
Release Date: April 23, 2010

Film/Feature: C+
In case you haven’t heard, there’s this film called Avatar, and it’s kind of a big deal because it made more money than Hollywood could ever imagine and now we have 100 3-D films in the pipeline as a result. I’m kidding of course, sort of, and in the same way the Matrix sold DVD players, Avatar will do the same for blu-ray. Both successful and controversial, Avatar quickly comes to consumers in this stripped down movie-only release and is sure add to director James Cameron’s legacy of money-making blockbusters.

Avatar is about a paraplegic Marine veteran named Jake Sully (Sam Worthington) who enlists in the Avatar Program and infiltrates the Na’vi a sentient race of giant blue-skinned warriors who are connected with everything that lives on the moon Pandora in the Alpha Centauri star system. Pandora is full of hostile creatures but also beautiful things humans can only dream of. It is also full of rich resources like unobtanium that can be mined out and be worth millions back on Earth. Jake is serving two purposes, one for the science exploration and understanding of the Na’vi and the military strategic angle because underneath their home base, Hometree, is the largest known mineral deposit of unobtanium.

Dr. Grace Augustine (Sigourney Weaver) leads the Avatar Program and has been trying to bridge a peaceful truce with the Na’vi to learn of their culture and Pandora’s ecosystem. It is under her command that Jake is taken in by the Na’vi, and is the first human to truly be accepted into the Omaticaya clan of the Na’vi. What she doesn’t know is that Jake is gathering information for Colonel Miles Quaritch (Stephen Lang) and Administrator Parker Selfridge (Giovanni Ribisi) in exchange for treatment that will restore mobility in his legs. Selfridge is leading the mining expedition, is unsympathetic to the lives they’re trampling on with their mining machines. Jake gets in with the Na’vi under the tutelage of Neytiri (Zoe Saldana) and is of course suspected by others in the tribe to be trouble as all outsiders are and Jake must prove to them that he is indeed true of his word. Once it is discovered that there is no way the Omaticaya clan will work with the humans or desire anything they can offer, Quaritch and Selfridge decide to take the area by force.

To get it out of the way, let me just say that Avatar is not an original story. I’ve heard all the comparisons to Dances with Wolves. Personally, it reminds me of the wonderful but sad 1986 Rolad Joffé film, The Mission starring Robert DeNiro and Jeremy Irons, about peaceful Jesuit missionaries trying to save South American tribes from being enslaved and forced out of their lands by of Portuguese and Spanish plantation owners. That film was based on the events revolving around the Treaty of Madrid in 1750, Avatar is undeniably influenced by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney’s invasion of Iraq as well as humans’ assault on mother Earth with industrialization and pollution.

Avatar’s pop culture significance stems from our current environmentally consciousness (hence its release on Earth Day), paying respect to few remaining indigenous tribes still left on this planet (and those that have been wiped out completely), and showing the crime of razing native civilizations from their land for the extraction of natural resources for capital gain. The fact that this story remains relevant, shows that no one has learned the lessons of it being told before, again and again. We have gotten to a point where we have forgotten the past sins. It’s no more “white guilt” as some have called it, than it is human history. One group of people trying to impose their will on the other for no other reason than personal gain and to exercise power.

Does that make it a good film, or more importantly an enjoyable film? That’s debatable and left to be discussed by film buffs, James Cameron-ites, and those who come out to see a film three times a year. I’d have loved to have seen Cameron not rest so much Avatar on what he’s done in the past; echoes of Aliens ring throughout from Sigourney Weaver’s Dr. Augustine character resembling Ripley, Michelle Rodgriguez’s Trudy Chácon to Jeanette Goldstein’s Vasquez, and Ribisi’s slimy Selfridge to Paul Reiser’s equally despicable Burke. If not for the awesome and creative world that was put before us by the countless animators and artists, the story of Avatar would leave you wanting much more. A special nod goes to Zoe Saldana for giving one of the most convincing and emotional performances as an animated character in recent years. By the end of the film, I cared about what was happening to these overgrown smurfs.

It’s not what you tell, but how you tell it, as they say, and Cameron keeps finding new ways to get us into theaters. Based on the box offices, and the recent numbers on Blu-Ray and DVD sales, Avatar appeals to the masses and I’m not here to convert anyone into liking the film; you either do or you don’t. (I did, but recognize it’s trite shortcomings.) I am here to tell you that it looks fantastic on blu-ray, which brings me to the analysis of the disc.

Video: A+
This will be the most high scrutinized part of the blu-ray because everyone who saw this in the theater will attach their 3-D experience to the film. There’s no possible way this looks good on 2-D, right? Wrong. The 1080p AVC-encoded transfer in 1.78:1 aspect ratio looks damn impressive with brilliant colors and loads of high-detailed depth. That high definition in conjunction with the depth in many scenes makes it appear almost three dimensional. There’s not that polarized or stereoscopic three-dimensional feel, but all I can say is that it is a completely different experience and I mean that in a good way. Look, I enjoyed the 3-D moments as much as the next person and when this gets its eventual 3-D release I will understand the need to recreate that original experience but this blu-ray release shows how magnificent a high definition 2-D image can benefit a film that was intended to be seen in 3-D. I could truly ramble on about this at great lengths, but just know that the depth on this film is as good as I’ve seen on any film and is in now way a lesser experience. The size and quality of your television, however, may lessen the visual impact, but everything else is golden. Blacks are immensely deep, primary and neon colors explode on the screen. There are no moments of digital artifacts, halos, or moments when the picture breaks down despite the high speed action. Textures remain true and stable and the gradual swirl of colors in the skin of the Na’vi are reproduced wonderfully. The detail in reflections, strands of hair, the vines of the Tree of Souls, and any scenes where the living plants show their neon colors/energy make for dazzling light show that will light a fire in your senses. I had a feeling it would look good, but not this good.

Audio: A
I can see Avatar being many folks’ first experience into blu-ray. Who knows, maybe it will inspire people to step up to a surround sound set up and for the first time in their lives, experience high definition audio as well. If so, they’ll be greeted to a 5.1 English DTS-HD master audio track. This soundtrack is aggressive and full of home theater audio moments where front-to-rear and side-to-side sound effects will turn heads all around. It has a punchy bass but I’ve heard films that go to the extremely far end of trying to blast your family room apart. Avatar won’t do that. In some instances I think it holds back. I was expecting a resounding thud when Hometree topples to the ground. There was another scene early when machine guns are spraying bullets and instead of being a directional sound moment, it got pushed to the center channel. Dialogue is distinctive, clear, and easy to understand. It sounds good where it needs to sound good, but I’d be lying if I said it was perfect. Other audio selections include: 5.1 English Dolby Digital, 2.0 English Descriptive Audio, and French, Spanish, Portuguese 5.1 Dolby Digital tracks; subtitles are available in English SDH, French, Spanish, and Portuguese.

Extras: D

Avatar DVD Avatar in standard definition. Yeah that about sums up the extras. But this does allow you to easily take Avatar on the go, in your van, and on your portable DVD player. I must point out the differences in the two formats because it’s hard to explain unless people have both formats available to compare with.

So here’s a quick run down of the DVD experience. It’s like night and day. With the added clarity of the blu-ray there’s not much that separates the foreground and the background. That’s why even on a 2D level, the blu-ray at times gives the perception that a 3D image is still there.

All of that is absent in the DVD. You still get the story, and some of the technical wonder, but it’s a noticeable step down. And you can live with that with a movie shot on traditional film stock and then transferred, where there’s that acceptable level of grain we’ve all come to love. Avatar though, is rich with technical and visual wonder, extreme color and levels of detail that you want as clean an image as you can get. Should you bring this home, you’ll be able to see the difference.

Now, this is not a shot at DVD, because that technology is great. For this instance though, the experience between DVD and blu-ray is incredible. This disparity is magnified by the type of film visually, that Avatar sets out to be. That gap may be much closer with a film that’s not designed to be as clean, and as detailed, one with much more intended grain. That variance in film to film, transfer to transfer is why I tell people that blu-ray maintains the intended look of the film, preserving how the film was meant to be seen.

There’s also a $25 coupon for Panasonic Blu-Ray disc players or entertainment systems to be used in conjunction with the purchase of the Avatar Blu-Ray or DVD.

Overall Shock Value: B
Avatar is one of those films that achieves such delight on a technical level that it overcomes the been-there-done-that story. There’s going to be a lot of speculation at how the Avatar experience is going to translate at home. I’m here to say that it translates beautifully. I can’t endorse how the film looks on DVD, because this is one of those films where the high definition experience needs to be preserved as close to the original as possible. If it the capacity of one entire blu-ray was needed for the film alone, then that effort was not wasted.

With only the movie and no extras, I’d say it’s hard to be completely immersed into Pandora outside of the nearly two and half hour running time. If you want to wait for extras, then you’ll have to wait this November. They are pricing this release as an affordable purchase for those who want to take the Avatar experience home ASAP, and for those who have been missing out, with a new blu-ray player and see what all the buzz is about.

So whether it’s an impulse buy or just to hold you over until the fall, Avatar on blu-ray is worth a Buy It recommendation if you can score a great sale, or if all you want is the film. Otherwise, plan for the collector’s release this Thanksgiving.

Don’t let Ben Stiller have all the humiliation. Start painting yourself blue for the anticipation and arrival of the Avatar Blu-Ray and DVD in the US and Canada, which will coincide with Earth Day on April 22, 2010. I’m eager to see how Cameron’s latest epic film looks and sounds in the home theater. Na’vi willing, PCS will get the blu-ray to tell you what that ideal high definition experience will be before it comes out.

Around the rest of the world, the release dates will vary. Sorry, Italy.

FRANCE – April 21
BELGIUM – April 21
NETHERLANDS – April 21
SPAIN – April 21
CHINA – April 22
BRAZIL – April 22
RUSSIA – April 22
NORTH AMERICA – April 22
GERMANY – April 23
JAPAN – April 23
SWITZERLAND – April 23
MEXICO – April 23
UK – April 26
DENMARK – April 27
NORWAY – April 28
SWEDEN – April 28
NEW ZEALAND – April 28
AUSTRALIA – April 29
FINLAND – April 30
ITALY – May 6

GRAVEL #16 (AVATAR): I’ve given this particular note on Gravel before, but this is easily my favorite series Warren Ellis is doing right now. Stuff like Black Summer and No Hero are fine and fun, but they’re all just riffs, tossed off ideas about superheroes, or other genres, put in comics form. Even something like Dr. Sleepless is more or less Warren Ellis writing about whatever he read about in Boing Boing or Wired that day, and then having the residents of Heavenside freak out about.

Gravel, on the other hand, starts with a high concept idea: crusty old combat magician comes back to England and proceeds to take down all the corrupt magic users in the UK. But it’s considerably grown since its first few issues, tweaking the concept, and actually allowing the situation to change.

Spoilers for the first fifteen issues of the series after this, but Gravel is now the most powerful magic user in Britain, created his own “Minor Seven” from more street level magicians like himself, and dealing with a whole new set of issues… Specifically the British government, which is tolerant of Gravel as long as he stays out of human affairs.

After so many huge arcs and world-building, its nice to settle down for an issue, with a done-in-one military mystery that draws Gravel (for the time being) off his high perch. It’s a pretty straight-forward revenge tale, but Ellis’ dialogue crackles, as usual. And though Mike Wolfer is working in the Avatar house style (bloody and realistic), he brings some cartoony flourishes to the series that make it distinct from the rest of the company’s output.

There’s also a nice tease at the end which should get fans chomping at the bit for more; and nice, subtle character reveals for at least two members of the new Minor Seven that make good arguments for their addition to the supporting cast of the book.

I know Gravel is in development at Legendary Pictures, with Ellis writing a script based on his own book, and that’s awesome. But with this issue, there’s an even better argument for making this an ongoing TV series. It’s eminently adaptable, and seeing the adventures of William Gravel on a weekly basis would be a real thrill. Though, I’m not sure anyone could afford to make the show the way it plays out in the comic.

Go back and pick up the trades, pick up this issue, just do yourself a favor, and pick up Gravel.

He’s been the King of the World, collaborated with the Governor of California multiple times, and after a twelve-year hiatus from fictional filmmaking, is about to break his own box office records with the international mega-smash Avatar. But how much do you really know about James Cameron’s filmography? Well, honestly, if his box office receipts are anything to go by: Quite a lot. But we’re guessing there are a few corners of his library you’re not familiar with; and even his well known movies are worth a second glance. Let’s take a look back at the films of James Cameron:

Continue reading “Flashback Five – The Movies of James Cameron” »

Movies:

Megan Fox (Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, Jennifer’s Body)

Shola: I know that Megan Fox is the girl that you’re SUPPOSED to dig, but she earned points with me for Jennifer’s Body. She could’ve followed Transformers with something more overtly sexual, but instead opted to dive directly into the realm of Diablo Cody’s geek horror movie which, remarkably, isn’t as sexual as you think. Think what you will about the movie (it gets my vote for most underrated cheap thrill of the year), but Megan Fox did a fantastic job as the High School cool girl with a demonic twist. Really!

Matt: It would be a shame to let something like overexposure get in the way of acknowledging that the woman has got the tools to make us drool. Yeah, I wrote that.

Kayode: Jennifer’s Body certainly could have been better in general, but Fox definitely had her moments where she was downright scary.

Zoe Saldana (Star Trek, Avatar)

Kayode: I actually remember her from her bit role in the first Pirates of the Caribbean, and even back then, I knew I wanted to see more of her. She’s definitely been putting in work the past few years, and having major roles in two of the biggest films this year, period, certainly puts her ahead of the curve.

Shola: Zoe started pulling ahead of my former favorite, Rosario Dawson, shortly after she started doing more geek roles. Star Trek started the heart palpitations, but Avatar definitely sealed the deal. Anyone that sees that spirited Na’vi princess fighting fiercely to protect her land (and her dude) would have a hard time saying no to anything this woman wanted. Simply amazing…just don’t count our Rosario yet.

Naomie Harris (Ninja Assassin, 28 Days Later)

Kayode: Eventually, people are gonna have to start giving this woman her due. That girl from 28 Days Later is still there, and if you go crazy on her, she take you out in a heartbeat!

Shola: Yes, she was super hot in 28 Days Later. She had that natural beauty that I tend to fall for. No make up with a tad of around-the-way normalcy. She was ride-or-die violent in 28 Days Later, which made her perfectly suited for a zombie-killing guy like me.

Television:

Jasika Nicole (Fringe)

Shola: Did you know that she’s an accomplished artist as well as a geek? No? I did after seeing this beauty week after week in Fringe, and she certainly became a compelling reason to watch the show. I mean, sure Fringe is GREAT, but Jasika Nicole makes everything that much better….nevermind the fact that maybe she likes the female attention a little more than she’d like MY come-ons. Alas…

Kayode: She definitely does wear her geek heart on her sleeve. They’re giving her a little more to do this season, thankfully. . . .but I wanna see her shoot somebody! Or, knowing Fringe, somebody that turns into someTHING!!!

Morena Baccarin (V)

Kayode: Being sexy AND creepy at the same time isn’t that easy to pull off. So when Morena Baccarin does it so effortlessly on V, you definitely have to pay attention. It’s a credit to her ability as an actress, especially in contrast to her role on Firefly.

Shola: She’s certainly a reason to keep turning into V on the rare occasion the show airs. As an alien high queen thingy, she’s stunning. I can see why the earth is enchanted. Here’s hoping she can pull off evil as well as she pulls off sexy.

Lauren Velez (Dexter)

Kayode: What can I say, I’m a sucker for an authoritative lady.

Matt: really? I’d go with Trinity’s daughter, whatserface, from Dexter, if anything. She was all nekkid and domestic and murdery. Discuss.

Kayode: Well, I’ve been about Lauren Velez since I Like It Like That/New York Undercover days, but she’s still a sexy MF’er, in my opinion. The whole subplot with her and Batista (and both actors are Oz vets!), I thought it was nice. And I’m a sucker for authoritative ladies. Not that Trinity’s Daughter wasn’t hot to death . . . literally!

Shola: Meh. Wasn’t really feeling her too tough back in New York Undercover either. Still, she’s probably the hottest thing going on Dexter so if it’s between Jennifer Carpenter and Julia Benz, I guess I’d pull Lauren over for some midnight detective work.

Abby Elliot (Saturday Night Live)

Matt: Inherited her father Chris Elliot’s sense of humor; thankfully, she did not inherit his looks.

Kayode: Thank God for that!

Music:

Rihanna

Kayode: The beginning of the year certainly wasn’t kind to Rihanna, but she’s managed to keep moving forward, not really missing a step. And she just keeps gettin’ dirtier!! That “So Hard” video is no joke!

Shola: I’m old now, and she’s looking like jail bait, man. Admittedly, if i were 18, maybe I’d have her posters all over my dorm walls. Now, I like a little more seasoning. Ask me again in five years, though.

Yukimi Nagano (Little Dragon)

Kayode: Actually getting to meet and interview the talented Swedish songstress was certainly one of the high points of the year for me. Few performers are as vibrant and energetic as her.

Beyonce

Matt: The video for “Video Phone” put me through puberty again.

Kayode: I was just happy it wasn’t a black and white vid with just her flanked by two backup dancers in an open white space. But I agree, it certainly had its “moments”.

Shola: I still have a hard time believing that Jigga is tapping this. She’s fine. Even when she’s not all photoshopped up, she’s still one of the sexiest-looking divas on the pop scene. Now personally, I’m leaning more towards the lovely and underrated Chrisette Michelle, but Beyonce Knowles Jigga is certainly the crowd favorite.

Sade

Kayode: No one does like “Love = War” songs quite like Sade, and “Soldier Of Love” is no different. Arguably my favorite song of the year, it makes the wait for the new album that much more agonizing. And dammit if she isn’t puttin’ some young chicks to shame, still looking mighty fine if I may say so!

Shola: This woman is ageless and will forever remain gorgeous. I’m uncertain if her beauty comes from the sexiness of her vibe or the music itself, but Sade is a gem.

Multimedia Division:

Felicia Day

Matt: The Guild blew up this year

Kayode: Confession – I’ve yet to see Dr. Horrible’s Sing-A-Long Blog in its entire, and I’ve never seen The Guild at all. But her Dollhouse episode was pretty good!

Shola: Dr. Horrible’s Sing-A-Long was fantastic, Kayode, and the little bit i’ve seen of The Guild makes it pretty obvious why geeks love her. She’s totally nerdy looking in that believable way, Like she’s really playing World of WarCraft on the other side of the screen. And unlike some of these female gaming celebs, she really, REALLY is. She’s the real deal from interviews I’ve seen. She flows off the cuff with enough gaming references to make you want to do a co-op game with her…which is just enough to balance that goofy awkwardness.

Olivia Munn

Matt: Turned Attack Of The Show into a bunch of magazine covers, Playboy, an autobiography, and a role in Iron Man 2.

Kayode: Whether her geek persona is real or not, you can’t have that much shame if you’re gonna do even HALF of what she does on Attack of the Show! And that’s my kind of woman!

THE PCS Future Ex-Wife of the Year: Zoe Saldana

Matt: Zoe gets my vote for book-ending the year with big nerdtastic movies, and for forwarding the cause of furries everywhere. ew.

Shola: So yeah, she kind of earned it with that Avatar/Star Trek combo. I’ve been appreciating her since the indie flick, The Blackout, and although she could probably stand to eat a few meals, there’s no denying that the woman is the new ‘in’ thing with looks, talent, and charm. Kerri Washington and particularly Thandie Newton, should be a little worried. They’re not the hot new skinny black chicks anymore!

Kayode: There’s just no stopping this woman. Can’t wait for The Losers. The whole cast is pretty badass, but Zoe packin’ heat? Advance ticket purchase for me!

It was a spirited discussion as the PopCultureShock Crew goes in on James Cameron’s most ambitious project to date. Is AVATAR a cinematic achievement, or is this 12 year, 237 million dollar effort, the death of 3D film making before it ever truly begins?

Threading issues of race, ecology, and spiritualism with good old fashioned sci-fi fun, James Cameron has created, if nothing else, the most TALKED about movie of the yuletide. Have YOU seen AVATAR yet?

Click any title to jump into our full debate on that topic!

Ernie: “I’m not even going to get into the debate about race, because to me the issues at hand aren’t about race at all, they’re much bigger than that, and if you’re trying to focus on one specific group rather than what everyone has done as a whole, then you miss the point of the film.”
read more

Quick Links:

1. Was the movie worth the 12 year wait? How does this rank on the Cameron scale?
2. Was the movie was an unqualified success?
3. Did the movie really usher in the start of the 3D era?
4. The movie’s nothing if not controversial. Half of the people complain about James Cameron’s ‘tree-hugging’ liberal slant while the other half of movie goers are sick of the ‘white guy saves the natives’ tone. Do you guys feel that it’s all overblown?
5. Haven’t we seen this movie already this year? Wasn’t it called District 9?
6. There’s Oscar buzz, but is the oscar talk from the performances, the CG, or an acknowledgment of the astronomical 237 million dollar budget?

As always, welcome your feedback — post your thoughts on the ongoing debate by leaving a comment below!