Werewolf 'acting'

Silverclaw · Post by **Silverclaw** » Wed Dec 08, 2004 3:11 pm

I think that the werewolves need to act like real animals. Their ears should be able to move; not stuck in one place like in so many other movies. When they get angry, the fur on their back should stand. Their tail would show their emotions or rank in the pack. And their faces should not be stuck in a permenant snarl/angry face.

Terastas · Post by **Terastas** » Wed Dec 08, 2004 3:25 pm

Silverclaw wrote:I think that the werewolves need to act like real animals. Their ears should be able to move; not stuck in one place like in so many other movies. When they get angry, the fur on their back should stand. Their tail would show their emotions or rank in the pack. And their faces should not be stuck in a permenant snarl/angry face.

Ditto.

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Wed Dec 08, 2004 3:51 pm

I think thats already been considered.

Costumes with facial movements will have a mechanical look to it. Besides, it costs more to even make one.

With CGI, its allot easier and will cost less. No worries of parts breaking down.

Terastas · Post by **Terastas** » Wed Dec 08, 2004 5:19 pm

Again, ditto. There's only really two problems with CGI. First, it can be seriously overdone, but I'm presuming based on what I've heard so far that more emphasis will be on the acting than the special effects, so that wouldn't be a problem. The other problem is that CGI monsters are harder for onscreen actors to interact with, but that can be handled by having an actor wear a werewolf body suit and CGI-ing the werewolf's head over the actor's. Technically prostetics are more expensives, but don't worry: it'll increase in value if the film's a hit, and there's always a yo-yo or two (like us

) that'll buy it later.

LoupGarou · Post by **LoupGarou** » Wed Dec 08, 2004 5:53 pm

CGI-ing only the head is a great idea,most of the time the same problem occurs where you can clearly see the head tilt from side to side and it doesn;t exacly follow the same precise movement as that of the body.
But if you guys pull it off really well it would look spectacular.

ABrownrigg · Post by **ABrownrigg** » Wed Dec 08, 2004 6:21 pm

Oddly enough, we're experimenting with that very thing too.

Anthony Brownrigg

Vuldari · Post by **Vuldari** » Wed Dec 08, 2004 7:13 pm

Silverclaw wrote:I think that the werewolves need to act like real animals. Their ears should be able to move; not stuck in one place like in so many other movies. When they get angry, the fur on their back should stand. Their tail would show their emotions or rank in the pack. And their faces should not be stuck in a permenant snarl/angry face.

Yes. Absolutely.
I think the Werewolves should express a wide range of complex emotions while in wolf form, and movement of the ears, tail and facial movements other than snarling would certainly be neccesary to do that.

Frozen features don't quite say, "that looks like a real creature", do they?

Treads Lightly · Post by **Treads Lightly** » Wed Dec 08, 2004 11:45 pm

I agree with everyone that wolf like expressions in wolf form would bring the character to life. Subtle movements such of the ears, tail, hackles and general posture can say so much more than words and fancy CGIed lip movement. It is the difference between the audience saying, ”those werewolves had a nice fur texture,” and, “it sure is difficult to live as a werewolf.” What I am saying is that natural movements don’t draw attention to themselves, but rather add to the realism of the character on more than a technical level.

ShadowFang · Post by **ShadowFang** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 4:27 am

The natural movements along will give our beloved werewolves the character that they so deserve. When viewers first see this movie and they first see a werewolf on the screen its going to almost blow them away. They'll see a werewolf who isn't snarling with drool running down his face. They won't see bloody hands/mouths or a manics rage. When this happens, people will have to stop for a brief moment and re-evaluate what they know about werewolves. It's definitly a plus to show real wolf movement.

If you ask the average Joe, he'll tell you that werewolves need to be destroyed cause their "evil". However, if you ask him about wolves he may very well say that they are beautiful creatures.

WolvenOne · Post by **WolvenOne** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 4:39 am

Well, to make sure the CG follows the tilt of the head correctly, you can always wear a very rudimentory werewolf shaped helmet or mask.....

Though that may cause problems. As the other actors won't be able to see the facial expressions of the actor playing the part of the werewolf. On a similer note, then the CG fellow won't have a real face to model the CG-heads facial expressions after.

Of course though, I'm just a hack with very little knowledge on this subject. I'm sure the speciel effects guys have thought of all this already.

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 5:57 am

Whoa...I hope the werewolf is 100% CGI, not half costume half CGI.

If you watch Scooby Doo 2, they placed Shaggy's head on a female body. They didn't do a very good job of it. I noticed some flaws in the movement.

TakeWalker · Post by **TakeWalker** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 10:42 am

One thing I'm hoping to see is good facial expression. Werewolves aren't *entirely* animals; they would use canine facial expressions along with human ones: smirking, smiling, winking and so forth. A good blend of both would really give me the impression of realism. As real as a mythical creature can be, anyway.

Terastas · Post by **Terastas** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 4:22 pm

Figarou wrote:Whoa...I hope the werewolf is 100% CGI, not half costume half CGI.

If you watch Scooby Doo 2, they placed Shaggy's head on a female body. They didn't do a very good job of it. I noticed some flaws in the movement.

Oddly enough, that's the same movie I was thinking about citing for the half n' half mixture. In the scene with Scooby in the disco suit, the only CGI-ed elements were his head, neck, and afro wig. The rest was an actress.

Frankly, it's not really fair to compare a partial werewolf project to a masculinity/femininity CGI creation. Giving a slender female body to a tall hairy guy and making it look convincing is damn near impossible.

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 4:31 pm

Terastas wrote:
Figarou wrote:Whoa...I hope the werewolf is 100% CGI, not half costume half CGI.

If you watch Scooby Doo 2, they placed Shaggy's head on a female body. They didn't do a very good job of it. I noticed some flaws in the movement.
Oddly enough, that's the same movie I was thinking about citing for the half n' half mixture. In the scene with Scooby in the disco suit, the only CGI-ed elements were his head, neck, and afro wig. The rest was an actress.

Frankly, it's not really fair to compare a partial werewolf project to a masculinity/femininity CGI creation. Giving a slender female body to a tall hairy guy and making it look convincing is damn near impossible.

Oh yeah. I forgot about that part.

I like to see them use 100% CGI. The CGI werewolves in Van Helsing was perfect. Yes, it was lacking a tail. But its the best looking werewolves compared to the others in the past. With the exception of Velken. Didn't like how that one looked.

NightmareHero · Post by **NightmareHero** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:28 am

Silverclaw wrote:I think that the werewolves need to act like real animals. Their ears should be able to move; not stuck in one place like in so many other movies. When they get angry, the fur on their back should stand. Their tail would show their emotions or rank in the pack. And their faces should not be stuck in a permenant snarl/angry face.

works for me

Silverclaw · Post by **Silverclaw** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 2:43 pm

Maybe those working on the movie could do some studying of real wolves. Just learn about how they move and act. Some of what you find out could be used to make a better werewolf.

NightmareHero · Post by **NightmareHero** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 4:52 pm

TakeWalker wrote:One thing I'm hoping to see is good facial expression. Werewolves aren't *entirely* animals; they would use canine facial expressions along with human ones: smirking, smiling, winking and so forth. A good blend of both would really give me the impression of realism. As real as a mythical creature can be, anyway.

I agree also, they are part human, so if they are rational, they should have some human like characteristics in their movements/body language.

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 4:57 pm

Think-Harder wrote:
TakeWalker wrote:One thing I'm hoping to see is good facial expression. Werewolves aren't *entirely* animals; they would use canine facial expressions along with human ones: smirking, smiling, winking and so forth. A good blend of both would really give me the impression of realism. As real as a mythical creature can be, anyway.
I agree also, they are part human, so if they are rational, they should have some human like characteristics in their movements/body language.

like are new emoticons? I'd love to see a werewolf in shades in the movie.

Bladewing · Post by **Bladewing** » Wed Jan 12, 2005 11:16 pm

Very good ideas. I love them all.

Their eas should be perched on top of their head, like a wolf. Their faces should be able to express emotions, such as sadness, etc. Their eyebrows (placed where a wolf's are) should be able to move as well, so that emotion are better expressed.

Their faces should be more wolf-ish, but with either a shorter or longer muzzle.

WordWolf · Post by **WordWolf** » Thu Jan 13, 2005 12:26 pm

I was offended by a car commercial some time back.

It was basically showing a family diving for safety in their SUV
because a pack of wolves was prepared to attack.

First of all, the behaviour of the wolves was unnatural-
wolves chase off or avoid humans, one or the other.

Second of all, they didn't MOVE like a pack.
They were CGI done by someone who'd never seen a pack on the move.

Third of all,
the CGI fool added a snarl to the wolf, and concluded that's how
wolves say they're angry.

Mind you, the wolf that was snarling was just standing there.
His ears were in a normal position, his eyes were normal,
his tail was at rest, his fur was not up, his hackles were not raised.

When a wolf is angry, his entire BODY is angry, not just his mouth.

It was so obvious-besides the stupid "wolves are killers" stuff-
that this was a bad CGI job.

ANTIcarrot. · Post by **ANTIcarrot.** » Thu Jan 13, 2005 8:11 pm

A note on animal 'acting'...

I remember an old '1800s' show where a young girl was pirched about ive foot up a 'cliff' with a wolf wagging its tail and tugging at her dress playfully. The soundtrack? Growling and scre4aming of course - because the wolf was 'attacking her'.

I've seen the results of trying to get wolves to 'act'. The BBC has some quite legendary footage of a pair of wolves brought on set to add realism to a dead wolly mammoth. It had a cut in its side filled with meat the wolves were supposed to eat; as if they'd freshly killed it. The wolves thought it was much more fun eating the mammoths instead and playing 'you can't catch me' with the film crew.

I've also seen so many 'wolves' with curly tails I've lost count.

Much as some have expressed horror at the thought of CGI; might I similarly cast doubt on using real animals? Or worse, real animals with dubbed sound tracks.

ANTIcarrot.

Apokryltaros · Post by **Apokryltaros** » Thu Jan 13, 2005 9:53 pm

ANTIcarrot. wrote:...Much as some have expressed horror at the thought of CGI; might I similarly cast doubt on using real animals? Or worse, real animals with dubbed sound tracks.

*scene of gigantic wolf-as-mighty-predator bearing down on hapless little girl, wolf opens his mighty, froth-flecked jaws, and utters forth a mighty...*
mew

What Mafia · Post by **What Mafia** » Fri Jan 14, 2005 1:01 am

Yeah, no more of this wolf walking around and acting like a school boy bs. =/

THE PACK Message Boards

Werewolf 'acting'

Werewolf 'acting'

Re: Werewolf 'acting'

Re: Werewolf 'acting'

Re: Werewolf 'acting'