I thought that the Tracker Station explosion in "The Psychobombs" and the
reaction shots looked fantastic. Correct me if I'm wrong but that was a model
wasn't it?
Alex
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: pagrin07 <
[hidden email]>
To:
[hidden email]
Sent: Tue, 25 January, 2011 6:46:15
Subject: Fw: [SHADO] Re: Gerry Anderson to make new TV series of Thunderbirds
It's really a question of money.
CGI can do everything the original show had and more, but it will cost pure and
simple. (Much like Rob has already mentioned.)
But its worth remembering that the same is true for physical models and effects.
If you need a Big explosion to tear apart a building. But your budget isn't
there you get a crap match head flash and a cardboard cutout.
I would guess that Mr Anderson feels reasonably the same way about the TBs as
the bulk of it's fan base.
With that in mind he is hardly going to settle for a flash and a cardboard
cutout. He's more likely to push for something with a bit of quality. After all
it's hardly likely he's doing this because he needs money, or fame.
So personally I think people are over reacting slightly to not just someone
making Thunderbirds. But Thunderbirds being made by the one man who hands it can
be truly safely left in.
But that's just me I guess. :-)
--- In
[hidden email], "Rob" <tryptych@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> One has to appreciate that CGI-based effects are very expensive to produce as
>effects shots, let alone a complete TV series. It is also difficult to keep the
>quality consistent. The New Captain Scarlet cost over £25m to make 26 Episodes.
>
> That said, using miniatures and puppets could be even more.
> Thunderbirds cost £32,000 an episode in 1965, which would equate to over £2m a
>show in today's money. People are often unaware of how expensive
>Supermarionation cost to produce.
>
> Personally, I think the puppet way would be the most effective. As somebody
>pointed out, CGI *can* be good, but unless serious money is thrown at it, it
>ends up looking clunky. The new Scarlet varied from excellent (the flying shots)
>to seriously crap (some interiors and the lip sync) - I think if Thunderbirds
>were shot again using the same production values, but used digital solutions to
>hide strings, add backgrounds and overlay models with puppets, it could look
>amazing.
>
>
> An attempt to do just this was made in 2005, but it ultimately failed, but I
>think they were definitely working in the right direction:
>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNF5PXBAHkg>
> Rob
>
> --- In
[hidden email], "virgil64" <nemo1701@> wrote:
> >
> > In my opinion, there are two ways of doing this:
> >
> > 1)Updated CGI version. Gerry did a good update of Captain Scarlet(pity ITV
>trashed it), the BBC have done good with Dr Who and Star Trek: The Next
>Generation worked as an update on the original although strictly speaking, it's
>a sequel series. The recent Trek movie was an enjoyable reboot.
>
> >
> > 2) Make it exactly as it was in 1965, models, wooden puppets, wires... the
>lot!. It might work as a period piece:).
> >
> > Lets face it, Gerry rebooting Thunderbirds can't be worse than that rubbish
>movie.
> >
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Locked
