Latest news with #Framestore
Geek Tyrant
2 days ago
- Entertainment
- Geek Tyrant
THUNDERBOLTS* VFX Video Reveals How The Films Visuals Came to Life — GeekTyrant
If you've been wondering how Marvel pulled off some of the visuals in Thunderbolts* , a new VFX breakdown from Framestore was released, and it's packed with fascinating details. From high-altitude battles to surreal moments inside The Void, this video shows just how much artistry went into the film's biggest scenes. One of the standout elements in Thunderbolts* was Bob, played by Lewis Pullman, who doubles as Sentry and his terrifying alter ego, The Void. Bringing that duality to life took a combination of practical effects and heavy CG work. The breakdown starts by zooming in on Valentina Allegra de Fontaine's secret vault, perched atop a mountain. This location is where our dysfunctional team first collides, only to discover Valentina has set them up to kill each other. The entire mountain-top structure and the army of guards outside was fully digital. The reel also showcases Ghost's signature phasing ability in action, like when she slides through the back of a jeep. Then we see Florence Pugh's Yelena Belova being launched through a wall inside The Void, landing on a table thanks to old-school wire work. The set's practical curtains, are swapped out for CG elements that add a supernatural touch, creating the effect of the room itself attacking her. Then, at the vault, we see Bob ascend high into the sky after taking fire from guards, his rise and dizzying fall back to Earth happen in a fully CG environment. Later, the sequence jumps to a sprawling lab, which was partially practical but digitally expanded and ultimately annihilated during Bob's brutal clash with The Void. Early concept shots reveal how the lab grew in scale and then crumbled in spectacular fashion. Yelena, meanwhile, dodges collapsing debris in a mix of wire-assisted stunts and CG enhancements. This behind-the-scenes look reinforces just how much invisible work goes into making an MCU film of this scale. Thunderbolts* doesn't just rely on CGI spectacle, it blends practical stunts, intricate digital artistry, and meticulous planning to create something that feels chaotic yet grounded.
Los Angeles Times
14-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Los Angeles Times
How Toothless evolved for the new ‘How to Train Your Dragon': ‘We wanted him to feel like a big pet'
Whether soaring through the sky or sharing a playful moment with his human bestie Hiccup, Toothless, the dark-hued dragon with a friendly face and an injured tail, disarms you with his endearing nature. It's no surprise that he's become the emblem of the 'How to Train Your Dragon' animated movies, the first of which arrived in 2010. (There have since been two sequels, three separate TV series and five shorts.) A fan favorite among Gen-Z viewers, Toothless now returns to the big screen in a new hyper-realist iteration for the live-action remake, now in theaters. And in an unprecedented move, Dean DeBlois, who directed all three 'Dragon' animated films — as well as 2002's original 'Lilo & Stitch,' along with Chris Sanders — was asked to helm the live-action reimagining. It was his priority to preserve Toothless' essence. 'He is our most recognizable dragon within the entire assortment,' DeBlois says on the phone. 'And he has a lot of sentience and personality that comes through. And so much of it is expressed in this face that's quite Stitch-like with the big eyes, the ear plates and the broad mouth.' In fact, the entire live-action endeavor hinged on whether Toothless could be properly translated as a photorealistic dragon among human actors and physical sets, while retaining the charm of the animated movies. According to Christian Manz, the new film's visual effects supervisor, when Peter Cramer, president of Universal Pictures, initially considered the project back in 2022, he wasn't convinced Toothless would work. His touchstone for a fantastical creature that successfully achieved believability was the Hippogriff, a winged four-legged creature seen in 2004's 'Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban.' To test the viability of a new Toothless, DreamWorks enlisted British visual effects and computer animation outfit Framestore to spend three months trying to create a 'realistic' version of Toothless. Framestore has had some popular successes to its name: Paddington Bear in the film series, Dobby from the 'Harry Potter' universe and Groot and Rocket Raccoon from the Marvel movies. 'We always knew that we weren't aiming for a real dragon, as in a 'Game of Thrones' dragon,' says Manz, via video call from the U.K. Toothless' design, particularly his facial features, presented a challenge for Manz and the team at Framestore. If they made his eyes or his mouth too small or if they tried to drastically reshape his head with more naturalism in mind, he quickly lost his personality. 'His big, expressive face with eyes that are larger than any animal in the animal kingdom, including the blue whale, had to remain because, without them, we felt like we were going to be delivering a lesser version of Toothless,' says DeBlois. A stage show based on the first film called 'How to Train Your Dragon: Live Spectacular,' which toured Australia and New Zealand in 2012, radically changed the design — to a mixed response. 'Toothless was too creature-like and it just wasn't as appealing and as charming,' says Simon Otto, head of character animation for all three animated movies, via Zoom. While they may be too subtle for an untrained viewer to notice, certain design changes have been made that differentiate the live-action Toothless from his animated counterpart. 'He's now bigger, his head's smaller, his eyes are actually smaller,' says Manz. The nuanced reshaping of his head and his body was intentional: an effort to make him blend into a photorealistic world. 'The interesting thing is that when people see the live-action movie, they say, 'Oh, it's Toothless, like he stepped out of the animated movie,'' says DeBlois. 'But in truth, if you put them side by side, you'll see quite a few differences.' The texture of Toothless' body needed to be more intricate for the live-action version, so he would feel more convincingly integrated within the environments. 'In the animation, he's quite smooth,' says Manz. 'We tried very snake-like skin, but it just made him look very unfriendly. You wouldn't want to put your hand on his forehead.' Both on-screen versions of Toothless were crafted using essentially the same digital technique: computer animation. The difference here is that the one meant to share space with a flesh-and-blood world, with distinct aesthetic concerns. Even if seeking realism in creatures that only exist in our imagination might seem counterintuitive, the goal is to make them feel palpable within their made-up realm. 'One of the things I don't like about live-action remakes is they seem to try to want to replace the animated source, and I find myself very protective of it,' says DeBlois with refreshing candor. 'We tried to create a version that lives alongside it. It follows the beats of that original story, but brings new depths and expanded mythology and more immersive action moments and flying. But it's never trying to replace the animated movie because I'm very proud of that film.' Toothless as we now know him originated expressly for the screen. The Toothless in Cressida Cowell's originating book series is tiny and green (a design that can be seen in the first animated movie in the form of a minuscule dragon known as Terrible Terror). But when DeBlois and Sanders came aboard, 15 months before the 2010 release, replacing the previous directors, their first major change was to make Toothless a dragon that could be ridden. It was the screensaver of a black panther that first inspired the look of Toothless in the animated films. Otto, one of the designers who knows Toothless best (he drew the original back in 2008), recalls his real-world animal references. 'He is a mix between a bird of prey, like a peregrine falcon, with extremely streamlined shapes — of course a feline but also a Mexican salamander called an axolotl,' Otto says. Sanders' design for Disney superstar Stitch, namely his large almond-shaped eyes, ears and pronounced mouth, also influenced the design. 'There's a little bit of a design influence from Stitch in Toothless' face that makes them feel like they're distant cousins,' says DeBlois. He believes that making Toothless more closely resemble a mammal, rather than a reptile, and giving him pet-like qualities were the keys for him becoming so memorable. '[We] spent a lot of time on YouTube looking at videos of dogs and cats doing funny things,' he says. 'And we would try to incorporate a lot of that behavior into Toothless with the hopes that when people watched the movie, they would say, 'That's just like my cat' or 'My dog does that.' We wanted him to feel like a big pet. Ferocious and dangerous at first, but then a big cuddly cat after.' On the set of the live-action movie, Toothless and the other dragons existed as large puppets with simple functions, operated by a team of master puppeteers led by Tom Wilton, a performer who had worked on the 'War Horse' stage play. Using puppets was meant to provide the actors, especially Mason Thames, who plays Hiccup, a real-world scene partner. The Toothless foam puppet had an articulated jaw and articulated ear plates that allowed for a subtle, interactive performance. 'There's a performance that Dean can direct and that Mason and the other actors could act against, so that the interaction is utterly believable,' says Manz. '[The puppets] are obviously removed from the frame in the end, but it just means you believe that connection.' As for the impressive flight sequences, in which Hiccup rides Toothless, the production created an animatronic dragon placed on a giant gimbal that moved on six different axes to simulate the physics of flying. 'If the dragon was diving or ascending or banking and rolling, Mason would be thrown around in the saddle, like a jockey on a racehorse,' says DeBlois. 'And it married him to the animal in a way that felt really authentic.' For all his success in the animated realm, DeBlois has never directed a live-action film until now. 'I do commend Universal for taking a risk on me knowing that I had not made a live-action film, but also recognizing that I knew where the heart and the wonder was, and I was determined to bring it to the screen,' he says. Otto, the designer who trained Toothless before anybody else, candidly says he would have 'peed his pants' if he knew the drawings he did back in 2008 would spawn a franchise and a theme-park attraction (a re-creation of the films' Isle of Berk opened at Universal Studios Florida earlier this year). 'The most critical choice they made for the live-action was making sure the audience falls in love with Toothless,' he adds. 'And that you understand that if you have a creature like that as your friend, you wouldn't give up on it.'
Business Upturn
01-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Business Upturn
Netflix's One Piece Season 2: Everything we know so far about Chopper's live-action debut
By Aman Shukla Published on June 1, 2025, 17:30 IST Last updated June 1, 2025, 10:46 IST The highly anticipated second season of Netflix's live-action One Piece adaptation is generating buzz, especially around the introduction of Chopper, the Straw Hat Pirates' adorable and skilled doctor. As fans eagerly await updates, here's everything we know so far about Chopper's first look and role in One Piece Season 2. Who is Chopper? Tony Tony Chopper is a beloved character from Eiichiro Oda's One Piece manga and anime. A reindeer who ate the Hito Hito no Mi Devil Fruit, Chopper gained human-like intelligence and the ability to transform between reindeer, hybrid, and human-like forms. As the Straw Hat Pirates' doctor, he brings heart, humor, and medical expertise to Luffy's crew. His debut in Season 2 is expected to cover the Drum Island arc, where Chopper's backstory and recruitment unfold. Chopper's First Look in One Piece Season 2 Netflix unveiled Chopper's first look in One Piece Season 2 during the Tudum 2025 event on May 31, thrilling fans worldwide. The reveal came during a livestream featuring cast members Iñaki Godoy (Luffy), Mackenyu (Zoro), Emily Rudd (Nami), Jacob Romero (Usopp), and Taz Skylar (Sanji), who introduced a short clip showcasing Tony Tony Chopper in his live-action form. Chopper's CGI design, developed by visual-effects company Framestore, stays true to Eiichiro Oda's vision. With his signature blue nose, antlers, and iconic red hat, the adorable reindeer-doctor has already sparked plenty of online discussion. While Mackenyu described him as 'the cutest,' fan reactions have been mixed, with some praising the design's charm and others expressing reservations. Mikaela Hoover, known for roles in Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 and The Suicide Squad , provides both the voice and facial motion capture for Chopper. She shared her excitement about portraying a character with such a 'huge heart,' emphasizing the emotional depth behind Chopper's soft-spoken nature. Aman Shukla is a post-graduate in mass communication . A media enthusiast who has a strong hold on communication ,content writing and copy writing. Aman is currently working as journalist at
Yahoo
24-02-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
‘Paddington in Peru' VFX Studio Reveals Secrets of Bringing the Lovable Bear to Life, From Human Stand-Ins to 4K Fur (EXCLUSIVE)
With 'Paddington in Peru' now on its second week of adventures in U.S. cinemas and having hit a global box office of $125 million, VFX powerhouse Framestore has lifted the lid on how it brought the entirely CG bear — and much of his surroundings — to life. In a VFX breakdown video exclusively given to Variety, the company has unveiled the work that went into not just creating Paddington Bear, but the vast array of other animals that feature in film, the exotic Peruvian locations, including the Home for Retired Bears (mostly shot in a U.K. studio), and a scene in which Paddington takes control (badly) of a riverboat careering down a chopping jungle river (again, shot in the U.K.). The video shows Ben Whishaw — who voices Paddington — in the studio, recording the lines and also embodying the bear emotionally so his face can be used as reference for VFX, others (including animation director Pablo Grillo) standing in for the bear for the CG to be added later and also the shoot that took place in the real life Machu Picchu. More from Variety 'Peter Hujar's Day' Releases First Look Following Sundance Sale Ben Whishaw's Banner Year: The 'Black Doves' and 'Peter Hujar's Day' Star on Refusing to Be Pigeonholed and Playing Characters Whose Sexuality Isn't Their 'Defining Characteristic' Box Office: 'Captain America: Brave New World' Inaugurates a $40 Million Opening Day Alongside the video, Framestore has also provided a few facts about making 'Paddington in Peru,' which was produced by StudioCanal and released by Sony in the U.S. In the film, Paddington's fur was multiplied by 4 times as much as on the 'Paddington 2' to make sure the design translated into 4k resolution. Everything Paddington touches is CG, so the VFX team had to build digital versions of any prop he interacts with. The llamas in the film were all CG. In order to create them, the team first had to visit a llama sanctuary to 'cast' their hero llama (a 'fine specimen' named Diesel). Paddington's duffle coat was recreated, to achieve greater movement, drape, and texture, using a new cloth solver called Carbon. For reference, they used stand-ins wearing the coat to see how it would move, react and interact. For Paddington's roar, they needed to create specific facial shapes and pay closer attention to the inside of his mouth. On set, leaf blowers generated 'wind' to interact with the roar, to make it more realistic. Machu Picchu was not closed off for filming, so the original background plates contain other visitors and tourists that had to be removed using digital matte painting. The rig for the riverboat was suspended 10-12 feet from the ground, in order to be able to simulate the movement on the rough water. Capturing the background plates for the riverboat scene required a 5 camera array, all shooting in 4k. The total render time for 'Paddington in Peru' reached an incredible 88,884,749 hours (or 10,146 years), across Framestore's studios in London, Montreal, and Mumbai. See Framestore's VFX breakdown video below Best of Variety New Movies Out Now in Theaters: What to See This Week Grammy Predictions, From Beyoncé to Kendrick Lamar: Who Will Win? Who Should Win? What's Coming to Netflix in February 2025
Yahoo
24-02-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Paddington in Peru's use of previz turned a London studio into a jungle
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. Paddington in Peru's visual effects are beautifully real, often vert subtle, and occasionally bamboozling – you'll rewatch Paddington's perilous adventure to find Aunt Lucy and wonder, 'how was that done?'. Well, I caught up with Sylvain Degrotte, VFX Supervisor at Framestore London to uncover how some of the best shots were made, but importantly how previz and techviz made recreating jungles in London. Sylvain has also shed light on how how the team animated Paddington in a previous feature, and VFX colleague Mark Curtis, a VFX Supervisor from Framestore Montreal, shared how the ruined Citadel was created for the film's finale. Here Sylvain lets us in on how previz and techviz connected London's studio team to that in the beaches and jungles of Columbia. If you're inspired, read Framestore's career advice, and our guide to the best 3D modelling software, but read on to discover how Framestore created the visuals for Paddington in Peru. Sylvain begins by telling me the Framestore team had limited input into the creative choices when it came to previz and techviz, because a lot of the work was done at the storyboard stage by Pablo, Alexis (Wajsbrot, Production VFX Supervisor), but says "our involvement was limited to the cherries on top", meaning Framestore got to work on the key shots and sequences. Key to making things work for Paddington in Peru was the dynamic between location filming, work on-set in London and compositing elements. Sylvain explains that, 'On this movie previz was essential: we were shooting plates in Colombia and plates in London. So the previz and the techviz, in particular, were very important for planning the shoot and for planning work in both locations". Highlighting the set-build on the beach sequence Sylvain says the team first visited Colombia to get lidar scans. This information was given to techviz, which then goes to the prop builder who analyse it and creates the physical build. Then the beach can be inserted digitally into the Colombian plate. "Previz also helps when you have limited time in a hard-to-access location," says Sylvain who explains: "We did previz for the river rapid sequence that was shot in Columbia, because it helps you lock down your sequence, identify the necessary cameras, the speed of the boat and so on." Using previz for the project, Sylvain tells me the previz informed how the team would be shooting elements in Colombia and London in a cohesive way. "To start with, our previz team built their 3D environment based on real-world data," begins Sylvain, who then adds: "FPS then converted their previz into techviz that gave useful information for the on-set supervision team regarding the focal length, position and speed of the boat, cameras and actors. All of this contributed to the planning and efficiency of the shoot, which benefited the VFX team immensely." He adds: "Additionally, FPS helped in a novel way to replicate drone motion for the last shot of the Browns on the beach going in the forest. It was shot with a drone in Colombia, and we needed to shoot the same camera movement in London with the actors. "We worked closely with our on-set supervisor Rob Duncan and the drone company (Helicopter Girls) to send them some useful data so that they could position and reproduce the same camera motion that was done weeks before in a completely different part of the world. The two pieces of footage that we received tracked really well with each other so we were able to assemble a first version of the shot quite quickly.' Have you seen Paddington in Peru? What did you think of the film's visual effects?
