Once you're done this, check out the one problem with superhero costumes: kzread.info/dash/bejne/X5t9q7CNc9avZtI.html

@gabrielsayre1516

2 жыл бұрын

I thought it was a Rickroll… but I watched the video and it was great

@madscience6283

2 жыл бұрын

Well I just had a seizure at the beginning. Thanks for the flashing light warning.

@readhistory2023

2 жыл бұрын

Giger did the original alien design, he had nothing to do with the Queen alien.

@SirEvilestDeath

2 жыл бұрын

You analyzed the wrong aspect of monsters. It’s the unknown and unexplained that’s the true horror not the design. All of these monsters can be horrific if they can’t be explained or beaten. That Stranger Things Monster failed as soon as it was able to be overpowered. Shit, single artist hand crafted monsters are not scary once the viewer knows they can be overcome. Alien inAlien Isolation is not scary based on how it looks. It’s scary because only fire can get it away but never kill it. It’s the threat that the thing can’t ever truly be beaten…how are you so inept you focus on Turku the wrong aspect of what horror even is at it’s core concept? I literally gave you the concept of what this video should have been in a few lines. You clearly have no clue what true horror even is.

@Freyii

2 жыл бұрын

Are you serious? At least hire people that proof read. I would narrate your videos 10x better than this for free for my resume lmao... Clearly sold your channel :\

Surprised colour wasn't mentioned. All these modern monsters are washed out greys and fleshy whites. Very rarely will you see a monster stand out visually with a vibrant colour like, for example, Swamp Thing's green or Dracula's black and red.

@JonathanMandrake

2 жыл бұрын

And what I have noticed, some of the features that are to look like alien body parts are simmilar to octopi or other deep sea creatures, take some inspiration in other animals!

@quinxly201

2 жыл бұрын

@@JonathanMandrake like where are the furry creatures

@catsplat1272

2 жыл бұрын

@@quinxly201 I was just thinking this. I think the issue is that fluffy creatures look cute no matter what because they remind us of our housepets. I'm sure there was a day in human history where tigers or wolves were terrifying creatures, but even though they are still just as dangerous, we now see them as adorable.

@catsplat1272

2 жыл бұрын

I think it would be cool to make a creepy-looking birdlike monster. If only Jurassic World had given us feathered dinosaurs, we would've been there already. Feathers are very complex structures and I think that's part of the reason they just made the raptors scaly again -- easier to animate.

@thealientree3821

2 жыл бұрын

Like, even mammals have some strange alien-like features. The cat’s retractable claws, the elephant’s trunk, shifting into a ball form like an armadillo or a hedgehog, the elongated hand wings of bats, the snouts and tongues of anteaters, and especially whatever the platypus is.

I'd say the problem lays more with producers telling artists to copy other things. I seriously doubt it's a lack of creativity. I bet some of these artists have absolutely wild ideas.

@Dan_Kanerva

2 жыл бұрын

is always the idiotic burocrats that are only calculating for profit what ruins creativity and vision... theya re doing the same to videogames in the west

@_travisimo

2 жыл бұрын

even directors for that matter! a lot of directors have a specific look for what they want and its usually inspired by something else they've seen so it ends up becoming an evolution of something that has already been shown rather than something completely new.

@criticalthinker3262

2 жыл бұрын

@@_travisimo I disagree with the idea that directors are stifling creativity. I think most movie directors are either just blandly making what the producers want, which I think is on the producers and the companies, or directors have full (or at least a lot of) creative control over the main aspects of the story, which has birthed some of the most interesting (and terrifying) creatures from modern media I can think of, like in Pan's Labyrinth, Bioshock and Bioshock Infinite.

@FezFindie

2 жыл бұрын

For'em to get bonked on head for suggesting if they dare?

@_travisimo

2 жыл бұрын

@@criticalthinker3262 I do agree with what you’re saying to an extent, but I’ve worked with many directors who people have labeled “visionaries” that just want to copy things that have already been seen, I’ve been given photoshop files from directors of scenes from other movies slightly modified to be “original” with the notes, “like this. make it work” of course there are going to be a lot of directors who are true visionaries as well, Del Toro, Nolan, Ken Levine, etc but most are just people who get hired because they can deliver a product on budget

I'm a CGI artist for film, I've worked on some of the creatures shown in this video. I just wanted to point out that, when the creature is at the stage of making it look super realistic for the movie, which is where I start my work, the design of it, and the general colors of it, have already been choosen by the director and external vfx supervisor. The concept is already locked in, in 90%+ of the cases, and I have very little play in that area. The director and the vfx sup make all the calls in that regard and they want what's worked on other movies sadly, instead of innovating. CGI always gets blamed but it's the directors that want the same thing and crazy over the top shots on every movie! I laugh when I hear people say that it should be all practical like in the old days. You can have beautiful props and sets like in dark crystal but as soon as the animatronics start to move, the illusion is broken and it looks like a puppet. You'd be amazed how much CG was right in front of you and unnoticed!

@zan3958

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you for the insight, it was an interesting read

@Reereez4795

2 жыл бұрын

While there are many movies where the director’s vision tempers that of the writer’s in a way that’s palpable for the big screen, there are just as many directors who (often at the behest of the corporate heads) opt for safety and familiarity because it’s “proven to work before.”

@DSAhmed

Жыл бұрын

"The concept is already locked in" :'( This is the problem with Hollywood in general. Why we have an overabundance of sequels, prequels, reboots, remakes and recycled crap. Now that budgets are astronomical, nobody wants to gamble with a quarter of a billion dollars. Play it safe. Innovation is risky.

@ziroadoki_

Жыл бұрын

@Alex_Canninnioni I see your point, but I think that part of the charm of The Dark Crystal's movie and series is to feel like living puppets, like the puppets or teletubies (even the children know that animatronic face is fake, at least I did in my days), your case might be better illustrated by Terminator on the first movie, or the gremlins, where the story takes itself seriously, and you can see the struggle to make them really look real enough to be believable as they should be...

@TomDestry

Жыл бұрын

@@ziroadoki_ It seemed a bit of a cheap shot for a CG artist to lash out at practical effects when they were not mentioned in the video or a preceding comment. And let's face it, while there are many puppet monsters that move like puppets, there's a hell of a lot of CGI in movies that looks like video games. In my view the best work is done in movies like Peter Jackson's King Kong or the original Jurassic Park, where practical and CG effects are combined beautifully to keep the viewer immersed.

ALL monsters also have the tendency to "roar" before they attack and they all strike the same pose when they do so. Like stretching their hands back and head front while giggling it a bit to make it look like more "effort". It looks like shit and makes all monsters look less scary or intimidating. But it's one of the most overused tropes, along with the superhero landing pose.

@shivuxdux7478

2 жыл бұрын

Yes! It seems like almost all movie monsters do this, and generally move in a really exaggerated way, with lots of stretching and flexing… like they’re performing for an audience, and KNOW they’re supposed to look impressive and scary. Real animals never act like that (except a little during threat-displays). Their movements purposeful, efficient, and extremely casual.

@chris_1988

2 жыл бұрын

Ha, that's totally a thing. I got kinda annoyed by it in Metroid Dread, too. Vicious creatures that are mostly driven by the desire to kill / eat you rather than some higher motive shouldn't walk up to you, do a cinematic scream and THEN start attacking. Makes it feel very artificial.

@dragonqueen9452

2 жыл бұрын

Ya but like it makes it 10× more cool. XD

@sunessetham627

2 жыл бұрын

It makes all those monsters seems like some kind of creature that can be easily defeated, and more importantly, easily understood.

@zionleach3001

2 жыл бұрын

Never noticed that.... Your right. I don't have a problem with them roaring. Maybe have them roar as thier chasing the victim down in order to scare them? 🤷

I think the key is properly establishing their threat. Most monster movies don’t elaborate on what actually makes them dangerous. Just being generically fast and strong isn’t enough. What is their vision like? Their hearing? How fast or agile are they? Venom? Sharp claws? Exploitable limitations? All of these things feed into our tension as the viewer and help to give more context to the immediate peril that the characters are facing during an encounter.

@Nerdstalgic

2 жыл бұрын

100% agree

@patrickiamonfire965

2 жыл бұрын

Agreed

@DickShlongJohnson

2 жыл бұрын

@@Nerdstalgic oh and awesome vid as always!

@HonestWatchReviewsHWR

2 жыл бұрын

I completely agree.

@Markunator

2 жыл бұрын

_A Quiet Place_ gets _very_ specific about its monsters’ sense of hearing.

As an artist, I am always told “limitation is the mother of creativity”. It’s important to stick to a few core ideas and figure out the best way to express them in a meaningful way. Rather than take a bunch of generic ideas and rehash all of them. I think it’s important for modern day character and creature designs to serve a purpose and function rather than just check all the boxes on a list of arbitrary/stereotypical features.

@laksh98

2 жыл бұрын

"limitations is mother of Creativity" and "Immigration is MURDER of creativity"

@matheus5230

2 жыл бұрын

Often the ideas that most excite creativity are when you stick to a very narrow concept, and then try to figure out everything that can be done with it. For example, many classic cartoons took very simple and narrow concepts, and then played around with them using creativity. Like High Diving Hare.

@rottensquid

2 жыл бұрын

I think it's not so much a problem of generic ideas. I suspect these generic monsters start "like this awesome thing we've seen before, but different." So even before the concept artist is brought in, the directors have an iconic monster design in mind, one it's hard to steer away from. But what made those monsters iconic in the first place was that they started with a unique design concept. the Alien's head, the predator's mouth, Godzilla's walking volcano shape, the graboid's underground whale shape, etc. The uniqueness was build in from the beginning, and so the designers weren't pulled by familiar choices. Since the Predator wasn't lifted directly from the Alien, it may never have occurred to the designers to make it the same grey-black Giger-like texture. Instead, it got that gorgeous mottled skin. The graboids were the color of the red desert rock they swam through. The monster from The Ritual was a moose with an upside-down human body for a head. Nothing like that existed anywhere before. Someone just pulled it out of the ether. Starting with a unique design concept frees up the imagination, while starting with a previously established iconic design, no matter how brilliant, tends distract the artist from their own potential ideas.

@loganricard8713

2 жыл бұрын

Writing prompts are an excellent example of this

@gronk6098

2 жыл бұрын

it's 'necessity is the mother of invention'

As a working artist, I can tell you it has less to do with the tools and a lot more to do with what investors are willing to take a risk on. It's like how in the nundies you could get funding for any game you wanted to make, so long as it's a first person shooter- and so we had a ton of shooters. In the studio, everything is geared towards what the investors will want, what is 'safe' and 'people will like'. It can even shape your personal work because you need to practice the things that will put food on your table. I work in both traditional and CG, and find the dogpiling on CG that goes on very tiresome.

@father270

Жыл бұрын

@@CalebBerman saying i love jesus has become too much of an inside joke with my friends so lol sorry i can't be a christian.

@AbhiMoz

Жыл бұрын

Exactly CGI allowed for a lot more people to be involved and lot more movies to be made. It's investors and studios who decide what to put on screen, not the artist. Part of the reason why you get cooler designs in games than in films which care more about realism and detailing than core design.

@Monica-br8pi

5 ай бұрын

Agree! Film is an industry and as such is subject to the dynamics of one. Safe investment is contrary to the spirit of taking creative risks, regardless of medium.

"Everyone is just interested in creating what has suceed before". That quote can be applied to LOT of other things related to the entertainment industry, not just the creation of monsters.

Can we get some love for the monster design in “Annihilation”? The shark crocodile, the screaming skull bear or even the shapeshifting alien at the end are all wonderfully creative and utterly terrifying.

@Dan_Kanerva

2 жыл бұрын

the screaming skull bear was the only terrifying thing in that movie and i will never forget it... such a cool concept for terror . A beast that imitates your or your friends voices to lure you in and then eat you in a classic-bear gruesome way the shapeshifting alien at the end was more psychological terror but very meh

@cherrylikesclouds4796

2 жыл бұрын

I had to take a break from the movie after the bear scene! It left me super uneasy lol

@bryanseenath5717

2 жыл бұрын

I haven’t watched that movie, but those sound awesome!

@absolutehuman951

2 жыл бұрын

Was there even a "shark" part in those crocodiles apart from the teeth bullshit? Looked just like some albino crocks to me...

@bondrewdthelordofdawn3744

2 жыл бұрын

If you like that movie try Made in abyss its have unique creature like silk fang and corpse weeper

I really don't think the blame lies with artists with too few limitations. Modern vfx artists have incredibly strict deadlines and have to give up their creativity to appease the executive that decide whether they can pay their rent. Corporate structure stifles creativity, collaboration doesnt.

@thesplendor8654

2 жыл бұрын

I agree. There's only so much one person can do on their own

@GameBreaker1055

2 жыл бұрын

I argue that the lack of limitations is something that really eats away at the limits time they have. The less instructions someone have to come up with a monster, the more decisions there are to make and the more time will be spend fearing to do mistakes because one barely has a clue what their client actually wants. Limits are what spark creativity. It much more fun to design a creature based on certain elements than to just design a creature.

@crackedemerald4930

2 жыл бұрын

So it's a lot like the modern corporate flat cartoons people have complained about

@planetaoruga

2 жыл бұрын

I'm sure all this artist had way better ideas in the drafts drawn together with what they ended up using, only that corporate didn't want to risk with something new, go with safe choice, hey that looks like the demagorgon, people like that, let's use it!

@PatrickLofstrom

2 жыл бұрын

Executive: hey that's a nice original design, but can you make it look more like the monster from that famous movie?

They’re also pretty infuriating from a biology standpoint. I don’t mean that in the sense of “that body wouldn’t work”- the whole point of horror is that it wouldn’t work! The issue is that the designers never consider the monsters ecological niche. Long, gangly limbs make a lot of sense for a jungle monster that needs to traverse canopies. Flower-faces make sense in a toxic atmosphere where you want to keep chemicals out of your mouth. Frills are understandable if there’s multiple monsters, and to settle disputes, they ram heads against each other like goats do. But… those aren’t considered, even though they create MUCH more interesting and believable creatures. Why.

@avamasquerade

Жыл бұрын

This exactly! You say it so much better than I could, but without history, without lore, the creature is just another boring and utterly superficial construct that blends in with the rest of brown/grey landscape.

@sebthestrider

7 ай бұрын

This is exactly why I love the new "Monsterverse" for Godzilla. I know in this video it was used as an example of repetition, but they in reality, creatures from the original Godzilla movies were not only super unique, the Monsterverse revamps of those creatures were modified and relocated to be from regions that make biological sense! There are a also few artists that I've noticed to have found almost a perfect middle-ground for creature designs, where they have evolved very quickly to blend into human environments. **Quick question by the way: you wouldn't happen to have any recommendations of media that actually does put more thought into their creatures would you? Doesn't have to be limited to specifically horror movies (I don't really watch a lot of movies anyways), but most of my horror inspiration is limited art I find online or stuff the KZread algorithm throws into everybody's face.

I think the problem here is that you are comparing the monsters from the last few years against the best monsters of all time-and that’s an unfair comparison. There was always loads of look-a-like monsters in films, but they are mostly forgotten. It’s like the common argument that modern music isn’t as good as the best music from the 20th century-look at the actual charts from the 1960s, or whenever, and they are full of terrible, and mainly forgotten, songs. That’s not to say you haven’t got a point, it’s just that it was always thus.

@TheSpeep

2 жыл бұрын

The monsters from A Quiet Place are virtually identical to the bat monster from Primeval, which is a show from 15 years ago, except there its an evolved bat instead of an alien. That specific monster design has been around for a while.

@EbonyPope

2 жыл бұрын

Week I'd you haven't produced an iconic monster in over 20 years since CGI took over but you can still find more iconic monster in let's say the 80s I think that DOES prove his point. I couldn't think of a single monster in the last TWO decades that changed pop culture.

@KentBryanDMedez-tw6wc

2 жыл бұрын

​@@EbonyPope Tell me those iconic 80s monsters, because they kinda didn't have one.

@valletas

2 жыл бұрын

@@EbonyPope slender, piramid head, siren head etc They still exist just not in movies anymore They either come from video games or creepypastas (AKA: modern internet horror) Movies have just gone stale in the last few decades in character design

@badconnection4383

2 жыл бұрын

@@KentBryanDMedez-tw6wc Staypuff Marshmellow Man, The Predator, Pinhead, The Thing.

Also so many monster movies don’t pull enough on “local monsters.” Ie. The kinds of monsters that mothers would warn children about to keep them out of the woods. Seeing those old wives’ tales brought to life would be amazing.

@Bicicletasaladas

2 жыл бұрын

In whatever country that was part of the Spanish empire you get some very cool folklore monsters. Most lure children during siesta time and most get pawned by prayer and holy water. A tough point to sell if you aren't religious.

@moduleheadindependentcreat8158

2 жыл бұрын

... And this is where the Witcher 3 excelled, at least is some parts. Since it's creatures were based on European mythology they felt genuine. Great effort all in all

@iunderstanphotography2780

2 жыл бұрын

this is true! every ethnic group has creatures, monsters and spirits that should provide endless reference

@NFaba

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah. A monster based on, for example, the Okuri Inu would be fascinating. The Okuri Inu, or "sending-off-dog", is a creature from Japanese myths. It follows a person through the dark woods and, if that person trips and falls, the Okuri Inu attacks. It can however be outwitted by pretending that the fall wasn't an accident and making it seem as though the person simply sat down to take a break. Creepy birds known as Yosuzume herald it's arrival. The fact that the Yosuzume only be seen or heard by a single individual at a time could also be incorporated.

@ilonakonradsheim3988

2 жыл бұрын

Yes! I recently browsed a bit through abook with local myths and there are so weird and different ones! I also suppose that in the depths of the internet there exist creative conceps or finished indie movies, it's just the loudest and the ones from well known productions that get spread everywhere... not the acually deeply interesting ones...

There's more to this than visual design. That is surely a part of it, but there's little to no personality in the actual actions of these creatures. They are very little more then just creatures, having little staying power or enough time on screen to actually do anything, or enough for characters to interact with when off screen to IMPLY personality in actions. The Xenonorph, Predator, the Thing, and all these yesteryear creatures weren't just memorable because of the texture of their suits. They were memorable because they DID things to differentiate them. They were written as characters in their own right. This slew of creatures has less personality than a bear in the woods. They are generic danger and nothing more.

@dyllanaldridge1044

2 жыл бұрын

The way the velociraptors stalked and clattered their way through the kitchen in Jurassic Park...easily the scariest scene in any movie as a kid.

@petrfedor1851

2 жыл бұрын

Many of new monsters are just that with not much more under it. There often Is not more than "they kill people because reasons".

@tescherman3048

2 жыл бұрын

100% agree! It's not all sucky creature design. It's sucky writing and character development.

@wynsonrao5177

2 жыл бұрын

Agree! One thing I keep noticing is that they all move in this very specifically unnatural way: usually twitchy and with jerking motions that CAN evoke unease, yes, but makes them feel less grounded in reality, and there's no depth beyond that. The monster always stalks around, bares it's teeth, growls or gurgles, and moves on.

@CrazyLikeUhFox

2 жыл бұрын

A reoccurring trope I’ve noticed ever since Cowboy’s and Aliens is that the monsters all just tend to fucking sprint and flail and spaz around like idiot animals. A Quiet Place and this most recent Amazon exclusive that I don’t care enough about to remember the name of are perfect examples. Action does not equal horror, but Hollywood sure seems to think it does.

Yeah chief, this video ain't it. It's ironic how near the end, you say that the major problems are because of a lack of limitations (endless resources = lack of creativity??) when the major problem is limitations (both monetary and creatively) that studios and producers put on artists. Concept artists aren't just copying each other because of a "lack of creativity" but because studios aren't going to hire you if you don't create work in this style. Concept artists and VFX teams are already put under ridiculous deadlines and budgets, and it's honestly only getting worse. It always bugged me when people blame the artists when EVERYTHING coming out of studios (be it movies, TV shows, or video games) is filtered through a corporate lenses. Just look at the work in the Art Of books of projects and you'll see how many great concepts get thrown out because of corporate meddling. When every single movie needs to be a massive franchise or "cinematic universe," studios will always (unfortunately) take the "safe" route cause even these properties you mentioned are multi-billion dollar successes. Also, your part about digital art is just dumb. Speaking as a digital and traditional artist, hearing people talk about how "digital art isn't true art" is just frustrating. I know you said, "well, neither is better than the other," but your entire point of that segment is that monsters drawn traditionally are better. There is next to no way with today's deadlines that traditional art could survive in today's studios. Artists are expected to pump out multiple concept paintings in a day while, back then, a few paintings a month was considered more the norm. Don't blame artists for using a tool they literally have to use to survive this industry.

@concept.byfran

2 жыл бұрын

I agree man, It's really a shame how they all fall under the "safe" monster design bin and all the good, personalized ides get thrown out because they are too ambitious. I want to work in this industry and your comment actually made me realize that making a difference is going to be a lot harder than I thought. Its all the same to these compaines and the safe option is generally described as being better. Maybe by using new technologies which allow for uniqueness or by using Guillermo Del Toro's approach to movie monsters we willl be able to get more of these refreshing ideas out, like Keith Thompson, who definately blew me out of my seat when he made the design for the monster from The Ritual (the giant elk thing) which the video talks about briefly at around 2:40. I'm not sure how will we depict to these companes that the safe route isn't always the best, but I'll try to push their limits to the max with designs that do not stem from the classics.

@composerjalen

2 жыл бұрын

He lost me at "Many of their shapes and forms are defined using speedpainting and Photoshop", because what the fuck does that even mean?? Does he think artists actually draw that fast when they're using digital mediums??

@knit2purl

Жыл бұрын

@@composerjalen right? When you design something with pen and paper like that, you usually start with tiny gestural sketches too lol. And then someone picks a basic shape and you go from there. It’s like the same thing.

I'm just going to say what many have been saying: many of these problems come down to producers and board executives pushing their noses where they don't belong in the process of creating these memorable monsters. It really kills creativity when you have 12 pencil-pushers breathing down your neck telling you to work faster, work harder, and replicate that monster that sold billions of dollars in ticket sales from 2 years ago. An artist can have a stellar idea that gets lost in transit when it is cut down too early before it can really flower. I feel like that's a major reason why Del Torro's monsters are so memorable, even in this modern hellscape: he's the creative director, and often producer of his own films, so HE gets the final say of what flies. Artists can and LOVE going wild when they have a higher-up that LETS them have fun.

Here is the thing about limitless possibilities. It sucks! Limitations is what makes creation interesting! "Make me a monster." will yield much less interesting results as "Make me a sea-monster that can only enter land by night-time and does so to eat the first large-enough living creature it can find, but it has no teeth to do so." The first request ends with copying one of the most popular designs, but the other one forces the writer or artist to think as there are so many things to look out for.

@haiitsmarebear

2 жыл бұрын

This.

@distantsails

2 жыл бұрын

True. That said, only the first monster will end up on the big screen, while the sea-monster is going to be discarded in some artists' desktop folder, because that's not what executives and audiences want. I don't like the thesis this video makes placing the blame on the artists and the mediums of today.

@dannore8077

2 жыл бұрын

Just going to say that reading the second request, made an very easy to picture monster pop up in my head, very easy concept to go after, but the question is, are the artist allowed to ask questions, like number of legs, color, how does it interact with the world through its senses, is it strictly carnivorous or is it an omnivore, is it completely aquatic and just able to go on land for a couple of hours before suffocating, or semi aquatic just spending it's time in the water to relax in the cold, before going on land when the sun is gone,

@carlosroo5460

2 жыл бұрын

I'm thinking of something with a mole shaped body, paw-like fins open on fan membranes ends, a mouth that extends in the fashioned kiss of death like of alligators, eye-less, scales that can't decide between brown or green, a nose elevated as a airplane tail but spin horizontally, nose holes that could be black fangs coming together on the upper lip, and the substances of the mouth's molecular composition is bird-peak like.

@oliviarose3513

2 жыл бұрын

There's a legend about giant jellies living deep in the sea that hunt moose, bears, humans... when the tides are high some unlucky nights they squirm onto the earth to hunt. A jelly would find the largest creature it can find, and use its stingers to paralyze its prey. Then, it would slither like a slug over its still-conscious prey, open its beak and slice its meal into chunks, which can easily be swallowed whole. Jellyfish don't think, or feel. They have no remorse, but they have no hatred either. They only want to eat. So stay away from the waters after dark. (I wish I could draw but I like words lol)

To be fair to the creators, the other thing that really matters here is just regular old diminishing returns. Those OG monsters are memorable in part because there just weren't very many monsters to remember. Now media is flooded with them. There are only so many ways to make a monster, and each new one is going to be less memorable, because it's also less new. I largely agree with the thesis, but after 1000 monster movies, the non-uniqueness is going to be a problem regardless.

@rottensquid

2 жыл бұрын

Absolutely true.

@SlapstickGenius23

2 жыл бұрын

Accurate!

@punchatz

2 жыл бұрын

Fact!

@ethanjobson3879

2 жыл бұрын

Idk, will take a while for Starro to be unmemorable for me.

@MVPMVE

2 жыл бұрын

@@ethanjobson3879 Starro is a giant star fish. With an eyeball. Meh. I think Polka Dot Man's raised glowing neon spots the size of tangerines on his literal skin that he has to purge offscreen every so often to stay alive was more horrifying to me. I kept asking myself, "How does that work? Does it hurt? Is it gross? Does he pop them? What comes out?"

I actually loved the MUTO designs from Godzilla. I thought they were unique and fresh in that their obvious design inspiration came from bugs. They weren't just some amorphous, vaguely human-shaped monstrosity with limbs and features that made no evolutionary sense, like the monsters in Pacific Rim for example. They kept the male smaller and gave him wings, while the female was a flightless powerhouse. This is just like real life phasmids (stick and leaf bugs), and the attention to sexual dimorphic detail was a real treat to see utilized in a film. The male in particular has a really unusual silhouette that I find very cool.

@wxldfl4wer850

2 жыл бұрын

The kaiju in pacific rim don't evolve, they're genetically produced from flesh to limb by the precursors and are sent off to destroy. That comparison makes no sense.

@Shaddiewolf

2 жыл бұрын

@@wxldfl4wer850 I'm sorry that you think that comparing movie monster designs to other movie monster designs doesn't make sense. I find the Pacific Rim monsters to be uninspired. You know, like the exact topic that this video is addressing?

@wxldfl4wer850

2 жыл бұрын

@@Shaddiewolf the pacific rim kaiju don't even apply to the things you are stating, "makes no evolutionary sense" to which i said the kaiju don't evolve, so their designs don't need to make evolutionary sense. ur the kinda guy who always tries to apply real world logic to fictional movies about monsters. Every kaiju in PR is unique and has something that vastly differentiates them from the others, none of them are even close to looking vaguely human. The dude in the video was spouting nonsense anyways, the majority of people in these comments disagree.

@shivuxdux7478

2 жыл бұрын

@ Darion jackson, you’re applying “real-world logic” to a conversation about aesthetic preferences. Plenty of bad monster designs have ridiculous features that are clearly there to look cool or weird or dangerous, but make no evolutionary sense. Pacific Rim’s kaiju are a perfect example of that kind of look. I actually like them too, and you’re right that their bizarre features make a bit more sense in-universe… but that’s beside the point. Shaddiewolf’s just talking about the look, not the story-logic behind it.

@AbhiMoz

Жыл бұрын

​@@wxldfl4wer850 well often time as designers we have to start by mimicking things we can find in nature and exploring from that. So evolution is a good way to explain movie monster design.

As a professional creature designer - responsible for the Deathclaw and the Dragons in Skyrim, for instance - I totally hear this. I've even made videos about *how* one can create something unique and different that no has seen before. I'm glad to see this analysis.

@kimbureh7338

Жыл бұрын

I've read through a lot of the comments here, and you're the the first professional (one whose work I repsect a lot at that) who takes the critique of this video as motivation to do better rather than getting defensive. as an aspiring creature designer myself, thank you for being such an inspiration!

@JonahLobeDraws

Жыл бұрын

@@kimbureh7338 My pleasure! This was a good video and spot-on with the analysis. As a creature designer myself, I'm very particular about creature designs, and I hate seeing the same designs again and again... it all looks so generic!

I personally think you're putting too much blame on the artists. You don't think that back in the day artists in movies didn't work together or had deadlines as well? Don't even get me started on the digital vs traditional mediums argument. As though creating a concept digitally doesn't take as much time and effort as something traditional. Both have have different skill sets, but no one ever talks about the similarities in terms of skill and the artistic process. My opinion is that the real issue boils down to what kind of movies get green-lit. Most studios do what's safe and pick safe designs based on what sells tickets. It's unfortunate, but you can find a lot of smaller movies that are bolder in that aspect.

@milddiffuse

2 жыл бұрын

Completely agree with you. There is somewhat of a style overlap in many of these new designs, but many of the reasons given here aren't really fair to the artists or tech involved.

@JayKatycat

2 жыл бұрын

Yep, I completely agree, I was going to make this exact same comment and I saw yours. The thing is, we as artist don't really get to make choices in the industry, specially in big projects such as stranger things. In the end, it's down to the people in charge, and their main interest is to sell a product, so they play it safe with designs that have worked before. And well, don't get me started on the traditional Vs digital argument,,,

@THEPELADOMASTER

2 жыл бұрын

The video felt like a big "practical good, cgi bad waaaahh!!"

@broadbandislife

2 жыл бұрын

@@THEPELADOMASTER That's not entirely wrong though. Back when moviemakers had to contend with the stark limitations models and rubber suits and whatnots they were obliged to put some serious thought into how they used those in the narrative lest the results look merely ridiculous (IIRC this was explicitly the reason why the original _Alien_ showed the Xenomorph so sparingly for ex); CGI can be just plunked into any old scene with preciously little actual creative effort and that _shows._ Necessity is the mother of invention as it were. This isn't even remotely restricted to mere critters either. Dunno 'bout you but I always found for example the little model spaceships of the OG _Star Wars_ far more impressive in every respect than the shiny sleek CGI jobs of the prequels (putting aside everything *else* wrong with the latter...). I suppose the difference can be summed up as "artisan craftsmanship" versus "industrial mass production" - irrespective of how much more easier and more convenient the latter may be for the people doing the work behind the scenes it's hard to argue the former didn't inherently have far more of a distinctive personal touch.

@levi2725

2 жыл бұрын

@@broadbandislife CGI models are as much artisan craftsmanship as models. You might maybe just not realize how much work and soul goes into a 3d model. I'd argue they're even harder to make right.

i wish we had gotten more examples of modern monsters that you think were done right. I found it harder to be persuaded by your essay without a counter example to compare the current aesthetic to.

@thescottishaccent

2 жыл бұрын

I'd nominate the terrifying skeletal-faced bear creature from Annihilation (I don't know if the monster has an official name). It was genuine "I need to put the lights on" stuff. Really amazing work. Hadn't felt so unsettled/scared by a movie monster since my childhood.

@melvinshaw7574

2 жыл бұрын

I kind of what to go with the Starfish from The Suicide Squad, if only because it a) does not share the same design principles outlined here regarding monster design, and b) it draws from something of a different type of fear than other contemporary monsters. A lot of people are referring to the bear from Annihilation, but the doppelganger from the same film also works for me in that the context of the thing makes it just as frightening to me as the overtly scary bear (on the whole, Annihilation really works for most of its scares, to me). I kind of also want to give a bit of a shout out to amorphous creatures in general, such as the Soecters in His Dark Materials (despite their designs feeling a lot like Fantastic Beasts' Obscurus 2.0). I'm kind of a sucker for monsters whose true form I can't get a solid visual concept of.

@phabiorules

2 жыл бұрын

@@melvinshaw7574 I disagree with using Staro the conqueror because even though he is from a modern film, the character itself was created in the 1960's, so it's not surprising he looks different than modern monsters.

@wtfr3nch

2 жыл бұрын

Video game monsters like the ones in Dark Souls or Diablo franchises would be good examples, and why don't monsters in gaming have this same problem as the ones in film and TV?

@tompotter8703

2 жыл бұрын

@@wtfr3nch Because each enemy in games is designed look and feel distinct, even if they share a design origin, body type etc, usually by exhibiting different behaviours, aesthetics and weaknesses, so the player is encouraged to try different tactics to beat them and progress without it being too samey. These enemies can take maybe a minute or more/less to beat, but there can be hundreds in the game total, so spreading them out is paramount to keeping the game exciting.

Hands down, the most memorable, freakiest and most disturbing monster of 21st century cinema has to be the Pale Man from "Pan's Labyrinth." That thing was seriously disturbing. And I've no doubt at all that it was initially sketched out with a pencil on paper.

@arminxvs3372

4 ай бұрын

Is it the creature with eyes in the palms? That shit was freaky AF. Reminds me a lot of the Caretaker from the Witcher 3.

I don’t know, the Demogorgon still feels like terrifying eldridge monster that could kill you within seconds. And even though The Mind Flayer looks derivative in it’s meat forum, in its phy-mist forum, it looks like one of those impossible/ mind blowing creatures that could exist just beyond your line of site. It’s just a big silhouette, feels very classic to me.

@CALKULTIK

Жыл бұрын

What was so compelling about the Flayer to me was how its scale and majesty didn’t translate in our dimension, that omniscient skyscraper-sized smoke creature had to take a form of flesh. I think that helped distinguish the upside down as a totally different reality, the way that the smoke form was physically powerless but could so easily steal and contort life to its own will. It truly felt like a distant, omniscient threat that was just barely starting to slip through the cracks and gain control.

@nicreven

Жыл бұрын

Mindflayers in D&D are just fascists with squid heads and psionic abilites who eat people's personalities and brains

@AIIXIII0

Жыл бұрын

Personally, I find The Great Wall creature is a lot more terrifying. Perhaps the plot also influence it. Souls game also had more terrifying creatures.

@avamasquerade

Жыл бұрын

I obsess over the practicality of these monsters. In my opinion what makes them believable, on that visceral, primal level is the idea that a creature could reasonably exist and survive in our world. The Demogorgon seems kinda derpy to me because exactly how does it eat with any speed and efficiency when we can clearly see it struggling to manage all the unwieldy aspects of its mouth? Also, it's head is too small for its body and that irks me relentlessly.

@ri13h44

Жыл бұрын

​@@CALKULTIK though it does have physical strength, its a giant tornado, i do agree

as a designer and fulltime digital artist, i actually too notice like. how common those monster designs are...admittedly they're more cool than scary. designers! up your game!

@aaronversiontwo4995

2 жыл бұрын

It's the same with all "art" groups these days to the point of it becoming a serious degredation to the form of art these days. Wether it is graphic design, 3d graphics or even digital sculpture every group seems to want to jump on a trend and all do the same thing because it gets the likes and the attention and then move onto the other trend. Just look at how corporate graphics for websites today are the crazy exaggerated illustrator drawings of people. The 3d graphics scene is all Beeple cinema 4d rip offs. The visual effects scene have been doing the same muzzle flash and exploding stuff videos since 2004. It used to be that individuality made you stand out. But now days with the drag and drop, kitbash, download resources from a 3d blog and rehash it generation. The trend becomes the popular item and the artist gets lost. It is essentially why NFT's seem like such a cheap and nasty way to make money these days. I've literally seen someone download a 3d model from a site use a material preset on it and post it as an NFT 30 seconds later and demand money for it.

@futurestoryteller

2 жыл бұрын

Look up "narm" on TV tropes and then "narm charm" - I think artists need to take some risks and not be afraid to do something that has a tinge of the ridiculous at the risk of being subsequently ridiculed. There's a fish with "human teeth" in real life, which looks like a meme, and the thing is absolutely nightmare fuel. - This put me off to watching it, personally, but Attack on Titan is the last thing I've noticed that really embraces this kind of absurdity with absolute confidence that the end result will still be scary.

I actually really like some of the Pacific Rim monsters, as well as the new Godzilla, because they break enough from this mold to be noticeable. The MUTOs and Skullcrawlers are very similar, but Godzilla and the beefier Kaiju have a totally different physicality that sets them apart for me.

@MattGodzilla2000

2 жыл бұрын

Too bad the newest Godzilla movie is more hust a copy of Pacific rim instead of its own Good movie

@Megaspinosaurusrex

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah tbh I was surprised Ghidorah showed up in that video since he doesn't really fit in that category. The Mutos and skull crawlers do but have at least some threats that separates them from those other monsters.

@Zanzibarbarian88

2 жыл бұрын

yeah the MUTOs were cool. But godzilla 2014 was far and away the best of the american godzilla movies, so no huge surprise there.

@rottensquid

2 жыл бұрын

I think the issue with the Mutos is they didn't even remotely match the style of Godzilla. They felt like something out of another, unrelated movie. Whereas in the next film, the redesigns of Ghidorah and Rodan fit better. Those monsters all felt like they belonged in the same film. I think this is an artifact of Gareth Edwards' directorial style. He's all about breathtaking set pieces, but couldn't be less concerned how they fit together. The Skullcrawlers were a little different. They just felt like they were designed by committee. At least the Mutos were distinct, weird designs. Their problem is they looked like aliens rather than oversized earth creatures, or things out of myth. But the Skullcrawlers were the worst of both. They seemed alien, in that nothing like them exists in the real world. But they were also quite generic. Imagine if, instead of being funky skull-headed t-rex rip-offs, they'd been the only giant insects on the island. That would have given them a "final boss" uniqueness, an extra layer of horror, and still fit the "oversized earth creature" theme of the rest of the film. There's a lot to admire about Skull Island, but it's just under-baked. Even the director thinks so.

@brettwood1351

2 жыл бұрын

@@Megaspinosaurusrex Also Ghidorah is an update of a design from 1964, that was very much a case of working around budget, time and suit limitations. With the designer being told "it has three heads, two tails, flies and a voice like a bell". The Pacific Rim Kaiju also had a rule of "If we had to, you would need to make a suit of it" from what I understand, though some follow that better than others.

I agree with the spirit of this video, and a lot of good points where made about how boring and basic modern creature design has become, but the implication that digital art is somehow different or “easier” than classic pen and paper is fucking stupid and tells me this dude isn’t familiar with art in general. As someone who’s worked in both mediums, the majority of which was non-digital, I can safety say that digital art is just as involved as the physical shit.

@broadbandislife

2 жыл бұрын

In practical terms digital art is much easier to _apply_ because you don't have to worry about, say, the freaking rubber monster actually looking like crap if examined closely in good lighting - which is AFAIK why Scott & Co. had to show their Xenomorph so sparingly and carefully in the original _Alien._ Which sort of shortcomings with the available effects forced filmmakers to get creative and seriously think about how they used their painstakingly crafted critters and whatnots in the actual shots, and put more thought into compensating for such practical limitations with narrative and tension and what have you. Those who failed to do so ended up as B-movies mostly, and rightly, forgotten today. CGI? Just paste it into any old scene. The nitty-gritty details of making it fit are basically programming grunt work rather than an exercise in serious creative effort. Might be considerably easier and cheaper in practical terms (which is obviously why the purse guardians so like it) but the difference in the nature and amount of effort involved tends to show.

@levi2725

2 жыл бұрын

@@broadbandislife yeeeaah... you don't realize how hard it is to make good CGI.

@broadbandislife

2 жыл бұрын

@@levi2725 So much fucking woosh. The point is not the amount of effort it takes to create the model; the point is how easy it is for the *director* (and whoever else) to use them in shots without much thought. Which has no direct bearing on the demands placed on the people responsible for the concrete technical execution thereof.

@levi2725

2 жыл бұрын

@@broadbandislife you huh... Still don't realize how hard it is to make good CGI. CGI changes the way you film movies, the lighting you use, the way you direct the actors, the kind of stories you can tell etc etc...

@broadbandislife

2 жыл бұрын

@@levi2725 And the average result is actually fairly unimpressive, even at the end of the spectrum where budgets and technical skill should not be a problem. So, yeah. And what is the most relevant difference in this context? I'd argue it's not having to put serious thought and effort into getting around the laundry list of practical limitations imposed by concrete physical props, effects, costumes _etcetera_ in order to make the whole thing work. Fundamentally CGI is a _shortcut_ and that tends to show in the end result.

I build my best inventions out of repurposed materials. The limitations are like footholds for my creativity.

@ninjarehab4420

2 жыл бұрын

Huh same I went for multiple things for my new monsters design in my show

@corporaterobotslave400

2 жыл бұрын

Same here. I use the same techniques to build custom model starships and original songs.

@ninjarehab4420

2 жыл бұрын

@@corporaterobotslave400 what kinda songs you do rock rap or hip hop

@AM-sw9di

2 жыл бұрын

Every creator I've ever liked has had limitations which they've worked hard to find ways around withinntheir own skill set. I do that with my art too, and by doing so my skills improve and I have more options. If I knew every skill on the planet I'd be bored, I'd probably be lazy and uninspired.

I’d argue that the Mutos are actually fantastically designed and don’t fall into the pitfalls the rest of these creatures fall into. Yes they share a similar basic body plan with the Cloverfield monster, but those two were the first to do it and they are very distinct from one another. A lot of these modern monsters are confusing to watch because there are so many limbs and tentacles flying around whenever they are on screen that it’s hard to make out the actual design of the creature. Muto has 2-4 long, distinct, angular arms that move slowly and deliberately (because of their immense size), so you never run into the “tentacle soup” problem like you do with most of these other monsters. Another thing that sets them apart is their design theme and special abilities. The Mutos were designed to look like stealth bombers, so they are matte black and angular, with recurved hook hands and fins on their heads. This is an incredibly unique design theme and it helps set them apart, along with their EMP powers. The monsters from Stranger Things and A Quiet Place steal a lot of what made the Muto unique, including the hook hands and angular arms. The best feature of the Mutos is that, unlike the rest of these monsters, they have personalities. They show affection for one another. The male likes to patrol the perimeter of the nest from the skies and is very aggressive, while the female is more of the defensive bruiser, using her increased size and stability to guard her eggs at all costs. She clearly feels sad when her nest is blown up. These creatures have a well defined biology and personality element to them that just isn’t in other monsters of this kind, and that’s what sets them apart.

@zacharyzipf5665

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah I don't really like the whole, "Mutos are clover rip offs" argument (I know that's not the point of the video). They have a similar body structure (super 8 monster is also similar in this regard), but lets not pretend like the vast majority of kaiju/tokusatsu monsters aren't bipedal reptilians. This is not a knock to the genre, obviously it was a limitation of the suitmation technology, (and I am purposefully neglecting the more creative kaiju as featured in works like Ultraman), but in the larger context the mutos and clover are the exceptions in the kaiju genre not the rule. I also wish he spent more time describing the shared aesthetic. Some like the demogorgan and quiet place monster are quite apparent, but others either seemed like another subgenre of modern monster clichés altogether, or looked a lot more unique than he was giving them credit for.

@vladprus4019

2 жыл бұрын

Also nice thing about the mutos it is they are looking like things that already exist.... but at same time they are distinctive enough from them. They are like weird thing between bat, cockroach and the moth that somehow you could picture existing somewhere (in exception of the size)

@DileepNow

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, the Mutos are pretty unique. Its not just unique by design, but also by the characteristics. Like the male being able to fly while the female can't.

@guga_dias

2 жыл бұрын

My favorite thing about the MUTO design is that even though they look modern, they are shaped in a way that could be played by a human. What I mean by this is that the same design could be made into a rubber suit and shot practically. Even though 100% of the shots used in the movie are CGI, there's just enough shared DNA in the design for it to feel natural in the Godzilla universe. I've never seen anyone bring this up and I think it's such a cool homage to past Godzilla artists.

@jjkthebest

2 жыл бұрын

Tentacle soup does have a purpose. If you're trying to create lovecraftian vibes, making the design of the monster hard to pin down helps a lot. That kind of horror relies on a fear of the unknown. By making the monster's design unclear, you keep some of that even after you've shown the monster. Of course, tentacle soup has become kind of a "known" these days as well, so it doesn't quite work as intended anymore.

The idea that this is a modern problem isn’t really true. There has always been running trends in creature designs of various eras, and the modern day is no different. In about 10 years there’s likely gonna be a new trend in monster designs, that we’ll see pop up in multiple movies again.

@youraveragesinner5474

Жыл бұрын

ikr? It's like thoughty2 situation all over again

@Don-fw3nv

Жыл бұрын

@@youraveragesinner5474 whats the thoughty2 situation?

The MUTOs are actually some of my favorite designs for these kind of monsters. That's a large part thanks to their incredible sound design, but even visually they feel so distinct in their setting and even against other monsters of this flavor. They're a lot more angular than many of their contemporaries and the distinctive sexual dimorphism between the sexes shown in the movie made them all the more memorable. Plus that scene where the male dives looking like a bomber jet? Stunning silhouette right there.

Thanks for giving the Ritual some love. It immedieately jumped to one of my favourite horror films of all time, in big measure thanks to creature reveal and design, but it's often dismissed as another Netflix horror . I love it, for the atmosphere, the non typical protagonists, and the non reliance on jumpscares. As for the creature designs I think it also plays that general audiences like to see the same things over and over again. With todays sensory overload of content people have harder time picking something out, so they rely on familiar tropes and story beats. Very broadly speaking of course.

@concept.byfran

2 жыл бұрын

Same, I love it. It is my all time favourite movie, mostly because of Keith Thompson's designs. But also because of those extremly scary praying scenes and the whole atmosphere. Glad to have someone else appreciate this awesome movie!

As much as I get what your trying to say, I’d say this video oversimplified the problem. Some issues I see on the argument is one yes computers have opened up a universe of possibilities but to say it’s easier I’d say is wrong. For one I am an artist who has experience in both traditional and digital artwork and often jump back to traditional because it is easier, also I don’t know of any digital artist who doesn’t also have a sketchbook they draw in. When time comes to pitch an idea many artists will take there traditional art and transfer it to digital. Another issue is I’d argue artists today struggle just as much with deadlines and pay cuts as those of the past. If you want to take a look at how many CGI companies struggle to stay in business because of deadlines and lack of pay. It is a very competitive and grueling industry that never gets enough credit if you ask me. Another thing is often monsters all have a similar theme because most artists take inspiration from things that creep us out in real life, why do so many monsters (including the famous xenomorph) have long unnatural limbs? Well partially because there just that unnatural so we get creeped out, just think about spiders and other insects that creep us out. My point is there are only so many ways to visually portray a monster. A couple other things I disagree with is one I wouldn’t say all these artists go to the same schools, there is of course those popular schools that everyone knows but that’s like saying all lawyers go to Yale or Stanford. And this last thing is a little issue but “speed painting” is a term that literally refers to a video in which an artists process is spread up for someone to watch, the art themselves could take multiple hours or days to complete. I’d say one of the real big issues is honestly executives, I know it’s been stated a lot in the comment section but the artists who create these designs don’t have much freedom in there decision making, they may come up with some cool scary monster that gets shot down because the hirer ups don’t want to take a chance. Also I’d say monsters typically look similar, what makes certain ones stand out is how there presented in the story being told. Lastly I’d say the reason why so many monsters look like the demigorgen today is the same reason there were a lot of similar looking monsters after Alien was released, higher ups wanting to capitalize on something popular. Now obviously these are my opinions so feel free to agree or disagree or even point out something that may be wrong, but I just felt like this video not only simplified the problem but also put modern day creatives in a bad light when they really don’t deserve that, so I wanted to throw in my two cents about why I disagreed.

@idkrgb7070

2 жыл бұрын

I completely agree with you, and quite frankly, hate this video

@goodial

2 жыл бұрын

many good points here. Another I'd say is that the concept artists don't work alone on their project. They are there to bring a director's and a studio's vision to life.

@Dan_Kanerva

2 жыл бұрын

@@idkrgb7070 you don't hate the video , you hate the opinion of the guy who made it because is different than yours... and that's al right . that's very human . But just be honest

@zillauniverse7208

2 жыл бұрын

I’d highly recommend you go check out the Omni Viewer response to this video as well

@eleanorligon7941

2 жыл бұрын

@@zillauniverse7208 I just finished the video, thanks for the recommendation, I definitely agree with many of his points. One point that he made that really stuck with me was the question, is really a “problem”? I have been thinking about that ever sense I watched this nerdstalgics video. I’d argue that it really isn’t a problem per say because as Omni Viewer points out this is a trend so it’ll change over time as all trends do. Plus there has always been trends like this and whether you like them or not they still influence Hollywood in more good ways than bad I’d argue. Again thanks for the video suggestion and all the comments and likes I’ve gotten on my comment, I wasn’t expecting so much feedback so thank you.

Another problem is that they show too much. Less is more... An audiences imagination being left to fill in the blanks makes things more scary. Also now matter how good the CGI is, it just doesn't evoke the same visceral response as a practical effect.

@lennysummers6672

2 жыл бұрын

represent the blair witch project

@erickh555

2 жыл бұрын

''now matter how good the CGI is, it just doesn't evoke the same visceral response as a practical effect'' this will age like milk

@HonestWatchReviewsHWR

2 жыл бұрын

@@erickh555 Well I'd argue that CGI has gotten to the point of more or less photo realism. But despite that you can still tell when it's CGI (with people, creators etc. Not with objects and backgrounds soo much). You might not exactly know why, but you just have this feeling that something isn't quite right. I'm personally of the opinion that CGI is best used to enhance practical effects, or as I mentioned earlier, for backgrounds etc. I just don't think that fully CGI people or creatures etc work.

@erickh555

2 жыл бұрын

@@HonestWatchReviewsHWR the problem is the animation, not so much the 3d rendered character, also the simulations, they always look so cartoonish, thats why you cant tell with objects but its so painfully obvious with characters

@HonestWatchReviewsHWR

2 жыл бұрын

@@erickh555 That's a fair point.

Just look at Evangelion’s Angels, their designs are unorthodox yet so memorable

@broadbandislife

2 жыл бұрын

[screaming in fractals] TBF animation always had far more leeway by its very nature.

@HilbertXVI

2 жыл бұрын

God Ramiel's design is simple but just beautiful

@OrbitOnceAround

2 жыл бұрын

The only memorable angel is the one that’s shaped like a pyramid and that’s shaped like a gay boy and Lilith

@theatheistbear3117

2 жыл бұрын

@@OrbitOnceAround All angel designs are memorable. Zeruel, Sachiel, Shamshel, etc.

@megustaelpan1527

2 жыл бұрын

@@theatheistbear3117 Literally who?

I think one of the good examples of a modern movie monster is the aliens from Edge of Tomorrow. They move like they’re not from this dimension, they’re not humanoid or look anything like they’re from Earth (unlike a lot of aliens in movies today). They also show the beneficial side of CGI in how creative we can get.

@concept.byfran

2 жыл бұрын

Yup those guys were really cool

@jcohasset23

Жыл бұрын

When you could see them they were great looking. My problem is too often all you could see is this thing that's moving around so much that you can't tell what it is other than that it's obviously cgi.

@dunkyking6310

9 ай бұрын

It's crazy what the monsters look like that are in the manga Edge of Tomorrow was based off of. I do like the movie versions better tho

Is it that they don't know how to do the monster mash?

@Nerdstalgic

2 жыл бұрын

I guess there are two problems

@tylerhackner9731

2 жыл бұрын

That’s a huge part of it yeah lol

I don’t think it’s the new monsters that are the problem, it’s the Director and film crew. A good script and director should be able to make a bottle of water sitting on a counter terrifying.

@Gibbons3457

2 жыл бұрын

It's not simply that they aren't scary, it's that once you've seen one, you've seen them all. They are share from a very limited design language. It'd be like if 90% of all films were all inspired by just Hamlet.

@naanbread4523

2 жыл бұрын

the way the monster in cloverfield was presented and revealed was amazing imo, it was vague, yet scary and they really played with the scale of it, you don't even get a shot of the full thing in daylight till the end, but the monster design itself was really boring and unoriginal

@xwagner76

2 жыл бұрын

Script? What are you suggesting? Spending less money on useless CGI and hiring actual WRITERS?!!?!?

A lot of this also applies to sci-fi spaceships and other objects. Especially in games, it's hard to find a spaceship that has personality.

@getsideways7257

2 жыл бұрын

Ugh, sci-fi spaceships... Personality be damned, at least let them start making any sense first.

@SinceWeLastDreamt

Жыл бұрын

"Firefly" as a good example for a genuine and lovely designed spaceship with character.

@151monka

Жыл бұрын

Sanctuary 3 ship from Borderlands 3 is pretty well done.

"You know a Stan Winston monster when you see it" Cites Stan Winston's Alien Queen as a HR Giger design.

Honestly, the most recent versions of Godzilla are probably the most iconic modern monster designs.

@Godzilla-jr5gi

2 жыл бұрын

nothing can beat toho tho

@elcuy3544

2 жыл бұрын

@@Godzilla-jr5gi Gotta love those charmingly goofy puppets, they're genuinely great in their own way.

I would love for some Trevor Henderson (creator of Siren Head, Long Horse, etc) style monsters to start popping up in movies. Films with that uncanny and nostalgic monster look are totally untapped right now, but I would easily blow all of my money to see a movie like that. (Also, combo that with liminal spaces. Sounds like an instant masterpiece horror film to me).

@combatraptor4592

2 жыл бұрын

@Carson Lawler it's like an area with lots of corners that you can't see around, its designed to make you feel uneasy and paranoid, at least thats what I've heard

@TheWaterlooWatermelon

2 жыл бұрын

@Carson Lawler They're like those weirldy familiar places that were popular on KZread about a year ago.

@leetri

2 жыл бұрын

@Carson Lawler A liminal space is a threshold (liminal literally means "on the threshold") between two destinations. A corridor, a parking lot, an airport, etc. They're places of transport, you're not expected to stay there for extended periods of time. Because we normally associate these places with lots of traffic of people coming and going, it's almost surreal to see them empty and abandoned. That's what creates unease and a subliminal (below the threshold) dread.

As an artist I feel this to be very unfair, many of the monsters you mention have distinct color pallets and shape design, especially the kaiju from first pacific rim. Artist this days have to work quick because thats what the studio wants. Additionally I think the esthetic of grey monsters is so prolifuc because producers see it and can believe its real. If we have a crazier movie like Guardians of the Galaxy or the new Suicide Squad you can get very weird momsters. Starro and the t-rex octopus thing are the first that come to mind.

@srijangupta.automobile6320

Жыл бұрын

Starro was such an awesome and unique monster. I wish more of these quirky, unrealistic but fun monsters were made

@ultragkart6789

Жыл бұрын

Totally agree. This video had some good points but not the best examples. The original pacific rim had designs that are unique as it gets!

This is why I love subnautica, the designs are unique and still pretty chilling when most video game monsters and movie monsters all look the same

@dunkyking6310

9 ай бұрын

Subnautica also takes scientific principles into account with its alien designs. I would recommend the video "Alien Ecosystems" by Terrible Writing Advice

The Ritual had one of the most original and impressive monsters of the past decade. The reveal was great, and it genuinely felt terrifying because it looked so unique.

@SLASHERHEATH

2 жыл бұрын

To play the devil's advocate I was really surprised to see The Ritual's monster singled out, but I guess my view comes from a more filmic viewpoint. Unlike Alien where the xenomorph's appearance is slowly teased and intensifies your curiosity, The Ritual pretty much just suddenly shows you the whole beast at once and I thought it was overkill. Though I do wish the advent of cgi would have lead us towards less anthropomorphic designs, as largely necessitated by practical effects.

@leetri

2 жыл бұрын

@@SLASHERHEATH They actually show her 3 times before she appears in full, but you have to pay attention. The first time is when one of them is staring into the woods, and you see one of her hands grasping a tree before she slowly moves it and freaks the guy out. The second time is when they're climbing up a steep incline, in the background you can see the head and upper body moving between the trees. The third time is when one of the guys gets grabbed and impaled in the tree, you can see her head, arms and some of her body when she pulls the dude back. On top of that there's some evidence of her handiwork, such as the impaled deer that also sparks intrigue. The big reveal is that she has the body of an elk since we already know how her head and arms look like and that she's really tall.

It's not really the creature designers so much as the producers and directors. I studied 3D for two years and generally they don't care about creativity, they want something that's easily marketable. It's one of the reasons that I decided not to pursue 3D. I went into that field wanting to do something creative and entirely my own but there isn't as much room for that anymore. It's an entirely undervalued field and as such a lot of productions aren't willing to give those studios enough time and money to try something new. The truth is the people who excel in 3D are people who are happy with long hours and don't mind making the same thing over and over. They're just cogs in a machine at work rather than artists. Most people at ILM or Weta or any other big 3D studio are severely overworked too. Productions just aren't as willing to take a chance at the moment. Just look at the regurgitated superhero, horror and action films that have been coming out over the last ten years. They're only just starting to go through a period of change but it will settle into a lull again one day. That's just how entertainment works.

@tescherman3048

2 жыл бұрын

I am a CGI artist. And I don't work in the entertainment industry, which is rife with exploitation. I work for a Fortune 500 company 40 hours/Week with vacation, health benefits & profit sharing. There are 9 of us on our team. And I make enough to have bought a house by myself, and so have my co-workers. I've been there 7 years and our team can often call the shots when it comes to creativity. And they are the smartest, goofiest and most fun team I have ever worked with. There are far more opportunities for CGI artists than most CGI artists think! Screw the shitshow that is Hollywood. The world is much bigger than that.

It's all in the eyes-Geiger's Xenomorph stood out because it didn't have eyes, and like the shark in Jaws it was barely seen. It was groundbreaking, but we overdosed on it. Most of us didn't even know what it looked like until we saw the toys, But by all the copy-cats, with eyes that were tiny, or on the extreme sides of its head, or non-existent, these monsters have no face, no expression, and cannot connect with us as characters. But one example- Frankenstein truly terrified audiences in its day, but we still connect with him because of the profound sadness and loneliness we felt emanating from him.

I recall watching the 'ice monster' creature that appeared in JJ Abrams first Star Trek film & literally thinking at the time - this thing looks like the people who designed the Cloverfield creatures just went through their 'reject' monster designs, picked one, tweaked it & thought yeah, that'll be fine. But one of my pet hates with monsters in a lot of films is when you get to that inevitable 'boss fight' climax scene with the protagonist & after very swiftly dispatching many other characters in the course of the film up to that point, they default to 'grab & throw across the room repeatedly' mode!!

@concept.byfran

2 жыл бұрын

Your comment made me laugh because I just saw the new "Antlers" movie where a huge wendigo kills like 6 people, two of them police officers. Then a woman and a sick child kill it with a single knife in a dark cave.

@Duothimir

Жыл бұрын

I can't help but think of the Cyberdemon in Doom 2016, which started the fight by grabbing Doomslayer through a door and throwing him across the room, then doing the "monster roar" (you know what I mean). Though, the Cyberdemon is an intelligent creature with a specific hatred of Doomslayer, who is himself a walking legend among the denizens of Hell. This isn't just a fight for survival, it's essentially a formal duel, and the Cyberdemon eschews grappling and monstrous theatrics (mostly) during the fight proper. I dunno, just a time where the cliches are justified and put to good use for wordless storytelling.

I think old movies played with horror to scare audiences while new movies demand in your face threats. All those 'new' monsters you mentioned share big claws, big teeth, are just huge in scale, etc. Frankenstein looks like I could find him in my local dive bar. While they are cinema classics, old monsters pose an insignificant threat compared to new monsters. Blame it on our want for the here and now scares. Edit for more thoughts after reading the comments. Another thing is that these monsters look extremely alien yet have humanish proportions that are stretched until it is unsettling. A face that opens up, limbs that stretch to the ground, animalistic behavior with little or no regard for it's own life. These monsters are in your face creepy and scary and I think that's what the general public wants.

@wierdsnake

2 жыл бұрын

Xel'lotath has the best monster autopsies.

@mds_main

2 жыл бұрын

I agree, it's a trend that is also present outside of the entertainment business, everyone tries to build monsters that are hyper aggressive, that possess uncanny valley features, that are inhumane and lovecraftian in size and scope and that are teeth filled and eager to eat you. In my opinion a monster doesn't need all of this to fulfil its role, Dracula and Frankenstein's Monster are already good examples of that. There is no more mystery, the danger is always in your face. It all adds up to the problem in my opinion, even if the design is good standalone.

I was with you until you said the issue lies in drawing with collages for speed is effectively less creative than paper and pencil. I recently gotten a drawing tablet that has allowed me to collage and draw. That technique has made it so much easier for me to produce a fast and accurate representation of whats in my head. Even just drawing on a tablet has been beneficial because I have less anxiety around marking the paper. Also more accuracy in defining lines, line weights, and strategically erasing. I do think that the issue pointed out in the video is clear, but I don't think good old fashion paper and pencil, practical effects, and good masks are the answer. They will all certainly be involved, but that's to constraining. You mentioned a select few were good at these effects. This is true, but it creates a bottle neck of creativity. Your solution to a artistic inbreeding is selective artistic cultivation. I believe that more people need to embrace CGI, drawing on computers, and making collages from pictures to draw over. That being said, they should also absolutely learn how to make the foam armor and the clay models of their monsters and spaceships. From there they can take a picture with it lit how they want, and draw or render on top of that. This would make A sort of fusion of practical and digital arts. That would allow more people than ever to engage with art in a fast and creative way. So many people could produce such creative styles.

@THEPELADOMASTER

2 жыл бұрын

A blend of practical and cgi is always better than only one of them. But the point in this video about how you draw the concept art is ridiculous.

I have noticed this very thing in movie monsters today but could never put my finger on what it was! Thank you for making this video! It's one of the best you have ever made!

That is such a good point!! I've been working on a zombie-mutant-monster screenplay and this video made me so excited to re-work the monsters!!!! Thank you!!!!

Finally, a video talking about how Monsters are wack now a days, John Carpenter’s monster was so cool because it had no definitive form.

@hntrl8880

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah The Thing was the best sci fi horror monstrosity

@endgamenull3562

2 жыл бұрын

I watched The Thing for the first time last night, and I was absolutely blown away by how good the monster was! I don't think I've ever been so disturbed by a movie monster, that first appearance of the thing will haunt my dreams for a long time

@devinsaylor1853

2 жыл бұрын

@@endgamenull3562 It is my favorite monster movie! Even more so than Alien!

@stevenscott2136

2 жыл бұрын

Also, the Thing won't just eat you, it'll REPLACE you and use your knowledge against your kind. And it could be ANYWHERE -- your buddy, your dog, the bloodstains on your shirt, the bacteria in your drinking water. Your own HAND could be the Thing, and you won't know it until the contamination reaches your brain. It's scary because of its seeming inevitability. While most monsters can be seen, tracked, and definitively killed -- even if it does take a giant mecha or a nuke. With the Thing, the only victory is just that you aren't assimilated... yet.

@brettwood1351

2 жыл бұрын

@@stevenscott2136 Well it was based on Cancer.

The problem that bothered me with the scene wasn't the appearance of the monster but the sheer fact that it was a pushover. I get that probably took a while for those kids to prepare for that fight and whatever. The rule I go by is if it's a monster it should be harder to kill than an animal. I don't think that to those kids could kill a hippo that easily.

@futurestoryteller

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah, Eleven might be able to drown a Hippo.

@highadmiraljt5853

Жыл бұрын

Counterpoint: one for the kids is literally a psychic with slight realm bending powers. In scenes without her, it’s usually near unkillable.

This one isn't technically a film, but the monsters in The Last of Us was amazingly terrifying. Especially since it has some truth with it as that can happen to ants when exposed to certain fungus spores.

@melvinfranco2142

2 ай бұрын

Ophiocordyceps?

I created my own monster. It was a giant, ogre/troll with wings, that lived and hunted in the snowfields. It was called a Drangull. I also made another monster that was just a formless mass of Ether and Mana that dissolved everything it touched. That one was called a Rine.

You kinda had me at first then you started showing stuff like the MUTOs and the Kaiju from Pacific Rim and you lost me. Even the White Spikes have originality to their design and abilities due to their unique presentation. Their designs and color palates are vastly different, plus it’s more the behavior that makes something interesting than the design. I don’t get why dragons are included either since western dragons have a consistent design in every adaptation of them. Also I don’t like the generalization, a lot of the points are broad and have no connection with the argument since there’s such a broad stroke you’re painting.

@HilbertXVI

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you

@futurestoryteller

2 жыл бұрын

I would bet money the dragons are only there to demonstrate the base CGI texture he was referencing, especially since modern CG dragons have lumpy uneven skin, and almost never something like the smooth symetrical scales you'd see on a snake. By implication all dragons must look the same because you can't personally imagine the subtle ways they could be different. Not the best counter argument, imo

@jacobtheorangeyoshi8710

2 жыл бұрын

@@futurestoryteller but still there are unique dragons in Harry Potter like the dragon that’s found imprisoned in the bank, plus the Jabberwocky from Alice In Wonderland which is black with a more thin frame. Like I said behavior is one thing to keep in mind with monsters, design is one thing but how it’s executed actually matters.

While I do agree that limitations open up certain doors for creators, I disagree with the thesis of this video. Many of the vfx artists working today have most likely created wonderfully unique creatures that got scrapped along the way. Executives have always been a pain in the ass for creative processes, but now when they can essentially request virtually anything they will request something they already know. My point being that the problem lies within the request itself, not necessarily the artist(s) up for the task

@nickmonks9563

2 жыл бұрын

I do wonder if, as you say, the problem is very similar to the music problem in modern film. "Hey, can you do me a track that sounds just like the one that was in that other blockbuster last year?"

The monsters in Attack The Block are some of the best I’ve ever seen. Definitely watch it if you’re interested in original monster movies, it’s even got a pre Star Wars John Bogeya as the lead.

This was very enjoyable. I do find sometimes it is best to leave the monster unseen or mostly unseen, but I realize that might not fit the intended entertainment purposes of a given film and might not be the best way to get those opening weekend box office receipts.

I've always thought another important point that this doesn't touch on is the human psyche. Why are these homogenized monster designs so successful? Look at the Quiet Place and Demagorgan designs. The lanky, angular, sinuous limb structures emphasize their speed and strength, which inherently emphasizes our inability to run away or fight back. Helplessness is the easiest way to propogate fear. It's why so many people are afraid of deep water and the dark. It also gives them a bug-like appearance, which scores up there with some of the most common human fears. Bugs are very alien to us compared to mammals because of how incredibly different their anatomy is to us. Additionally, they are very visceral in appearance. The demigorgan's maw and Quiet Place aliens' hearing organs show an unsettlingly large amount of visceral tissue. That makes humans feel uncomfortable because we generally like to keep all of that stuff inside us. Lovecraft and Kronenberg did amazing work in exploiting this aspect of the human psyche and most people have been borrowing from it ever since. That's my take on why the designs are so successful and safe, and why it's hard to get visual design teams to branch out of those archetypes.

@GreaterGrievobeast55

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah they do have unmistakable similarities but they still have uniqueness in their execution!

All the old ones are a man-eating shark, a giant gorilla, a dead man with a large forehead... All simple designs based on an already existing creature.

3:43 man I was not expecting to see the Star Wars Ewok caravan of courage monster here lmaoo

I love the flashing lights warning in the beginning, it’s like having a bullet that tells you to get out of the way after it’s fired

I'm caught up on something. You admonish the industry for having creature creators coming from the same 4 or 5 schools, but then later I your video, you are nostalgic for a time when the ability to create creatures was limited to a few people. Isn't that contradictory?

Lol I'm sorry but this video reeks of "it was better in my day because all we had was bubblegum and duct tape!" Like I got so tired of hearing editors say "well back in MY day we had to hand splice the film!" Great, thanks grandpa, I've had to hand splice film too, and ya know what? I'd still take Avid over a Steenbeck any day. Plus, this is very subjective. Yes, there are obvious not-so-inspired monsters, but there are good ones out there too (yes, even the full CG kind)! I actually liked the monsters in The Tomorrow War (even though the movie sucked), particularly because the female was badass (I was honestly rooting for her in the end), but also the way they were introduced after characters mentioned "all I can hear is the clicking"--thought that was a great detail. And the MUTOs in Godzilla weren't meant to cause fear, but God did I feel for the female when her nest exploded (the sound designers did great work for her pained cry). Mothra was gorgeous, and I enjoyed her fight with Rodan. You have to remember not every monster is meant to invoke fear, they serve other purposes too, but you kept comparing them to only monsters that the audience was meant to fear.

@futurestoryteller

2 жыл бұрын

Now you're over-simplifying the argument. Pretty sure this guy is younger than me, and wouldn't surprise me if he's younger than you. I'm guessing we all grew up on CGI, it's not about "back in his day" it really is true that limitations breed creativity. In a less overtly artistic but tangible sense it's why you sign up to play football, baseball, hockey, or golf and not Calvin Ball. Rules make play interesting and art is play where you make the rules.

@bigbird4481

2 жыл бұрын

@@futurestoryteller yo I've never seen someone reference Calvin ball that's cool man

One thing I also thought changed movies not for the better when it comes to monsters is, back in the day you couldn’t show the monster to much because it was a costume so the director wouldn’t want you to really get a good look at it. So they would show you signs and flashes and your imagination would fill in the rest. Till the end when they would reveal the monster. Now days because of CGI they can show you the monster in the first 5 minutes and basically say this is it , this is what your supposed to be afraid for this movie. Kinda kills the imagination.

As someone working on a horror novel with my own illustrations, this is immensely useful criticism for how to make more interesting and unique creature designs.

I feel like these designs are all too similar and familiar. Also they don't tap into what causes us to truly fear something; the unknown and unexpected. Even with practical effects, older movies often masked it with dark lighting and great writing so that its believable that something that scary can exist and it terrified us. Also because we would see the flaws of the suit if it was revealed to light. It feels like they rely too much on action and cgi today and it takes the horror aspect out of it. Horror is often better shown simply and at its worst (best?) when that is the only thing to focus on.

@liefnova3534

2 жыл бұрын

Or, taking from Lovecraft: To not be described. To see the threat is far less terrifying than what we can imagine the threat to be.

@shikniwho7215

2 жыл бұрын

well back in the day, we also have stuff like that too. There just too many monsters look like a big chunk of meats with few tentacles here and there wiggling around or bunch of Gremlims like small monster because we are limited to puppet and effect to made the creature. There are not a good way to show those tentacles too so it just look like someone wiggling a rope around but for some reason, 90's movie really love to use tentacles, The thing, Tremor, The visitor, even the Blob which still have one of the best movie kill still go for tentacles in the later half.

@stevenle9960

2 жыл бұрын

Yea a lot of modern horror movies instantly ruin the horror element by showing their monster in too much detail. If you can see the monster then you can run from it, stab it, kill it. If you can’t see it your mind fills in the blanks it becomes an idea, and you can’t kill an idea

@carpedm9846

2 жыл бұрын

@@shikniwho7215 yeah its like the saying goes "old art wasnt better than the art of today. The only difference is that you wont see bad old art." Alien was one of the Good Old Arts like somehing from Beethoven.

@shikniwho7215

2 жыл бұрын

@@carpedm9846 people also look more fondly to old stuff too. With how recap movie's channels have been blow up lately, i see a lot comment in old movie with "man, this movie is underrated". That kind of movie just not feel as special back then because we have so many with similar plots back then to care.

yes! i watched a quiet place part II last night, and all i could think about was how familiar and unscary the monsters were. i think it would have been much better if we didn’t see so much of them - less is more. the unknown is always scarier

Yes!! This sums up so many of my thoughts in movies and series of late.

I tried to explain this not too long ago and couldn't articulutate it/couldn't think of enough examples to prove my point so thank you for this!!

This was actually a much more interesting topic than I thought it would be. Thanks for the very well done video!

As someone who got to grow up in Japan, there's a whole plethora of weird and insane designs from ultraman, kamen rider and even the guyver. I mean, there's a literal kaiju from ultraman that's basically a dinosaur on a tank. Moreover, a lot of the Godzilla monsters, as I'm sure everyone is aware, all all separate and iconic, thus being instantly recognizable from a silhouette alone (Mothra, Rodan, Varan, Biollante, Orga, to name a few). I get that Western monster design has become rather homogeneous since the early 2000's, but they are still iconic in their own ways. In the end, if that's still not up to yours or anyone's snuff, then consider looking at the weird and wonderful monster designs from Japan. You'll get a kick out of it, as have I.

@brettwood1351

2 жыл бұрын

Heck, look at just Hedorah and Gigan, who were in back to back movies, but are visually, intentionally, completly different.

@melvinshaw7574

2 жыл бұрын

Having started reading Junji Ito's work, and just opening myself up to Japanese horror in general, I agree one hundred percent about the sheer insanity that is Japan's monster designs. I would love to see that influence carry over a bit.

@Delta5Qmp

2 жыл бұрын

I'm watching Big Man Japan right now and it has CG creatures of incomparable creativity that I will always remember. I think the big thing missing from the films in this video is the hiring of artists like Giger or Junji Ito. They hire hollywood 'creature designers' instead of amazing surrealists and nightmare artists. When their design becomes a job instead of an art, you get the stuff in the video.

@donflamingo795

2 жыл бұрын

Even now Alien Baltan is still an iconic race in Ultraman series.

@youkofoxy

2 жыл бұрын

Isn't Orga a jab at Godzilla 1998? Let me check, yes it probably is. Anyway, one just need to look at Digimon to see how crazy it can get. I noticed some patterns there, however each design and it's digievolution will have you scratching your head. Even Pokémon, gets quite creative, despite obvious guide lines and (more clear) evolution rules. So yeah, it sounds more like a problem on this side if the world until you look into anime ans see it is a industry problem.

When I first saw the giant sea creature in Aquaman, I remember being like, "Why does it look exactly like the Empress Leviathan from Subnautica?"

It’s kinda funny, one of the most scary monster concepts I’ve seen in recent memory were the Guardian concept art in the Breath of the Wild behind the scenes art book. For all their family friendly charm, there are still some designers at Nintendo that can create some seriously chilling creatures!

@concept.byfran

2 жыл бұрын

Where did you see this?

Different monsters is one of the reasons for me the Witcher 3 works so well. As it's based on Polish folklore the monsters were unlike anything I'd ever seen before and it made the world so much more interesting. It also helps that many of the monsters are colourful which is a welcome change from the usual grey or brown.

@pcm1011

2 жыл бұрын

Don't forget Bloodborne

@rottensquid

2 жыл бұрын

Witcher 3 monster designs, over the top as some are (I'm looking at you, zebra-striped fiend), was exactly what I thought of. Some really gorgeous, hideous concepts in there.

After remembering the examples you brought, I sadly have to agree. I really like monsters movies, so I hope originality and creativity will one day come back. CGI has so much potential, and we are wasting it!

This is exactly why I'm so glad that "the thing" was made in 1982. The whole abomination feels so much more alive and repulsive.

You made really good points in this video! Can I request you to make another video talking about good (and possibly iconic) monster designs in the recent years?

The TV show "alien worlds" has some freakish looking monsters. I would love to see those concepts translate over into movies today.

@Dan_Kanerva

2 жыл бұрын

what we need is the guy who made "all tomorrows" to be founded by James Cameron to finally take his masterpiec einto the big screen

@petrfedor1851

2 жыл бұрын

I thing that show Is not So much horror movie design but speculative evolution. Which produce some of thé most memorable creatures.

You have some good points but you have greatly misrepresented how concept artists work. I have worked in the industry for many years as a creature designer and I never speed paint for designs. Thats often a thing artists do outside of work because they only have limited time.

It's like the mind flayer and mutos being the exact same shape

I’m glad he brought up the monster from The Ritual. That was totally unique and really well thought out. He’s right in that it’s design was so much different than what’s being designed today. I remember watching it and they would occasionally show you a part of the monster hiding behind a tree and each time you would see something different so it was hard to figure exactly what it was. There’s so much to that design yet it comes off great as one really cohesive monster.

I hate when they use flashing lights for “artistic effect”. It honestly just tries to make fight scenes seem less hokey (ala Rise of Skywalker finale)

@geraldmartin7703

Жыл бұрын

Lots of flashing lights near the end of Alien.

As a music producer this hit me so hard, we have endless sound and sampling capabilities but paradoxically we end up using alot of the same sounds. And the parallels are so clear with design and music, the tech is so advanced but we are all using it and at the end of the day, a group of ppl made that tech which is alot more A.I and assisted logic as opposed to modular compared to retro production tech. And honestly I've made some of my best music on my early crappy setups. When you become professional you look for the quickest turn around which is probably why there's a crisis of imagination in pop culture right now. Anyway thanks for raising this flag I'll be alot more aware of the creative process from now on and be intentional about it.

It blows my mind that people can go to a theater, see a giant mess of teeth, drool, and claws, and say “wow that’s that’s so cool and scary”. That is just truly mind boggling let me tell you.

My man. You did my boys the skull crawler and ghidorah dirty, they don't even fit on the same category as the others you've shown

Most people could name all the classic movie monsters because of how unique they all were. The predator, xenomorph, Godzilla and all his friends etc. But new movie monsters are hard to name and know what movie they came from cause they are all so similar. It was nice to learn why this is

@DzinkyDzink

2 жыл бұрын

Because there are no new ideas behind them: 1. Great Wall, Edge of Tomorrow, Tomorrow War - Evil Predatory Hive Mind. 2. Will Smith kid in space/A Quite Place - Unrealistic superpredator with a handicap. 3. Cloverfield, MUTO - a daddy long legs kaiju. I am too tired and drunk to continue the list, but you have seen the flashes of many more of them in this video. What unifies them is that they are all second hand. On the other hand we have Paxtonverse: Alien - bursts from a hosts taking upon its' traits to better hunt, Predator - a high tech Trophy Hunter Gatherer, Terminatot - an infiltration robot with LIVING tissue over it sent BACK IN TIME.

@sarahbelle81

2 жыл бұрын

@@DzinkyDzink IMO the MUTOs are more unique than you give them credit for.

@Dan_Kanerva

2 жыл бұрын

@@sarahbelle81 only because their EMP ability , their cool sound desing , and sexual dimorphism... other than that they are very generic

@kennethsatria6607

2 жыл бұрын

@@Dan_Kanerva Yeah they kinda are doomed to just be a placeholder kaiju until the toho monsters could be borrowed.

@Dan_Kanerva

2 жыл бұрын

@@kennethsatria6607 should have made them white with dark spots , and give them fur or feathers instead of just elephant skin... that would give them TON of unique-ness

Nothing more iconic than the xenomorph inner little jaw.

The Pacific Rim's kaijū are designed with features that are familiar in nature but are meant to be as bizarre and almost otherworldly as many are in the genre, especially Gamera and Ultraman. As for the Titans in the MonsterVerse, the monster designs in that franchise are the best in recent years, they're the perfect blend of modernization while keeping the overall silhouettes classic and recognizable. Godzilla retains his large and bulky "man-in-suit" aesthetic while updating him to look like an actual creature. A similar thing can be said for Kong as well who he greatly resembles his original 1933 counterpart sculpted by Marcel Delgado; he is the only incarnation of King Kong to date that actually looks like the original. Rodan's new look is the greatest design since the original. Mothra desperately needed an update. I'm a huge fan of MechaGodzilla's new design being a mix of classic G1 Transformers and the T-800 Terminator skeleton. And King Ghidorah? There are not enough words in the English language to describe how perfect his design is. What I'm saying is that I may partially understand your point, but I disagree with with anything regarding Pacific Rim and The MonsterVerse.

The way it's filmed nowadays also contributes a lot, in the past we seen a glimpse of the monster, nowadays we presence his full body

While designs like the Predator are influential, the film's plot isn't as memorable. Meanwhile the story is what made Stranger Things and A Quiet Place popular, not the monster design. If we look hard enough, there are plenty of forgettable plots in movies with great designs and vice versa. Combine the two and we get films like Alien, The Thing, Pan's Labyrinths, or-as mentioned-The Ritual.

@MasonMcLeodFilms

2 жыл бұрын

Don’t think it’s quite right to say plot of alien and predator and the thing aren’t memorable, they’re memorable in their simplicity, I already forget what actually happens in a quiet place other than there’s a deaf girl and they’re on a farm

I found this video interesting as an armature sci-fi writer. One of my monstrous alien species (the kind that can't be reasoned with) is all smooth and actually quite pleasing on the eye, properly proportioned and with no teeth or claws to speak of. The terror comes from what they can do to you- both physically and psychology, being telepathic and feeding off neural energy.

@joeparrigen4982

2 жыл бұрын

Sounds cool.

I love monster movies, and it’s great to see more and more of them.. But you are absolutely right. They are extremely similar.. And the ones that stick out, are the ones I remember. Like edge of tomorrow, life, critters, and gremlins… Yeah gremlins might fall into the same category, but it’s the lore and rules surrounding the gremlin that makes you remember it.. Slither had some good stuff too… Anyways, great video.. Subscribed!

Edge of Tommrow is a pretty good exception to this. They were designed with an algorithm determining their movements. Very creative exception. Great video.

Let's make one thing clear: art takes time no matter the medium. One isn't inherently faster than the other; it depends on the artist and their skill level at that medium. I can't ask a sculptor who does abstracts to paint precise lines an architect does. Or ask an oil painter to reproduce the same thing in ink. The mediums work differently and that causes time to be used differently in each medium. It's like when a water colourist needs to add black line work in. The artist must wait for the paint to dry or else the line work won't be crisp. Let's stop degrading digital artists to hold up the "true artist" elitist BS that a lot of traditional art lovers recite to the irritation to actual traditional artists.

@kraziiXIII

2 жыл бұрын

I really enjoyed the video but that line of commentary really rubbed me the wrong way. Like I agree with the critique of how there is a "CalArts style" and a lot of design is just a rehash of what has been done before due to groupthink and "make what sells".

@distantsails

2 жыл бұрын

@@kraziiXIII Thanks, I voiced a similar criticism in a comment. This point in particular really perpetuates the stereotype that digital art is somehow lazier or worse than traditional mediums. You can focus on speed and efficiency just as much on pencil and paper. I feel the video in general pins the blame of a lack of creativity in the industry today way too much on the artists and mediums of today, rather than addressing the actual reason which is that executives and audiences just have an expectation of how monsters look. This is just the current swing of the design pendulum. Just think about how all Pixar, Disney, Illumination movies look the same. No way you'd say that it's because the artists only look at each others' work, when there's an ocean of historical art to draw inspiration from. It's just what viewers expect and want to see. Additionally, it's a totally unfair comparison to hold the Stranger Things monster (and similar ones) next to monsters like Dracula or Frankenstein's monster. If one of them burst through the portal it would be totally jarring, the context places some design restrictions necessarily.

@kraziiXIII

2 жыл бұрын

@@distantsails oh yeah exactly! Like we wouldn't have chararicture artists or portrait makers doing commissions in big cities if they weren't fast as hell! It all comes down to what the executives think will sell and what is cheapest to create. Like Pixar had to come up with new techniques to make wet hair and clothes in the Incredibles and DreamWorks had to come up with a way to do fur and clothes on their characters in Kung Fu Panda. Necessity is the mother of creation. But executives don't want new or innovative tech

@jeffmayo6002

2 жыл бұрын

His comment makes me think he doesn't realize that speed drawings are just normal drawings played at superspeed. Also blaming artists for copied designs when its more likely a producer or director came in last minute and said make it more like stranger things. So the changes needed to be rushed.

@goodial

2 жыл бұрын

@@jeffmayo6002 well the example in the video is sped up. But concept artists work in a very demanding environment where they have to deliver large amounts of ideas in limited time. Work efficiency gets increased and they can deliver amazing artworks in short time. There is a facebook group called "Daily Spitpaint". The task is to create something in 30 minutes. You'd be amazed what some of these artists manage to create in 30 minutes ;)

When humans seem to outrun monsters for no apparent for other than suspense, then they lose all fear facto. A Quiet Place 2 was a perfect example. Telling me the carrying her baby was easily able to outrun that monster in the warehouse? They had to have stumbled upon the clumsiest creature ever.

Being someone who works in this industry, the problem is not at all as described in this video. Concept design has never been so varied as what it is now. The problem isn't that all the artists do the same style, its that the clients and the studios tend to brief and ask for tried and proven kind of designs, a lot of money is involved in the pipeline. Current design trends and technically reliable designs (skin/muscle is easier than liquid & hair to render and animate for eg) tend to mean we have a lot of overlap. A lot of the designs shown in this video originated as pencil sketches despite them being 3D sculpts in the final project, the process thesedays is really freeform and its about what gets the job done there are directors that sign off pencil sketches and others that sign off clay models, as well as zbrush. The craziest designs tend to be left on the cutting room floor, but not always To think that previous eras of cinema didnt reference each other is madness, everything is a remix, you should definitely watch the documentary.