
One of the best parts of blogging is starting new features that are invariably forgotten, scuffed up, stepped on and finally, mercifully, left for dead. "I'm starting a new feature..." is bloggerspeak for "I'm bored and have an idea that I will stick with for one or two posts, maybe three, and then move on. Hope you're not expecting too much!" I've done it and most other film bloggers have done it too. Whether or not they want to own up to the whole sordid affair is their business. But here's the thing:
I'm starting a new feature!
And like a gambler convinced he's finally figured out a way to beat the system I am here to assure you it will not be forgotten. Why? Because in my feverish obsession with editing together images and effects and music I have already created enough clips for this feature to last well into 2011. I purposely held off starting it until I was absolutely positive I had enough clips to carry me through the lean years, as it were. And what is this new feature (hold for maximum reader letdown)? A celebration of miniature and effects work from before 1993, the year Jurassic Park all but effectively killed the miniature business in Hollywood. There are still great examples of miniature work done post 1993, like Independence Day, but not many. My feature will focus on the craftsmanship behind the work that went into creating these little worlds on the silver screen.
One very important point: The quality of the film is of no concern as evidenced by my mention of Independence Day. My concern is to celebrate great hands-on effects work from a bygone era, even if it is the only thing worth seeing in the whole movie. Also, if making fun of how "fake" miniatures and models look is your bag these posts will hold little appeal for you. I'm not here to poke fun at the amazing work done by craftspeople and artisans that the average person couldn't duplicate with a million dollars and all the time in the world if their life depended on it. I'm here to celebrate it. Each clip will start with the title and director but will end with the names of all involved in the production of the effects sequence, often uncredited on the movie itself but recognized today thanks to the complete credit listings for most movies found on IMDB. On the flip side I am also not here to deride CGI which I recognize is enormously important in the effects world today and has changed the industry immeasurably. It's just that celebrating the lost art of miniature and model work is the primary concern.
We start with San Francisco, a 1936 W.S. Van Dyke production with Clark Gable, Jeanette MacDonald and Spencer Tracy. Its story of romance and business rivalry is well told but ends on a much too sentimental note to really embrace all that came before. Nonetheless, it is worth a viewing and the effects sequences for the earthquake are terrific.
Two of the most difficult things to deal with in miniature work are fire and water. Getting them "to scale" is impossible. A drop of water instantly betrays the size of the model ship it graces just as the size of a flame gives away the game for a model building. In San Francisco, effects photographer Loyal Griggs got around the problem as best he could by optically printing flames from a larger fire behind the models and making the models themselves as big as they could but still manipulative as miniatures.
Another problem faced with miniatures is the speed at which debris falls. On a larger scale it appears to fall more slowly and so high-speed cameras are employed to shoot the footage at many more frames per second than is custom so that it will play back at a slower but graceful speed. This sometimes but not always works. Note the dynamiting of the Victorian house in the clip. It is shown twice being dynamited. The first time looks like a model, the second time it appears much more natural. Why? The fault lies not with the high-speed photography but with the fact that the house was designed as a breakaway house rather than letting the explosives blow it apart. Thus, after the first explosion, we see whole sections of the house suddenly make clean breaks from the rest of the house betraying its model status. But the second explosion deals only with debris and as we see it fly into the air and slowly cascade down it has the look of the real thing.
Unfortunately, even on IMDB, the model makers are not listed, only members of the special effects crew. I hope that means the model makers as well because I would hate to not credit them for their extraordinary work. Also, as with any special effects sequence, sound is very important but the only credit is for the famed Douglas Shearer, head of the sound department. While he was certainly involved in many films of the era it was also common practice to simply put the head of the department on the credits (like Cedric Gibbons or Edith Head) giving short shrift to the many technicians working beneath them that often did most of the heavy lifting. I'd like to list the technicians who did such great Foley work on these scenes but sadly their names are lost to the ages.
Finally, let's remember that all the special effects members listed did some amazing full-scale work as well as seen when the street splits in two or the opera house starts breaking apart with hundreds of people inside. Enjoy.

32 comments:
Since I've never seen EARTHQUAKE, I only watched part of the clip, because I was worried about some stuff being spoiled for me. But you're right, it looks great.
This stuff has sort of been on my mind lately, because I recently watched CLOSE ENCOUNTERS again for the first time in ages. I also watched the making-of documentary, and there's an effect in the film that's really striking. It has nothing to do with miniatures, really, but it's the part where the clouds seem to be quickly closing around the top of the mothership. In the documentary, the effects guy (forgive me for spacing on his name) said they did that by pouring white paint into water and photographing the way the paint, due to the different viscosities of the two liquids, moved. It's a brilliant solution, and the effect is still stunning.
Yeah, Close Encounters is one of the ones I've already done an episode for. It's not all miniature and model work I'm focusing on but stuff like the liquid mixing you mention. In The Beginning or the End (1947), the first movie made about the Manhattan Project, they reproduce the Trinity test by setting up a large aquarium (about 10 or 12 feet high and wide) with a photo backdrop of the desert behind it, upside down. Then, filming this with a high speed camera, paint is quickly released into the top of the tank, billowing down to the bottom. Projected at normal speed and flipped right side up it produced a plausible atomic bomb explosion for the film. I love that kind of shit in movies! Those guys were brilliant!
Isn't amazing how, in the middle of an earthquake and with his head cut open, Clark Gable can still look so dapper?
Greg, I've never seen San Francisco before, but had only read about it and seen some stills. Considering the vintage, the effects work is quite outstanding. Sure you know it's a model, but I'm sure folks who saw this in the theater when it first came out were impressed. Also, since the actual earthquake predated our crazy 24/7 newscycle of today, this may have been the only "film" they saw to represent the actual event, thirty years prior.
I'm also an opponent of most CGI. I was at a client's office when the first trailer for 2012 premiered (the one with the Tibetan monk and the Himalayan tidal wave). The folks in the office were impressed with the effects, but my response was "if they are featuring all of this CGI in the trailer and the don't really tell you about the film, its premise or any of its actors, then it's probably a big POS with CGI carnival ride effects."
I'm looking forward to future entries in this series. Good luck!
Oh, and Bill, it's San Francisco not Earthquake although I think I want to do one on Earthquake as well. And go ahead and watch it. No story is given away, just effects shots.
Fred, I'd much rather see them try to conquer a tidal wave over the Himalayas with miniatures and models but I understand doing it with CGI now. And if you don't like CGI boy are you in the right place. I can't stand most of it. It has a Thomas Kincaid air brushed quality that I don't like while miniatures and models have a real here and now quality to them that keeps me in the movie.
It's been a very long time since I've seen San Francisco on a 16mm print, one summer in Martha's Vineyard. What impressed me is that when the buildings come apart, they still look like real buildings. There is much more attention to interior and structural detail than for example, the Japanese monster movies, where destroyed buildings are more clearly models.
Peter, that's a great point. When Gable observes the facades of the row houses come tumbling down the viewer can see detailed interiors which actually creates a much better illusion than the optically superimposed woman falling to her death does.
What a truly great idea and I loved this entry's clip, especially as I think 'San Francisco' has some really great elements to it, though it's been a while since I last saw it.
Thanks Sebina, it's great to see you here. The ending is one of the only things I don't like very much about it but everything that comes before is great. It's a much better movie than most disaster films, easily.
I loved that when the facade of what I took to be a miniature building crumbled, there was an actual person inside, so it wasn't miniature.
Isn't it sad to think someone somewhere might be watching these clips and just laughing? "So fake, haw haw haw!" And then he goes out and gets another tattoo.
Watching the trailer for 2012 (the backstory of which seems to be another Loveable Loser redeems himself with Ex-Wife and Children tale) I'm struck not by the spectacle but by how many people are dying in front of our eyes. There's a shot of John Cusack's daughter looking out the airplane window as her neighborhood cracks and falls in and the movie wants you to be saying "oooh, cool" but to this character she's watching all of her little friends die. Yeah, feel good movie of the year!
Crap - I can't open it to view. It'll have to wait for the superior talents of my Mac at home. But this is a great feature. I love miniature work.
Arbo, it's interesting to note the differences between then and now. So many of the nameless deaths in San Francisco are given a close-up before their final moment and a reaction shot by Gable that work together to give them humanity. In something like 2012 the dying takes place from a distance. We see the aircraft carrier plowed over D.C. on a massive tidal wave of destruction but don't see all the people dying below.
There's also a powerful and unsettling shot of Gable walking through the ruins and passing the propped up body of a dead man with a sign around his neck that says "Shot for Looting." The death in this movie takes place on a personal level that the effects never overwhelm.
Marilyn, I can get it fine here on both pc and mac. Hope it's not my damn link again. Shouldn't be though as I have abandoned YouTube for Photobucket. Anyway, I love miniature work too, just love it. I put together several of these before I even decided it was a feature. I just loved pulling together the clips. Later entries will have in-video analysis as well.
"Shot for Looting"
... by Marjoe?
I had to look that one up. Like I told Bill, I'm definitely going to do that one as well. I'll work in some clips of Marjoe for good measure.
Mrs. Arbogast and I watched Earthquake a few years ago with friends who lost a loved one on 9/11, which lingers at the back of our collective consciousness whether we speak of it or not. We all grew uncomfortably quiet during the bits with the damaged office building. Cheesy as it may be, Earthquake has gained a bit of grace in retrospect. But just a bit.
I haven't seen it in years but I have stills of the tech crew working on the miniatures, which were quite sizable. Again, I have a great respect for that kind of craftsmanship, especially in the service of a mediocre script because often times peer recognition comes only if the movie itself is well-received which makes little sense.
At any rate, I'm excited about the feature because miniature work gives me the thrills and the chills.
Of course, there's always The Beginning OF the End, with giant grasshoppers taking over Chicago. No phoney baloney CGI in that one, no stop-motion animation either. Just real live grasshoppers hopping around on 8x10 glossies of the city.
gee tharts a bit rough for a good old Clark Gable picture isn't it? :o)...and people rave over the panning of the wounded and dead in GWTW!
I saw Earthquake theatrically when it first came out in NYC. The audience seemed mostly to have a good time with the film. "Sensurround", rather than making me feel like I was in a real earthquake, made me think that a subway was rumbling underneath or nearby, an experience I understand is part of watching films at the Angelika Film Center in NYC today.
Flickhead, as I recall from my youth, the effect is, shall we say, less than stunning but certainly endearing.
We have our own version of Sensurround which involves our cat clawing at the couch, batting at our feet, jumping on our laps and kneading at our chests while we attempt to watch the movie.
Middy Minuit Fantastique.
Greg, I just so your response and, it may just be a coincidence, but the client who was raving about the 2012 trailer collects Thomas Kincaid.
This is a fantastic post and video. I love this movie - saw it a number of times a long time ago on TV - and I love miniature special effects. I also love disasters in movies. The earthquake in The Rains Came is a notable pre-CGI disaster.
Fred, hearing someone collects Thomas Kincaids sends a shiver down my spine. I have always connected the two, CGI landscapes and his paintings. I imagine people with that... uh... "aesthetic" would like one if they liked the other.
Hokahey, I put The Rains Came in my queue just yesterday for the expressed purpose of doing a Land Before CGI post on it. In fact, there are so many I want to do, this could easily become the focus of the blog (though it won't, just saying it could).
"I'm bored and have an idea that I will stick with for one or two posts, maybe three, and then move on. Hope you're not expecting too much!"
Ha, Ha! Count me as one. I'm constantly saying I'm going to do "this" or "that" and FAIL! On a few occasions I've stopped on purpose (DVD of the Week became tired when every film blogger on earth started doing it) and my hubby stopped contributing Tokusatsu clips when he got in trouble with Youtube. I have managed to keep "Modern Mondays" going pretty strong so far with only occasional lapses.
I know we've discussed the San Francisco earthquake before since I lost my great great grandfather in it. Having a personal connection to the thing always makes it an unusual experience to watch films about it.
Since living through the last BIG bay area earthquake back in 1989 I've become extremely paranoid and terrified of quakes. Anytime I feel a minor rumble (which seems to happens a lot lately) I panic and rush towards the nearest doorway.
But I digress....
I'm telling you all this just to say that I'm looking forward to your new blog feature and I was happy to see you use Earthquake as the first example. Those miniatures are amazing!
Thanks Kimberly! Back to the new feature part I can't remember at this point how many I've started and stopped over the years. It must be around 20 at this point. This may end up being, in the long run, the only one I stick with as there are so many to do that I've been collecting. Also, I am increasingly fond of the video post as it has become easier for me to record and put stuff together with new software I have.
Interestly, we discussed the 1906 earthquake and your personal connection to it in another feature of mine that I haven't dropped but haven't updated in a looooong while, History and the Movies. Clearly, the 1906 Earthquake is very interesting to me and San Francisco does a great job of making it real with great effects done almost 75 years ago!
You make terrific clips, Greg so it's nice to see you doing more of them!
Thanks, soon you'll hear my voice on them too.
Post a Comment