|
|
Post by Commandingtripod on Sept 23, 2011 11:08:22 GMT 1
If he comes by here any time soon, and he's looking for some funds to help his project then I think he should consider Kickstarter. I've had a look around the site and it seems pretty excellent, if you set yourself a realistic goal then there's every chance you'll get enough money - or more, like these guys who met (and exceeded) their target of $75,000 in less than 24 hours. |
|
Thunder Child
Been Here a while!
"Two!," yelled the captain.
Posts: 145
|
Post by Thunder Child on Sept 26, 2011 16:33:36 GMT 1
Will do!  |
|
eliash
Newbie!
craptacular
Posts: 15
|
Post by eliash on Sept 28, 2011 16:23:46 GMT 1
Holy shmolies. I'm not sure if I want to get excited again about a War of the Worlds film, the Pendragon one was just devastating, the Spielberg one was just nauseating, and the other one with the guy from The Hitcher just wasn't even worth investing any emotions. But it's hard not to get excited after seeing the quality so far of the trailers, and I love the tripod design.
A few nitpicks about the longer trailer...
I think the fighting machine needs to display a little more 'weight' as it walks. It doesn't feel massive as it strides along. The Spielberg version got their tripod walk down perfectly, one of the few good things about the movie. These tripods need to feel something more like that. I'm just talking about the motion of it... I think the design is frikin amazing.
Not sure about the scene where the cylinder is falling. Maybe too much green smoke and not enough fire. The cylinder should be glowing, maybe, and going a lot faster and at more of an angle downward. That's just how I imagined it is all... but it definitely didn't look like a falling star, as described in the book.
Any other nitpicks are just due to what I'm guessing are the unfinished aspects of this early trailer.
I'm pretty late learning about this, as the thread was started a couple of years ago, and I was afraid I'd get to the end and it wouldn't have been updated since then. I'm really excited to see that it's still going on. We're all pulling for you Stevezie! Can I call you Stevezie?
Oh. One more thing. The book describes the tripods as being submerged almost all the way up to their hoods in the Thunder Child scene. But heck, that's a real nitty picky nitpick. And I'm only nitpicking because it all looked so hella cool.
|
|
eliash
Newbie!
craptacular
Posts: 15
|
Post by eliash on Oct 5, 2011 19:48:57 GMT 1
Another thing about the fighting machine walk that I was nitpicking...
While the Spielberg tripod walk was really good, the image I actually had in my mind that I only just realized the other day was of the ATST walkers from Return of the Jedi. That kind of a 'weight-shift' feel when it walks, is what the tripod needs, I think.
|
|
stevesudz
Trainee
The grandson of Col. Strakers hairdresser.
Posts: 97
|
Post by stevesudz on Oct 12, 2011 22:37:25 GMT 1
Hello! Blimey theres been a lot going on here! I apologise that Ive not responded much on scifishocks and I should..(hand slapped) ..and you Chaps can call me what you like although I do take offense at ****, ******* and ***** *** **** *******. Stevesie is fine lol.. The whole project has taken an unexpected turn. Ive started a blog to try and log the events.. stevesouthern.blogspot.com/and my main website www.stevesouthernassociates.com no longer has any of the WOTW stuff on there. ( although the showreel has a couple of test clips at the end). All the WOTW stuff is going on a new site www.waroftheworlds.org.uk ( its not online yet but soon will be). The reason for this is because Ive teamed up with US Director Neil Johnson (british born) who is another huge WOTW fan and want to make the period film here in the UK. Hes known for the scifi channel style of films for the US market and can use his US company to get around the awful copyright mess. Plus, between us we have everything we need. In answer to the nitpicks (which is fine by the way), the original trailer is old now and flawed in many ways and was only representative of trials. Everything has been refined many times but I will take ALL comments on board. I did want the Tripods to walk like a spider ( or cat) and keep the hood stable as it was creepier. The ATST walk always struck me as incredibly uncomfortable and would shake the occupants to death! BUT I do accept the "mass" argument and will endeavour to address it properly. The new site will have all the tests up as they are done. ..But dependant upon what Neil and myself decide to give away. We want to keep some secrets..just wait for the sea battle and the flying machines. We aren't Speilberg or Ridley Scott but we stand a fighting chance and Neil is very optimistic. In fact there is more than one film in the pipeline.. Things are looking up. Please sub to the blog ( it emails automatically) and Ill keep you up to date as well as an occasional report on here. Thank you guys so much for the support and enthusiasm. It means a great deal. Im not ever giving up. Kindest regards Stevezie |
|
stevesudz
Trainee
The grandson of Col. Strakers hairdresser.
Posts: 97
|
Post by stevesudz on Oct 12, 2011 22:44:35 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by Lonesome Crow on Oct 12, 2011 23:07:38 GMT 1
Ooooo! Sounds like some good stuff 'stevesudz' Looking forward to the WOTWS site. Alien Armageddon look pretty damn good too! |
|
|
|
Post by Relyt on Oct 12, 2011 23:56:18 GMT 1
I spy the USS John C. Stennis, CVN 74, near the end of your showreel. Very nice.
Unfortunately I just now watched that scene again and it says the name right there! Let it be known and remembered thoroughly that I did not see the name the first time, lest I become saddened by pointing out the obvious.
|
|
stevesudz
Trainee
The grandson of Col. Strakers hairdresser.
Posts: 97
|
Post by stevesudz on Oct 13, 2011 0:05:59 GMT 1
Cheers Lonesome. You've been most patient! I have to finish that little number for mr Poyks too! and yes Relyt it is the John C although there is a little story to that. I was considering making a pilot program recreating some famous ships using cgi to show them in different ways so I built a complete model of the Stennis and a few others ( man o wars etc) but when I researched the CVN74 I gathered hundreds of photos and noticed that there were huge differences in the structure from photo to photo..not just refit changes. I have a theory..I suspect that the reason the US navy has HUGE letters and numbers on the ships is so that they can swap them around and confuse the enemy as to WHICH bloody ship they're looking at! lol!...
|
|
|
|
Post by Relyt on Oct 13, 2011 3:07:30 GMT 1
Or maybe it's just (in order) USS Nimitz CVN 68, USS Dwight D. Eisenhower CVN 69, USS Carl Vinson CVN 70, USS Theodore Roosevelt CVN 71, USS Abraham Lincoln CVN 72, USS George Washington CVN 73, USS Harry S. Truman CVN 75, USS Ronald Reagan CVN 76, and lastly USS George H. W. Bush CVN 77. However, the last two could not work for your theory because their island houses are larger than those of the preceding ships. Regardless, what ship it is will never matter to an enemy fleet. It would be the last ship they ever see. That is, if they were lucky enough to get close enough for a gander or two. ;D
I could make a list of famous ships for you. Might take a few hours to remember them all, and even longer just to model one. The list would be quite extensive and would take a few years to make models of them. Making the list would be fun though. Or I could make a thread about famous warships, giving their careers and such. It'd be completely off topic however, much like this conversation. Perhaps I could mend it with the forum's primary interest by telling the tale of the Thunder Child's real-life counterpart...
|
|
Thunder Child
Been Here a while!
"Two!," yelled the captain.
Posts: 145
|
Post by Thunder Child on Oct 13, 2011 9:17:57 GMT 1
Steve! Nice to see you back. I am very glad to see that the project is still up and running. That showreel is looking very good. I did noticed one thing though: the name Thunder Child is mispelled as Thuderchild  In respond to Eliash: Not sure about the scene where the cylinder is falling. Maybe too much green smoke and not enough fire. The cylinder should be glowing, maybe, and going a lot faster and at more of an angle downward. That's just how I imagined it is all... but it definitely didn't look like a falling star, as described in the book. The way I always made this out from the book is that the flash / smoke is only seen when the cylinder is fired from Mars and when the cylinder enters the Earth's atmosphere. The cylinder does not leave a green trail in space, it only leaves this trail when it burns in the atmosphere, just like some natural meteors can leave a green trail after being burned up. All in all it does not look very much different then any other meteor... I have also seen in some clips, like in the Jeff Wayne game, that the cylinder can change course. Also not true me thinks. The cylinder is shot like a bullet from Mars. As soon as it leaves the canon, that's it. It is on his way and there is nothing that can be done anymore. "The Martians seem to have calculated their descent with amazing subtlety--their mathematical learning is evidently far in excess of ours..." In this line of text I read their mathematical learning to be: to shoot a bullet, 30 yards across, from one planet to another and make it land on a piece of land 800 acres big with exact precision.  |
|
stevesudz
Trainee
The grandson of Col. Strakers hairdresser.
Posts: 97
|
Post by stevesudz on Oct 13, 2011 14:44:14 GMT 1
*!**$%"!** and !**!^&%$£$!....Thuderchild...hmm..I had a cold when I wrote it.... flippin heck.. lol.. cheers Thunderchild,  I think you and Eliash have good points. I tried a bit of an experiment with the cylinder to be honest. When one reads the book, as usual the details are sparse in a way. I know that the Martians are supposed to have different technology to us but to place an organism in a "shell", fire it from a gun and have it impact on Earth just a short time later would mean that the speed of travel and resultant impact would be immense. There would be no "rounded bulk, larger than a bear"; just a pancake of inert biological mess at the bottom of the utterly pulverised shell, if indeed there was anything left at all. We have to assume that Wells more or less threw the physics rule book out of the window if he was describing the Verne style method of transport. I personally would imagine the Martians would have a more subtle approach and like Thunder' says, used advanced science and mathematics. Soooo..I experimented with the "cylinder" (not the most advanced description of a spacecraft). If you look closely, the cylinder is in two sections with a huge recoil system in the middle. The propulsion couldn't be as simple as a gun as that would make the subtlties that Wells describes difficult or impossible. In flight, the cylinder draws a green mist behind it. This to me, is the result of additional motive force. Maybe the projectile was launched by a gun type system then accellerated and steered ( or adjusted) in flight then deccelerated and brought into a safer angle of entry and slowed even further. Even a landing speed of 2 or 3 hundred miles an hour coupled with a 100 foot by 350 foot metal projectile would make a hell of a dent in the sand pits..In short I think there is room to take Wells' ideas and maybe wrap a little extra interesting detail to them given that they are victorian ideas. If people insist that the cylinders are simply that, big metal jamjars with a lid that smacks into earth at 77 thousand kilometers an hour ( the speed it would have to travel to make the 56million k journey in 30 days) then it would make for an interesting visual but a short invasion. I think we need poetic license? |
|
|
|
Post by Lonesome Crow on Oct 13, 2011 23:04:11 GMT 1
I always imagined the cylinder's trail of green smoke was due to counter rockets or retro jets to reduce the violence of the impact.  This is a drawing I did back in the 1990s of the cylinder coming in to land. Most of the craft would be buried, just leaving the top cylindrical part above ground. |
|
|
|
Post by Lonesome Crow on Oct 13, 2011 23:52:24 GMT 1
If people insist that the cylinders are simply that, big metal jamjars with a lid that smacks into earth at 77 thousand kilometers an hour ( the speed it would have to travel to make the 56million k journey in 30 days) then it would make for an interesting visual but a short invasion. I think we need poetic license? Steve, I don't know where you are getting your 30 day journey from. I imagine the journey taking the Martians years. The storm burst upon us six years ago now. As Mars approached opposition, Lavelle of Java set the wires of the astronomical exchange palpitating with the amazing intelligence of a huge outbreak of incandescent gas upon the planet. It had occurred towards midnight of the twelfth; and the spectroscope, to which he had at once resorted, indicated a mass of flaming gas...So unless the story wasn't written down until six years had past, I can only imagine the above passage refers to the time between the launching of the cylinders to the end of the war, a period of six years, most of which, would have been taken up with the flight across space. |
|
|
|
Post by Relyt on Oct 14, 2011 3:39:21 GMT 1
Well if it did take the martians six years, that would mean their cylinders were moving even slower than the capsules carrying the Mars rovers. Those only took a few months if I remember correctly.
|
|
I think you and Eliash have good points. I tried a bit of an experiment with the cylinder to be honest. When one reads the book, as usual the details are sparse in a way. I know that the Martians are supposed to have different technology to us but to place an organism in a "shell", fire it from a gun and have it impact on Earth just a short time later would mean that the speed of travel and resultant impact would be immense. There would be no "rounded bulk, larger than a bear"; just a pancake of inert biological mess at the bottom of the utterly pulverised shell, if indeed there was anything left at all. We have to assume that Wells more or less threw the physics rule book out of the window if he was describing the Verne style method of transport. I personally would imagine the Martians would have a more subtle approach and like Thunder' says, used advanced science and mathematics. Soooo..I experimented with the "cylinder" (not the most advanced description of a spacecraft). If you look closely, the cylinder is in two sections with a huge recoil system in the middle. The propulsion couldn't be as simple as a gun as that would make the subtlties that Wells describes difficult or impossible. In flight, the cylinder draws a green mist behind it. This to me, is the result of additional motive force. Maybe the projectile was launched by a gun type system then accellerated and steered ( or adjusted) in flight then deccelerated and brought into a safer angle of entry and slowed even further. Even a landing speed of 2 or 3 hundred miles an hour coupled with a 100 foot by 350 foot metal projectile would make a hell of a dent in the sand pits..In short I think there is room to take Wells' ideas and maybe wrap a little extra interesting detail to them given that they are victorian ideas. If people insist that the cylinders are simply that, big metal jamjars with a lid that smacks into earth at 77 thousand kilometers an hour ( the speed it would have to travel to make the 56million k journey in 30 days) then it would make for an interesting visual but a short invasion. I think we need poetic license?