HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER miniature effects (part 2)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 вер 2024
- HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER miniature effects (Part 2). Ron Gress, Bruce Macrae, Scott Schneider and Danny Wagner, talk about the miniature effects work from Boss Films and ILM. Extended Sense of Scale segment. Photos: Bruce Macrae, Scott Schneider, Greg Jein, Evan Jacobs, Danny Wagner, Kim Smith, Boss Films, ILM
Damn it is so awesome never imagine this is how they made the movie.
The Navel Undersea Museum at Keyport WA, has the miniature of the rescue sub on display. That sucker is big too.
@@gregwilliamson3001 how much accurate data were available for the public on those subs 1988? Moron
@@gregwilliamson3001 you do hear an explosion in space. Explosions release gases and debri. When that hits, you hear the explosion.
Awesome thank you
At 3:49, you see the deck of the typhoon, showing WAY more than the 20 missile hatches that typhoons actually had. I wonder if this was also “artistic license” used by the director?
In the Clancy novel, the Red October carried 26 Seahawk missiles, which is indeed more than the 20 tubes of the Typhoon class. Declassified documents show the CIA knew the capacity of 20 tubes as early as 1983, but Clancy and McTiernan might not have known the true capacity of the class before publishing their works. Either way, the model as shown in this video has too many silos. My guess is assembly logistics were simplified by adding space for a few extra tubes on the two barges used for filming surface scenes in the harbor. The smaller model might have been forced to match that number of tubes.
0:18 Curious fact.. 688 class subs dont have those vertical stabilizers in the back .. their predecesors the Sturgeon class did.. but no Los Angeles ever had them... i renember reading in some modeling forum that the Director wanted those as it made it look cooler (wich i agree ..but its still inacurate)
The Typhoon also had shrouded screws. Tom Clancy got a bunch of other things wrong about the Typhoon, but to be fair, he had no way of really knowing anything beyond what people could see in overhead photos. Things like, the Typhoon had two reactors instead of one, and the missile tubes aren't accessible from inside the pressure hulls (no gun fight), and far from "living conditions that would have shamed a Gulag jailer," the Typhoon's twin pressure hulls actually gave it a lot of room for crew accommodations.
@@BlackEpyon yeah.. obviously the internall setup they had no way of knowing in the mid 80s when he wrote the book.. but they did had photos of the Typhoon (they are shown in the movie) wich for example shows the shrouded screws.. i can forget the towed array sonar in the fin (wich the real ones dont have there) because it looked very cool and the Akulas and Victors used those.. However i for a loong time believed the 688s had those twin vertical fins in the back due to this movie.. then when internet came to the rescue and i began to see they were not there first i tought it was the 688is .. then maybe newer boats.. then found out they never had those.. and years later found that it was a director's choice acording to the guy who built the actual Dallas model in a modellers forum
I’ve come to the conclusion that once you know anything about the subject matter when reading Clancy, ironically it’s best to ignore the technical details.
@@paulbrozyna3006 So then the thermonuclear device I’m building in my garage WON’T work?
@@paulbrozyna3006 Clancy's knowledge of facts and details is mythical rather than legendary.
My favourite sub movie. How does Crimson Tide compared to it?
Not as good
Not even close
I worked at the fx house that did the Crimson Tide fx. The subs were 25 ft long and shot in a smoked stage. The supports were digitally removed. The "imploding subs" had vacuum jars in them that burst when the sub was hit and sucked the water in. They were shot in the USC swim pool. The rock cliffs were something like 20 ft high and 40 long, huge things, but you barely see them in the smoke. The main fx guy did all sorts of tests on CGI bubbles coming out of torpedo hatches, propeller wash, even a shot looking up at the bottom of the sub. But the director hated that and had them remove it.
@@philcarpenter242 cool bro, that's a one-in-a-lifetime experience
They are both excellent films. I've seen both movies maybe 50 times. It's impossible for me to look away when either of them is on. Both great stories with some of the finest acting talent of the era in their acting prime. Interesting that they both have red in the name, for entirely different reasons, but both sub films.
Is that rotating airbrush a custom creation? I think he said it was. I have friends that would love a tool like that.
Yes. It was called the Chameleon. Invented by miniature painter, Ron Gress (RIP).
When movies were real movies.
What about crimson tide submarine model
Bruce Macrae also worked on the Crimson subs.
@@piercefilm yes I know this making a model of the film is available
CGI sucks...
Sound was consistently bad on the lavaliers,
Then there would be no more interviews. I did these by myself on my own dime. If you are so great at doing sound then you can work for free and help. This is UA-cam. Not Amazon Prime or Netflix. No paid work or budget. This is FREE! Go out and do it better yourself!
@@piercefilm I'm sorry to have been so gruff, I apologize. That was uncalled for. I have acted in a feature film on Netflix, and numerous episodes on the Travel Channel for no pay so I understand that. I also teach production techniques in a film school here, and sound is the number one mistake because they don't think about it. All that these interviews needed was medical tape, the fabric kind to secure the lavalier not to the clothes but to their bodies. A simple fix to me but I wasn't thinking compassionately. Again, I'm sorry, I should have just made the suggestion and left it at that.
@@austinevplab7167 What your hearing is the boom mic on the camera itself mixed with the lavaliere mic. If you listen carefully you can hear the hand movements on the camera acoustically being coupled into the boom mic. The mix is stereo, the boom mic is stereo and you can clearly hear the panning of the audio depending on where the person is in relation to the camera, and I believe the lavalier mic is just a mono mix to the center.
It makes for an odd stereo mix with shifting phase adding and canceling the lavalier with the boom. I would drop cameras boom mix altogether and just do a mono mix from the lavalier for the cleanest possible sound. @AustinEVPLab, I think your idea about using medical tape to secure a lavalier mic is a great idea. Never knew about that method.
@@marcusdamberger Thank you for the explanation. I made the mistake of mixing audio from two cameras, sound from one with the image from the other. The doppler effect was opposite, sound became lower pitched and quieter but the vehicle was quickly approaching! I attended a presentation by director Robert Rodriguez who told us not to obsess over a mistake by going back over and fixing it. Just learn from it and move on with our time better spent filming something new.
The Hunt For Ŕed Òcrober was the worst Tom Clancy movie ever.
Excuse me what?
@@Centauri012 I think they bumped their head.