HOME | DD
Jerome-K-Moore — SPEED RACER
Published: 2008-07-17 00:34:59 +0000 UTC; Views: 13442; Favourites: 210; Downloads: 1714
Redirect to original
Description
WB Marketing art, SPEED RACER. Pencil.Well... I reckon it's safe to post this now, seeing as the movie raced through its theatrical release as speedily as the title character's namesake. Heheh.
It's a very tricky thing translating a property from one medium to another, television to film, animation to live action, and vice versa. A balance must be properly struck that takes full advantage of the new medium, while taking care never to disrespect the original rendition (unless one is satirizing). A filmmaker must decide how faithful to be, while freely manifesting his/her own vision. It must be decided what to include in the adaptation, and what to wisely jettison.
In the case of SPEED RACER, and other notable cartoon-to-live action transfers, I continue to fail to understand why they try to so closely emulate animation. Full animation is an art form in which the human imagination is more unleashed, and it becomes pointless to expend the effort to capture this with real actors and situations. It's an exercise in futility really, and the result is most often merely an amusing oddity at best. Look what we can do with a hundred-plus million dollars.
So it is with SPEED RACER, a film only for the most ardent fans, and bedazzled children. It's a loving tribute to the cartoon, surely. But for all that, it's far too long, too technically glitzy, and a bit too silly.
I DO think the casting of the main characters was brilliant, though.
But in the end, was it all really necessary?
Image is copyrighted by Warner Bros Studios.
Related content
Comments: 73
BUZZZZ!!!
Nope!
No way would she fit in with that cast, or with SPEED RACER in general. At least, I don't think so. Her career is definitely on another arc anyway.
I must admit, I'm one of the few who is not impressed by Ms. Scarlett.
Anyone else ya got?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
OH GOD THE PRESSURE!
Um...um...um...
Let's see...thin...short...beautiful...fun...
0_0
MILA KUNIS!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MUCH better choice. Nicely done.
Kunis is sexy cute, and has the necessary comic flair.
I like her. But I still think Ricci was superb. She looks like a living cartoon anyway.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Plus she has experience being the hot piece of tail around a bunch of guys.
Ricci needs to eat a burger. Just one. And keep it down. That's all I ask.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hey! Isn't that a sexist comment concerning Kunis? HaHa! I'm glad YOU said it, and not me!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, but does it make it better or worse since I'm a woman? >_<
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It IS what it is.
I know there are words that somehow I can get away with more than some other people, should I choose to use them.
I'll just leave it at that, and reserve the offense to those more sensitive than I am.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The drawing is not good!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I actually loved Speed Racer and I only know a little about the original series.
I loved all the cast, I thought they all played their roles spot-on and I genuinely enjoyed the film all the way through. Seeing at the IMAX though definitely helps because you really get to appreciate just how next-level the visuals were. Although, best thing of everything was Michael Giachino's score... that was serious class.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
"Was it all worth it?" ...I dunno. I'll tell you, it certainly gave me a lot to digest about colours, vibrancy, that sort of thing. I'll also say that I do think the animation should have been kept to the races.
As for your artwork, I continue to be impressed by how well you turn people into simple but instantly recognizable graphic likenesses and make it seem so effortless, it's something I still try to do myself and I know I said it before but I'll say it again, every time you post something like this it inspires me.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thanks, Chris.
Obviously, there are myriad ways to render a portrait, both in fine art, as well as commercial art. Often with the latter, the more sophisticated portrait rendering has very limited application, especially on product, which is what my assignment concerned. So, reducing a likeness to its most basic lines, with minimal tone, is my objective. Whatever proficiencey I have achieved in this stems from my experience in comics.
I have had some success in faithfully rendering portraits with extreme realism. However, I maintain that this type of illustration, with the advent of photography, amounts to little more than a stunt. Impressive, but a stunt nonetheless. An artist is behooved these days to add something more to a portrait rendering, other than the illusion of photography. This adds meaning, emphasizing the artist's individual perspective, and therein lies a deeper and greater merit.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Which is sort of ironic since photography was invented to assist realistic art, not replace it.
And not to dismiss stunts, just watch skateboarders or bikers, or Evil Knieval! And I wouldn't even call it a stunt because you clearly can take what you've learned when doing that and can apply it. But that's just my opinion, I don't think you could do simplified as well as you do without the ability for detailed.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hmm...
I confess I'm unaware that photography was invented as an aid to art. Granted, the term translates to "drawing with light," however it was strictly an invention of science that later was applied to art. Indeed, it did replace a great deal of realistic painting and illustration, and it continues to do so today (see: Advertising- package design, bookjackets, movie posters, etc.).
Many an artist, myself included, use photography, or the product thereof, to facilitate photo-realistic art. But where the process of capturing a stunning and slavishly lifelike portrait is most genuine is in an actual life-drawing, no cameras involved. That's the traditional method, and it remains the most highly esteemed.
But I agree that it's far more difficult to simplify a likeness illustration without having first gained the depth of understanding afforded by a detailed study. It then becomes easier to strip away the extraneous information, and honing things to the distilled result. However, once you do this, you begin to see a greater value in the simpler perspective, as you solve more specific problems, and express new perceptions in a more uniquely creative way.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Can I say I love the fact we're able to talk shop like this?
Photoreference is something I love, I collect, I organize... it's an invaluable tool and the computer makes it so easy to file and manage and keep. But the great thing about a model is that you can see it, walk around it, peer around it, touch it if you like. You have a sense of it being there and real because when you draw you're really not laying down flat lines, I think. Like, when you do that line going from Speed's chin to his ear (or vise versa), you're not really drawing an angled line, you're moving the pencil back in space. In your mind, you're sculpting, at least, that's my mentality, even when I don't realize it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, too much touching of the live model could get you arrested. I'm just sayin'. HaHa!
But, what better place to talk shop than here amongst fellow creatives?
Photo-referencing is a phenomenal tool. But the caveat is that it can easily ensnare an artist, and reduce creativity to photo-reliance. This is never a good thing, as this stifles confidence. An artist is most fulfilled when able to create strictly from imagination, or through some form of stylization.
Drawing from photography removes the illustrator or painter one to two steps away from the subject. The viewpoint is that captured by a device, and in most cases, guided by the eye of another artist. How much more imperative it is then for the illustrator to seek to express his/her own individuality as much as possible.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah right, arrested, HAHAHAHAHA (laughs, then looks around nervously)
Part of this assumes you don't take the photograph yourself, I actually love to take pictures so in an ideal world I'd work off all my own photoref but you can't snap everything.
I will say I do dislike when I see very tightly referenced photoreference work because when you recognize the picture (which happens in "The Ultimates" a couple of times) it totally takes you out of the moment. That's the downside, unless you take all your pictures yourself like Alex Ross.
Photos do make for great practice, though. DVDs especially because you get to see things move slowly or frame by frame and study how people walk, run, whatever... I'm a big believer in the clay pot theory, you just keep doing it and doing it and develop, THEN when you start pulling things from your imagination you have the skill to back it up. THEN you can use photo refs to get the details right. That's just my theory.
(It took way too long to write this, I hope it doesn't come out as mindless as I'm worried it will)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No assumptions at all. I was careful to imply that the artist might also be the photographer when I said, '...captured by a device, and IN MOST CASES, guided by the eye of another artist.'
Alex is a strong enough illustrator that he can flat-out draw without photo-reference at all. I've watched him do this during dinner at a restaurant. And of course, he was then obnoxious enough not to pick up the check. HaHa!
But again, it's vital not to become reliant on photography for one's creativity. I would say the same is true of all artistic tools that are mechanical, including the airbrush, and the computer. These things certainly have their place, but any step back from the intimate connection between artist and subject is a step back from the truest creativity. Balance is the most desirable and beneficial bargain.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
That is freaky how stylized he's draw and yet it looks EXACTLY like Emile Hirsch (sp?) Anyway, this is kind of what I'd like to achieve when I draw portraits and your work is definitely helping me towards that.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I appreciate your kind words, Bunny. Thank you.
Regarding my minimalistic approach to this portrait, please see my reply to "*Neumatic."
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thanks! I've read through all the comments and I have to say, I think I learned a lot in 10 minutes of reading. I don't have anything to add myself; I agree with many of your points regarding photo referencing and such but I'll stick to my guns about loving the way you approach portraits.
Oh, and I love Speed Racer for the nostalgic rush, mostly, not to mention the great low-key casting of Goodman and Sarandon as Mom and Pop. Best part of the movie, I believe.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
<= Prev |