All language subtitles for Industrial.Light.Magic.Creating.The.Impossible.2010.1080p.WEBRip.x264.AAC5.1-[YTS.MX]

Downloaded from
YTS.MX

Official YIFY movies site:
YTS.MX

Industrial light and magic

has created some
of the most iconic imagery

that cinema has ever seen.

For the past 35 years,

they have transported us
to worlds beyond

the reaches
of our imagination.

Their pioneering
and breathtaking visual effects

have transformed
the way we see movies.

We're all jaded
when we go to movies.

I mean,
we watch all kinds of stuff

that we aren't suppose
to be looking for.

We're looking for the seams,

we're looking for cracks.

But you know, when they
make you forget all that,

and pull you into
the magic that is the story,

then they've succeeded.

Through their masterful blend
of art and technology,

they have revolutionized
movie-making

and helped to define
popular culture.

From the sublime
to the ridiculous.

From "ET" to the amazing work
they did on "Transformers".

ILM loves to find different ways

of telling stories visually.

They've made us wonder.

They've made us marvel.

They've made us believe.

It's wonderful to know
that the tools are there

to really begin
to get what's in here,

you know, out there
to the-- into the world.

And ILM has been
leading the charge

in that quest
since it began.

The digital era that dominates
modern day visual effects

was ushered in by ILM.

Hundreds of artists
work collectively

to create complex imagery

from a variety
of elements that combine

to perform
a masterful illusion.

Action.

Through their technology,
ILM has given filmmakers

the means to achieve anything.

Photorealistic
characters and environments

can be created from scratch,

such as on "Iron Man 2"
and "Avatar".

But these high-tech
advancements

have not come easy,

nor have they come overnight.

The roots of today's
cinema magic

goes back over 100 years.

But the revolution
of modern visual effects

began with a story
in a galaxy far, far away.

Industrial Light and Magic
was formed in 1975,

to realize the complicated
special effects challenges

for a new film
called "Star Wars".

A space adventure dreamed up

by young filmmaker
George Lucas.

His vision was unlike anything
Hollywood had heard before.

With "Star Wars",

I wanted to do
an action picture.

I wanted to do something where
I can pan with the spaceships.

I want to do it
with really short cuts.

There's a lot of rhythm,
a lot of pace,

a lot of movement
on the screen.

I want it to be
a very, very cinematic.

And at that point in time
that was impossible.

You just could not do that
with special effects.

So, when the studio said

"Well how are you
going to do this?"

I said, "Oh don't worry
we'll figure it out."

you know I got it,
you know,

but I had no idea
what I was going to do.

At the time,
the special effects departments

at the major studios
were all but gone.

So George Lucas was able
to buy up old equipment

for pennies on the dollar,

and set up ILM in a
Van Nuys California warehouse.

With 20th Century Fox onboard,

George Lucas
and producer Gary Kurtz

enlisted photographic effects
expert John Dykstra

to lead the effort.

Dykstra brought together
a rag-tag group

of college students,
artists and engineers

whose mixed skills
in photography,

model-making,
and mechanics

would set the stage
for the fantastical space saga.

Creating ILM to do
the work for "Star Wars"

was like gambling
high odd bets.

We knew we were taking
a huge number of risks.

We were incredibly
naive to think

that we were going to be
successful in doing that.

And we were
incredibly fortunate

that George and even
Fox in it's own way,

were willing to back us.

When I read the script,

I was just thinking,
"my god, what is this movie?"

all these different genres
are kind of together

in this massive space film,

and you're reading like
the last 30 or 40 pages

and every page is full
of another effect shot

of the battle.

Every page it's like--
this thing will never get done.

When I first read
the script for "Star Wars",

I think I came across
a few lines that were worrisome.

The description,

unlike anything
you've ever seen before,

to most studio executives
and to producers

and even to directors,
was daunting.

We had 365 shots
to do for this movie,

which had never really been
done for an effects movie.

It was really fun because
we all knew we could do it.

We had this nexus of talent
that was just outrageous.

To create a believable universe

in the pre-digital age,

known as the photochemical era

ILM had to advance
the use of traditional

handcrafted effects techniques,

such as animation
and rubber-mask creature work.

Artists would use
matte paintings

to increase the scope
and production value

of a scene
by extending environments

painted on glass
that would be photographed

and combined
with live action elements.

Detailed miniatures
and models were built

and shot against blue screen

to allow the placement

of other elements
into the scene.

In a process
called optical compositing.

ILM retooled a dormant
optical printer

that allowed for a record
number of separate filmstrips

to be re-photographed
and combined

onto a single layer of film.

I knew what I was up against

and I knew how
I wanted to do it.

But I was constantly
bumping up

against
the technology ceiling.

Sometimes you'd have
as many as a hundred

different elements
going through

and it would
take 24 hours to do it

and if you made one mistake,

with one element,
you had to start over again.

There's no second chance.

If anything goes wrong
during something,

it's over and you have
to sort of stop

and start the entire
process over again

and that is really difficult

and that takes a good team

and a lot of concentration
to get a high speed model

to blow up quick enough
and in the right way.

Or stop motion characters

to walk across the scene
over a period of a 12 hour shoot

and it's only going to last
four seconds.

There can't be
anything go wrong.

No light bulbs can blow out.

No-- nothing can
be bumped accidently,

you know between
each frame of film.

So it's really
hard to do that.

It had to look real.

And so that was the trick.

We would paint
ourselves into a corner

and then have to invent
our way out of it.

We all knew we could
depend on each other.

There was this spirit
of camaraderie

and so many of us gave
our best ideas to the show.

John Dykstra designed
the revolutionary Dykstraflex.

This computer controlled system

allowed for
the programming of dynamic

and repeatable camera moves.

The dykstraflex facilitated
the combining

of numerous elements into
a single, dynamic shot,

freeing up
the stationary camera

that has been the norm
in model photography

for over 100 years.

It was like we were in
Florence during the renaissance.

There were so few places
that did

that type of visual effects

and there were so few artists
that could do it.

I was very rare,
very wonderful

and it was a rebirth
of the-- the industry.

"Star Wars" was the beginning

of the renaissance
of visual effects.

And "Star Wars" woke up
the sleeping giant.

George anthropologically

looked out
at the world and said,

"What's missing here?"

* ["Star Wars" theme playing]

The first day
that I saw "Star Wars",

I was one of those people,

along with my wife Cheryl,

that saw it and immediately
went back and got

into the two hour line again
to see it right away.

We saw it twice
on the first day,

and it was just
this transformative,

mind-blowing,
cinematic experience.

And I called
George and he said,

"well, unfortunately we only
got maybe 30, 40 percent

of what I really wanted there."

I'll never forget seeing
"Star Wars" for the first time.

I was in film school
and it was like,

I was there on opening weekend
at the Chinese Theater,

standing in line
for six hours.

And the way that that film
entertained the audience

was unlike
any film in history.

[announcer]
from the world famous
Chinese Theater

come the stars of the biggest
box office success

in motion picture history.

I think the success
of "Star Wars"

opened the doors for a whole
series of genres of film,

that hadn't been done
before because people

simply couldn't figure out
how to make the images.

ILM was born
out of sort of a rebirth

of the beginning of cinema,
which is to say,

it's-- it's all a trick.

And we're in the business of--
we're the tricksters.

The historic success
of "Star Wars"

allowed George Lucas to
establish a filmmaking center

outside of Hollywood.

He relocated to Marin county
in northern California,

and eventually built
Skywalker Ranch.

ILM would set up shop

in the nearby town
of San Rafael.

Inhabiting
a nondescript building

known as Kerner Optical,

their home until 2005.

They immediately began work
on the next "Star Wars" film,

"The Empire Strikes Back".

All in all,
the real impendence of ILM

was to keep a core group
of creative people

and the highly
technological environment

they needed functioning.

It was really clear that,

in order for ILM to sustain

we did have to find
a model that would work

for becoming
a viable business

and working
for multiple filmmakers.

ILM, opened its doors
to the outside film community,

becoming the first independent
visual effects studio

to realize the visions
of directors

with unique stories to tell.

First film
I collaborated with ILM on

was "Raiders of The Lost Ark".

Most of the effects
of Raiders came at the end

when they opened
the ark of the covenant,

and the effects involved
you know, creating

the power of God I guess.

What was coming out
of the actual ark, the spirits.

There were a lot
of challenges posed,

I mean I wanted a scene
where the one bad Nazi's face

kind of implodes

and where Toht's head melts,

and where Belloq's
head explodes.

I didn't know how to do this,

and I just left it to these guys
that had done "Star Wars".

I figured well if they can do
"Star Wars"

they can certainly melt a head.

And they did figure out
how to melt this wax head

they built,
it was kind of genius.

And that was all the beginnings
of my relationship with ILM.

While ILM continued
to push the boundaries

of photochemical effects,

George Lucas
could see the potential

for an entirely new way

of creating cinema magic.

In the same way George
had so much vision

about marrying computers to
cameras and optical printers,

he felt that there
were probably ways

to create all
the kinds of things he did

in "Star Wars"
in the computer.

He felt that there were ways

to do editing with computers.

He thought there
were ways to create

and manipulate music
with computers,

and those three things
led him to start

the Lucasfilm
Computer Graphics Division

that he hired
Ed Catmull to start.

I was asked
to bring in technologists

and computer scientists
and wizards of various sorts,

to bring this--
into this industry.

Among PhD students Ed Catmull's
early advancements

in computer technology

was the ability to create
smooth curved surfaces

and wrap textures
around them.

This was a pioneering leap

in the rudimentary world
of computer graphics

known as CG.

I think their charter
was to make a system

that might be able
to make images,

ultimately images onto film
that look photo real.

And in the process of that,
the Apple came out.

And Dennis Muren had said,

"Gee, can I take
six months off

and just learn how
to use this Apple?"

so he, was the one that first
put his foot in the water

and learned what Ed
and the guys were doing.

And that started the link,

so that I could transfer
the technology

that the computer division
was developing

over into ILM, which is where
it was meant to be.

It was a very
risky thing certainly

for George to fund this,

and also very visionary

because it all
really did pay off.

Today's powerful
computer generated imagery

owes it's roots
to this early CG group,

who by 1982 were able
to prove their various skills

to create a sequence
in "Star Trek: Wrath of Khan".

While developing
hardware and software,

they spent five months
advancing texture mapping,

motion blur,
digital matte painting

and compositing programs
to create

the first visual effects shot

made in the computer
for a motion picture.

It was mind-blowing
for the time,

and now of course
it looks old fashion.

But it was part
of earning the way in.

And the minute Dennis Muren
saw the types of things

that could be done
in computer graphics,

it led to Dennis
using computer graphics

to create the stained-glass man
in "Young Sherlock Holmes".

Dennis came over
to us and said,

why don't we try it
in computer animation.

And this was very innovative

and very forward thinking.

It was really exciting.

I mean it was a lot of work

because back in the day
we didn't have the tools.

I literally had
to take the footage

and project it
onto my computer screen

and I matched-- animated
the camera move by hand.

I don't know
if I've ever worked harder

on six shots in my life.

But it was worth it
because when

"Young Sherlock Holmes"
came out,

people who worked
in the special effects industry

had no idea how it was done.

The stained-glass knight

was the first computer
generated character

in a motion picture,

and the film was nominated
for an academy award

for best visual effects.

A testament
to the growing impact

of computer technology.

ILM's work
in stop-motion animation

and optical effects
would advance further

into the digital realm
with George's next movie,

a fantasy epic
he asked Ron Howard to direct.

Dennis Muren
called George and I

over to his office
there at ILM and he said,

"we're beginning
to use computers

to work with film digitally."

the first time I ever--

you know,
heard that phrase used,

to sort of blend film images.

So there was
this one transformation

that we needed
to make in the movie.

I assumed
we'd have to do it

the way werewolf
transformations

had always been done
with dissolves, cuts.

And he thought
we could do it in one shot,

which was a really
interesting notion to me.

And he said, "I can't guarantee
it's going to work,

but you know it just might."

and it was the first
morphing shot ever done.

And it really was
more like, kind of magic

that you see on stage where
there's no camera trickery

it just happened.

And of course there was
so much technology behind it.

It was all
breakthrough stuff.

That was--
that was amazing for me.

By the late 1980s,

the computer was threatening
the analog ways of old.

The Lucasfilm computer group

had developed
an astounding array of tools

that remain today's
industry standard.

The first digital
editing system,

the first digital
audio editing system,

a film laser scanner

and a powerful
graphics computer

for digital compositing
and high-resolution imagery.

The Pixar image computer

and it's processing
software called renderman,

enabled the group
to create a breakthrough

computer animated short film,

"Andre and Wally B",

which inspired them
to pursue their far off goal

of a full length
animated feature film.

At the time, as the vagaries
for finance come up and down

George realized he couldn't
afford all of this,

because there was so many
things going on,

and so we had some meetings
with George and said,

"We really want to make
an animated film."

and he said, "Well that's not
what I want to do now."

He wanted the technology,

so we started down the path
of selling off the group

to be a separate company,
which is what became Pixar.

So we set up our own CG group,

within ILM instead of Lucasfilm,

that's purpose was to use
CG work only for films,

and it was great.

And it took a couple of years
or so to really get it going.

We did some wire removal stuff

and eventually
we did "The Abyss".

It was "The Abyss"
that I think, in many ways,

put a larger stake
in the ground

for the notion
of digital characters

in live-action films
created by the computer.

It ended up being about
90 seconds of animation.

It used a mix
of computer graphics

and traditional optical
compositing techniques

so, it was kind of a
transitional step.

That was something
very new for us.

There were not a lot
of established procedures

for doing any
of this work at the time.

So, we just dove into it

and were making it up
as we went along.

It was just so exciting
to be able to see

that what had been
a promise for so long,

and so difficult to do

because nobody had
ever done it before.

The tools were now in place,

the software was in place.

The hardware was
sort of in place.

It was a matter
of applying them.

What happened after
"The Abyss" came out

was a number of projects
that had been sort of circling

needing effects that couldn't
have been accomplished before,

really started to rise up.

One of them came out as a
direct result of "The Abyss",

which was "Terminator 2".

After Jim Cameron felt that

we had successfully
created what he wanted

for "The Abyss"
with CG animation,

um he then created
a character in "Terminator 2"

that had to be done
in computer graphics.

I think that was the real
breakthrough film also for CG.

We did all our work
with digital compositing

for the first time.

There's no sign of any sort of
matte line around anything,

or any grain mismatching
that used to tip people off

to an effects shot.

It looked like it was
right in the scene.

So we got 52 shots in it.

And most of the people
I don't think

had any idea
how we did that work.

In order to create
the shape-shifting

t-1000 terminator,

ILM employed a revolutionary
laser scanning process

to capture Robert Patrick's
form and expressions

that would enable
them to animate

and model a realistic
computer version of the actor.

It was a lot of breakthroughs

that we had to do
to get that show done.

To get the CG to work.

All the reflection
maps on it,

and not have it just rip
it's geometry apart.

And being able to pan
the computer camera

to match the background
live action camera.

And so we can
follow the guys feet

as he's walking across
the checkerboard floor,

and up from that
grows this head.

And that was really,
really tough stuff to do.

You know it was on
the cutting edge.

So everybody
in this industry is saying,

"wow everything's
changing now."

so then there's
this general awareness

that the technology
is coming into this industry.

So with that film
it made the awareness

that something big is coming.

I was perfectly happy
to do the dinosaurs.

The technique
that Phil Tippett

had honed to a fine point.

And we had settled on that
for "Jurassic Park".

Personally I didn't think
the CG was ready

to do "Jurassic Park"

for at least the close ups
of the dinosaur.

I thought maybe we could
do like some stampede sequences.

Cause what computers
are good at is,

like in a word processor

you can clone something
a million times,

you can copy a word
and duplicate it

100 times on the page
or anything you want.

Well it's true also
with models

and so you can
do it with dinosaurs.

You could make one
Gallimimus dinosaur,

and clone 20 of them

and have them all running
with the same run cycle.

That's the sort of thing
that's really hard to do

with stop motion
or anything like that.

But we started doing
these tests in CG

before the show
was going on.

And our tests started
looking better and better.

Until one day Dennis Muren
came over to me and said,

"you know I really think we
should do this in the computer."

and let me shoot
a test and show you.

Dennis was working
off in the corner.

We were off going
along the normal route.

Dennis then got
the audience with Steven,

and part of it is
to convince Steven

and part of was me saying,

"we can do this,
I will guarantee it,

it'll be fabulous."

the test was a herd
of running Gallimimuses,

and he didn't flesh them out.

He just basically
put the bones in motion.

It didn't have that
kind of artificial look,

it was completely realistic.

It looked like skeletons
had come to life

and were just running
throughout Hawaii.

And all the onus
of stop-motion photography

was suddenly eradicated.

We were both kind of wondrous

about what this was
promising this industry.

We literally didn't know
from one day to another

how stuff was going to look.

Everyday we'd be
looking at the dallies

and saying did we do this?

Did people make these images?

We had never seen anything
like this before, you know.

Where's the trickery?

We've been seeing movies
for you know, 80 years?

There's nothing there,
it looks real.

A visual effects shot starts

with a line in the script
that describes something.

Let's say a dinosaur
runs across the field.

You start by going on
the live action set,

and shooting
what's called a plate.

The plate is the background

that you're ultimately
gonna insert

that digital
character in this example.

The plate comes back
to the artists,

they create
a virtual topography

that reflects what
they've seen in that shot.

They build a character
in the computer.

They build its bones,
they build its structure.

They then come up with
surfaces and skins for it.

They color it,
they give it eyes,

they give it motion,
they give it fingernails,

they rig it so that
it can be animated.

So they take that
photograph background plate.

They take that character,

and they animate
the character

in the computer space

to fit into that
photographic plate.

When that's done
to the director's satisfaction

they actually composite it
into the scene.

Once it's composited
into the scene

it is filmed
out of the computer,

and cut into the film.

And hopefully everybody
loves it in the movie house.

Here there was not even
going to be a thought

in the audience's mind
that what they were seeing

was not absolutely real.

And because Stan Winston
did this amazing job

of creating full-size
life replicas of a t-rex

we were able to
effortlessly cut together

the digital dinosaurs

with the Stan Winston
full-size dinosaurs.

And the audience
sometimes was confused

as to which was which.

The major breakthrough
really was

when Steve bought off on
the idea of making that leap

from analog to digital.

And that really is what
changed everything.

Once we did those dinosaurs

I saw that we had
unlimited possibilities.

From the point of view
of the industry,

the turning point
was "Jurassic park".

When "Jurassic park"
happened then

that was like
this big switch was thrown.

It was like the world
has changed.

It started
kind of a revolution

and an evolution
that began to move faster

than the speed of light.

It's-- it's a dinosaur.

I was amazed at how much
ILM was able to accomplish

and go beyond the dinosaurs,

with everything else they did

in the next several years.

Transferring the culture
from the analog culture

to a digital culture
was huge, huge problem.

Lots of pain,
lots of heartache,

lots of emotions for people

who were getting
crunched in the shift.

It caused concern
for the people

who were used to doing
traditional effects.

You know would their jobs
become obsolete someday?

When I started working
in computer graphics training,

they referred to me as going
to work for the dark side.

The model shop were
threatened by this--

by this whole,
division that was growing up.

And I was one
of the few people

who made the first jump
into CG from the model shop.

Since then there
have been many,

and we've all been-- most,

on the whole,
been very successful.

But at first
it was not considered

to be loyal to the shop.

I had an interesting experience

where we had a shot in the movie
that was just really bad.

It was an optical composite,

and we re-did the comp
with some frustration

and people didn't want to do it
with digital, with Photoshop,

and it was like night and day.

So I showed this to one
of the old timer optical guys

who had done it
the first time.

Showed him both
versions and I said,

"which one do you like?"

cause I wanted to bring
him into the digital world,

and he liked--
he picked the old one.

And I thought
what the heck are you seeing?

What's going on?

And I realized then
there was a problem here.

You know,
there's fear going on,

denial is going on,

but he ended up being one
of our best digital compeers.

Once he came over to it,
and saw what he could do.

Right around the same time

Bob Zemeckis
did "Forrest Gump".

And "Forrest Gump"
had a similar importance

in terms of changing
the industry.

What "Jurassic Park" did

in terms of big
in your face visual effects,

big characters,
bringing fantasy

and sci-fi
to the foreground.

Um, "Forest Gump" did
in exactly the opposite

and understated way,

invisible effects.

Doing things that
you couldn't do before,

changing people's
performances

by changing the way
their lips moved,

changing the skies
and pictures

to create a different mood.

All kinds of little things

that had you been able
to do photograph

it that way originally
you would've,

but you couldn't.

So manipulated everything
to enhance the storytelling.

At one point in "Forrest Gump",
he's playing ping pong.

And he's playing
at this phenomenal speed.

And you might ask
how did tom hanks

learn how to play ping pong?

Well the answer
is of course he doesn't

he's just moving the paddle.

And somebody's
putting a ball in

and it's used
with renderman.

So, it's this
simple little thing,

but what it meant
was a story point

would go into
the movie and the audience

doesn't know or care about

and we reached that point where

it's not about
special effects anymore.

It's about telling a story.

So, suddenly visual effects
has a place in dramatic films,

in comedies,
all types of things

that it just didn't
fit into before.

And at that point in time
everybody started to try

to figure out how to
dust off those old scripts

the had that they didn't
know how to make before.

As ILM approached
their 100th movie.

They would be challenged
with the next level of realism.

It was the beginning of

kind of,
working with CG creatures.

Cause I remember
at one point

there's a wall blew
open and a guy came through

he's the rhino,

ok,

run away from the rhino.

And that was the beginning
of kind of,

ok imagine now
that's the rhino,

the one on the right
is an elephant,

Phil is the hippopotamus.

Ok, good I got it.

Let's do this.

Run!

It's a stampede!

Basically it's just
fight or flight.

Most of the time
you're just running.

It's not a creature
that's having a dialogue

it's nothing
that's talking to you.

It's basically chasing you
or confronting you

or running from you or
you're both in a state of fear.

I was amazed by all
the larger creatures,

it was insanely beautiful.

And I found out they had
taken some of the programs

from "Jurassic Park",

and applied them
to elephants and rhinos.

And they are working
you through

going, you can't go there
you have to look over there

and they're going literally
this area is a no go

especially if you're thinking
can I run over there?

No. Why?

That's a pit.

Okay cool.

It's a twister,
it's a twister!

The tornado
in "Wizard of Oz" to me

just stood out
as being strikingly real

compared to other stuff
I had seen.

It was beautiful
also to look at.

It had this-- I had
never seen that done before

and I don't think
it's been done since

as well the beautiful
cylindrical design.

ILM is consistently
breaking new ground.

I think that the visual effects
industry requires that.

"Twister" I remember
got green lit

because of a special effects
shot that ILM did.

And we did a test

and we sat in
the screening room at Amblin.

Everybody loved
the shot so much

that's when the movie
got green lit at that moment.

When we started
working on "Twister"

we were dealing with
really organic materials.

Things like dust and debris
and tornados and water.

And those things
hadn't been solved

and creating those elements
in the digital world

was extremely difficult.

We had to develop
our own particle system,

and a way of rendering
the particles

that was realistic.

In doing anything photo real

you need to look at
the real world around you.

To see how light
bounces off of things

or illuminates us,

or how cloth bends,

or how people move,
and animals move.

ILM's stock and trade
is photo realism.

That we make stuff that
you can really believe is real.

A lot of painters,

a lot of the modelers
tend to either fall

into what we call
a hard surface camp,

which are things like planes,
spaceships, hardware.

And then you've got your organic
creature type stuff.

What helps me is to go back
to real things.

To study nature to see
how a feather functions.

How it's actually
constructed so brilliantly,

and if I can take some of that
enthusiasm and curiosity.

I can bring that
into my work.

To create the reality

the visual effects
supervisors lead an army

of production managers,
artists, and technicians

to realize the most
complicated imagery on time

and on budget.

The starting point begins
with the ILM art department.

The concept artists

and the art department
in general

are sort of the front end group

or the spearhead
to get everybody

on the same page
the starting point.

In a lot of cases at ILM

they'll be designing
the effects sequences,

or the creatures
or the environments

of the world
of our clients.

The directors we work with.

As often happens,
directors ask ILM

to create imagery
that has never been done.

The visual effects supervisor

brings these challenges

to ILM's research
and development department.

One of the great
things about ILM

is that you have
a R&D department.

I can go to them
and say you know what?

I need controllable smoke.

It just has to do this,

and you've got a brilliant team
of smart people

that can say,
"ok you know what?

We're going to make
you smoke system."

and they come out
with the goods.

Everything that you see
on the screen

is meticulously assembled
out of hundreds or thousands

of different elements.

And those are all there because
an artist put them there.

So much of it is about
giving them tools to layer

in greater
and greater complexity,

but always with the control
that's necessary

to give the director
the images that he's after.

On set,
the visual effects supervisor

is responsible for delivering
the live action elements

to ILM's artists.

When you are
in principle photography

you have 300,
350 people in your crew,

your days is costing
about 250,000 dollars a day.

And there is a question,

and you need to answer
that question,

everybody turns to you
and you have about two seconds

to say exactly what you need
these people to do,

and then they do it.

One of things I love about this
place is the ILM methodology.

You know we try to create
an atmosphere here

where creative people
are free

to share their
opinions about things

if somebody has a good idea
about a shot say it.

And when people are honest
about what they think,

the work is better.

There's amazing times

when you're struggling
with something.

You're maybe working
on it for days

or even weeks
and everybody is thinking

how to solve
this certain problem,

and you really get a sense

of a community art
going on at that time,

where everybody's--
where it's all been worth it

to come together
and contribute on something

that's never been done.

Nearing the dawn
of the new millennium

George Lucas returned to ILM

as a client
with a daunting task

of making three new
"Star Wars" prequels.

George had to wait
to do the prequels.

Because his vision was so grand,
and it was so big,

and he wanted to do so much

that he had to wait
for the technology to catch up.

And I think what
he saw in ILM

and the work ILM was doing
throughout the 1990s

sort of encouraged him
to believe,

that finally
the time had come,

and it was absolutely
possible to achieve greatness.

I could sort of come in
and push things forward

as the owner
and as the client.

You know we're pushing
the envelope in a few places.

But the biggest issue is volume.

Just the amount of stuff.

We were attempting
a scale of visual effects

that had never
been done before.

And over 90% of that movie

had some sort
of visual effect in it.

We over doubled the size

of our computer graphics
department for that movie.

As well as the potential
changing culture

of the company because
we were growing so much.

So, there was
the trepidation of,

have we bitten off more
than we can chew,

and can we do this.

It's not just that we have
to do it for this picture,

we have to do it
for two more pictures.

And also if this picture works

then everybody else will want
it done for their picture.

And what are we going to do?

We had over 2000
visual effects shots in it.

There were so many aspects
of what needed to be depicted

that couldn't be done
with tools we had at the time.

It was painful, scary,
a lot of things.

You need somebody there
to hold your hand and say,

"Look I'll take the blame,

if this doesn't work
I take the blame"

and that's what I've always
done on my own movie.

Okay so, I am doing
my damndest to figure out

well how do we even
do a shot like this.

And ok these
are the techniques

I think are going to be
the most bang for the buck,

and geez we'll just have
to able to animate

that in two weeks.

We had very dense scenes

with hundreds of thousands
of characters in them.

And we had to do
rigid body dynamics,

cloth simulations,
synthetic terrains.

The list of things
that we needed to develop

new tools for was quite
large and intimidating.

The real point is how
can we manage to change

the operating procedures
in a way

that we can
completely revolutionize

the way we make movies,
so that this is all do-able.

We'd have discussions
back and forth in the beginning.

You know
the supervisors, myself

now I want to do this
and I want to do that,

and they go well...

and sometimes I'd say,
"we're going to do it anyway."

they said, "No we can't"

and I said,
"we're going to do this.

I know we can do this."

what he brought to us
was something

that had never been
sort of accomplished before,

and he really
pushed us as a company

to grow and learn how
to create such a large vision.

*

To do a big
complicated show like that

you develop some confidence
in the process

of you take big problems,
you break them down

into smaller problems.

You break those
smaller problems

down into yet
smaller problems.

Until you get to a scale

where it's tractable
by a single person.

And so when a new
big project comes

with some kind of scary
unknown aspect to it.

You have to comfort
yourself with the fact

that we've been doing this
for a long time,

and this process works,
it always works.

When I was asked
to paint Yoda

as a computer
generated character

I really remembered
what it was like for me

when I first saw Yoda
on that screen.

And what Frank Oz had done
with him as a character.

That was a really honor
to be asked to work on him.

To get Yoda's expression,

to get his character
was terribly important

that we get that right.

The fear of loss
is a path to the dark side.

In the CG Universe
performers were now challenged

to act in virtual worlds

when invisible characters
unlike ever before.

That was the time we created
the Jar Jar Binks character.

And a lot of people
feel different ways

about Jar Jar Binks,

but the fact
of the matter was

you had a living
breathing character

who was acting
alongside the actors

for a large portion
of that film.

And it really showed you could
have digital characters

integrated with
live action people,

and make that work.

Get away, get out of here!

[mumbles]

I remember meeting Liam Neeson

after he had done one
of the "Star Wars" movies

and he went,
"Robin I don't know anymore

I really don't want to act.

I've given up,
I don't really think I can.

Cause I've just spent
times looking at an X,

I don't know what
it's about anymore really.

I've been trained to do lots
of amazing things,

but now I've just been looking
at an X for a long time."

and if I saw him--

I'm going, "Oh no
they've gotten poor Liam!"

Dear God, Dear God.

I would've liked to work
with a Yoda character.

That would've been fun.

'cause I've worked
with the Muppets,

I can deal with the fact

there's a guy
under there going [mumbles]

I'll work with a puppet,
I see you.

It's okay.

[Yoda voice]
Syntax none have.

Mhmm the dark side
clouds everything.

Impossible to see
the future is.

They would bring
the puppet in,

so you could see it and get
a visual of how tall he was,

or where he was going to be

and sometimes I had to walk
with him and talk with him,

which was kind of new too

because he usually
didn't walk and talk.

That was a whole bunch
of new stuff

they were able
to do with him.

So, I just had to pick
a spot and kinda do it.

I kind of like that,

I'm an only child
so I played by myself

a lot in my room
I made up stuff,

and I'm used to fighting
things that aren't there,

talking to people
that aren't there.

It was perfect for me.

So when actors
complain about it

I just kind of look
at them and go,

"Where's your imagination?"

this is the perfect
time to do what you want.

I was very happy to know

that I was part of something
that was changing

the way people
were going to make,

watch, and create films

for the rest of the time.

"The Phantom Menace" was
released on may 19th, 1999

and became
the highest grossing

"Star Wars" film of all.

Its success paved the way

for the next two films
that were shot

completely on digital
high definition cameras,

and showcasing
the most extensive use

of virtual characters
and environments ever.

George brought the original
"Star Wars" universe

back into popular culture
in a whole new way.

You're George Lucas!

Uh, I take it you're here

for the "Star Wars"
convention.

Oh dear god.

Oh my god!

George Lucas!!!

Ahhh!!!

All of the films
that Lucasfilm have made

have become
culturally significant

in one way or another.

And people have a very
emotional connection

to props
and costumes and artwork.

Because it's part
of something much larger

that really effected them.

So when I walk around here

everything that I see
fills me with memories

of you know movies
that I watched

and the experience I had.

It's pretty incredible
to see all the costumes,

and it was like
nerd's paradise.

All of a sudden I was 12,
that's so cool.

No matter how much you
romanticize a weapon or a mask

or a costume
or a character,

you come and touch it

and somebody had
to paint it and build it

and cast it out of foam
or wood or plastic

or what have you.

It's really wonderful
and heartwarming

for me to come up here
and see these models

that I built almost
30 years ago.

'cause it brings
back so many memories

you don't think about
these things for so long,

and then you see them
and it's like,

oh gosh I remember
when I built that.

Whoops, ten people just died.

It's odd though, we didn't
build them to last forever,

and we certainly
didn't build them

to go out into travelling
shows and be in museums.

And so it's kind of odd
to see them up here

where they won't
let us touch them

and if something breaks off

they photograph
where it came off,

and they put it in little
plastic bag and seal it up.

When you see them

and you realize that
when they lit them,

they had a life.

They were a creature.

Yoda, to see Yoda like,

[Yoda voice]
mreaaa moving not.

CG take work is.

In 2001 ILM brought
history to life

like never before with the epic

world war 2 battle sequences
in "Pearl Harbor".

Another series of landmark
achievements for the company.

In 2004 they created
the first extreme close up

of a realistic digital human

for "Lemony Snicket's:
A Series of Unfortunate Events"

ushering in a new era
for digital actors.

The realism paved the way
for the highly anticipated

"Pirates of The Caribbean"
films.

When the script
for "Pirates" came in.

The gag was that our crew
of pirates were cursed,

so that when
they appeared in moonlight

they were these
tattered skeletons.

Which immediately
brought back memories

of "Jason and The Argonauts".

There's a scene of sword
fighting skeletons

that's an iconic scene.

You know that image
came immediately to mind

when I read
that in the script.

It's a really fun opportunity

to pay homage to Ray's work,

but to update with some
of the newer technologies.

The "Pirates of The Caribbean"
series

made extensive use of in camera

motion capture technology.

Otherwise known as Imocap.

This advanced system
of sensors records actions

of human actors
and uses the information

to animate digital characters.

I mean the characters
were all created

by the visual effects.

It wasn't make-up.

They were walking
around in gray suits.

And uh you know it's
very difficult you know

for actors sometimes
to interact with a character

that's wearing a gray suit
with a beanie,

but since our actors

are so well trained,
so professional,

they did a fantastic job.

Most challenging thing
on pirates was Davy Jones.

We had motion capture
trackers on him.

He had all these
silly dots on his face.

But Bill Nighy
was that character.

And I think for me
that was the first time

I really saw
a direct transference

of someone's performance
onto a CG creature,

and it was so complex
and so layered.

You've got all these tentacles

trying to get them to operate

like they really would
is a major challenge.

Because in the computer

although you've got
the shape of the tentacles

if they are going
in different directions

they'll just penetrate
right through each other.

The idea that
they would hit and react

is just not in the computer,
it has to be worked out.

And it takes a lot
of calculations

to make something
like that work.

It was just so
incredibly detailed

and the work
that the model builders

and the texture painters

and all the guys
that contributed

to that show
in all the different ways

just bringing this
immensely complicated crew

and ship to life.

Technology changes
very quickly

and gets better and better

so it gives the artists at ILM

and their supervisors
more fun to play with

more things to play
with more toys,

and it pushes the limits

which is exactly
what we want to do.

We thrive on developing
new techniques

to achieve something
that's never been done before,

so imagination
is unencumbered.

Inspired by the original
1953 version

of "War of The Worlds"

Steven Spielberg
teamed with ILM

once again to push
visual storytelling

to a whole new level.

Well I had this
crazy idea one day

when I was doing
my storyboards.

I had sketched out
a three minute dialogue scene

between the two kids
and tom cruise in the car

after they escape new jersey.

I began sketching it in cuts

you know in close ups,
profiles,

and over the shoulder shots.

And then threw
all that stuff out

because it wasn't
exciting enough.

And I thought,

there's got to be a way
to do this,

what if I did this
all in one shot?

And then I had some
of the pre-vis guys come in

and I pre-vised the entire
scene with the moving camera,

that actually went through
the car at one point,

when through the back window
at another point,

went out into the middle
of the turnpike

to make room for cars
that are passing,

then went back
into the window again.

It was an impossible dream

and I knew it was not achievable

cause I didn't quite know
how to blend it,

where are the blend lines
going to be?

How do we glue these
disparate pieces together

to make it seem
like it's one shot.

So when I showed
Dennis Muren the pre-vis,

Dennis said,
right away this time

he didn't even have
to think about it,

he said,
"You could do it in two shots."

I said, "Where's the break?"

he said, "When you come
back in through the car

through the back of the car."

and then when
you're pulling back out

to the high crane shot
at the end

as the car moves off
into the vanishing point.

So, Dennis thought that
was going to be no problem.

I don't think
there's much clue

that you're seeing an effect
in those scenes

because there are no camera cuts

it's done much more
like documentary style,

and that's got a really great

sense of surprise
when that happens.

It's much more
realistic and immediate,

and that's hard to do
with any kind of effect.

Every little thing
as a collection

of what we do in the history

of all the films that
we've done kind of goes

into every movie
we're doing right now.

"Transformers" represents
a colossal collection

of all these
different stair steps

of ideas on the way.

By this point in time
in computer graphics,

we have learned how
to do hard shiny objects.

Yes.

But have we really
conquered how they are lit.

Have we really conquered

a more realistic
style of animation,

or a cooler
style lets say.

No.

We're constantly re-assessing
what can we do better?

Then we start
designing the robots.

I think initially a lot
of the robots were made

out of all these
questionable material

that looked very CG-ish.

And we actually started
building a couple robots

out of these bony fragments
that look like,

you know what
is alien space stuff,

we don't know what it is.

Michael Bay, our director,

and myself kept going back
and forth on this--

you know what,
this is not working.

Let's just go to car parts

and just start drawing
from real world

because you and I
go to the movie

and if we something
we don't quite understand

it looks fake.

If you want it
to look photo real,

well what does that mean?

It's go to look like
people made it.

And so that's why
we gravitated

all toward these designs

that were more or less
things that we know.

I think
the transformation scenes

from the first movie
you know,

were something that people
had never seen before.

There were about
10,000 moving parts.

And all those pieces
have to move and articulate

with one another.

Technology wise
that stuff didn't exist before,

so again it puts ILM
on the leading edge

of technology breakthrough.

On "Iron Man" we drew a lot

from what they learned
on "Transformers".

Um and that made me
extremely comfortable

with how ambitious
to get with "Iron Man",

because I 've always been
a bit of a skeptic about CGI.

I think primarily because
it hasn't been done right

in many cases.

A challenge was
I think initially

to impress him
with the idea

that we could
make the Iron Man suit

look pretty seamless
and realistic.

I love this suit!!

The other issue
was that there were some

very beautiful
practical suits

created by what was then known
as Stan Winston studios.

Robert, he was finding the suit
very uncomfortable to wear,

and so we would usually
pull one or two pieces off

just so that he had more
freedom with his are movements.

It was clearly
still constricting

so we pulled more
and more pieces off.

So in the end I said,
"look, let's pull it all off.

I'm confident based
on what we've done

we can replace
the whole thing."

and so we did,
we pulled it all off

and I was putting
the markers on Robert

he was like, "I love you."

because he was so happy
that he could now act and emote,

and we would just add
it all digitally later.

At one point in the process

I was giving notes on a shot,

saying how I didn't believe
a certain reflection,

it looked fake to me.

And that's when Ben Snow,

who was
the ILM supervisor said,

"That's the real suit."

so I was giving notes
on the real suit

thinking it was the CGI suit.

And that's when I knew that
it crossed that line.

And from that moment on

I realized that technology
was a good one

it had passed the point

where I could tell
the difference.

And then it became about
how best to design the shots

to make full use of what
it could do well,

and not to ask of those shots
or that technology

what it wasn't good at.

So I think a lot of times
now when you see bad CGI

it's because of poor planning
on behalf of the filmmaker

as opposed to the artists
that are working on it.

And it's a big--
that's a big leap,

that's a big change,

and so now I think it's
incumbent upon the filmmakers

to learn more about CGI

because it's a tool
that's here to stay.

The suit is the star you know
of the "Iron Man" movies.

You watch that suit do stuff

that's what we go there for.

When the screws come out,
the boots come on,

the tu-tu-tu--
things come on his arms.

You really wish
you had one of those things

and the ability
to make you want to be

that particular
character is the dream

of, I'm sure all the guys

that are working in those
particular places

that sit there and go,
ah that would be so cool,

what if the suit did this.

And they make us want
to be those characters

the make us want to see
that stuff happen.

In 2009 director J.J. Abrams

reinvigorated the original
"Star Trek" universe

through the help
of ILM's illusionists.

The first challenge

being a new design
for the starship enterprise.

The thing about
the enterprise was

you can't really play
with it too much

because it's so iconic.

I just knew we were dealing
with those very vocal fans

who were going to be pissed off
no matter what we did.

So I thought,
let's just update a little bit

but let's maintain
it's essential silhouette.

There's certain level of
pressure involved in that too

because I remember when
we did the new enterprise

for the J.J Abrams "Star Trek",

and the first image
that was revealed to the public,

it sounded like they
were going to kill us

if they could find us.

And we were talking about
an artist relocation program

because we're like,
"Oh my god" you know.

They got so upset,

and then it came out
and they loved it.

You know
the amazing thing is ILM

took these designs
that were done

and it made this thing
live and breathe.

It brought
this ship to life.

"Star Wars" made it impossible
to do anything new.

There's not a weather system,
a terrain,

an environment,
a character color,

a number of arms or legs.

There's nothing--

I mean he did everything

like in the last three films
probably exponentially more

than you know all science
fiction films put together.

And every once in awhile

someone would whisper you know

remember, "Star Trek"
came before "Star Wars".

And I was like yea yea
it doesn't help me

cause George had out done it.

ILM made the most of practical
and visual effects magic

by shooting two
very different worlds

side by side
just 30 feet apart

in the parking
lot of Dodger Stadium.

Creating kirk stranded
on the icy Delta Vega Planet

was done on a partial set

under the balmy skies
of Los Angeles.

It was a really
fun magic trick

to get to kind of shoot
those things so closely,

and yet have them
seem so worlds apart.

There's a step with lighting

and rendering that
is just unnervingly magical

that when you get
you're like, "huh!"

You can work
on a shot for months.

You go and watch one
of the movies you've worked on,

and you see the audience react

to something, you go,
"Wow that's awesome."

so, it's very fulfilling
from that aspect.

It just requires
an incredible organizational

and artistic endeavor,

and I think that the fact
that it works as well as it does

is a testament
to how ILM is built,

and the kind of people
that work there.

It's an amazing team,
a huge amazing team.

In 2005 ILM
moved from Marin county

across The Golden Gate Bridge

to a 23-acre complex
at the historic Presidio.

Within this house
that "Star Wars" built,

ILM's team
of visual effects wizards

continue to push the envelope.

From their humble beginnings
in a Van Nuys warehouse

to a state of the art facility.

They've single
handedly transformed

the photo chemical days of old
into a new digital era

changing the industry
one film at a time.

Over the last 35 years

ILM has created visual effects

in nearly 300 movies.

Their innovations and artistry

has been recognized

with 15 visual effects
academy awards,

23 additional nominations,

and awarded the National
Medal of Technology.

In dark theaters everywhere

they transport us
to other worlds

with their cinema magic

always inspired
to create the impossible.

I think ILM's
greatest challenge

is, in a way,
their own reputation.

You know continuing to grow,

and expand and live up
to the standards they've set.

This work is very complicated

and it's very labor intensive,

but it's, to some extent
become commoditized

and the expectation is that
the more of this we're doing

we should be getting
cheaper, cheaper, cheaper.

The competition from overseas
especially has been really hard

when the salaries are
so much less than here

so how do we work
faster and better

and still keep
the quality of it?

And we've had a lot of people

who have gone through ILM
set up other companies

around that are
doing great work also

and we need to try
to keep on top of it

to come up with
the next thing

that's better than what
someone else is doing.

ILM's body of work is something
to be extremely proud of.

I mean you go back
and look at all the things

that ILM has done.

It's the history of movies
at the last part

of 20th century
and into the 21st century.

Lightning just keeps
striking at ILM.

That's the remarkable
thing about ILM.

It's not like
they had their moment

and it's moved on,

they find ways to reinvigorate

the facility,
by breaking new ground.

I think ILM's
biggest accomplishment

isn't any one show

it's that they've managed
to realize the dream

that any filmmaker
would have,

which is the ability
to do anything.

The ability to continue
to make us believe

what we see
is the true genius

of what these guys do.

George made his company
available to every studio,

and to every filmmaker.

And in a sense
it was the first time

that had ever happened before.

Where a company
was formed for all us

to be able to achieve
our our impossible dreams.

And George made that
possible for all of us.