Le jeu de réalité virtuelle le plus déjanté du moment vient d’ouvrir la porte aux […] Cet article 20 chats déchaînés en VR : I Am Cat devient multijoueur ! a été publié sur REALITE-VIRTUELLE.COM.

At first it was dismissed as a crazy joke. Making the Enhanced Games a reality needed a Peter Thiel posse, a couple of retired swimmers, some MAGA money, and a whole lot of drugs.

One of the four pillars of good conversation is levity. You needn’t be a comedian, you can but have some funTetra Images, LLC/Alamy Conversation lies at the heart of our relationships – yet many of us find it surprisingly hard to talk to others. We may feel anxious at the thought of making small talk with strangers and struggle to connect with the people who are closest to us. If that sounds familiar, Alison Wood Brooks hopes to help. She is a professor at Harvard Business School, where she teaches an oversubscribed course called “TALK: How to talk gooder in business and life”, and the author of a new book, Talk: The science of conversation and the art of being ourselves. Both offer four key principles for more meaningful exchanges. Conversations are inherently unpredictable, says Wood Brooks, but they follow certain rules – and knowing their architecture makes us more comfortable with what is outside of our control. New Scientist asked her about the best ways to apply this research to our own chats. David Robson: Talking about talking feels quite meta. Do you ever find yourself critiquing your own performance? Alison Wood Brooks: There are so many levels of “meta-ness”. I have often felt like I’m floating over the room, watching conversations unfold, even as I’m involved in them myself. I teach a course at Harvard, and [my students] all get to experience this feeling as well. There can be an uncomfortable period of hypervigilance, but I hope that dissipates over time as they develop better habits. There is a famous quote from Charlie Parker, who was a jazz saxophonist. He said something like, “Practise, practise, practise, and then when you get on stage, let it all go and just wail.” I think that’s my approach to conversation. Even when you’re hyper-aware of conversation dynamics, you have to remember the true delight of being with another human mind, and never lose the magic of being together. Think ahead, but once you’re talking, let it all go and just wail. Reading your book, I learned that a good way to enliven a conversation is to ask someone why they are passionate about what they do. So, where does your passion for conversation come from? I have two answers to this question. One is professional. Early in my professorship at Harvard, I had been studying emotions by exploring how people talk about their feelings and the balance between what we feel inside and how we express that to others. And I realised I just had this deep, profound interest in figuring out how people talk to each other about everything, not just their feelings. We now have scientific tools that allow us to capture conversations and analyse them at large scale. Natural language processing, machine learning, the advent of AI – all this allows us to take huge swathes of transcript data and process it much more efficiently. Receive a weekly dose of discovery in your inbox. Sign up to newsletter The personal answer is that I’m an identical twin, and I spent my whole life, from the moment I opened my newborn eyes, existing next to a person who’s an exact copy of myself. It was like observing myself at very close range, interacting with the world, interacting with other people. I could see when she said and did things well, and I could try to do that myself. And I saw when her jokes failed, or she stumbled over her words – I tried to avoid those mistakes. It was a very fortunate form of feedback that not a lot of people get. And then, as a twin, you’ve got this person sharing a bedroom, sharing all your clothes, going to all the same parties and playing on the same sports teams, so we were just constantly in conversation with each other. You reached this level of shared reality that is so incredible, and I’ve spent the rest of my life trying to help other people get there in their relationships, too. “TALK” cleverly captures your framework for better conversations: topics, asking, levity and kindness. Let’s start at the beginning. How should we decide what to talk about? My first piece of advice is to prepare. Some people do this naturally. They already think about the things that they should talk about with somebody before they see them. They should lean into this habit. Some of my students, however, think it’s crazy. They think preparation will make the conversation seem rigid and forced and overly scripted. But just because you’ve thought ahead about what you might talk about doesn’t mean you have to talk about those things once the conversation is underway. It does mean, however, that you always have an idea waiting for you when you’re not sure what to talk about next. Having just one topic in your back pocket can help you in those anxiety-ridden moments. It makes things more fluent, which is important for establishing a connection. Choosing a topic is not only important at the start of a conversation. We’re constantly making decisions about whether we should stay on one subject, drift to something else or totally shift gears and go somewhere wildly different. Sometimes the topic of conversation is obvious. Even then, knowing when to switch to a new one can be trickyMartin Parr/Magnum Photos What’s your advice when making these decisions? There are three very clear signs that suggest that it’s time to switch topics. The first is longer mutual pauses. The second is more uncomfortable laughter, which we use to fill the space that we would usually fill excitedly with good content. And the third sign is redundancy. Once you start repeating things that have already been said on the topic, it’s a sign that you should move to something else. After an average conversation, most people feel like they’ve covered the right number of topics. But if you ask people after conversations that didn’t go well, they’ll more often say that they didn’t talk about enough things, rather than that they talked about too many things. This suggests that a common mistake is lingering too long on a topic after you’ve squeezed all the juice out of it. The second element of TALK is asking questions. I think a lot of us have heard the advice to ask more questions, yet many people don’t apply it. Why do you think that is? Many years of research have shown that the human mind is remarkably egocentric. Often, we are so focused on our own perspective that we forget to even ask someone else to share what’s in their mind. Another reason is fear. You’re interested in the other person, and you know you should ask them questions, but you’re afraid of being too intrusive, or that you will reveal your own incompetence, because you feel you should know the answer already. What kinds of questions should we be asking – and avoiding? In the book, I talk about the power of follow-up questions that build on anything that your partner has just said. It shows that you heard them, that you care and that you want to know more. Even one follow-up question can springboard us away from shallow talk into something deeper and more meaningful. There are, however, some bad patterns of question asking, such as “boomerasking”. Michael Yeomans [at Imperial College London] and I have a recent paper about this, and oh my gosh, it’s been such fun to study. It’s a play on the word boomerang: it comes back to the person who threw it. If I ask you what you had for breakfast, and you tell me you had Special K and banana, and then I say, “Well, let me tell you about my breakfast, because, boy, was it delicious” – that’s boomerasking. Sometimes it’s a thinly veiled way of bragging or complaining, but sometimes I think people are genuinely interested to hear from their partner, but then the partner’s answer reminds them so much of their own life that they can’t help but start sharing their perspective. In our research, we have found that this makes your partner feel like you weren’t interested in their perspective, so it seems very insincere. Sharing your own perspective is important. It’s okay at some point to bring the conversation back to yourself. But don’t do it so soon that it makes your partner feel like you didn’t hear their answer or care about it. Research by Alison Wood Brooks includes a recent study on “boomerasking”, a pitfall you should avoid to make conversations flowJanelle Bruno What are the benefits of levity? When we think of conversations that haven’t gone well, we often think of moments of hostility, anger or disagreement, but a quiet killer of conversation is boredom. Levity is the antidote. These small moments of sparkle or fizz can pull us back in and make us feel engaged with each other again. Our research has shown that we give status and respect to people who make us feel good, so much so that in a group of people, a person who can land even one appropriate joke is more likely to be voted as the leader. And the joke doesn’t even need to be very funny! It’s the fact that they were confident enough to try it and competent enough to read the room. Do you have any practical steps that people can apply to generate levity, even if they’re not a natural comedian? Levity is not just about being funny. In fact, aiming to be a comedian is not the right goal. When we watch stand-up on Netflix, comedians have rehearsed those jokes and honed them and practised them for a long time, and they’re delivering them in a monologue to an audience. It’s a completely different task from a live conversation. In real dialogue, what everybody is looking for is to feel engaged, and that doesn’t require particularly funny jokes or elaborate stories. When you see opportunities to make it fun or lighten the mood, that’s what you need to grab. It can come through a change to a new, fresh topic, or calling back to things that you talked about earlier in the conversation or earlier in your relationship. These callbacks – which sometimes do refer to something funny – are such a nice way of showing that you’ve listened and remembered. A levity move could also involve giving sincere compliments to other people. When you think nice things, when you admire someone, make sure you say it out loud. This brings us to the last element of TALK: kindness. Why do we so often fail to be as kind as we would like? Wobbles in kindness often come back to our egocentrism. Research shows that we underestimate how much other people’s perspectives differ from our own, and we forget that we have the tools to ask other people directly in conversation for their perspective. Being a kinder conversationalist is about trying to focus on your partner’s perspective and then figuring what they need and helping them to get it. Finally, what is your number one tip for readers to have a better conversation the next time they speak to someone? Every conversation is surprisingly tricky and complex. When things don’t go perfectly, give yourself and others more grace. There will be trips and stumbles and then a little grace can go very, very far. Topics:

show some love for the losers Delightfully irreverent Underdogs isn’t your parents’ nature docuseries Ryan Reynolds narrates NatGeo's new series highlighting nature's much less cool and majestic creatures Jennifer Ouellette – Jun 15, 2025 3:11 pm | 5 The indestructible honey badger is just one of nature's "benchwarmers" featured in Underdogs Credit: National Geographic/Doug Parker The indestructible honey badger is just one of nature's "benchwarmers" featured in Underdogs Credit: National Geographic/Doug Parker Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more Narrator Ryan Reynolds celebrates nature's outcasts in the new NatGeo docuseries Underdogs. Most of us have seen a nature documentary or two (or three) at some point in our lives, so it's a familiar format: sweeping majestic footage of impressively regal animals accompanied by reverently high-toned narration (preferably with a tony British accent). Underdogs, a new docuseries from National Geographic, takes a decidedly different and unconventional approach. Narrated by with hilarious irreverence by Ryan Reynolds, the five-part series highlights nature's less cool and majestic creatures: the outcasts and benchwarmers, more noteworthy for their "unconventional hygiene choices" and "unsavory courtship rituals." It's like The Suicide Squad or Thunderbolts*, except these creatures actually exist. Per the official premise, "Underdogs features a range of never-before-filmed scenes, including the first time a film crew has ever entered a special cave in New Zealand—a huge cavern that glows brighter than a bachelor pad under a black light thanks to the glowing butts of millions of mucus-coated grubs. All over the world, overlooked superstars like this are out there 24/7, giving it maximum effort and keeping the natural world in working order for all those showboating polar bears, sharks and gorillas." It's rated PG-13 thanks to the odd bit of scatalogical humor and shots of Nature Sexy Time Each of the five episodes is built around a specific genre. "Superheroes" highlights the surprising superpowers of the honey badger, pistol shrimp, and the invisible glass frog, among others, augmented with comic book graphics; "Sexy Beasts" focuses on bizarre mating habits and follows the format of a romantic advice column; "Terrible Parents" highlights nature's worst practices, following the outline of a parenting guide; "Total Grossout" is exactly what it sounds like; and "The Unusual Suspects" is a heist tale, documenting the supposed efforts of a macaque to put together the ultimate team of masters of deception and disguise (an inside man, a decoy, a fall guy, etc.).  Green Day even wrote and recorded a special theme song for the opening credits. Co-creators Mark Linfield and Vanessa Berlowitz of Wildstar Films are longtime producers of award-winning wildlife films, most notably Frozen Planet, Planet Earth and David Attenborough's Life of Mammals—you know, the kind of prestige nature documentaries that have become a mainstay for National Geographic and the BBC, among others. They're justly proud of that work, but this time around the duo wanted to try something different. Madagascar's aye-aye: "as if fear and panic had a baby and rolled it in dog hair" National Geographic/Eleanor Paish Madagascar's aye-aye: "as if fear and panic had a baby and rolled it in dog hair" National Geographic/Eleanor Paish An emerald jewel wasp emerges from a cockroach. National Geographic/Simon De Glanville An emerald jewel wasp emerges from a cockroach. National Geographic/Simon De Glanville A pack of African hunting dogs is no match for the honey badger's thick hide. National Geographic/Tom Walker A pack of African hunting dogs is no match for the honey badger's thick hide. National Geographic/Tom Walker An emerald jewel wasp emerges from a cockroach. National Geographic/Simon De Glanville A pack of African hunting dogs is no match for the honey badger's thick hide. National Geographic/Tom Walker A fireworm is hit by a cavitation bubble shot from the claw of a pistol shrimp defending its home. National Geographic/Hugh Miller As it grows and molts, the mad hatterpillar stacks old head casings on top of its head. Scientists think it is used as a decoy against would-be predators and parasites, and when needed, it can also be used as a weapon. National Geographic/Katherine Hannaford Worst parents ever? A young barnacle goose chick prepares t make the 800-foot jump from its nest to the ground. National Geographic An adult pearlfish reverses into a sea cucumber's butt to hide. National Geographic A vulture sticks its head inside an elephant carcass to eat. National Geographic A manatee releases flatulence while swimming to lose the buoyancy build up of gas inside its stomach, and descend down the water column. National Geographic/Karl Davies "There is a sense after awhile that you're playing the same animals to the same people, and the shows are starting to look the same and so is your audience," Linfield told Ars. "We thought, okay, how can we do something absolutely the opposite? We've gone through our careers collecting stories of these weird and crazy creatures that don't end up in the script because they're not big or sexy and they live under a rock. But they often have the best life histories and the craziest superpowers." Case in point: the velvet worm featured in the "Superheroes" episode, which creeps up on unsuspecting prey before squirting disgusting slime all over their food. (It's a handy defense mechanism, too, against predators like the wolf spider.) Once Linfield and Berlowitz decided to focus on nature's underdogs and to take a more humorous approach, Ryan Reynolds became their top choice for a narrator—the anti-Richard Attenborough. As luck would have it, the pair shared an agent with the mega-star. So even though they thought there was no way Reynolds would agree to the project, they put together a sizzle reel, complete with a "fake Canadian Ryan Reynolds sound-alike" doing the narration. Reynolds was on set when he received the reel, and loved it so much he recoded his own narration for the footage and sent it back. "From that moment he was in," said Linfield, and Wildstar Films worked closely with Reynolds and his company to develop the final series. "We've never worked that way on a series before, a joint collaboration from day one," Berlowitz admitted. But it worked: the end result strikes the perfect balance between scientific revelation and accurate natural history, and an edgy comic tone. That tone is quintessential Reynolds, and while he did mostly follow the script (which his team helped write), Linfield and Berlowitz admit there was also a fair amount of improvisation—not all of it PG-13.  "What we hadn't appreciated is that he's an incredible improv performer," said Berlowitz. "He can't help himself. He gets into character and starts riffing off [the footage]. There are some takes that we definitely couldn't use, that potentially would fit a slightly more Hulu audience."  Some of the ad-libs made it into the final episodes, however—like Reynolds describing an Aye-Aye as "if fear and panic had a baby and rolled it in dog hair"—even though it meant going back and doing a bit of recutting to get the new lines to fit. Cinematographer Tom Beldam films a long-tailed macaque who stole his smart phone minutes later. National Geographic/Laura Pennafort Cinematographer Tom Beldam films a long-tailed macaque who stole his smart phone minutes later. National Geographic/Laura Pennafort The macaque agrees to trade ithe stolen phone for a piece of food. National Geographic The macaque agrees to trade ithe stolen phone for a piece of food. National Geographic A family of tortoise beetles defend themselves from a carnivorous ant by wafting baby poop in its direction. National Geographic A family of tortoise beetles defend themselves from a carnivorous ant by wafting baby poop in its direction. National Geographic The macaque agrees to trade ithe stolen phone for a piece of food. National Geographic A family of tortoise beetles defend themselves from a carnivorous ant by wafting baby poop in its direction. National Geographic A male hippo sprays his feces at another male who is threatening to take over his patch. National Geographic A male proboscis monkey flaunts his large nose. The noses of these males are used to amplify their calls in the vast forest. National Geographic Dream girl: A blood-soaked female hyena looks across the African savanna. National Geographic A male bowerbird presents one of the finest items in his collection to a female in his bower. National Geographic The male nursery web spider presents his nuptial gift to the female. National Geographic Cue the Barry White mood music: Two leopard slugs suspend themselves on a rope of mucus as they entwine their bodies to mate with one another. National Geographic Despite their years of collective experience, Linfield and Berlowitz were initially skeptical when the crew told them about the pearl fish, which hides from predators in a sea cucumber's butt (along with many other species). "It had never been filmed so we said, 'You're going to have to prove it to us,'" said Berlowitz. "They came back with this fantastic, hilarious sequence of a pearl fish reverse parking [in a sea cucumber's anus)." The film crew experienced a few heart-pounding moments, most notably while filming the cliffside nests of barnacle geese for the "Terrible Parents" episode. A melting glacier caused a watery avalanche while the crew was filming the geese, and they had to quickly grab a few shots and run to safety. Less dramatic: cinematographer Tom Beldam had his smartphone stolen by a long-tailed macaque mere minutes after he finished capturing the animal on film. If all goes well and Underdogs finds its target audience, we may even get a follow-up. "We are slightly plowing new territory but the science is as true as it's ever been and the stories are good. That aspect of the natural history is still there," said Linfield. "I think what we really hope for is that people who don't normally watch natural history will watch it. If people have as much fun watching it as we had making it, then the metrics should be good enough for another season." Verdict: Underdogs is positively addictive; I binged all five episodes in a single day. (For his part, Reynolds said in a statement that he was thrilled to "finally watch a project of ours with my children. Technically they saw Deadpool and Wolverine but I don't think they absorbed much while covering their eyes and ears and screaming for two hours.") Underdogs premieres June 15, 2025, at 9 PM/8 PM Central on National Geographic (simulcast on ABC) and will be available for streaming on Disney+ and Hulu the following day.  You should watch it, if only to get that second season. Jennifer Ouellette Senior Writer Jennifer Ouellette Senior Writer Jennifer is a senior writer at Ars Technica with a particular focus on where science meets culture, covering everything from physics and related interdisciplinary topics to her favorite films and TV series. Jennifer lives in Baltimore with her spouse, physicist Sean M. Carroll, and their two cats, Ariel and Caliban. 5 Comments

Elon Musk may be gone from the Trump administration — and his friendship status with President Donald Trump may be at best uncertain — but his whirlwind stint in government certainly left its imprint. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), his pet government-slashing project, remains entrenched in Washington. During his 130-day tenure, Musk led DOGE in eliminating about 260,000 federal employee jobs and gutting agencies supporting scientific research and humanitarian aid. But to date, DOGE claims to have saved the government $180 billion — well short of its ambitious (and frankly never realistic) target of cutting at least $2 trillion from the federal budget. And with Musk’s departure still fresh, there are reports that the federal government is trying to rehire federal workers who quit or were let go. For Elaine Kamarck, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, DOGE’s tactics will likely end up being disastrous in the long run. “DOGE came in with these huge cuts, which were not attached to a plan,” she told Today, Explained co-host Sean Rameswaram. Kamarck knows all about making government more efficient. In the 1990s, she ran the Clinton administration’s Reinventing Government program. “I was Elon Musk,” she told Today, Explained. With the benefit of that experience, she assesses Musk’s record at DOGE, and what, if anything, the billionaire’s loud efforts at cutting government spending added up to. Below is an excerpt of the conversation, edited for length and clarity. There’s much more in the full podcast, so listen to Today, Explained wherever you get podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Pandora, and Spotify. What do you think Elon Musk’s legacy is? Well, he will not have totally, radically reshaped the federal government. Absolutely not. In fact, there’s a high probability that on January 20, 2029, when the next president takes over, the federal government is about the same size as it is now, and is probably doing the same stuff that it’s doing now. What he did manage to do was insert chaos, fear, and loathing into the federal workforce. There was reporting in the Washington Post late last week that these cuts were so ineffective that the White House is actually reaching out to various federal employees who were laid off and asking them to come back, from the FDA to the IRS to even USAID. Which cuts are sticking at this point and which ones aren’t?First of all, in a lot of cases, people went to court and the courts have reversed those earlier decisions. So the first thing that happened is, courts said, “No, no, no, you can’t do it this way. You have to bring them back.” The second thing that happened is that Cabinet officers started to get confirmed by the Senate. And remember that a lot of the most spectacular DOGE stuff was happening in February. In February, these Cabinet secretaries were preparing for their Senate hearings. They weren’t on the job. Now that their Cabinet secretary’s home, what’s happening is they’re looking at these cuts and they’re saying, “No, no, no! We can’t live with these cuts because we have a mission to do.”As the government tries to hire back the people they fired, they’re going to have a tough time, and they’re going to have a tough time for two reasons. First of all, they treated them like dirt, and they’ve said a lot of insulting things. Second, most of the people who work for the federal government are highly skilled. They’re not paper pushers. We have computers to push our paper, right? They’re scientists. They’re engineers. They’re people with high skills, and guess what? They can get jobs outside the government. So there’s going to be real lasting damage to the government from the way they did this. And it’s analogous to the lasting damage that they’re causing at universities, where we now have top scientists who used to invent great cures for cancer and things like that, deciding to go find jobs in Europe because this culture has gotten so bad.What happens to this agency now? Who’s in charge of it?Well, what they’ve done is DOGE employees have been embedded in each of the organizations in the government, okay? And they basically — and the president himself has said this — they basically report to the Cabinet secretaries. So if you are in the Transportation Department, you have to make sure that Sean Duffy, who’s the secretary of transportation, agrees with you on what you want to do. And Sean Duffy has already had a fight during a Cabinet meeting with Elon Musk. You know that he has not been thrilled with the advice he’s gotten from DOGE. So from now on, DOGE is going to have to work hand in hand with Donald Trump’s appointed leaders.And just to bring this around to what we’re here talking about now, they’re in this huge fight over wasteful spending with the so-called big, beautiful bill. Does this just look like the government as usual, ultimately?It’s actually worse than normal. Because the deficit impacts are bigger than normal. It’s adding more to the deficit than previous bills have done. And the second reason it’s worse than normal is that everybody is still living in a fantasy world. And the fantasy world says that somehow we can deal with our deficits by cutting waste, fraud, and abuse. That is pure nonsense. Let me say it: pure nonsense.Where does most of the government money go? Does it go to some bureaucrats sitting on Pennsylvania Avenue? It goes to us. It goes to your grandmother and her Social Security and her Medicare. It goes to veterans in veterans benefits. It goes to Americans. That’s why it’s so hard to cut it. It’s so hard to cut it because it’s us. And people are living on it. Now, there’s a whole other topic that nobody talks about, and it’s called entitlement reform, right? Could we reform Social Security? Could we make the retirement age go from 67 to 68? That would save a lot of money. Could we change the cost of living? Nobody, nobody, nobody is talking about that. And that’s because we are in this crazy, polarized environment where we can no longer have serious conversations about serious issues. See More:

To this day, Jaws remains the best example of Steven Spielberg‘s genius as a filmmaker. He somehow took a middling pulp novel about a killer shark and turned it into a thrilling adventure about masculinity and economic desperation. And to the surprise of no one, the massive success of Jaws spawned a lot of knockoffs, a glut of movies about animals terrorizing communities. None of these reach the majesty of Jaws, of course. But here’s the thing—none of them had to be Jaws. Sure, it’s nice that Spielberg’s film has impeccably designed set pieces and compelling characters, but that’s not the main reason people go to animal attack movies. We really just want to watch people get attacked. And eaten. With such standards duly lowered, let’s take a look at the best animal attack movies that came out in the past half-century since Jaws first scared us out of the water. Of course this list doesn’t cover every movie inspired by Jaws ( for example Godzilla Minus One, which devotes its middle act to a wonderful Jaws riff), and some can argue that these movies were less inspired by Jaws than other nature revolts features, such as Alfred Hitchcock‘s The Birds. But every one of these flicks owes a debt to Jaws, either in inspiration or simply getting people interested in movies about animals eating people. Those warning aside, lets make like drunken revelers on Amity Island and dive right in! 20. Sharknado (2013) Sharknado almost doesn’t belong on this list because it’s less a movie and more of a meme, a precursor to Vines and TikTok trends. Yes, many fantastic movies have been made off of an incredibly high concept and a painfully low budget. Heck, that approach made Roger Corman’s career. But Sharknado‘s high concept—a tornado sweeps over the ocean and launches ravenous sharks into the mainland—comes with a self-satisfied smirk. Somehow, Sharknado managed to capture the imagination of the public, making it popular enough to launch five sequels. At the time, viewers defended it as a so bad it’s good-style movie like The Room. But today Sharknado‘s obvious attempts to be wacky are just bad, making the franchise one more embarrassing trend, ready to be forgotten. 19. Orca (1977) For a long time, Orca had a reputation for being the most obvious Jaws ripoff, and with good reason—Italian producer Dino De Laurentiis, who would go on to support Flash Gordon, Manhunter, and truly launch David Lynch‘s career with Blue Velvet, wanted his own version of the Spielberg hit. On paper he had all the right ingredients, including a great cast with Richard Harris and Charlotte Rampling, and another oceanic threat, this time a killer whale. Orca boasts some impressive underwater cinematography, something that even Jaws largely lacks. But that’s the one thing Orca does better than Jaws. Everything else—character-building, suspense and scare scenes, basic plotting and storytelling—is done in such a haphazard manner that Orca plays more like an early mockbuster from the Asylum production company (makers of Sharknado) than it does a product from a future Hollywood player. 18. Tentacles (1977) Another Italian cheapie riding off the success of Jaws, Tentacles at least manages to be fun in its ineptitude. A giant octopus feature, Tentacles is directed by Ovidio G. Assonitis, a man whose greatest claim to fame is that he annoyed first-time director James Cameron so much on Piranha II: The Spawning that he activated the future legend’s infamous refusal to compromise with studios and producers. Tentacles somehow has a pretty impressive cast, including John Huston, Shelly Winters, and Henry Fonda all picking up paychecks. None of them really do any hard work in Tentacles, but there’s something fun about watching these greats shake the the octopus limbs that are supposed to be attacking them, as if they’re in an Ed Wood picture. 17. Kingdom of the Spiders (1977) Spielberg famously couldn’t get his mechanical shark to work, a happy accident that he overcame with incredibly tense scenes that merely suggested the monster’s presence. For his arachnids on the forgotten movie Kingdom of the Spiders, director John “Bud” Cardos has an even more formative tool to make up for the lack of effects magic: William Shatner. Shatner plays Rack Hansen, a veterinarian who discovers that the overuse of pesticides has killed off smaller insects and forced the tarantula population to seek larger prey, including humans. These types of ecological messages are common among creature features of the late ’70s, and they usually clang with hollow self-righteousness. But in Kingdom of the Spiders, Shatner delivers his lines with such blown out conviction that we enjoy his bluster, even if we don’t quite buy it. 16. The Meg (2018) The idea of Jason Statham fighting a giant prehistoric shark is an idea so awesome, it’s shocking that his character from Spy didn’t already pitch it. And The Meg certainly does deliver when Statham’s character does commit to battle with the creature in the movie’s climax. The problem is that moment of absurd heroism comes only after a lot of long sappy nonsense. Join our mailing list Get the best of Den of Geek delivered right to your inbox! It’s hard to figure out who is to blame for The Meg‘s failure. Director Jon Turteltaub hails from well-remembered Disney classics Cool Runnings and National Treasure. But too often he forgets how to pace an adventure film and gives into his most saccharine instincts here. One of the many Chinese/Hollywood co-produced blockbusters of the 2010s, The Meg also suffers from trying to innocuously please too wide an audience. Whatever the source, The Meg only fleetingly delivers on the promise of big time peril, wasting too much time on thin character beats. 15. Lake Placid (1999) I know already some people reading this are taking exception to Lake Placid‘s low ranking, complaining that this list isn’t showing enough respect to what they consider a zippy, irreverent take on a creature feature, one written by Ally McBeal creator David E. Kelley and co-starring Betty White. To those people, I can only say, “Please rewatch Lake Placid and then consider its ranking.” Lake Placid certainly has its fun moments, helped along by White as a kindly grandmother who keeps feeding a giant croc, Bill Pullman as a dumbfounded simple sheriff, and Oliver Platt as a rich adventurer. Their various one-liners are a pleasure to remember. But within the context of a movie stuffed with late ’90s irony, the constant snark gets tiresome, sapping out all the fun of a killer crocodile film. 14. Open Water (2003) Like Sharknado, Open Water had its fans for a few years but has fallen in most moviegoers’ esteem. Unlike Sharknado, Open Water is a real movie, just one that can’t sustain its premise for its entire runtime. Writer and director Chris Kentis draws inspiration from a real-life story about a husband and wife who were accidentally abandoned in the middle of the ocean by their scuba excursion group. The same thing happens to the movie’s Susan Watkins (Blanchard Ryan) and Daniel Travis (Daniel Kintner), who respond to their predicament by airing out their relationship grievances, even as sharks start to surround them. Kentis commits to the reality of the couple’s bleak situation, which sets Open Water apart from the thrill-a-minute movies that mostly make up this list. But even with some shocking set pieces, Open Water feels too much like being stuck in car with a couple who hates each other and not enough like a shark attack thriller. 13. Eaten Alive (1976) Spielberg’s artful execution of Jaws led many of the filmmakers who followed to attempt some semblance of character development and prestige, even if done without enthusiasm (see: Orca). Not so with Tobe Hooper, who followed up the genre-defining The Texas Chainsaw Massacre with Eaten Alive. Then again, Hooper draws just as much from Psycho as he does Jaws. Neville Brand plays Judd, the proprietor of a sleazy hotel on the bayou where slimy yokels do horrible things to one another. Amity Island, this is not. But when one of the visitors annoy Judd, he feeds them to the pet croc kept in the back. Eaten Alive is a nasty bit of work, but like most of Hooper’s oeuvre, it’s a lot of fun. 12. Prophecy (1979) Directed by John Frankenheimer of The Manchurian Candidate and Grand Prix fame, Prophecy is easily the best of the more high-minded animal attack movies that followed Jaws. This landlocked film, written by David Seltzer, stars Robert Foxworth as Dr. Robert Verne, a veterinarian hired by the EPA to investigate bear attacks against loggers on a mountain in Maine. Along with his wife Maggie (Talia Shire), Verne finds himself thrown into a conflict between the mining company and the local Indigenous population who resist them. Prophecy drips with an American hippy mentality that reads as pretty conservative today (“your body, your choice” one of Maggie’s friends tells her… to urge her against getting an abortion), making its depictions of Native people, including the leader played by Italian American actor Armand Assante, pretty embarrassing. But there is a mutant bear on the loose and Frankenheimer knows how to stage an exciting sequence, which makes Prophecy a worthwhile watch. 11. Piranha 3D (2010) Piranha 3D begins with a denim-wearing fisherman named Matt, played by Richard Dreyfuss no less, falling into the water and immediately getting devoured by the titular flesh-eaters. This weird nod to Matt Hooper and Jaws instead of Joe Dante’s Piranha, the movie Piranha 3D is supposed to be remaking, is just one of the many oddities at play yhere. Screenwriters Pete Goldfinger and Josh Stolberg have some of the wacky energy and social satire of the original film, but director Alexandre Aja, a veteran of the French Extreme movement, includes so much nastiness in Piranha 3D that we’re not sure if we want to laugh or throw up. Still, there’s no denying the power of Piranha 3D‘s set pieces, including a shocking sequence in which the titular beasties attack an MTV/Girls Gone Wild Spring Break party and chaos ensues. Furthermore, Piranha 3D benefits from a strong cast, which includes Elizabeth Shue, Adam Scott, and Ving Rhames. 10. Anaconda (1997) With its many scenes involving an animal attacking a ragtag group on a boat, Anaconda clearly owes a debt to Jaws. However, with its corny characters and shoddy late ’90s CGI, Anaconda feels today less like a Jaws knockoff and more like a forerunner to Sharknado and the boom of lazy Syfy and Redbox horror movies that followed. Whatever its influences and legacy, there’s no denying that Anaconda is, itself, a pretty fun movie. Giant snakes make for good movie monsters, and the special effects have become dated in a way that feels charming. Moreover, Anaconda boasts a enjoyably unlikely cast, including Eric Stoltz as a scientist, Owen Wilson and Ice Cube as members of a documentary crew, and Jon Voight as what might be the most unhinged character of his career, second only to his crossbow enthusiast from Megalopolis. 9. The Shallows (2016) The Shallows isn’t the highest-ranking shark attack movie on this list but it’s definitely the most frightening shark attack thriller since Jaws. That’s high praise, indeed, but The Shallows benefits from a lean and mean premise and clear direction by Jaume Collet-Serra, who has made some solid modern thrillers. The Shallows focuses almost entirely on med student Nancy Adams (Blake Lively), who gets caught far from shore after the tide comes in and is hunted by a shark. A lot of the pleasure of The Shallows comes from seeing how Collet-Serra and screenwriter Anthony Jaswinski avoid the problems that plague many of the movies on this list. Adams is an incredibly competent character, and we pull for her even after the mistake that leaves her stranded. Moreover, The Shallows perfectly balances thrill sequences with character moments, making for one of the more well-rounded creature features of the past decade. 8. Razorback (1984) Jaws, of course, has a fantastic opening scene, a thrilling sequence in which the shark kills a drunken skinny dipper. Of the movies on this list, only Razorback comes close to matching the original’s power, and it does so because director Russell Mulcahy, who would make Highlander next, goes for glossy absurdity. In the Razorback‘s first three minutes, a hulking wild boar smashes through the rural home of an elderly man in the Australian outback, carrying away his young grandson. Over the sounds of a synth score, the old man stumbles away from his now-burning house, screaming up into the sky. Sadly, the rest of Razorback cannot top that moment. Mulcahy directs the picture with lots of glossy style, while retaining the grit of the Australian New Wave movement. But budget restrictions keep the titular beast from really looking as cool as one would hope, and the movie’s loud, crazy tone can’t rely on Jaws-like power of suggestion. 7. Crawl (2019) Alexandre Aja’s second movie on this list earns its high rank precisely because it does away with the tonal inconsistencies that plagued Piranha 3D and leans into what the French filmmaker does so well: slicked down and mean horror. Set in the middle of a Florida hurricane, Crawl stars Kaya Scodelario as competitive swimmer Haley and always-welcome character actor Barry Pepper as her father Dave, who get trapped in a flooding basement that’s menaced by alligators. Yet as grimy as Crawl can get, Aja also executes the strong character work in the script by Michael Rasmussen and Shawn Rasmussen. Dave and Haley are real people, not just gator-bait, making their peril feel all the more real, and their triumphs all the sweeter. 6. Piranha (1978) Piranha is the only entry on this list to get a seal of approval from Stephen Spielberg himself, who not only praised the movie, even as Universal Pictures planned to sue the production, but also got director Joe Dante to later helm Gremlins. It’s not hard to see why Piranha charmed Spielberg, a man who loves wacky comedy. Dante’s Looney Tunes approach is on full display in some of the movie’s best set pieces. But Piranha is special because it also comes from legendary screenwriter John Sayles, who infuses the story with social satire and cynicism that somehow blends with Dante’s approach. The result is a film about piranha developed by the U.S. military to kill the Vietnamese getting unleashed into an American river and making their way to a children’s summer camp, a horrifying idea that Dante turns into good clean fun. 5. Slugs (1988) If we’re talking about well-made movies, then Slugs belongs way below any of the movies on this list, somewhere around the killer earthworm picture Squirm. But if we’re thinking about pure enjoyable spectacle, it’s hard to top Slugs, a movie about, yes, flesh-eating slugs. Yes, it’s very funny to think about people getting terrorized by creatures that are famous for moving very, very slowly. But Spanish director Juan Piquer Simón, perhaps best known for his equally bugnuts giallo Pieces (1982), pays as little attention to realism as he does to good taste. Slugs is filled with insane and ghastly sequences of killer slugs ending up in unlikely places, swarming the floor of someone’s bedroom or inside a fancy restaurant, and then devouring people, one methodical bite at a time. 4. Deep Blue Sea (1999) When it comes to goofy ’90s CGI action, it’s hard to top Deep Blue Sea, directed by Renny Harlin and featuring sharks with genetically enhanced brains. Deep Blue Sea doesn’t have a strong sense of pacing, it lacks any sort of believable character development, and the effects looked terrible even in 1999. But it’s also the only movie on this list that features LL Cool J as a cool chef who recites a violent version of the 23rd Psalm and almost gets cooked alive in an oven by a genius-level shark. It’s scenes like the oven sequence that makes Deep Blue Sea such a delight, despite its many, many flaws. The movie tries to do the most at every turn, whether that’s clearly reediting the movie in postproduction so that LL Cool J’s chef becomes a central character, stealing the spotlight form intended star Saffron Burrows, or a ridiculous Samuel L. Jackson monologue with a delightfully unexpected climax. 3. Alligator (1980) In many ways, Alligator feels like screenwriter John Sayles’ rejoinder to Piranha. If Joe Dante sanded down Piranha‘s sharp edges with his goofy humor, then Alligator is so filled with mean-spiritedness that no director could dilute it. Not that Lewis Teague, a solid action helmer who we’ll talk about again shortly, would do that. Alligator transports the old adage about gators in the sewers from New York to Chicago where the titular beast, the subject of experiments to increase its size, begins preying on the innocent. And on the not so innocent. Alligator shows no respect for the good or the bad, and the film is filled with scenes of people getting devoured, whether it’s a young boy who becomes a snack during a birthday party prank or an elderly mafioso who tries to abandon his family during the gator’s rampage. 2. Grizzly (1976) Grizzly stands as the greatest of the movies obviously ripping off Jaws precisely because it understands its limitations. It takes what it can from Spielberg’s masterpiece, including the general premise of an animal hunting in a tourist location, and ignores what it can’t pull off, namely three-dimensional characters. This clear-eyed understanding of everyone’s abilities makes Grizzly a lean, mean, and satisfying thriller. Directed by blaxploitation vet William Girdler and written by Harvey Flaxman and David Sheldon, Grizzly stars ’70s low-budget king Christopher George as a park ranger investigating unusually vicious bear attacks on campers. That’s not the richest concept in the world, but Girdler and co. execute their ideas with such precision, and George plays his character with just the right amount of machismo, that Grizzly manages to deliver on everything you want from an animal attack. 1. Cujo (1983) To some modern readers, it might seem absurd to put Cujo on a list of Jaws knockoffs. After all, Stephen King is a franchise unto himself and he certainly doesn’t need another movie’s success to get a greenlight for any of his projects. But you have to remember that Cujo came out in 1983 and was just the third of his works to get adapted theatrically, which makes its Jaws connection more valid. After all, the main section of the film—in which mom (Dee Wallace) and her son Tad (Danny Pintauro) are trapped in their car and menaced by the titular St. Bernard—replicates the isolation on Quint’s fishing vessel, the Orca, better than any other film on this list. However, it’s not just director Lewis Teague’s ability to create tension that puts Cujo at the top. Writers Don Carlos Dunaway and Lauren Currier key into the complicated familial dynamics of King’s story, giving the characters surprising depth. It’s no wonder that Spielberg would cast Wallace as another overwhelmed mom for E.T. The Extraterrestrial the very next year, proving that he still has a soft spot for animal attack movies—even if none of them came close to matching the power of Jaws.

Classic splitscreens, traditional face replacements and new approaches to machine learning-assisted face swapping allowed for twinning shots in ‘Mickey 17’. An excerpt from issue #32 of befores & afters magazine. The art of representing two characters on screen at the same time has become known as ‘twinning’. For Mickey 17 visual effects supervisor Dan Glass, the effect of seeing both Mickey 17 and 18 together was one he looked to achieve with a variety of methodologies. “With a technique like that,” he says, “you always want to use a range of tricks, because you don’t want people to figure it out. You want to keep them like, ‘Oh, wait a minute. How did they…?” “Going back to the way that Director Bong is so prepared and organized,” adds Glass, “it again makes the world of difference with that kind of work, because he thumbnails every shot. Then, some of them are a bit more fleshed out in storyboards. You can look at it and go, ‘Okay, in this situation, this is what the camera’s doing, this is what the actor’s doing,’ which in itself is quite interesting, because he pre-thinks all of this. You’d think that the actors show up and basically just have to follow the steps like robots. It’s not like that. He gives them an environment to work in, but the shots do end up extraordinarily close to what he thumbnails, and it made it a lot simpler to go through.” Those different approaches to twinning ranged from simple splitscreens, to traditional face replacements, and then substantially with a machine learned AI approach, now usually termed ‘face swapping’. What made the twinning work a tougher task than usual, suggests Glass, was the fact that the two Pattinson characters are virtually identical. “Normally, when you’re doing some kind of face replacement, you’re comparing it to a memory of the face. But this was right in front of you as two Mickeys looking strikingly similar.” Here’s how a typical twinning shot was achieved, as described by Glass. “Because Mickey was mostly dressed the same, with only a slight hair change, we were able to have Robert play both roles and to do them one after another. Sometimes, you have to do these things where hair and makeup or costume has a significant variation, so you’re either waiting a long time, which slows production, or you’re coming back at another time to do the different roles, which always makes the process a lot more complicated to match, but we were able to do that immediately.” “Based on the design of the shot,” continues Glass, “I would recommend which of Robert’s parts should be shot first. This was most often determined by which role had more impact on the camera movement. A huge credit goes to Robert for his ability to flip between the roles so effortlessly.” In the film, Mickey 17 is more passive and Mickey 18 is more aggressive. Pattinson reflected the distinct characters in his actions, including for a moment in which they fight. This fight, overseen by stunt coordinator Paul Lowe, represented moments of close interaction between the two Mickeys. It was here that a body double was crucial in shooting. The body double was also relied upon for the classic twinning technique of shooting ‘dirty’ over-the- shoulder out of focus shots of the double—ie. 17 looking at 18. However, it was quickly determined that even these would need face replacement work. “Robert’s jawline is so distinct that even those had to be replaced or shot as split screens,” observes Glass. When the shot was a moving one, no motion control was employed. “I’ve never been a big advocate for motion control,” states Glass. “To me it’s applicable when you’re doing things like miniatures where you need many matching passes, but I think when performances are involved, it interferes too much. It slows down a production’s speed of movement, but it’s also restrictive. Performance and camera always benefit from more flexibility.” “It helped tremendously that Director Bong and DOP Darius Khondji shot quite classically with minimal crane and Steadicam moves,” says Glass. “So, a lot of the moves are pan and dolly. There are some Steadicams in there that we were sometimes able to do splitscreens on. I wasn’t always sure that we could get away with the splitscreen as we shot it, but since we were always shooting the two roles, we had the footage to assess the practicality later. We were always prepared to go down a CG or machine learning route, but where we could use the splitscreen, that was the preference.” The Hydralite rig, developed by Volucap. Source: https://volucap.com Rising Sun Pictures (visual effects supervisor Guido Wolter) handled the majority of twinning visual effects, completing them as splitscreen composites, 2D face replacements, and most notably via their machine learning toolset REVIZE, which utilized facial and body capture of Pattinson to train a model of his face and torso to swap for the double’s. A custom capture rig, dubbed the ‘Crazy Rig’ and now officially, The Hydralite, was devised and configured by Volucap to capture multiple angles of Robert on set in each lighting environment in order to produce the best possible reference for the machine learning algorithm. “For me, it was a completely legitimate use of the technique,” attests Glass, in terms of the machine learning approach. “All of the footage that we used to go into that process was captured on our movie for our movie. There’s nothing historic, or going through past libraries of footage, and it was all with Robert’s approval. I think the results were tremendous.” “It’s staggering to me as I watch the movie that the performances of each character are so flawlessly consistent throughout the film, because I know how much we were jumping around,” notes Glass. “I did encourage that we rehearse scenes ahead. Let’s say 17 was going to be the first role we captured, I’d have them rehearse it the other way around so that the double knew what he was going to do. Therefore, eyelines, movement, pacing and in instances where we were basically replacing the likeness of his head or even torso, we were still able to use the double’s performance and then map to that.” Read the full Mickey 17 issue of befores & afters magazine in PRINT from Amazon or as a DIGITAL EDITION on Patreon. Remember, you can also subscribe to the DIGITAL EDITION as a tier on the Patreon and get a new issue every time one is released. The post The art of two Mickeys appeared first on befores & afters.

By TREVOR HOGG Images courtesy of Pixar. The character design of Glordon is based on a tardigrade, which is a microscopic water bear. Rather than look at the unknown as something to be feared, Pixar has decided to do some wish fulfillment with Elio, where a lonely adolescent astrophile gets abducted by aliens and is mistaken as the leader of Earth. Originally conceived and directed by Adrian Molina, the coming-of-age science fiction adventure was shepherded by Domee Shi and Madeline Sharafian, who had previously worked together on Turning Red. “Space is often seen as dark, mysterious and scary, but there is also so much hope, wonder and curiosity,” notes Shi, director of Elio. “It’s like anything is ‘out there.’ Elio captures how a lot of us feel at different points of our lives, when we were kids like him, or even now wanting to be off of this current planet because it’s just too much. For Elio, it’s a rescue. I feel that there’s something so universal about that feeling of wanting to be taken away and taken care of. To know that you’re not alone and somebody chose you and picked you up.” The character design of Glordon is based on a tardigrade, which is a microscopic water bear. There is a stark contrast between how Earth and the alien world, known as the Communiverse, are portrayed. “The more we worked with the animators on Glordon and Helix, they began to realize that Domee and I respond positively when those [alien] characters are exaggerated, made cute, round and chubby,” states Sharafian, director of Elio. “That automatically started to differentiate the way the Earth and space feel.” A certain question had to be answered when designing the United Nations-inspired Communiverse. “It was coming from a place of this lonely kid who feels like no one wants him on Earth,” Shi explains. “What would be heaven and paradise for him? The Communiverse was built around that idea.” A sense of belonging is an important theme. “It’s also inspired by Adrian Molina’s backstory, and our backstories too, of going to animation college,” Sharafian remarks. “For the first time, we said, ‘This is where everybody like me is!’” Green is the thematic color for Elio. Visual effects are an important storytelling tool. “Especially, for our movie, which is about this boy going to this crazy incredible world of the Communiverse,” Shi observes. “It has to be dazzling and look spectacular on the big screen and feel like paradise. Elio is such a visual feast, and you do feel like, ‘I want to stay here no matter what. I can’t believe that this place even exists.’ Visual effects are a powerful tool to help you feel what the characters are feeling.” A wishlist became a reality for the directors. “Claudia Chung Sanii [Visual Effects Supervisor] gave Domee and me carte blanche for wish fulfillment for ourselves,” Sharafian remarks. “What do you want Elio’s outfit in space to look like? It was a difficult costume, but now when we watch the movie, we’re all so proud of it. Elio looks fabulous, and he’s so happy to be wearing that outfit. Who would want to take that off?” The Communiverse was meant to feel like a place that a child would love to visit and explore. Methodology rather than technology went through the biggest change for the production. “The Communiverse is super complex and has lots of moving pieces. But there’s not much CG can’t do anymore,” notes Claudia Chung Sanii. “Elemental did effects characters. We did long curly hair, dresses, capes, water and fire. What we hadn’t done before was be a part of that design process. How do we get lighting into layout? How do we see the shaders in animation in layout? The tools department was working on a software called Luna which does that. I went to the tools department and asked, ‘Can I play around with it?’ They were like, ‘Okay. But it’s not ready yet.’ Tools will basically be bringing RenderMan and an interactive lighting workflow to the pipeline across all of these DCCs. Because we light in Katana, you can’t get back upstream. The conceit that we were dipping our toe in on Elio was, ‘Whatever you do in lighting, anyone on the pipeline can see it.’” The influence of microscopic forms and macro photography grounded the Communiverse in natural phenomena. The variety in the Communiverse is a contrast to the regimented world on the military base. There were no departmental borders, in particular with cinematography. “We had our layout and lighting DPs start on the same day. Derek Williams wouldn’t shoot anything without Jordan Rempel, our lighting DP, seeing it,” Sanii states. “Jordan would drop in lighting and start doing key lighting as Derek’s team was laying out. It wasn’t like you had to hit the render button, wait for the render to come up and go, ‘Oh, my god, it’s dark! I didn’t know that it was nighttime.’” A new term was adopted. “Meredith Hom [Production Manager] and I pulled the entire crew and leadership into this mental concept that we called the ‘college project.’ For some of us, college was a time when we didn’t have titles and crafts. You begged, borrowed and stole to hit that deadline. So much of our world has become linear in our process that I wanted to break that down to, ‘No. We’re all working together. The scope of this film is too large for us to wait for each other to finish our piece. If this person is slammed, fine. Figure out a different idea to do it with what tools you have.’” Directors Domee Shi and Madeline Sharafian are drawn to chubby, exaggerated and cute characters. Forgoing the word ‘no’ led to the technology breaking down. “I remember times when crowds [department] is dressing all of the aliens and because of forgetting to constrain it to the Communiverse, they all show up at the origin, and you’re going, ‘Why is there a whole party going on over there?’” Sanii laughs. “On Elio, it was always forward. There were no rules about locking things down or not installing over the weekend. It was always like, ‘Put it all in, and we’ll deal with it on Monday.’ There would be some funny stuff. We never QC’d something before walking it into the room. Everyone saw how the sausage was made. It was fun and not fun for Harley Jessup [Production Designer] because sometimes there would be a big thing in the middle screen, and he would say, ‘Is that finished?’ There was no way we could get through this film if we kept trying to fix the thing that broke.” An aerial image of Elio as he attempts to get abducted by aliens. Part of the design of the Coummuniverse was inspired by Chinese puzzle balls. A former visual effects art director at ILM, Harley Jessup found his previous experiences on projects like Innerspace to be helpful on Elio. “I liked that the directors wanted to build on the effects films from the 1980s and early 1990s,” reflects Jessup. “I was there and part of that. It was fun to look back. At the time, the techniques were all practical, matte paintings and miniatures, which are fun to work with, but without the safety net of CG. One thing Dennis Muren [VES] was keen on, was how people see things like the natural phenomenon you might see in a microscopic or macro photography form. We were using that. I was looking at the mothership of Close Encounters of the Third Kind, which Dennis shot when he was a young artist. It was nice to be able to bring all of that history to this film.” Earth was impacted by a comment made by Pete Docter (CCO, Pixar). “He said, ‘The military base should feel like a parking lot,” Jessup reveals. “You should know why Elio wants to be anywhere else. And the Communiverse needs to be inviting. We built a lot of contrast into those two worlds. The brutalist architecture on the military base, with its hard edges and heavy horizontal forms close to the earth, needed to be harsh but beautiful in its own way, so we tried for that. The Communiverse would be in contrast and be all curves, translucent surfaces and stained-glass backlit effects. Things were wide open about what it could be because each of the aliens are from a different climate and gravity. There are some buildings that are actually upside down on it, and the whole thing is rotating inside like clockwork. It is hopefully an appealing, fun world. It’s not a dystopian outer space.” Exploring various facial expressions for Elio. A tough character to get right was Aunt Olga, who struggles to be the guardian of her nephew. Character designs of Elio and Glordon. which shows them interacting with each other. Architecture was devised to reflect the desired tone for scenes. “In the Grand Assembly Hall where each alien has a desk and booth, the booth is shaped like an eyelid that can close or open,” Jessup explains. “It increases the feeling that they’re evaluating and observing Elio and each of the candidates that have come to join the Communiverse.” A couple of iconic cinematic franchises were avoided for aesthetic reasons. “As much as I love Star Wars and Star Trek, we wanted to be different from those kinds of aliens that are often more humanoid.” Ooooo was the first alien to be designed. “We did Ooooo in collaboration with the effects team, which was small at that time. She was described as a liquid supercomputer. We actually used the wireframe that was turning up and asked, what if it ended up being this network of little lights that are moving around and can express how much she was thinking? Ooooo is Elio’s guide to the Communiverse; her body would deform, so she could become a big screen or reach out and pluck things. Ooooo has an ability like an amoeba to stretch.” Flexibility is important when figuring out shot design. “On Elio, we provided the layout department with a rudimentary version of our environments,” states David Luoh, Sets Supervisor. “It might be simple geometry. We’re not worried necessarily about shading, color and material yet. Things are roughly in place but also built in a way that is flexible. As they’re sorting out the camera and testing out staging, they can move elements of the set around. Maybe this architectural piece needs to be shifted or larger or smaller. There was a variation on what was typically expected of set deliveries of environments to our layout department. That bar was lowered to give the layout department something to work with sooner and also with more flexibility. From their work we get context as to how we partner with our art and design department to build and finalize those environments.” Regional biomes known as disks are part of the Communiverse. “There are aquatic, lush forest, snow and ice, and hot lava disks,” Luoh remarks. “The hot disk is grounded in the desert, volcanic rock and lava, while for the lush disk we looked at interesting plant life found in the world around us.” The Communiverse is a complex geometric form. “We wanted these natural arrangements of alien districts, and that was all happening on this twisting and curving terrain in a way that made traditional dressing approaches clunky. Oftentimes, you’re putting something on the ground or mounted, and the ground is always facing upward. But if you have to dress the wall or ceiling, it becomes a lot more difficult to manipulate and place on something with that dynamic and shape. You have stuff that casts light, is see-through and shifting over time. Ooooo is a living character that looks like electronic circuitry that is constantly moving, and we also have that element in the walls, floors and bubble transport that carry the characters around.” Sets were adjusted throughout the production. “We try to anticipate situations that might come up,” Luoh states. “What if we have a series of shots where you’re getting closer and closer to the Communiverse and you have to bridge the distance between your hero and set extension background? There is a partnership with story, but certainly with our layout camera staging department. As we see shots come out of their work, we know where we need to spend the time to figure out, are we going to see the distant hills in this way? We’re not going to build it until we know because it can be labor-intensive. There is a responsiveness to what we are starting to see as shots get made.” Combining the familiar into something unfamiliar was a process. “There was this curation of being inspired by existing alien sci-fi depictions, but also reaching back into biological phenomena or interesting material because we wanted to ground a lot of those visual elements and ideas in something that people could intuitively grasp on to, even if they were combined or arranged in a way that is surprising, strange and delightful.”