James and the Giant Peach, Nightmare before Christmas
diritol
Giant Peach", and Henry Sellick was the director of both
"James and the Giant Peach" and "Nightmare before
Christmas," but did Tim have anything to do with designing
the characters in "James and the Giant Peach", as he did
with "Nightmare before Christmas"?
The characters of both movies are somewhat similar in
style....that's why I ask...
wolfman83
No, Burton wasn't invoved with the visual designs of James. The
similarities may derive from the fact that both Burton and Selick (and
I imagine this also goes for Lane, who did the character designs on
James) are inspired by many of the same things (Dr.Seuss, german
expressionism, Edward Gorey etc.) I believe it was these common
interests that drew them together in the first place...
--
Howl!- _|\/\
. #--'8 3
. \___,
. \----
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
The Minister of All Things Perfect
>Giant Peach", and Henry Sellick was the director of both
>"James and the Giant Peach" and "Nightmare before
>Christmas," but did Tim have anything to do with designing
>the characters in "James and the Giant Peach", as he did
>with "Nightmare before Christmas"?
>The characters of both movies are somewhat similar in
>style....that's why I ask...
Not from my knowledge. Tim really didn't have anything to do with James.
Perhaps why you find it similar is that most of the same people that worked on
Nightmare worked on James. As for my opinion, I find the styles very
different. Even the pics that just came out on Monkeybone look completely
different from both of those movies.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
http://members.aol.com/owlchatter/Spacegirls.jpg
Naked Girls. Pink Floyd. An Extrasensory Inducing Picture for Your Desktop.
diritol
Is it another clay-animated movie?
Son of Suzy Creamcheese
>different. Even the pics that just came out on Monkeybone look completely
>different from both of those movies.
Well, I see similar senses of movement in both films.... I think the only big
differences these films had, visually, was the design of them.... the
characters moved a bit like each other, I mean, James moves a bit like Lock,
Grasshopper moves a bit like Jack, and so forth.... It's not blatant or
repetive, but there are those certian elements to each character's motion that
I see reoccuring.... the fact that each film is designed drastically different
from the other helps these similarites to be a little less obvious.... I'm
sure this will be the case with Monkeybone, too. The drastic differences in the
stlyes of Tim Burton/Rich Heinrichs/Deane Taylor on Nightmare, Lane Smith on
James, and god knows who on Monkey Bone are so drasticaly difference, it's hard
to latch onto those similarties... (although I don't know about Monkey Bone,
i'm just guessing here.)
Abe Scott
- - - - - - - - -
"Liposuction, E-Mail, Breast Implant" -- Jerry from The Persuasions
Druid
> What's Monkeybone?
> Is it another clay-animated movie?
>
It's a combination of stop-motion and live action.
darli...@my-deja.com
owlch...@aol.comedy (The Minister of All Things Perfect) wrote:
>
> Not from my knowledge. Tim really didn't have anything to do with
James.
> Perhaps why you find it similar is that most of the same people that
worked on
> Nightmare worked on James. As for my opinion, I find the styles very
> different. Even the pics that just came out on Monkeybone look
completely
> different from both of those movies.
Oh I don't know, I think the styles of the characters were very much
alike. And the Aunties were very dark and strange, so maybe I can see
where someone might think "James" was a Burton project.
But honestly, the humor of the film was, to me at least, rather
different from Burton films. And there was this creepiness to many of
the scenes that just wasn't very "Burton." His work may be strange,
but it's not evil (for lack of a better word, because james isn't
exactly "evil").
My two cents.
~Zigi
Martin R. LiSanti
>>But honestly, the humor of the film was, to me at least, rather different
from Burton films.
>>And there was this creepiness to many of the scenes that just wasn't very
"Burton." His
>>work may be strange, but it's not evil (for lack of a better word,
because james isn't
>>exactly "evil").
Hmmm, I'd put that down to the Roald Dahl element. He wasn't as loving to
his misfit charachters like Tim Burton. When Tim says that his charachters
are just misunderstood and that there are no real bad guys, we all feel for
them. But Dahl was quite happy to make up vile, repulsive and horrid
charachters in his books. Actually, I think the Aunts in James were MORE
Dahl then Dahl wrote them originally!
_________________________________________________________
Martin LiSanti
belsha...@yahoo.com ICQ #8947421
Sam: Yes, I know, fantastic, marvellous, wonderful.
Remember me to Alison and the twins.
Jack: Triplets.
Sam: Triplets? My, how time flies!
-Brazil-
_________________________________________________________
Anthrid
> Hmmm, I'd put that down to the Roald Dahl element. He wasn't as loving to
> his misfit charachters like Tim Burton. When Tim says that his charachters
> are just misunderstood and that there are no real bad guys, we all feel for
> them. But Dahl was quite happy to make up vile, repulsive and horrid
> charachters in his books. Actually, I think the Aunts in James were MORE
> Dahl then Dahl wrote them originally!
I'd agree with that. There aren't too many _true_ villians in Burton films.
As for the character design, they look so incredibly Lane Smith to me, I
can see few resemblances at all :)
--
Ant...@mindspring.com
"Bad table manners have broken up more marriages than adultery"
wolfman83
33qta8m.dialup.mindspring.com>,
ant...@mindspring.com (Anthrid) wrote:
>
> I'd agree with that. There aren't too many _true_ villians in Burton
films.
Hm. The martians. Weren't they evil?
> As for the character design, they look so incredibly Lane Smith to
me, I
> can see few resemblances at all :)
The scenography is quite burtonesque. And Ms.Spider. She's like cut
right out of a Burton film. And the law of physics seems identical to
the ones found in Burton's films. Not to mention the lovely
"overacting" of the aunts.
Although Burton's mind was probably somewhere else when Selick made
this film I don't think "James" is a film Burton needs feel ashamed to
have his name attached to.
--
Howl!- _|\/\
. #--'8 3
. \___,
. \----
Mr. Bryan Frankenseuss Theiss
And the character Monkey Bone is CGI.
To answer the original question, no, Burton really didn't have any creative
input into James and the Giant Peach. According to the great Cinefantastique
issue about the movie, Burton got Disney to buy the rights to the book so that
Henry Selick could direct it. But other than that, he did not work on the film.
Selick was very angry that Burton did not use his clout to support him in his
fights against the suits at Disney. He was even more angry when Burton tried to
hire away James' animators to work on Mars Attacks! (which, at the time, was
going to have stop motion aliens).
The James characters were primarily designed by the great children's book
illustrator Lane Smith. If you check out some of his books you will see the
similarity in less then .05 seconds. He is best known for illustrating _Stinky
Cheese Man_, and he also did the one really good posthumous Dr. Seuss book,
_Hooray For Diffendoofer Day!_. I'm not sure if they are still in print or not,
but he did a really nice picture book based on the movie as well as a movie
edition of the original novel (with drawings not based specifically on the
designs from the movie).
Apparently Selick originally planned for Smith to design Nightmare before he
realized that Burton wanted it to be done in his drawing style. Now there's
something weird to imagine.
--Bryan Frankenseuss Theiss
Miraba
he
> realized that Burton wanted it to be done in his drawing style. Now
there's
> something weird to imagine.
A Burton story done in Burton's style? What was he thinking?
> --Bryan Frankenseuss Theiss
Miraba
Miraba <harp...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:AGEe5.42861$DJ2.2...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...
Oops, forgot the "not" in the first sentence. It should read "not done in
Burton's style".
> > --Bryan Frankenseuss Theiss
>
>
The Minister of All Things Perfect
>this film I don't think "James" is a film Burton needs feel ashamed to
>have his name attached to.
The art design and animation is perfect, in my opinion. I get lost in the
visuals so many times when I watch this film. The only blemish in my opinion
is the songs. Everytime I watch this film, once the characters start singing,
I either mute the volume, or turn it way down. This film would have probably
been better served as a non-musical.
The Monkey
>I either mute the volume, or turn it way down. This film would have probably
>been better served as a non-musical.
That is probably the main reason I really didn't enjoy the film. I remember
when I watched it, about 15 theater employees and our friends were set to watch
it. The second the first song started one guy got up and simply said "bye"
before running out. Gradually everyone left, but I toughed it out to the
bitter end (I rarely walk out). When the end credits began I looked around me
and saw only 2 people: one of my friends and the girl he brought. and it wasn't
the flick he was interested in at the time.
I have yet to give it a second viewing, but I may eventually. Opinions can
change.
The Monkey
http://www.angelfire.com/tx3/themonkey
"I know monkey see but monkey's dead, for you it would be wrong"~They Might Be
Giants
"I don't even want you near, what the f--- you doing here?, seem like I'm a
freak magnet"~Violent Femmes
Anthrid
<wolf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Hm. The martians. Weren't they evil?
Well, certainly. But other than those little guys, every one else is a
tortured soul. Even the Hessian is cruelly controlled from the grave.
Actually, next to the Martians in the Evilness Countdown we probably have
Anthony Micheal Hall.
> The scenography is quite burtonesque. And Ms.Spider. She's like cut
> right out of a Burton film. And the law of physics seems identical to
I dunno, Knut, Ms. Spider has a weird 1960s beatnik quality added to her
gothiness, whereas most Burton characters have more of a misery driven
Lydia quality. That's not to say she wouldn't be a welcome guest in
Halloweentown, but she has a peculiar modish quality.
> the ones found in Burton's films. Not to mention the lovely
> "overacting" of the aunts.
Actually, that seems to be more related to the beautiful and talented
Joanna Lumley. Aunt Spiker's a bit like a countrified Patsy without the
benefits of Christian Dior :)
> Although Burton's mind was probably somewhere else when Selick made
> this film I don't think "James" is a film Burton needs feel ashamed to
> have his name attached to.
Oh, certainly not. James is a beautiful film and I'm proud to own it, but
I simply don't find it particularly Burtonish. It has some similar
qualities and themes, but I don't think it would be easily mistaked for
one of his films.
Druid
Druid
> >Hm. The martians. Weren't they evil?
> >
>
adolescents
> thrilled with the prospect of having a BB Gun, or in their case, an armada
of
> spaceships with death rays.
>
So, removing Sarah Jessica Parker's head and placing it on a dogs body (and
visa versa) plus removing Pierce Brosnan's head would be the equivalent of a
kid pulling the wings off a fly, right?
Son of Suzy Creamcheese
>
I don't think so, I just think they were just more like idiotic adolescents
thrilled with the prospect of having a BB Gun, or in their case, an armada of
spaceships with death rays.
Abe Scott
- - - - - - - - -
"Yay! Ass!" -- Marc Maron
Miraba
Son of Suzy Creamcheese
>tortured soul. Even the Hessian is cruelly controlled from the grave.
>Actually, next to the Martians in the Evilness Countdown we probably have
>Anthony Micheal Hall.
I dunno, I don't think the Martians were evil, they were just immature idiots
who were obsessed with their ability to destory something they saw like many
humans see animals. Jim was a dick, an asshole, a bastard, a scumbag, a son of
a bitch, but I don't think he was "Evil", per se......
Monkey Boy
news:20000723063325...@ng-fq1.aol.com...
> >It's a combination of stop-motion and live action.
>
> And the character Monkey Bone is CGI.
>
No, he's StopMo. http://www.upcomingmovies.com/monkeybone.html
--
Anthony
v i s i t http://www.StopMotionAnimation.com