Digital Art - "Dark Days"

One of my entries for the Imagine FX magazine forum monthly competition.

Title: "Blade Runner"

Description: "Ridley Scott has decided to remake Blade Runner with the advantage of today's SFX. He's looking for a Concept Artist who can best envision what this world might look like."

Pen and Marker concept illustration

I spent quite a bit of time on this one, and I'm reasonably happy with the results. Given that the brief described a remake of the film and Ridley Scott is in fact genuinely making a sequel, I originally thought I might do something in a more 'up-beat' style. Perhaps envisaging one of the off-world colonies that were never seen in the original film, but that would share visual similarities. After seeing some of the other entries, however, I realised that people were expecting something more reminiscent of the original film, so I went for the dark and moody atmosphere already established. Perhaps not the best choice in hindsight, but it was fun to do something in a Blade Runner style anyway.

I started with a quick pencil sketch, that I then went over in ink. Once I had erased the pencil, I shaded it with markers, to create my initial concept illustration. When scanned, I then roughly coloured this, as a guide for the larger full piece.

In order to keep the atmosphere without directly copying, I avoided looking at too much reference material from the film. I wanted things to be filtered through my own imperfect memories, that way alterations that creep in hopefully introduce a few unique elements to the otherwise established look and feel. There's a bit of everything in there, for Blade Runner fans. A sushi bar with neon lighting, a cityscape in the background with flames from one of the buildings, an antennae-laden blimp advertising the off-world colonies, a spinner launching or landing, pedestrians with self-illuminating umbrellas, sheets of rain and of course a suspicious looking character in a futuristic trench-coat...

Final Painting

All work is the © copyright of W.D.Lee and/or the respective companies, individuals or organisations to which the work is related. No infringement is intentional. No reproduction or copying is permitted without express permission.

Digital Painting "Outpost 32"

I've been doing some of the weekly Imagine FX magazine forum competitions rather than the monthly ones, which has encouraged me to speed up and improve my techniques. Instead of getting bogged down in extraneous detail, they have forced me to make sure I get maximum effect without spending hours over-working something.

Hospital designs

This was created for the June 2011 weekly challenge entitled: "Highview Hospital design"

The 'Brief': "Your challenge this week is to produce a full colour environment painting of a futuristic mountainside hospital."

The 'Description': "Highview is built high on the side of a mountain range. The hospital is constantly battered by the elements, surrounded on all sides by snow and rock. Highview is only accessible by an advanced lift system built into the side of the mountain below it, or by helicopter (which is more commonly used, and overseen by the hospitals dedicated flight control tower). Their only communications are via a large satellite tower."

Helicopter designs

I thought that perhaps a futuristic building on a weather-beaten mountain would be designed to allow the weather to move around it with as little wind resistance as possible, so I imagined the bulk of the structures to be elliptical (see designs above). The communications pylon is positioned horizontally, so that it will be clear of falling/sliding snow from the mountain, and if damaged, it won't fall on the hospital itself.

As for the helicopter design, I wanted to do something futuristic and unusual, but instead of going wild with multiple rotor arrangements, I wanted to keep that archetypal helicopter feel alongside its futuristic look.

I also thought, why would you build a hospital on a mountainside that is practically inaccessible in the first place? I decided that it was on a different planet where this location actually is one of the safer places to build the hospital. Hence the alien planet on the horizon...

Final "Outpost 32"

This final version is almost the same as the one entered in the competition, except for a few minor details on the helicopter. I gave it the title 'Outpost 32' as a little nod to the film 'The Thing', in which the Arctic base is called 'Outpost 31'.

It's one of the pieces I've been the most satisfied with recently, as I think it almost has a 'movie production art' feel to it. It has also been great practice since I haven't done many landscape scenes of this nature so far.

All work is the © copyright of W.D.Lee and/or the respective companies, individuals or organisations to which the work is related. No infringement is intentional. No reproduction or copying is permitted without express permission.

Digital Painting - "Spybots"

As stated in my previous article, I've been doing the 'weekly' Imagine FX magazine forum competitions rather than the 'monthly' ones, which has encouraged me to speed up and improve my techniques. Instead of getting bogged down in extraneous detail, they have forced me to make sure I get maximum effect without spending hours over-working something.

This was created for the May 2011 weekly challenge entitled: "Tiny Robots"

The description was: "This week we go small as you are to design a set of tiny spybots used for covert information gathering."

An obvious route would've been mechanical insects, and such. Having already done a 'mechanical insect' acrylic painting before (see here), I had no desire to do the same thing again. I wanted to go a different route, and decided to do something more light hearted for kids. A group of spybot characters, each with their own individual skill set. The commander places traditional 'bugs' for listening in on people. One places camera devices, as well as being the team's lookout. Another acts as the team's transportation expert, capable of firing a grappling iron that enables them to reach difficult spots. While the final character is the 'hacker', who can tap into electronic devices such as computers, for secret files and communications.

Unfortunately I didn't get the colour version finished in time, so my entry was a tinted B&W version, but here's the final full colour picture.

Having gone the route of aiming the characters at kids, I chose to keep the adventurous and fun atmosphere, by making the final image look like a fictional poster for a new show or book.

All work is the © copyright of W.D.Lee and/or the respective companies, individuals or organisations to which the work is related. No infringement is intentional. No reproduction or copying is permitted without express permission.

Digital Painting - "Giant Parasite"

As stated in my previous article, I've been doing the 'weekly' Imagine FX magazine forum competitions rather than the 'monthly' ones, which has encouraged me to speed up and improve my techniques. Instead of getting bogged down in extraneous detail, they have forced me to make sure I get maximum effect without spending hours over-working something.

Parasitic creature designs

Here is the next one I did, toward the end of May 2011, titled: "Huge alien parasite invaders".

The brief was: "Design some huge alien parasitic creatures invading Earth."

Since most parasitic creatures are smaller than their hosts, I tried to merge the idea of a something huge with something smaller. By combining the two, I came up with a giant monster that releases tentacles with sub-creatures at the end, which hunt and capture a host, latch onto their victim, and then drain them of life and energy to support the large monster.

Being on holiday for most of the challenge time, this ended up a little too rushed. I did some design sketches while on holiday, but when I got back, had only two evenings in which to complete the finished piece. So it is heavily flawed (I may even return to it one day), but I hope you enjoy it anyway.

Final "Giant Parasite"

All work is the © copyright of W.D.Lee and/or the respective companies, individuals or organisations to which the work is related. No infringement is intentional. No reproduction or copying is permitted without express permission.

Digital Painting - "M.U.M. Unit"

I've been terribly distracted lately, and let my blog updates slip...

So I'll try to add a few new articles. Firstly, a few new digital paintings, for the Imagine FX magazine forum competitions. However, unlike the previous two articles, I've done the 'weekly' forum competitions instead of the 'monthly' ones, which have encouraged me to speed up and improve my techniques. Instead of getting bogged down in extraneous detail, they have forced me to make sure I get maximum effect without spending hours over-working something.

The first weekly I tried, was as follows:

Initial Designs

Brief: "Design a MUM system for long range space travel."

Description: "The MUM unit is an automated human incubation and hybernation pod designed for long distance interstellar travel. Each unit holds a single infant in hybernation. As the infant grows to adulthood within the unit, the MUM supplies the subject with sustinance, and provides muscle and brain stimulation (including educating the human as it sleeps). Once the destination has been reached the pod will wake and release the full grown adult, ready to perform his/her duties. Most terra-forming ships contain several hundred MUMs to establish base colonies among the stars (to infinity... and beyond)."

Final design before
digital colouring

As I often do, I started with a few rough pen/marker designs (above). I chose the first design, and in order to complete the task in time, I chose to draw the final version traditionally and only colour it digitally.

My idea, was that each unit would have a self-contained control tower beside it, that not only monitors and controls the growth of the individual, but provides a virtual 'up-bringing', during which the will learn and reach full maturity before arrival at their destination.

For the final image, I coloured and painted it digitally, then gave it a stylised context. As you can see, the result isn't astounding, but it was fun and satisfying.

Final "M.U.M. Unit"

All work is the © copyright of W.D.Lee and/or the respective companies, individuals or organisations to which the work is related. No infringement is intentional. No reproduction or copying is permitted without express permission.

How Might We Discover We Are Not Alone? Part 4 – Remnants And Artefacts

Monoliths to Asteroids

What might we find, hiding under our noses?

I did toy with calling this part '2001 Syndrome'. One popular theory, as expounded in the film 2001: A Space Odyssey, is this: considering the timespan of our planet's existence, alien life may well have visited in the past and left items behind for us to discover when we have advanced sufficiently to find and understand them.

I like this possibility. Given the enormity of the Universe, it makes a kind of sense that any aliens who may have visited, will have done so during the early 'hours' that our planet has existed with life, rather than last few 'seconds' in which humanity popped up.

If aliens visited our solar system and found our planet, seeing its clear potential to harbour intelligent life one day, it seems logical that they would leave some sign for us to discover at a later point. As in the film, it would make sense for such a sign to be located somewhere that we can only reach with reasonably advanced space-faring technology (For now, I won't get into the idea that they may have influenced our development). It's almost pointless discussing what it could be, because it could be anything. A ruin, a buried object with an obvious radioactive or magnetic halo to signal its presence on a planet or moon, a lifeless floating spaceship, or asteroid core... Who knows? The point being that it would be reasonably obvious to find once we had the required technology to look for it. The question, is what level of technology the species in question thought was required.

Taking a Step Back

Will we ever get back here?

Although I find this possibility plausible, even likely, I don't believe it will be the way we find alien life. Not for a long, long time, at any rate. Our society has become too insular, too concerned with the small pictures and forgetting the big ones. Look at how long it's been since we went to the moon. Even recent plans to go back, have since been scuppered.

As always, the excuse is 'wasted' money. I don't want to get on my high-horse, but it's too easy for politicians to cancel expensive projects related to space exploration. Average Joe Public doesn't care, because he or she does not see immediate benefits. Politicians in turn do not want to look at the wider picture, when their terms of office are so fleeting. They want to keep Joe Public happy for those small handful of years required to get back into office. How better, than to loudly announce the cancellation of space exploration projects that sound horrendously expensive (Never mind that they're usually a drop in the ocean compared to money wasted in other areas). Given the politically correct high-horse Joe Public likes to be on, he or she can look at space exploration, and say “Why are we wasting money in space, when we should be spending it fixing our problems here?”

People can also say “What's the point in going back to the moon?” Like any long-term project, the benefits may not be immediately apparent, but it would be the first step to getting humanity back out into a wider universe (forgetting the research and knowledge we would gain even on this small venture). Of course the lack of immediate benefit, especially for manned space travel, means the public tend to think: “Pah, stop wasting money! Just send probes! And we'll cut the money on them, too!”

Politicians and Joe Public will never consider that we're on a small planet, to which numerous disasters could occur at any time. We have all our eggs in one basket, and if something happens on a large enough scale, it could easily be goodbye to the human race. Of course, those issues all seem like the stuff of science fiction or scientific scaremongering that won't occur in our lifetime. So the world carries on, oblivious and caring less and less about space exploration.

What does this mean? That we're very unlikely to get out into our solar system, to even have a chance of finding signs left by another race. In my personal opinion, we'll be lucky if humanity makes it back to the moon this century, let alone anywhere else. It's possible that private industry, through financing anything from tourism to the gathering new raw materials, may be the area to make the big changes, but we'll have to wait and see. Big Business doesn't like to invest unless they can see clear progress, and space exploration isn't really an area that can make progress without big funding in the first place. It's a vicious circle. Luckily there are a few entrepreneur's such as Richard Branson, who are visionary enough to buck the trend, and fund research. Let's just hope they get somewhere.

Any Other Chances?

Might we discover something akin to what we
hoped the 'Face on Mars' was going to be?

In the meantime, what other potential is there for discovering these ancient signs? Perhaps one of the Mars orbiting satellites, or other planetary/moon probes could photograph something (Of course, the possibility exists that they already have). Though due to the scales at which these spacecraft take their photographs, it would have to be an ancient structures or similar large sized object, implying not only the past(?) existence of life, but intelligent life.

The sad truth is that in a very short time, we've lost our vision and pulled back to excruciatingly slow baby steps at our current point in history. Apart from the forms of probe mentioned above (which are themselves suffering increasing budget cuts), as a species we're doing very little to get out there. We're becoming increasingly insular and short sighted. Goals are always set in the near future, to ensure financing and public acceptance. We've stopped being a race that dreams of greatness in our children's future, in exchange for brooding self-blame and dwelling on the transitory. In short, while I find it quite probable that some race has left behind signs for us to discover, I don't believe it will be something we find any time soon.

Next, we shall explore the more controversial theories... first, 'Ancient Memories'

Click here for:
Part 1 - Equations and Paradoxes
Part 2 - Signals from Beyond
Part 3 - Something Small
Part 4 - Remnants and Arefacts

Image Credit:
2001: A space Odyssey - MGM / Warner Bros.
NASA - http://www.nasaimages.org

All work is the © copyright of W.D.Lee and/or the respective companies, individuals or organisations to which the work is related. No infringement is intentional. No reproduction or copying is permitted without express permission.

How Might We Discover We Are Not Alone? Part 3 – Something Small

Microbes and Worms

Possible Martian microbial life?

One possibility for the discovery of alien life, that is considered the most likely by many people, is that of microbial or at least small-scale life.

How might we find it? There are a few select ways. We might discover a fossilised sample in a meteor fragment from another planet, that has arrived on Earth itself. This possibility almost happened in 1996 (Click here to read more on the NASA website), when tiny worm-like shapes were found in what is thought to be a sample of Martian meteorite. However, the question of contaminated samples soon arose, as well as the suggestion that the shapes could have occurred through natural processes. New techniques recently put to use, suggest the existence of chemicals which could indicate the signature of life, thus strengthening the case for the worm-like shapes once again.

Mars

3D representation of a Mars Rover

Keeping with Mars, perhaps one of the Rovers or other probes might find something. Science Fiction especially, tends to jump toward Mars as the most likely suspect due to its historic expectations, but there are still good reasons to consider it. Mars is the only extraterrestrial planet on which we have regularly operating probes at ground level searching out new material. If the discovery is a small one, it is very possible that the Rovers would be the first suspects to find it. If they do find anything, chances are it would be a simple microbial life-form. But wouldn't it be fun if they caught a tiny Martian insect on camera? Perhaps they may find a simple moss-like substance on a rock, or even photograph a fossil fragment.

It seems unlikely that'll we'll find something like this anywhere else, though. We just haven't been sending out enough probes to the other planets and their moons, with the ability to investigate at this level. There have been a few others with potential, though.

Other Places

The surface of Titan

It's possible that recent spacecraft such as the Japanese Hayabusa probe that collected particles from the Itokawa asteroid, might find something. Perhaps some of the key chemical building blocks of life or even fossilised microbial samples may be discovered in its captured particles. The only other possibility that I can think of, is the Cassini-Huygens probe that landed on Titan, one of Saturn's moons. Further analysis of the photos and data it sent back may provide new evidence, but it seems unlikely, given the landing occurred some time ago.

The drawback with a discovery of this nature, is that it still leaves a lot of the doors open. For those interested in the subject of alien life, it would be of enormous import. It is a discovery that would make the headlines, and alter our perspective on the likelihood of life having evolved elsewhere in the universe. Unfortunately, it wouldn't make much difference to the everyday populace. The world would go on as normal. Proof of intelligent life is what will make the big change.

Next, we shall discuss 'Remnants And Artefacts'

Click here for:
Part 1 - Equations and Paradoxes
Part 2 - Signals from Beyond
Part 3 - Something Small
Part 4 - Remnants and Arefacts

Image Credit: NASA - http://www.nasaimages.org
Some text modified from my previous article 'NASA Announcement - Possible Proof of Life Out There?'

All work is the © copyright of W.D.Lee and/or the respective companies, individuals or organisations to which the work is related. No infringement is intentional. No reproduction or copying is permitted without express permission.

How Might We Discover We Are Not Alone? Part 2 – Signals From Beyond

SETI

The Arecibo Radio Telescope, most commonly
associated with the SETI project

Probably the single greatest public effort to detect signals from beyond our world, is the SETI ('Search for Extra Terrestrial Intelligence') project. We've all heard of it, and on the off chance you haven't, you should have, so click here. Aside from being used in numerous science fiction stories, it also crops up in almost any serious discussion about the existence of alien life.

This kind of search is probably one of the only mainstream and publicly acceptable outlooks on potential alien contact, next to the discovery of microbial or simple life somewhere close-by. Essentially it works on the principle “We think they might be out there, but even if they are, they're nowhere near us.” For some reason, this logic makes the subject more palatable to most people, organisations and governments. It's the 'polite' side of looking for ET. Most humans will only imagine what's beyond, in the context of their current level of socially-acceptable knowledge. So our belief that there could be life, combined with our disbelief that anyone out there would be capable of traversing the distances, makes it the seemingly 'logical' method. Not to mention, it is more comforting. If we do find anything, it's safe. Confined by distance and our belief that said distance makes physical contact nigh on impossible.

However, don't make any mistakes. Regardless of the reasons, the SETI project and those like it are a good thing. They're at least trying, but there are some serious problems.

WOW!

The (in)famous 'WOW' signal

Firstly, even if we run with the idea that other planets are putting out signals in the form we are looking for, it's a needle in a haystack. A signal must be regular enough and strong enough, that when astronomers look at the right portion of sky, they can detect it. Famously, they did once pick up something referred to as the 'WOW' signal (called such, because one of the astronomers wrote the word 'wow' beside the numerical print-out). The signal itself provided little information, except that the frequency number closely matches that at which hydrogen resonates. The thought is, that Hydrogen being the most common element in the Universe, the number could be used by different species as a baseline of mutual knowledge from which to begin communication. Unfortunately, even after repeated checks of the same portion of space with more powerful telescopes, it was never repeated. SETI has since had very little luck.

When, Where, How

Who's sending, and who's receiving?

The sceptic perspective, is of course usually based around the Fermi Paradox. “We've not found anything yet, after so much searching. Obviously it's because there's nothing out there.” If you've read 'Part 1', you already know why I think this is a complete misfire of logic.

Having said that, I also don't think we'll have much luck with this kind of search. For starters, it is perhaps a mistake to assume that other cultures will use communication methods akin to our own. You could argue that some are bound to, but then I believe another problem creeps into the mix. There has been a logical progression to our human communications technology that possibly implies similar races would find similar solutions. Of course I could be completely wrong, but it makes sense (to me, at any rate). If their progression follows a similar path, we have an obvious and simple difficulty.

Everyone from scientists to science fiction writers, love to talk about how we have been sending signals out into the distant reaches of space for the last hundred years. If science fiction is to be believed, they're either fascinated by repeats of 'I Love Lucy' or deciding to eradicate us because of old broadcasts of Hitler, war atrocities, and our 'destruction' of the planet.

The thing is, our communication methods are changing. Television signals are increasingly broadcast via satellite, a medium that transmits inward, not outward. Meanwhile the ever-growing internet is primarily transmitted via cable. While our transmissions are increasing, their methods are becoming refined and targeted. If this progresses, our civilisation will soon have very few broad, outward transmissions. The logical conclusion is that we will have had a short one-to-two hundred year window during which we have output hoards of signals for aliens to eventually pick up.

On a cosmic scale, imagine a thin circle radiating out from a small dot, eventually passing over other tiny dots very quickly. Now imagine that each of those dots has to be at a sufficient technological level and just happen to be listening at the right time, to pick up those faint messages radiating out from a tiny blue planet.

Reverse the situation. Imagine that a few of those worlds send signals out in a similar way to ours. What are the odds that we will be listening at just the right time, to pick up such a short period of transmission? Especially given the absurdly huge length of time that our world and others have been around, in comparison to the period we've had the technology to listen?

Whilst I think it's great that we're listening, I believe the odds of our discovering something through these methods are so low (even if the universe is teeming with life), that we shouldn't expect to hear anything. Even so, it is important that we don't make snap judgements based on our lack of success in this area. Detecting nothing should not make us believe we are alone, or be used as an excuse to give up the search.

Tomorrow, we shall discuss 'Something Small', the possibilities of microbial or primitive life.

Click here for:
Part 1 - Equations and Paradoxes
Part 2 - Signals from Beyond
Part 3 - Something Small
Part 4 - Remnants and Arefacts

WOW signal image credit: The Ohio State University Radio Observatory and the North American AstroPhysical Observatory (NAAPO).
Arecibo Radio Telescope and Adromeda Galaxy image credit: http://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/astronomy/downloads.jsp

All work is the © copyright of W.D.Lee and/or the respective companies, individuals or organisations to which the work is related. No infringement is intentional. No reproduction or copying is permitted without express permission.

How Might We Discover We Are Not Alone? Part 1 – Equations and Paradoxes

What Do I Know?

One of my illustrations

There seem to be an ever growing number of articles lately, discussing the possibilities of alien life. Whether they're asking if it's here already, discussing the likelihood of finding it via radio signals, or everything in between (perhaps my recent resurgence of interest has simply helped me notice and search them out more).

Either way, I thought it would be interesting to discuss the pros and cons of some of the established arguments. I'm no expert and I've not spent years researching the subject in great depth, so why do I feel the need to give my opinion? Because I thought it might be of interest to read the main issues, explained (hopefully logically) with the level of knowledge and understanding that most of us standard grunts on the ground have.

I'll deal with the main cases from 'Part 2' onward, but first let me get a couple of issues off my chest. Any person interested in UFOs or even just the possibility of extraterrestrial life, will know of the Drake Equation and the Fermi Paradox. These are oft-quoted arguments in almost any discussion of alien life, and I would like to get them out of the way before delving into anything else. They can be applied both positively and negatively to many of the arguments, so rather than repeat myself or get sidetracked, I will refer to these sections instead.

The Drake Equation

Frank Drake

The Drake Equation is a pseudo-mathematical equation that many individuals love to quote. It supposedly takes a number of variables, using them to estimate the number of extraterrestrial civilisations out there (just click here to look at it).  In my opinion, it unfortunately means nothing. The Drake Equation is based upon estimates of so many unknowns that it becomes worthless. Even the few factors that could be estimated, are exactly that. Estimates that we still have very little knowledge of (e.g. 'The number of Earth-like worlds per planetary system'). I may as well ask you to use an equation to come up with a reasonable answer for the number of grains of sand on a beach you've never seen, where you do not know and can only estimate a) The size of the beach, b) the depth of the beach before hitting bedrock, c) the amount of grains per metre vs the number of rocks, d) the tidal forces on the beach, etc...

Unfortunately, the Drake Equation has become quite established and entrenched even with scientists of note, having itself been created by the respected professor of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Frank Drake. It has probably helped a lot of research programs like SETI (which I'll cover in 'Part 2'), by giving 'numbers' and 'statistics' that can be shown to the money-sources, convincing them to back projects in a way that they understand. On the flip side, it adds unjustified weight to a lot of arguments and discussions about alien life, often with sceptics who wish to invalidate the ideas proposed by those they are countering.

So in all, I will state that I don't believe the Drake Equation can be used as a pro or con argument either way. It just doesn't have enough weight. It sounds nice because it looks scientific and can provide numerical answers, but it is essentially meaningless.

The Fermi Paradox

Enrico Fermi

The Fermi Paradox was proposed in 1950 by Enrico Fermi, a renowned physicist probably best known for his work on the first nuclear reactor and atomic bomb, alongside J. Robert Oppenheimer. Put simply, the Fermi Paradox says that statistically, given the age and scale of the universe, even with the most cynical estimates it should be teeming with technologically advanced civilisations. If so, we should have discovered some sign of their existence by now.

I'll admit, I prefer the Fermi Paradox to the Drake Equation because in essence it is simply asking a viable question. It is not trying to pull an answer out of thin air. The problem is that sceptics and non-sceptics alike, tend to forget that it is essentially a very good question. Not an answer or proof.

For example, many a sceptic will say “There is no life out there. Just look at the Fermi Paradox! It's proof that if there was life, we would've heard about it by now.” Perhaps most sensible sceptics wouldn't put it so bluntly, but often that is the thrust of their argument when they refer to the Fermi Paradox.

Using that logic, imagine an ancient scientist or philosopher, let's call him Fred Bloggs (A British equivalent of John Doe, for those wondering). He puts together some anecdotal facts about his world, before there are any real proofs, and concludes that it is probably spherical or at least round. He has a paradox, though. When he looks around, it's all flat. He puzzles over this, but at least he's still smart enough to wonder why his world facts don't quite match up. It becomes known as the Bloggs Paradox. Meanwhile, a man who only likes to believe the established safe view that the world is flat, hears of this Paradox. Next thing you know, he's in a discussion with friends who wonder about the nature of the world. He says “Ahh, but it's the Bloggs Paradox! You can't prove in any way that the world is spherical, with all the evidence around you. So it must be flat. The Paradox proves it!”

So to repeat, what I'm trying to say is that the Fermi Paradox is simply an unanswered question regarding current knowledge that seemingly contradicts. It is not a proof of anything.

So with those out of the way, let's move on to the good stuff... Next, we shall discuss 'Signals From Beyond'

Click here for:
Part 1 - Equations and Paradoxes
Part 2 - Signals from Beyond
Part 3 - Something Small
Part 4 - Remnants and Arefacts

All work is the © copyright of W.D.Lee and/or the respective companies, individuals or organisations to which the work is related. No infringement is intentional. No reproduction or copying is permitted without express permission.

'V' - The New Series - Alien Design Revealed

The new series of 'V' is due back on our screens sometime in the new year (And has already started in the U.S.) An image has been released of the proposed design for the Lizards (revealed here), sans human skin (Or Edgar Suit, for Men in Black fans).

'Visitor' lizard design - unfinished, or final concept?

The question is, can you imagine this fitting into a human shape? This article at High-Def Digest made me wonder... As a quick bit of fun, I re-positioned the creature's body parts to see (Forgive the poor editing, it was done very quickly!). I tried to stay true to the design, and only rotated body parts around the appropriate joints, without resizing. The only license I took, was shifting the shoulder pivot point upward slightly. The biggest obstacle seems to be those short thighs, and the unusual shape of the head (in comparison to a Human skull). But overall, it's certainly got potential!

Can this lizard fit into a human suit?

I rather like the design. It's nothing shockingly original and clearly going for the look of an insect crossed with a reptile, but at least it doesn't follow the usual cycle of Alien or Dinosaur designs that get over-used. It's thin and spindly, which is at least plausible for something that is doubling as a human skeleton, rather than being too bulky to be believable. It's also avoided the usual over-muscled comic-book clichés.

However they do it, at least it shows a willingness to grow and take the show in new directions. A definite plus, in the wake of the somewhat lacklustre first series, and the similarly lacklustre response it initially gained. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens...

All work is the © copyright of W.D.Lee and/or the respective companies, individuals or organisations to which the work is related. No infringement is intentional. No reproduction or copying is permitted without express permission.

TRON: Legacy - (2010) - Cinema Review (7/10)

Light Cycles at the ready!

1982 saw the arrival of a film unlike any other. TRON was a feast for the imagination and eyes. One of, if not the, very first film to utilise CGI (A term that hadn't even been coined then). With a mixture of computer and traditional animation, it plunged its characters into a digital computer world, where programs became humanised characters, and the laws of traditional human physics and reality meant nothing. The plot was simple yet effective, kept that way so that its audience wouldn't be alienated by the utterly alien and unique world they were plunged into. Yet it was not so simple that it neglected its characters and had a flimsy story.

Olivia Wilde as Quorra,
in TRON: Legacy

TRON wasn't a box office flop, but it was far from the hit it was hoped to be, at the time. Much of that can be blamed on it being such a unique film, introducing so many new and unusual concepts to its viewers, that the average cinema goer didn't quite know how to take it. As the years passed, it gained a cult following, and a high level of respect for its innovation and creativity.

Disney, the original backers of the first film, finally decided it was time for a sequel. A brave and welcome move, unlike the countless 'remakes' and 're-imaginings' that currently seem the norm, and then promptly fail to light anyone's enthusiasm at the box-office.

A view from the original TRON

Modern effects have reached a point where almost anything is possible, and the world established by TRON is a clear opportunity to use it to its full potential. In the first film, the lead character was computer programmer and game genius Kevin Flynn, played by Jeff Bridges (Starman, Arlington Road, Iron Man), plunged into the computer world by a sadistic artificial intelligence called the MCP (Master Control Program), originally created by his real world nemesis, Dillinger. In an effort to stop Flynn from finding the evidence of Dillinger's misdeeds, the MCP triggered a prototype digital transportation device in the real world, but instead of re-integrating Flynn, he was kept as digital information, and thus trapped in the world controlled by the MCP.

Sam finds his father's computer, in TRON: Legacy

Of course it's all fantastical, but it follows its own sort of logic once you accept that programs have their own personalities in this electronic world. Tron, of the title, is a program created by and in the image of Flynn's closest friend, Alan Bradley, played by Bruce Boxleitner (TV's Babylon 5, Heroes, Chuck). Bradley programmed Tron as an ultimate security program, which becomes Flynn's best chance for survival, as well as saving the system from the clutches of Dillinger and the MCP.

Stark, one of the main villains
of the original TRON

Why am I explaining the original film in such depth? Because while the new film explains some things for a new audience that hasn't seen the original, it neglects to explain others. For example, the transportation machine is a major plot device, and thus has a reasonable amount of explanation and time devoted to it in the original film, enabling Flynn's entrance into the digital world to seem less absurd and impossible. In TRON: Legacy, it barely garners a mention. It's a pivotal conceit of the story, even if it is an implausible MacGuffin, yet seems forgotten, except as a quick throwaway to get our lead character into the digital world. The 'Grid' (as the electronic world is termed) gains seemingly little explanation as well. In the original, it is a manifestation of the digital computer world, with its associated electronics and programming. For example, there are financial programs being absorbed and controlled by the MCP, IO towers, which of course are the input/output devices in the real world, etc.. In TRON: Legacy, it appears as though we are simply in an unusual virtual world created by Kevin Flynn.

Beau Garrett as a 'Siren', getting ready to fit Sam
into his new outfit, in TRON: Legacy

I'm not quite sure whether they thought modern film audiences would accept the conceits without explanation, or they just thought that the explanations and plotting would get in the way of jumping into the virtual world as quickly as possible, for the limited attention span (perceived by executives, and not necessarily real) of modern cinema goers. I suspect the latter.

Bruce Boxleitner stealing the show

In TRON: Legacy, Kevin Flynn has disappeared, leaving his son, Sam, played by Garrett Hedlund (Troy, Eragon), to grow up an orphan (mother having died off-screen). After this brief set-up, we arrive at the present, with a twenty seven year old Sam living a life that would seem more fitting of a rebel teen. Alan Bradley arrives to inform him that he received a message from Kevin's old Video Arcade, prompting Sam to investigate and discover his father's computers and subsequently get pulled into the digital world of the Grid...

Beau Garrett as a 'Siren' in TRON: Legacy

So how does the sequel hold up, overall? There are some great touches in TRON: Legacy. Little nods to fans of the original film, that raise a smile, such as the 'big door', and a building called 'Dumont'. There's also a possible set up for a third film, in the placement of Dillinger's son as a key employee at the ENCOM company (that created the MCP and housed the original computer world). Though this seemingly important fact remains somewhat unexplained if you haven't seen the first film.

Light Cycles in the original TRON

Surprisingly, though, apart from the advances in the effects, TRON: Legacy not only adds little to the ideas of the original, but in fact takes a step back. One of the most stunningly original factors of the TRON world, was the ability to be completely different from the real world. Things could happen that would be utterly impossible in the normal universe. For example, the original film's most iconic sequence is its light-cycle race, where vehicles can turn suddenly at ninety degrees, leaving trails of light behind them that create walls to block an opponent. This set TRON aside from anything seen before, and exemplified the originality and creativity of the film.

Light Cycles in TRON: Legacy

In TRON: Legacy, the cycles now move like normal motorbikes (albeit retaining the ribbons of trailing light). This alteration is a good example of what I consider a major flaw in TRON: Legacy. Its entire world seems far too based in real-world physics. We are plunged into a realm that has the potential to be full of impossible wonders, and instead are given one that, while impressive, has few elements that would seem out-of-place in simply a futuristic or alien world. Of course the visuals are far superior, but the imagination behind them seems to lack the originality of the first film.

a 'Recognizer' craft, in TRON: Legacy

In TRON, some vehicles existed despite parts that had no physical visual link to each other. After all, they don't exist in the real world, so why should they? In TRON: Legacy, everything looks as though it could've been constructed physically (albeit in a future, alternate or alien world). A whole host of such touches seem to have been lost. Damaged vehicles even smoke, where before they would probably have had an unusual digital equivalent. There is rain and steam, amongst other things. It's far too 'real-world'.

Jeff Bridges stares out onto a digital world,
in TRON: Legacy

Another strange alteration, is in the abilities of 'users' (The term used by programs to refer to their human masters) who have been pulled into the digital world. In TRON, Flynn discovered the ability to 'heal' or give power to things, in a way that was impossible for the programs. Not only did this set him apart and make him special in this world, it made a strange sense (given the context) that the 'creators' had a semi-mystical ability to make things work and give them life. This is forgotten in TRON: Legacy, in favour of a single unexplained moment of Jedi-like power that makes no sense.

TRON: Legacy, or 2001: A Space Odyssey?

The visual design of the sequel world, while wonderful to look at, does feel like a straight forward extrapolation of the original (mixed with a little Bladerunner, amongst others) in a very obvious and linear way, utilising the advances in modern effects. In the one area they did try to be a little different, they instead opted to go for a very direct copy of 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Michael Sheen as the
nightclub owner

One scene with Michael Sheen (The Queen, Frost/Nixon, Underworld: Rise of the Lycans) playing a nightclub owner, comes over as a strange addition more in keeping with the original film's 80's roots, that the original managed to avoid. There seemed to be a trend back then, of films with either aliens or time travellers or people from alternate worlds, hearing some 80's music, and the film would then show it all as incredibly 'cool'. Such scenes can be fun in a nostalgic way, but they do date some movies badly and add to the 'cheese' factor. The original TRON avoided the trend, but TRON: Legacy has dived in with both feet, and even shoe-horned in some terribly out-of-place shots of Daft Punk (responsible for the soundtrack), to no-doubt appease their fans.

Speaking of the soundtrack, the producers decided to go an unusual route, and hire the French duo referred to as 'Daft Punk' (known for their somewhat 80's style synth/dance music), over a conventional film composer. The result is somewhat mixed. The pair have risen far above their dance-music routes to create a more orchestral score, but it still feels like something that could've been created by a good film composer on automatic. You can't help wondering if they were hired more for their promotional use (which has featured quite prominently), than their musical ability. The soundtrack is functional but often repetitive, and unfortunately shows its somewhat simplistic 80's influences and 90's dance roots in a few scenes (notably Sam on his motorbike near the beginning, the night-club scene, and the end-credits). One can't help but wonder what a seasoned composer might have been able to create with the material (personally, I think composers such as Graeme Revell or Elliot Goldenthal would have been extremely suited).

Jeff Bridges after too much plastic surgery

As for the special effects, they are, for the most part, exceptional. Everything you could expect of a modern Hollywood blockbuster. However, there is one element that stands out terribly. For Jeff Bridges' program doppelgänger, CLU, they have utilised a digitally rendered version of Bridges' younger face, having caught his performance with motion capture. The method and result are the same as films such as Avatar, but where Avatar succeeded, was in avoiding the use of actual human characters. Therefore the system's failings were not quite so evident. Unfortunately the de-aged Bridges feels like a video-game character or someone with bad plastic surgery. This would have been reasonably acceptable for the CLU character alone (albeit jarring with the completely natural faces of the un-altered actors playing the other 'digital' characters), but they used the same technique for a flash-back in the real world, which feels quite dreadful. They would have done much better avoiding his face in that scene, until the final shot, and extracted something from one of Bridges' earlier films so that it looked natural.

Quorra relaxes, in TRON: Legacy

With regards the story, it works on a surface level as an excuse for the action set pieces. It's great fun in an unfortunately forgettable way. Where the original leaves you thinking about all the ideas and concepts and possibilities it created, the sequel is content to be an effects platform and a roller-coaster ride utilising the current tend for 3D.

It may seem that I disliked TRON: Legacy, but I didn't. It is great fun, but as with so many films these days, fails by a fair margin to live up to its potential. I never expected perfection, or a film based on my own preconceptions of what a TRON sequel should be like. But is it unreasonable to wish a film could have risen beyond the level of popcorn fun, when its own predecessor has become such an iconic example of imagination, creativity and innovation?

7/10

All work is the © copyright of W.D.Lee and/or the respective companies, individuals or organisations to which the work is related. No infringement is intentional. No reproduction or copying is permitted without express permission.

Skyline - (2010) - Cinema Review (6/10)

Keep Your Brain!

What went wrong? After some initially positive buzz and a trailer that got people interested and excited, Skyline turned into a bit of a damp squib at the box-office.

The film concerns itself with an alien invasion of Earth, in a similar style to everything from War of the Worlds to Independence Day. In this case, following events from the perspective of a small group of friends trapped in a Los Angeles apartment block, as they witness what happens and try to survive.

'The Brothers Strause', as they have named themselves, were responsible for producing and directing the film with their own funds. They own their own Hollywood effects company, and their previous (and first) feature-film directing credit was the rather dreadful Aliens Vs Predator: Requiem. This was the first bad sign, but supposedly a lot of studio interference marred that film, and Skyline was meant to be their independent proof of talent. Unfortunately it falls a little flat.

In itself, the idea is rather good fun. It steals rather obviously from a number of films, but with enough variation that it never quite feels too deliberate (Unlike, for example, a film like Avatar that copies only one or two films far too closely). In the character and location set-up, we are reminded of Cloverfield (without the shakeycam), and there are scenes reminiscent of any number of films, from War of the Worlds to Independence Day and everything in between.

The aliens and their vehicles have similarities to The Matrix, Cloverfield, Independence Day, War of the Worlds, even possibly Howard the Duck! To name just a few... Again, most are just removed enough from their possible inspirations, that they don't spoil the film. Unfortunately it does stop the creature and vehicle designs feeling particularly original and inspiring, as well.Although almost any film can trace its inspirations back to a multitude of others, Skyline does have a tendency to almost proudly show its own influences too directly, on the surface.

It's a strange film, because unlike many such movies, instead of starting out with the its interesting premise and ideas, then going downhill from there, it does the opposite. It starts out spending too much time introducing utterly bland characters with whom the audience cares little, then gains momentum through the increasing tension and action. If the characters had been interesting, and gained our sympathy and support in the first place, it would have been time well spent. Unfortunately it wasn't, which of course damages the effectiveness of the otherwise well-constructed action later on.

Lack of characterisation, is Skyline's biggest flaw. There are any number of potential plot holes, from improbable survival in close proximity to a nuclear blast (Along with nary a consequence of note), through to unrealistic military tactics, to explosive gas that seems to leave people completely conscious without any drowsy effects at all. All conceits that could have been somewhat forgiveable (How many successful films get away with worse?), had it not been for the utter lack of sympathetic and interesting characters that make us want to witness and follow their struggle to survive.

The characters are dreadful stereotypes, from the 'successful partying playboy' to the 'cool artist dude'. Strangely, the 'playboy' character exhibits every trait you would associate with someone who is supposed to be a shallow musical star (Perhaps a rapper or some-such), but turns out to be a special effects expert. It's as though the script writers wrote one thing, and the Strause brothers decided to change the character's livelihood as a nod to their own, without altering any of the clichéd trappings of the character's previous incarnation.

Jarrod, the lead character and 'cool artist dude', is played by Eric Balfour (known for numerous small parts in a variety of TV series). Unfortunately he seems completely miscast. His look and demeanour hint that he should be some gun-wielding LA 'gangsta'. Between the lack of interesting personality in the script, and his inappropriate casting and on-screen persona, it is difficult to care what happens to Jarrod, as events unfold.

The female characters, such as his pregnant girlfriend, seem to have even less depth. In one scene, a lone military drone struggles through impossible odds and personal injury, to sacrifice itself in a last ditch effort to bring down an alien vessel. The drone gains more of our emotion and has a more sympathetic and brave personality than any of the human characters. When you realise that, you also realise that something has truly gone awry with the script and direction.

It may seem as though I'm coming down hard on Skyline. The action scenes are often effective and well executed, the special effects are for the most part excellent, and the pace does build adequately as the film progresses. Make no mistake, the stars of this film are the special effects, and considering its rumoured low-budget of ten million dollars, it does look spectacular. This isn't a film that throws all of its best moments at you during the trailer. There is plenty of eye-candy to enjoy, from big explosions to gooey aliens.

As events progress, there are elements that feel straight out of classic 50s science fiction. It's over-the-top and extremely fun for someone such as myself, who is a fan of classic SF, but I can also see how those elements could appear 'cheesy' to a modern audience less versed in the genre.

Another positive on Skyline's side, is the ending. It's flawed, because it leaves things deliberately open for a sequel without a conclusion, but it did appear that it was going to end in a much more stereotypical and annoyingly pointless and hopeless way. So the subsequent ending did feel more satisfying. It ends with some hope, albeit it an extreme way that many may not like. In fact, the conclusion reminded me of something straight out of Edgar Rice Burroughs 'Synthetic Men of Mars' (first published in 1939). As such, I enjoyed its somewhat old-school sense of fun, mixed with modern action and effects.

So really Skyline is a mixed bag, but at the end of it all, I can't avoid some of its gaping flaws. I would suggest a rental for fans of science fiction, with the proviso that you don't expect anything outstanding. As for those of you who are not science fiction fans, I would advise giving it a miss.

It's a shame, as Skyline had a lot of potential. There are rumours of a sequel, and given the ending, it could be great fun. However, I won't hold my breath. I'm giving it 6 out of 10, for the sheer fun of some scenes, but that's being very generous, overall.

6/10

All work is the © copyright of W.D.Lee and/or the respective companies, individuals or organisations to which the work is related. No infringement is intentional. No reproduction or copying is permitted without express permission.