Session 4-34: Listener Contributions

ohhh pretty! I haven't seen her work before (let me quickly note that down). In this one Caranthir seems to have quite a bit of a fleet, so not only a lot of trade by road, but also by river going on here. (Or lake helevorn is a lot bigger here)
For some reason I’m imagining Caranthir living on a houseboat after the Nirnaeth...
 
I was going to make another version of my Tevildo - or rather I did, but failed. I’m not skilled enough at using water colours, and that was the only alternative at hand. So, for now, the sketch is all I’m going to come up with. Well, it’s something.
 
Regardless of size, housecats just don't seem to be physically imposing. The siamese cats in "Lady and the Tramp" are evil and manipulative, but not intimidating in a physical sense. While cats are chasing Beleg through the forests, or facing off with Angrod and Edhellos, there would be an element of comedy to it, no matter how dire the situations might be.

How absolutely not scary cats are is the main source of humor in this scene:


I feel like if you size them up a bit, they'd be less obviously cute and maybe a little bit scary. My ten pound housecat frequently draws blood on me with her claws and teeth. But yes, obviously I can pick her up and it's no trouble to physically control her. But it's also the case that, since our brains are so used to the actual size of a cat or dog, that attempting to size them up tends to look really fake. That's the main reason to try to pick a wild animal of roughly the size we want as a base, so that the viewer will believe the size of the creature without thinking...'wait a minute'.... They ran into this problem with the Direwolves on Game of Thrones.

One could argue for a smaller wild animal size for Tevildo, and allow for the number of cats involved in attacks to make the difference (maybe lynx rather than bobcat, but his thanes don't necessarily need to be the largest of big cats ever).

Jurassic Park has tested the limits of 'how small and cute can an animal be, and yet still be scary in a pack?' These little dinos are smaller than a housecat; more the size of a ferret. Granted, they are reptilian, and we naturally think reptiles are much scarier than mammals.

Is this compsognathus death scene believable? Eh....there's a reason The Lost World is not the best of the Jurassic Park films. It has to rely very much on the fear of being cut off from a group, of being left alone in the woods to die. In the novel, a group of three of these attack a new born baby left alone in a bassinet; definitely the most vulnerable of prey! Do we believe that a full grown man goes down to this pack? Again...ehhhh...it relies on him falling multiple times, and being bitten (they are venomous in the films). It still feels very forced. Like, he only dies because he's in a Jurassic Park film, not because it's believable they'd take him down in this manner. Which might explain why there is a minimal (though not non-existent) sense of danger when the man in this scene seems to be ignoring the presence of these small dinosaurs and falsely believes himself 'safe' in the second Jurassic World movie:
 
Last edited:
How absolutely not scary cats are is the main source of humor in this scene:


I feel like if you size them up a bit, they'd be less obviously cute and maybe a little bit scary. My ten pound housecat frequently draws blood on me with her claws and teeth. But yes, obviously I can pick her up and it's no trouble to physically control her. But it's also the case that, since our brains are so used to the actual size of a cat or dog, that attempting to size them up tends to look really fake. That's the main reason to try to pick a wild animal of roughly the size we want as a base, so that the viewer will believe the size of the creature without thinking...'wait a minute'.... They ran into this problem with the Direwolves on Game of Thrones.

One could argue for a smaller wild animal size for Tevildo, and allow for the number of cats involved in attacks to make the difference (maybe lynx rather than bobcat, but his thanes don't necessarily need to be the largest of big cats ever).

Jurassic Park has tested the limits of 'how small and cute can an animal be, and yet still be scary in a pack?' These little dinos are smaller than a housecat; more the size of a ferret. Granted, they are reptilian, and we naturally think reptiles are much scarier than mammals.

Is this compsognathus death scene believable? Eh....there's a reason The Lost World is not the best of the Jurassic Park films. It has to rely very much on the fear of being cut off from a group, of being left alone in the woods to die. In the novel, a group of three of these attack a new born baby left alone in a bassinet; definitely the most vulnerable of prey! Do we believe that a full grown man goes down to this pack? Again...ehhhh...it relies on him falling multiple times, and being bitten (they are venomous in the films). It still feels very forced. Like, he only dies because he's in a Jurassic Park film, not because it's believable they'd take him down in this manner. Which might explain why there is a minimal (though not non-existent) sense of danger when the man in this scene seems to be ignoring the presence of these small dinosaurs and falsely believes himself 'safe' in the second Jurassic World movie:
I remember something like that for The Hobbit; for Radagast’s rabbits they couldn’t just scale up a rabbit, they had to find a rabbit that was much larger and use that as a reference point.
 
It’s not just about our brains and how we perceive animals that we expect to be small, it’s also the fact that bigger animals move quite differently than small ones, so a small bunny blown up to mammoth proportions will look just like what it is, and not a huge bunny. They get heavier and slower.
 
I remember something like that for The Hobbit; for Radagast’s rabbits they couldn’t just scale up a rabbit, they had to find a rabbit that was much larger and use that as a reference point.

Also, IIRC, we don't get a particularly good look at them, just fleeting glimpses and wide shots. They certainly don't ever speak.
 
That's very true. That's part of what convinces us that the size is fake - after all, a scaled up bunny rabbit or a scaled down human are the same thing, so there is nothing about that to convince us that the rabbit is actually larger. Changing the body structure appeases the brain into believing that this critter actually has more mass.

I have been trying to think of (non-reptilian) animals that are small and scary, and what I have come up with is....rats in enclosed spaces. If someone is trapped and unable to get away, having rats in that space with you is pretty scary.

In El Norte, there is a scene where the Guatemalan brother and sister are crawling through a sewer pipe and get attacked by rats. It's not disfiguring or anything, and they certainly survive (in the short term), but...it is disturbing. And the whole point is that sure a rat is small, but if you can't even stand up, how do you get away from it?

In Game of Thrones, there's a torture scene where they strap a bucket with a rat in it onto someone's belly, and then heat up the bucket. The rat panics and tries to scratch and bite its way out, and the person can only scream as his guts are gnawed on. The same thing happens in 2 Fast and 2 Furious.

Here's the semi-historic background on this method of torture:

Here is a video of a rat in a cage. See how it just launches itself at the barrier, super fast? If you were trapped inside a cage with this critter, and it launched itself at you, there'd be nothing to stop it from biting you. It's still...very small and somewhat cute. The bloody nose is from the metal bars of the cage. And the squeaks sound very much like an animal in distress, not a threat. But there is a reason why fighting 'like a cornered rat' is a colloquial expression...the lack of concern for personal safety and unmitigated aggression is clear.

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade uses a crypt full of rats as a joke, not a serious threat. Indy hates snakes; his dad hates rats.

In this Deathwatch scene, the rats create horror. A paralyzed man is unable to even feel his legs, so he's not aware of the rats or able to escape them.

While we may have opportunities to show prisoners trapped in Angband unable to escape torments of various sorts, I don't think the point of our show is to depict torture, and obviously we need Tevildo's cats to be more menacing than simply to opportunistically attack unprotected flesh on a trapped prisoner.
 
Okay, so...I think the Jurassic Park franchise is a good example of 'scary animals.' The entire series of films is about clever, hungry animals attacking and eating people. Sure, there are plenty of films about killer sharks - Jaws, the Meg, all the Sharknado films. And there's always Gremlins. But Jurassic Park is a really good one - it's meant to scare you, and you're meant to believe these are 'real' (albeit prehistoric) animals.

And, easily, hands down, the scariest critter in the park is...the velociraptor. What makes velociraptors so scary?

Number one is their intelligence. They can figure things out. They can open doors. They can manage not to fall for the easy/obvious trap, and plot a counter trap of their own. They don't talk, of course, but they definitely communicate. (raptor sounds)

Secondly, their design is sleek and with a heavy emphasis on the claws and teeth. They have those giant raptor claws that are really impressive at tearing, both on their hands and feet. They're small enough that they can get into confined spaces; they're not huge monsters like the t-rex. They are right up close and personal. Very powerful, very reptilian, very fast.

Three - they coordinate. They hunt in such a way that you never see the one coming who gets you. So, the visible cat in front of you while the other cat sneaks up behind you (off camera) and surprise attacks will be good for a jump scare.

The original film kitchen scene:
This scene is suspenseful and legitimately quite scary, even though the raptors are ultimately unsuccessful and the children are not injured in any way. The first thing the raptor does is open the door that they closed behind them to hide. The second thing it does is 'call for back up' when it figures out its prey is present. While slowly stalking the children through the kitchen, the emphasis is placed on the click of the claws on the tile floor. At one point, one jumps up onto the countertops while the other stays at ground level so that they can cover more ground thoroughly. The raptors are very responsive to smell, sound, movement, etc. They're on high alert and 'stalking'.

The 'long grass' scene in The Lost World:
Here, you barely see the creature. The emphasis, rather, is on how they hunt together as a pack, surrounding and closing in on their unsuspecting prey. You see the heads pop up and catch the light/motion/movement/shouts. And you see the path of the men in a straight line across the field, as many other lines showing the progress of the raptors open up around them. Mostly, it's their tails, though there is a single shot of a raptor leaping on a man.

The 'clever girl' scene in the first film:
This is about the hunter becoming the hunted. Unlike the scene with the pack of little compsognathus overtaking a grown man for...some inexplicable reason...here you have two raptors working together to fool the human hunting them. It is very believable that he's a goner.

And of course, the give away that these are the scary villains and focus of this film "Try to show a little respect." We get the setup and explanation up front.

Granted, in Jurassic World, there is a bit of working with the raptors rather than against them. Blue is genuinely likable. The main villains aren't the velociraptors any longer.

I have been watching my cat crawl out of a cardboard box that isn't as tall as her, and that reminds me of the scene in Return of the King where Shelob emerges from the rock crevice. Your first thought is meant to be...no way that monster fits in there. We could have one of the cats make a similar type of appearance, practically oozing out of a small passageway he shouldn't even fit in. First you just see the head and front paws, and as the body emerges, you realize how big the beast is (would work with any of the wolves, too).

We can have a cat silently watching a scene (from above?) for a long time, and the characters are unaware the cat is even there. But when the camera reveals the cat's location, it's clear the cat was there all along.

A cat can silently appear out of nowhere....taking advantage of 'with cat-like tread'. We can show them lower their heads, stalk forward belly low to the ground (fixed on their prey), and then pounce with a surprising reach and speed.

Playing with their food is one of the things that makes cats particularly cruel. They put a paw on the bug, mouse, etc that they've trapped...and then let the paw up to see if the trapped critter will run. They bat at it a bit. The cat in Watership Down asks Hazel, "Can you run? I think not...." Very...cat-like. We want Tevildo to be a torturer, so doing something painful and then just watching almost clinically before repeating the action. Just to see what the prey will do. Plenty of opportunity for the cats to 'bat around' elves, slash at them, etc.

In other words, what I'm trying to say is that character design is part of this, certainly, but how you utilize the character is a lot of it, too. We don't just want to show Tevildo (and his cats) snarling and snapping at elves. We want to make them menacing, slinking-in-the-shadows characters whom we see, but worry about when we can't see. They won't be the stars of the show the way the velociraptors are in Jurassic Park. They're minor side characters, while the 'true' villains are other characters. The cats are more like dilophosaurus - perhaps a memorable scene here or there, but not an overall arc. But still...their characterization can be nightmare fuel, if we do it right.
 
Okay, so...I think the Jurassic Park franchise is a good example of 'scary animals.' The entire series of films is about clever, hungry animals attacking and eating people. Sure, there are plenty of films about killer sharks - Jaws, the Meg, all the Sharknado films. And there's always Gremlins. But Jurassic Park is a really good one - it's meant to scare you, and you're meant to believe these are 'real' (albeit prehistoric) animals.

And, easily, hands down, the scariest critter in the park is...the velociraptor. What makes velociraptors so scary?

Number one is their intelligence. They can figure things out. They can open doors. They can manage not to fall for the easy/obvious trap, and plot a counter trap of their own. They don't talk, of course, but they definitely communicate. (raptor sounds)

Secondly, their design is sleek and with a heavy emphasis on the claws and teeth. They have those giant raptor claws that are really impressive at tearing, both on their hands and feet. They're small enough that they can get into confined spaces; they're not huge monsters like the t-rex. They are right up close and personal. Very powerful, very reptilian, very fast.

Three - they coordinate. They hunt in such a way that you never see the one coming who gets you. So, the visible cat in front of you while the other cat sneaks up behind you (off camera) and surprise attacks will be good for a jump scare.

The original film kitchen scene:
This scene is suspenseful and legitimately quite scary, even though the raptors are ultimately unsuccessful and the children are not injured in any way. The first thing the raptor does is open the door that they closed behind them to hide. The second thing it does is 'call for back up' when it figures out its prey is present. While slowly stalking the children through the kitchen, the emphasis is placed on the click of the claws on the tile floor. At one point, one jumps up onto the countertops while the other stays at ground level so that they can cover more ground thoroughly. The raptors are very responsive to smell, sound, movement, etc. They're on high alert and 'stalking'.

The 'long grass' scene in The Lost World:
Here, you barely see the creature. The emphasis, rather, is on how they hunt together as a pack, surrounding and closing in on their unsuspecting prey. You see the heads pop up and catch the light/motion/movement/shouts. And you see the path of the men in a straight line across the field, as many other lines showing the progress of the raptors open up around them. Mostly, it's their tails, though there is a single shot of a raptor leaping on a man.

The 'clever girl' scene in the first film:
This is about the hunter becoming the hunted. Unlike the scene with the pack of little compsognathus overtaking a grown man for...some inexplicable reason...here you have two raptors working together to fool the human hunting them. It is very believable that he's a goner.

And of course, the give away that these are the scary villains and focus of this film "Try to show a little respect." We get the setup and explanation up front.

Granted, in Jurassic World, there is a bit of working with the raptors rather than against them. Blue is genuinely likable. The main villains aren't the velociraptors any longer.

I have been watching my cat crawl out of a cardboard box that isn't as tall as her, and that reminds me of the scene in Return of the King where Shelob emerges from the rock crevice. Your first thought is meant to be...no way that monster fits in there. We could have one of the cats make a similar type of appearance, practically oozing out of a small passageway he shouldn't even fit in. First you just see the head and front paws, and as the body emerges, you realize how big the beast is (would work with any of the wolves, too).

We can have a cat silently watching a scene (from above?) for a long time, and the characters are unaware the cat is even there. But when the camera reveals the cat's location, it's clear the cat was there all along.

A cat can silently appear out of nowhere....taking advantage of 'with cat-like tread'. We can show them lower their heads, stalk forward belly low to the ground (fixed on their prey), and then pounce with a surprising reach and speed.

Playing with their food is one of the things that makes cats particularly cruel. They put a paw on the bug, mouse, etc that they've trapped...and then let the paw up to see if the trapped critter will run. They bat at it a bit. The cat in Watership Down asks Hazel, "Can you run? I think not...." Very...cat-like. We want Tevildo to be a torturer, so doing something painful and then just watching almost clinically before repeating the action. Just to see what the prey will do. Plenty of opportunity for the cats to 'bat around' elves, slash at them, etc.

In other words, what I'm trying to say is that character design is part of this, certainly, but how you utilize the character is a lot of it, too. We don't just want to show Tevildo (and his cats) snarling and snapping at elves. We want to make them menacing, slinking-in-the-shadows characters whom we see, but worry about when we can't see. They won't be the stars of the show the way the velociraptors are in Jurassic Park. They're minor side characters, while the 'true' villains are other characters. The cats are more like dilophosaurus - perhaps a memorable scene here or there, but not an overall arc. But still...their characterization can be nightmare fuel, if we do it right.
I like this idea of the cats being particularly cruel. Also, I think that one thing that reptiles/dinosaurs and Tevildo's cats could have in common could be that they show no sign of fear. They should run away when outnumbered and perhaps not always fight to the death, but retreat should be a calculated move. For example, we could show them being apparently chased away, but later they return in an ambush. I think they are well coordinated, but should follow their own minds rather than orders, if those two push in different directions.
The more I think about them, the more they seem a bit chaotic to me - or at least unreliable to some degree. I don't think this is something Sauron appreciates much, but I think he understands Tevildo well enough and knows how to use him. I think this unpredictability could be used to make them scary, as well as their coldheartedness.
 
So, to the topic of this thread...if anyone has any artistic contributions, please post them by tomorrow!
 
I'd like to discuss fight choreography at some point (I'm not sure when) on a few points, ie training actors to fight and what style of swordfighting is used. I admit on the latter point that I don't want to see HEMA all the time and would like to have some aspects of fencing (being from a fencing background) thrown in as one-on-one confrontations occur more often, ie Celegorm vs Dior and Tuor vs Maeglin.
 
I'd like to discuss fight choreography at some point (I'm not sure when) on a few points, ie training actors to fight and what style of swordfighting is used. I admit on the latter point that I don't want to see HEMA all the time and would like to have some aspects of fencing (being from a fencing background) thrown in as one-on-one confrontations occur more often, ie Celegorm vs Dior and Tuor vs Maeglin.

I'm not sure how much discussion there is to be had on this point (and certainly not on this thread).
 
I'm afraid i won't finish my tevildo & thuringwethil pictures I'm a bit swamped with work. but I can post a WIP, and the thoughts i had for it/where i am unsure. also the discussion here is very interesting, about size, manner of being dangerous etc. maybe the post-production department can get an extension on tevildo & company, not to overturn any decisions made before, but to continue developing?
 
I have been working on a few projects, but between school, illness, and just overestimating what I could get done, I have nothing finished. My sculpture currently looks like this:
26232624

It is very much a work in progress. I won't be able to work on it tomorrow, but I plan to spend a few more hours in the studio on Thursday. I will hopefully have pictures of a more complete version on Thursday afternoon, but I understand if that is too late to submit.
 
Back
Top