The discussion of the Alien series of films and the props used in them is the aim, but if it's got Big Bugs and Big Guns, then they are welcome too!





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: SA vs PA and other pedantic nonsense...
PostPosted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 5:48 pm 
Lifer
User avatar

Location: **Hamilton** Active Duty: USS Socorro
Country: Canada
earl312 wrote:
Troops:
I think that the discussion on what is "Screen Accurate" "Production Accurate" should be another thread. We could debate this till the cow's come home.


Fine. Let's do it here. :wink:

To start off I figure this will probably not be the easiest of discussions and will "probably" get a little heated at times. This is natural, however I figure as long as it doesn't turn into "You're an idiot!", "No I'm not!", "YES YOU ARE!"... we can keep it from being locked or nuked, or even told to tone it down (something that the Mods rarely do around these parts).

Now, I've been in this game for 11 years and have developed an opinion of what "I" consider "screen accurate", versus "production accurate" and "close enough."

We all know that most costumes used in films are only made to last for the production of the movie itself, and not really beyond that. They are not truly meant for everyday wear because they will only be worn for a short time. So in order for the production to save time and money, costumes usually are hastily made and do not have the same durability as actual clothing.

In other words if you saw a screen used costume you'd likely think that it looked cheaply made and (depending on the age or amount of use it received) was falling apart.

Nobody wants this. :lol:

Obviously we want a reproduction to last (especially if we plan on wearing it). But considering that the costume might only be worn a few times a year, or go on a mannequin, it doesn't have to be indestructable. :wink:

For me, I like my repros to last, so I'm willing to sacrifice "production accuracy" in a big way; I'm sure most of us are able to as well.


"What's seen on screen versus how it actually looks in real life"...

Again we know that there can sometimes be a HUGE difference between how something appeared on screen (especially colours) and how it appears in natural light if it was placed right in front of you.

Using the BDUs as an example (yeah... here we go), what I interpret is that the colours of the camo were brown tones, however on screen (well... on my tv or monitor which might need an adjustment :wink: ) colours appear differently. For instance the darker browns look almost purple, and tans look pale yellow.

This boils down to personal preference I believe. Someone might like a 100% accurate colour scheme as it appears in real life, while someone else might like a replica of how it appeared on screen. I prefer the latter of the two.


"How close is screen accurate and what is close enough"---

This is another grey area based mostly on preference. This is where opinions will probably be from one end of the spectrum to the other.

Because I am willing to scarifice production accuracy for durability, and how it appears on screen versus real life, I would say that a reproduction for me should be about 80% accurate to the actual production used item for me to be calling it "screen accurate." And this has sometimes been coined as being "idealized."

No reproduction will be 100%, because to have something like this, you would probably have to keep it in a glass display case lest it falls apart on you. :wink:

I'm at 80%, however some people would want a higher percentage or willing to accept a lower amount. There's nothing wrong with this.


"Close enough" to me means something like wearing an "off the shelf" or found item, that while might look okay at a glance or from afar, doesn't truly replicate the item in question upon closer inspection.

A classic example would be my hockey gear chest armour, or using Polish BDUs in place of repro USCM camo. Looks the part at a glance, but isn't really accurate at all. Again, this is something based on personal preferance. Obviously if I still wear my hockey armour I don't have any problem with "close enough." :wink:


Terms I've come to know around here...

"Armour" (or Armor :lol: ): The outer metal (and leatherette) parts of the costume: helmet, greaves, codpiece, chestpiece etc.

"BDUs": the camouflage uniform worn under the armour (or the all OD green uniform worn by Gorman alone).

"Service C": the "dress" uniform seen worn by Gorman during the apartment scene.


Lately there has been attempts to "call it what it is in the United States Marine Corps" or other real life military unit.

Frankly this just overcomplicates things.

Let me give you an example---

A few years ago I started a thread asking what the Pulse Rifle would be classed as. Because of its short barrel and smaller round, I wanted to know if it was considered a "carbine" or a sub-machine gun etc.

It took Airborne Mike to just come right out and tell me that a Pulse Rifle is a rifle. It's not a "Pulse Carbine" or a "Pulse SMG" or a "Pulse Machine Pistol" it's a rifle! :lol:

This was one (of more than a few :wink: ) times where I was just over thinking things and was trying to apply real life terms to what is fiction.

The bottom line is that the Colonial Marine Corps is a fictional military unit.

It can be fun to hypothesize what would be what if the USCM were "real" basing it on the actual military...

However when you get into heated statements like "that's not what it's called in the USMC", or "the real military doesn't work that way", you remove the enjoyment out of the purpose of this site and attempt to invoke true military doctrine and regime in it's place.

That's not what this place is about. Again this is another lesson I learned the hard way a few years back when I went through my own "WWTUSMCD" phase and tried to impose this on other members. I was wrong.

While I do appreciate "getting it right", I most certainly don't appreciate feeling like I've been drafted or have the impression I'll be ostracized for "doing my own thing."


Well... that's all I have to say about that. :wink:


Kevin

_________________
I told you I'd shoot, but you didn't believe me! WHY DIDN'T YOU BELIEVE ME!?!


Last edited by SSgt Burton on Sun Aug 04, 2013 5:56 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: SA vs PA and other pedantic nonsense...
PostPosted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 5:49 pm 
User avatar

Location: UK all the way
Country: United Kingdom
You're an idiot





:wink: :)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 5:53 pm 
Dresser of Nerds
User avatar

Location: NYC
Country: United States
No I'm not! You are!

_________________
-Spat

ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: SA vs PA and other pedantic nonsense...
PostPosted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 5:54 pm 
Lifer
User avatar

Location: **Hamilton** Active Duty: USS Socorro
Country: Canada
Osmotic wrote:
You're an idiot





:wink: :)


:lol: :lol: :lol:

You're the best! :lol:

Now piss off! :lol:


Kevin

_________________
I told you I'd shoot, but you didn't believe me! WHY DIDN'T YOU BELIEVE ME!?!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: SA vs PA and other pedantic nonsense...
PostPosted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 6:08 pm 
User avatar

Location: UK all the way
Country: United Kingdom
:lol:


On a slightly more sensible note..

Like many things in life it's down to personal preference. Personally if we're talking BDU's they have to have the right cut, right patten and right colour for me to consider them. Fortunately I still have my originals from USCM supplies and they've stood up pretty well to the test of time.

For those that weren't around when they were made they were patterned/cut based on a screen used set and the correct colour/pattern based on a original piece of fabric. I'd have to say they are right up there probably in the 95% + accurate to screen used stakes.

Reference the military bent the forum has been taken on I couldn't agree with you more.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 6:32 pm 
Dresser of Nerds
User avatar

Location: NYC
Country: United States
It also comes down to the "OD Green vs Brown Bess" argument. I'll always say that the rifle I saw on the screen was green, not brown.

I shoot to be as accurate as possible with my props and costumes compared to what I saw on screen. If I can also make it close to what was used on set (using the same base items, getting exact measurements or getting to actually measure and photograph and color match the originals), then even better. But I'm always willing to make small changes as needed to bring up the quality and durability of the item, especially if it's something that can't be seen from the outside.

If that makes sense.

_________________
-Spat

ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 6:52 pm 
User avatar

Location: glasgow uk
Service Number: A12/TQ0.0.52149E1
Country: United Kingdom
my goal is to make the costume look like what i saw on the screen. comprise when i have to but if i buy custom made gear it has to look screen accurate don't care if it's made the same better made is always better but must look the part.

_________________
Reformed Pacifist


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 6:56 pm 
User avatar

Location: long island , NY
Country: United States
"Close is fine with me" . IM not buying a screen accurate Steadicam ;)

_________________
Cpl Matthew Rendar. M56 smart gun operator. 2nd bat 7th colonial marines "Rendars Raiders "
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: SA vs PA and other pedantic nonsense...
PostPosted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 6:58 pm 
Pint of AB negative please
User avatar

Location: HOUNSLOW, west london
Service Number: A09/TQ2.0.12136E1
Country: United Kingdom
SSgt Burton wrote:
While I do appreciate "getting it right", I most certainly don't appreciate feeling like I've been drafted or have the impression I'll be ostracized for "doing my own thing."





Kevin


Great words

_________________
SSgt Kris "Bloodsucker" Kobus, VAS.
A09/TQ2.0.12136E1


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 7:08 pm 
I no longer have anything to add...Kevin put it more eloquently than I could have.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 11:15 pm 
Galaxy-hopping garbage man

Country: United Kingdom
I go with whatever I can afford. If that's not good enough for some people, then they can go buy me the version they like!! :D


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: SA vs PA and other pedantic nonsense...
PostPosted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 11:34 pm 
User avatar

Location: UK all the way
Country: United Kingdom
SSgt Burton wrote:
earl312 wrote:
No reproduction will be 100%, because to have something like this, you would probably have to keep it in a glass display case lest it falls apart on you. :wink:



Actually Kev I will pick you up on that point. (if anything to stop this thread becoming we all agree with Kev thread)

A number of people have made motion trackers from all of the original parts. I'd have to argue that in they are 100% screen used replica and don't fall to pieces. I'm pretty sure I can find some other examples if I try real hard. :wink:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2013 1:39 am 
I would say that's one of the few exceptions...for sure. Same as building a scratch PR from actual parts.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2013 6:30 am 
Jack of Hearts
User avatar

Location: Seattle, WA
Service Number: A07/TQ2.0.02158E1
Country: United States
Screen-whatnow?

_________________
"Screen what? I wouldn't know screen accurate if it were driving a bus and ran me over during the parade."

LCpl. Av "Spectre" Taylor
Long Range Infantry Support


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2013 11:08 am 
BOHICA
User avatar

Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Service Number: A05/TQ2.0.82134E1
Country: United Kingdom
I try and get as close as possibl, but I agree, I joined for the funsies, and when the fun is gone, wht's the point?

It's a fictional military unit, in a fictional universe. Lets rock :)

_________________
" I'm anispeptic, frasmotic, even compunctuous to have caused you such pericombobulation."

Private
UKCM
42 rgmt, 1st Bttln,
Hadrian's Wall.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2013 1:08 pm 
Built for comfort not speed
User avatar

Service Number: A12/TQ0.0.92142E1
Country: United Kingdom
Ttaskmaster wrote:
I go with whatever I can afford. If that's not good enough for some people, then they can go buy me the version they like!! :D



Axeman wrote:
I try and get as close as possibl, but I agree, I joined for the funsies, and when the fun is gone, wht's the point?

It's a fictional military unit, in a fictional universe. Lets rock :)



I couldnt agree more :D

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2013 1:52 pm 
I don't believe it!
User avatar

Location: Rochester, Kent, England
Service Number: A10/TQ3.0.02137E1
Country: United Kingdom
Axeman wrote:
It's a fictional military unit, in a fictional universe. Lets rock :)


At last ! comparing with what we see on screen to real life Military units is just digging your self in to a hole ,saying ..' That is not how they do it in the real military miss the point , Cameron made up the USCM so he could do what he wanted with out upsetting the real military , Cameron has said that at the time he knew little about Marine structure , which is why they have the wrong rank badges etc on uniforms and lack of Discipline

i have always gone with what you see on the screen as what has been mentioned .... (brown bess or olive drab)

If we all go with SA then i would have to take off my dropship wings and ribbions off my uniform and take my name tag as well as there was not a marine called, Allen in the movie :lol:

_________________
Pfc Glenn Allen ,
1st Batt. 69th Regiment,
Homers Hero's..
Drops so Far.... 29 and counting

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2013 1:57 pm 
Miscreant and Foukérre
User avatar

Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Service Number: A05/TQ1.0.32151E1
Country: United Kingdom
As far as costuming goes, I've always aimed for "As close as possible, within budget", with allowances for comfort.
ie. I have yet to find a pair of jungle boots I find comfy - Therefore Magnums or similar do me fine.

The importance of the terms varies greatly with context, however - If, for example, someone was to sell a "Screen accurate Motion Tracker kit", and I got one with an oversized slide viewer... I would be annoyed, and the vendor would be in the wrong.

_________________
MSgt, UKCM 42nd Reg., 1st Batt. : Hadrian's Wall. UKCM
Image
Wasteland Workshop
Props, cosplay pieces, upcycled ornamentation, and miscellanea;
For the discerning survivor of the apocalypse.
Steve Fletcher : Maker, Scavenger, and Junksmith.
linktr.ee/wastelandworkshop


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2013 5:02 pm 
Proceed on a 2-1-6...
User avatar

Location: Sunny Sussex
Service Number: A02/TQ2.0.52141E1
Country: United Kingdom
In my own opinion...

To start with, as someone who doesn't have the practical skill of being able to make or cast props, I'm damned glad this community has so many gifted people to make the kit to allow me to put together a CM impression...

To me it's about getting it right, and getting it right first time (or as near as dammit)... I can only do that because of the years of blood sweat and tears of the people who have trodden the path before me...

When I start to think about Colonial Marines in detail, I see that Cameron had thought out the detail very well. It's such an interesting look...

But for the screen and practicalities, what have we got? We've got very hastily made BDUs (with a clothiers label), foam filled pouches and so on...

To my mind, I like a few EU modifications... Like tough material... Strong stitching... EU labels etc. Thats all great... But it has to look right in colour and cut... The uniforms are a tough discussion point. With WW2 British kit, if I get reproduction gear, I want it to be spot on. But WW2 kit is copied from gear which was made (and made to last) on a mass scale. This is where the BDUs have room for improvement. If the screen used designs were used to copy stitch by stitch, then we'd all be disappointed in how they stood up to laundry etc.

At the moment, I'm going for Brown Bess paint not OD... Because that's what it was... BUT I like the look of OD... and i dont think OD is wrong.

I'll summarise myself as someone who wants to do a representation in the spirit of being screen accurate... But EU enough to have my kit named to ME... And EU enough to have pocket fillers and mods to my kit that suit me... In the spirit of the film and a bit of individuality...

Standards are like toothbrushes. Everyone's got one, but you wouldn't really want to use anyone else's...

_________________
A02/TQ2.0.52141E1

"Errr... Roger that's a 2-1-6..."


Last edited by ilovethecorps on Mon Aug 05, 2013 5:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2013 5:10 pm 
Dresser of Nerds
User avatar

Location: NYC
Country: United States
Magnus wrote:
I would say that's one of the few exceptions...for sure. Same as building a scratch PR from actual parts.


Well, using a Thompson and the correct Spas parts will always look the same, but the Shrouds were slightly different on each rifle in the film, so those are always "interpretations". Motion Trackers are the ones that can be made from all found parts.

_________________
-Spat

ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2013 6:46 pm 
You there! Get me a Turkey!
User avatar

Location: Oklahoma City, USA
Service Number: A03/TQ1.0.62157E1
Country: United States
Your costume, your project, your budget....your decision ;)

I like the fact we have so many choices when it comes to things (BDU's being a great example) but when it does come to certain items you have to work with what's available unless you build your own.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: SA vs PA and other pedantic nonsense...
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2013 7:04 pm 
reload
User avatar

Location: Hamburg
Service Number: A03/TQ3.0.12136E1
Country: Germany
Just my thoughts:

So what do you have when you have a pretty close to SA costume that fits and can survive a Con or an AirSoft gaming event,
but you have a name tag "Allen", "Peters", <ENTER YOUR Name here>, ...?

I read a couple of times statements like "... we are not the 501st".
I think this is good as deviations can be good.

Personally I prefer a parade with "Allen", "Peters“ ... instead of 100 versions of the "Hudson" theme.

In this regard I’m looking forward to DagonCon independent of the number of “Hudson” costumes.

Frank

_________________
Sgt. Frank Peters 'reload' Smartgun Operator
A03/TQ3.0.12136E1 "It will be no picknick!"
AL Colonial Admin. - Sergeant at Arms (SgtA) -- 2020-2022
GERCM - Executive Officer (XO)
UKCM Foreign Legion: The Deviant Dragoons


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2013 7:38 pm 
User avatar

Location: Manchester
Country: United Kingdom
The way I see it is if you want to go screen accurate and can afford it. Then that's fine, by all means please do so. ( And ignore the daggers of jealousy that I aim at you. :) ) If you can't and have to make do with non accurate items. Then that's fine too. As long as it looks like you're part of the Aliens universe then i'm more than ok with that.

Just because you don't look 'exactly' like somebody out of the film doesn't mean you couldn't be someone else in the same universe on a different ship or planet. If your stuff doesn't look exactly right then who's to say it isn't a different issue. Look at the US Jungle boots. How many different versions of those are there? They were all issued and were all in service. But they're all different. Who's to say your stuff isn't the same.

Myself. I'm going with the "Get what I can afford and replace it with more accurate stuff as time goes on" method. And it'll be unique to 'me'. I'm not one of the film actors so even if my outfit was a 100% exact match with those in the film I still wouldn't be screen accurate as i'm not the person who should be wearing it. It would be different if the outfit was fully enclosed but the Aliens outfits weren't.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2013 8:06 pm 
User avatar

Location: Minneapolis, MN
Service Number: A02/TQ0.0.52138E1
Country: United States
So far, everyone sounding off here is pretty much on the same page. At least, there are WAY more similarities of opinion than differences. Ooo-rah!

Though I'm fairly new here, I've been involved in lots of other fandom and cosplay groups, and I can tell you that maintaining that sort of attitude will go a long way towards keeping this fun and friendly for all.

I love obsessing about little screen-accurate details for stuff I might hang on the wall, but for heavy con-duty, I'd MUCH rather err on the side of durability and functionality. My favourite stuff to cosplay is military themed sci-fi because the uniforms are so damn practical. I LOVE having pockets and comfortable footwear. In the real world, you absolutely need to have a con badge, a room key, an ID, cash, smokes, several flasks of bourbon, condoms, bail money, ibuprofen, etc. Try doing that with a Spiderman bodysuit!

For con purposes, a good "10 footer" costume (meaning it's immediately recognizable from 10 feet away) is absolutely fantastic, and if you get closer and see lots of accurate details it's just fluff for conversation and for earning hero points.

And other than a few really iconic costumes (like the AWESOME Ripley-carrying-Newt last year) I think it's way cooler and way more fun to personalize stuff a bit. Like a previous poster said, we don't need 10 Hudsons. I'd rather have my own name or callsign or forum name or whatever on my gear.

Also consider that you can easily be "universe accurate" without being truly "screen accurate." Maybe the boots are little different, maybe your fictional unit had slightly different patches, etc. Know what I mean?

And more importantly, I can't wait to personalize my Spat armor, Matsucorp PR, and Horpat BDU/CCUs when they come! Let's rock!!!!

_________________
-Jeff


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2013 8:34 pm 
Proceed on a 2-1-6...
User avatar

Location: Sunny Sussex
Service Number: A02/TQ2.0.52141E1
Country: United Kingdom
I agree that it's good for people to go as 'themselves' name wise, or another EU name if they fancy it... Rather than kick the backside out of a screen used name... But again, each to their own... It's their money.

Personally, my dog tags are made to me... My armour labels are on order (for my soon to be ordered spanky SPAT screen cammo armour and helmet). Even though the helmet will have a cover on it, it'll still be stencil sprayed underneath - I'll know it's there)... I've got MARSHALL name tapes made up for my BDUs... The BDUs I'll be buying will be SPAT ones... The HORPAT ones aren't made in my tall size... And I can't get MAA ones... When Chef makes some BDUs, I'll be in line for those ones as well...

I know there is much debate about the attitude of the Marines in the film as opposed to the current day USMC... A mix of ranks... Etc... And no reference to formal radio chatter (use of actual this, that and the other that appears in the A:CM game)... I could go on...

To me, the USCM is an amalgamation of many service arms... The airborne... The Army... The Marines... All rolled into one... Because the shifting needs and demands of modern (futuristic) warfare and the changes of needs and demands on a future armed military service... Just look at the way the British Army has changed with regiments ceasing to exist overnight... Could anyone imagine 50 years ago the Black Watch being amalgamated? Any regiment with colours and a proud tradition for that matter. Who is to say the Marines will be immune to such a change in the future? They are called the Colonial Marines... Not just the Marines. They've bandied about combining the Paras and the Marines in the UK in the past. We all choked on that... But who is to say it'll never happen? The British Army (forces) of 2013 look nothing like the British Army of 1991... Or 82... Etc etc... And 2179 is a long way off...

The USCM are over-confident in their technology and ability and kit... Discipline is different... When deployed (out on the SULACO) the scope for 'in-theatre' type adaptations to kit is open with little in the way of formal bullsh*t... And the formalities if home are a long way away. I have no problem with the attitude and kit of the USCM as portrayed - it's fiction... It's very Vietnam like...

I hope this all makes sense...

_________________
A02/TQ2.0.52141E1

"Errr... Roger that's a 2-1-6..."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next



You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron