At least according to the IMDb he is.
I had no idea. I sincerely thought he died years ago, and have long since come to terms with it. Still, it’s good to know he’s still out there. The man’s a genius.
Still alive, but mostly retired for years since Clash Of The Titans.
He turns up in documentaries about sci-fi and fantasy films quite often, naturally, since he had such a huge role in their history as well as being an influence and inspiration to many who came after him even though movie special effects have shifted away from his particular craft, stop-motion animation. And he has reached the stage of life where you are more likely to see him accepting lifetime achievement awards rather than taking part in too many new projects.
I still prefer to watch Jason And The Argonauts instead of most of the CGI-laden sci-fi and fantasy movies that have come down the pike since he retired. I get a little shiver every time during the appearance of the skeleton warriors, especially just before they attack, that I don’t get from other scenes from other films. That’s effective (or even affective) use of special effects in my book.
God, yes. My friends all look at me a little funny because of all the old Harryhausen films lining my shelves (slight exageration), but I really do think they stand up well to much of the current crop of movies. Particularly Jason and the Argonauts and the Sinbad flicks.
As the IMDB entry notes, he recently worked with a couple of young filmmakers , helping them finish up his old stop-motion version of The Tortoise and the Hare. It was just released last year, and I saw it on cable.
I’ve known he was alive. I tried to send him a book , using an address I found on an internet site. But I never received any acknowledgment that it was received.
I wanted to ask about that as well. Is “the Tortoise and the Hare” any good? It would be especially nice to see it lined up against the upcoming “Tortoise vs. Hare” Aardman film.
Which, I now see, isn’t slated until 2005. Hate to hijack my own thread, but what exactly went wrong there?
RH on PJ re-doing King Kong:
http://www.empireonline.co.uk/news/news.asp?story=4910
I thought WETA invited RH to speak to reward themselves for the FOTR FX Oscar, but I can’t find an article on it.
Brian
Turner Classic Movies did a tribute to Harryhausen not too many months ago, so I knew he was alive as of then, and have not heard otherwise since.
My favorite creation of his is the Ymir, the cute little (and growing ever larger) lizardy guy in 20 Million Miles to Earth. The Ymir has such lovely, fluid, natural motion, and a personality, and he has my sympathies all through the movie.
The IMDB lists only locations in Italy for the filming of Jason and the Argonauts. But when I was in Greece some years ago I visited a fortress perched on a high rock over the sea, and the scene with the skeletons kept jumping into my mind. I convinced myself that the scene had been filmed there, though I’ve never seen any evidence to back me up. The town is called Navlion (spellings will vary), and it’s close to Mycenae.
Can anyone confirm or refute this?
Bravo, widdershins.
The first time I saw that scene as a child it scared the absolute bejeebers out of me. It stands tall among the most consumate stop-action animation scenes in filmdom. Harryhausen’s legacy is one of true cinematic art. While King Kong climbs The Empire State Building, you can see the wind blowing across his rippling fur. This was done by combing the clay in various directions every few frames. It is this sort of attention to detail that makes the man a living master.
I’m also very happy to see Nick Park and his Aardman clan mentioned here. Park is heir apparent to the throne of claymation. His work is simply light-years ahead of most everything else.
Harryhausen and Willis O’Brien (his mentor and inspiration, and the guy who gave life to King Konbg) were masters of the art, but this bit of detail is probably fortuitous. As Goldner and Turner note in their excellent book The Making of King Kong, the King was covered in rabbit fur that, for some reason, retained the direction the fur had last been brushed it. The animators discovered this, to their horror, during the rushes. One studio exec was watching, however, and noted the changing direction of the fur. He reportedly said “Kong is sure angry. Look at his fur bristle!” So they left it in.
By the time they made Mighty Joe Young they were able to get the kind of fur they wanted, which wouldn’t retain that effect. If you watch MJY closesly, you can see the difference.
When they made an “Energizer” battery commercial several years ago, I’m told that they actually used a Kong puppet, although it looked really good, and matched the appearance of the old film. I heard that they got the “bristling” effect there by actually using air jets to move the fur.
As for Parks and Aardman studios, I agree that they’re goodm, and I love Wallace and Gromit (and Chicken Run. But “Claymation” is a registered trademark of Will Vinton and co. I’d love to see more of their stuff. Much as I like Parks’ work, I liked Vinton’s more. His The Adventures of Mark Twain is, as I’ve maintained before on the SDMB, a regretfully unrecognized masterpiece. Vinton’s pallette was considerably brighter than Parks’ muted look. (Vinton did the “California Raisins”, the Domino’s Pizza “Noid”, the special effects in Return to Oz, and the music video “Vantz Can’t Dance”, with the wonderful dancing pig, among a great many other things. They also did the forgettable “Gary and Mike” and “The PJs”).
QUOTE]*Originally posted by Zenster *
**Harryhausen’s legacy is one of true cinematic art. While King Kong climbs The Empire State Building, you can see the wind blowing across his rippling fur. This was done by combing the clay in various directions every few frames. It is this sort of attention to detail that makes the man a living master.
I’m also very happy to see Nick Park and his Aardman clan mentioned here. Park is heir apparent to the throne of claymation. His work is simply light-years ahead of most everything else. **
[/QUOTE]
Only because the Boards are ostensibly about fighting ignorance, not spreading it more thinly…
-
Ray Harryhausen never worked on King Kong.
-
The King Kong figure was not made of clay. The fur was fur, or something very like fur.
-
A light year is a unit of distance, not time.
Back in June, during the last Seattle International Film Festival, I got to see Harryhausen in person. He was there with his freshly completed Tortoise and the Hare, which we were privileged to see projected on the big screen; we’re one of the only audiences in the world to be so favored. He did Q&A for an hour, talking about how he started, his various techniques, his favorite creations (which include the Ymir, you’ll be happy to know, Miss Mapp), and more. Plus — and this is where I almost fainted in sheer cinematic joy — he brought one of the original ‘Jason’ skeletons with him. It was about a foot high, and quite fragile, but he wanted us to see it. And then we got to see Jason and the Argonauts on the big screen.
All in all, it’s probably in my top thirty moviegoing experiences in my life. You can all touch me now. 
Irrelevant. Either way, the statement makes sense. Substitute other words, if you don’t believe me.
The original statement was this:
His work is simply light-years ahead of most everything else.
Try this:
His work is simply miles ahead of most everything else. (Figuratively speaking, of course.)
Or this:
His work is simply years ahead of most everything else.
Actually, the “distance” one makes more sense in this context.
Hijack over. I only brought it up “because the Boards are ostensibly about fighting ignorance”. 
Not only is he alive, he seems quite well.
I was fortunate enough to meet him at the H2H film festival in Kansas City a couple of weeks ago. He even had the original skeleton from The Seventh Voyage of Sinbad with him! I almost cried!
He was there three days and remembered me each day. I have long hair and a long beard so he called me Rasputin.
FTR, Ray Harryhausen was born in 1920. The first King Kong movie was released in 1933.
Also, as much as I love Harryhausen’s work and consider the man a genius, stop motion has never looked all that much more realistic to me than CGI. It looks incredible, but there’s never any doubt when watching one of RH’s old Sinbad films as to what was done with props and makeup, and what was done with stop-motion. Same with CGI. Jar-Jar Binks gets a lot of shit, and deservedly so, but mostly because of the poor writing and design that went into the character. From a technical standpoint, he was as realistic as anything Harryhausen ever did.
I fully expect to be pilloried for those remarks, but such is life.
You realize, of course, that by titling this thread like you’ve done, you’ve just sealed his fate. He’ll be dead before the year’s out. I’m only kind of kidding. It always seems to work like that.
I saw Sinbad for the first time a few years ago, and when I was watching it, I suddenly said, “Hey! There’s the shot that explains why there was a canyon in the Death Star!” It’s a shame in his pursuit of all things technological that Lucas has forgotten the kinds of films that inspired him. Obviously, Harryhausen never has.
Yeah, I thought about that. I hereby solemnly unjinx this thread, though.