ALL SCI-FI

[Krel]

[Bud Brewster]

________________________________

Very impressive analysis of the situation, David!

Shame on me, however, for forgetting all about the host of hostages who were not only abducted, they spent time inside the spaceship — something which Carlson didn't get to do.

Your comment about the alien's carcass in the water supply ties in beautifully with my remark about the possibility of dangerous organisms being released during an autopsy, and it takes it a step further by pointing out that the organism might already be in the environment.

Bravo!

Your analysis of the hand weapon's impact on our technology is equally impressive, both in the way you described the difficulties in reverse engineering it and the various applications the technology might have.

A digging tool! Wow! The scene where Alien/Barbara cuts a gash across the wall of the mine certainly demonstrated the weapon's abilities in that area.

You pointed out that the only casualties were the two aliens (Alien/Barbara Rush and Alien/Joe Sawyer). The first alien died because Carlson defended himself during an attack, but the second one died after being shot repeatedly by a murderous mob, causing the truck to crash and burn.

The government would rightly be concerned that the conduct of the Sand Rock, AZ, citizens might cause the aliens to view mankind as dangerous (which is true) and retaliate in some manner.

We know that the aliens are presented as very peaceful, but the government didn't get to know them like the audience did, so there would be a great deal of paranoia about alien invasion, I think.

That, of course, would figure prominently in the drama when a sequel is made.
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)

[Pow]

Watching this fine film the other night on MeTV's Svengoolie I was startled by the opening of the movie.

It had no pre-credits! That was unheard of for movies in the 50s,& all the films prior to the 50s.

[Bud Brewster]

________________________________

You're absolutely right! In fact, IMDB mentions this in their trivia section.

This was one of the few American movies from the 1950s to place its credits at the end rather than at the beginning.
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)

[Gord Green]

Part of the reason why the credits were moved to the end rather than the beginning of the film was because of union requirements for extended credits for all union members to be included.

Look at any film today and see the loooong list of EVERY union member in the credits and you can understand why if placed at the beginning would send most audience members screaming to the lobby!

Plus they'd forget what movie they went to see in the first place!

[orzel-w]

The first movie I recall seeing the endless roll of film credits on was the original Star Wars.
_________________
...or not...

WayneO
-----------

[orzel-w]

[orzel-w]

[Bud Brewster]

________________________________

I must not be clear on what you're describing, Wayne. What seems to be shattering is the spaceship prop, not the mirror (although I'm sure the mirror shattered, too).

But what appears to be visible are broken fragments of the translucent glass which were held in place by the framework with the hexagonal sections — and we also see portions of the framework itself which have broken away from the sphere.

The biggest portion is at the bottom of the jpeg below (the fourth arrow).





It looks as if the explosion we see at this moment was actually caused by a detonation inside the sphere, blasting the spaceship prop apart.
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)

[orzel-w]

You're saying you can tell from an out-of-focus prop and a shattering mirror which pieces belong to the prop and which to the mirror? They typically let the approaching object (a train, a meteor, etc.) shatter the mirror. If they could stop the approaching object on a dime, they wouldn't need to film it reflected in a mirror. That's the whole point of the setup.

And what translucent glass? That's an open lattice to let the sparks out. (You wouldn't be able to see any interior details through translucent glass either.)

You do understand the setup here, right? The mirror is mounted at 45° to the camera axis. The meteor/spaceship prop moves from right to left toward the mirror on a path 90↑° to the camera's axis. Visually the prop appears to be heading straight into the camera, and is allowed to run right through the mirror.



This type of shot is normally edited to end just before the prop (rather than its reflection) enters the camera's field of view from the side. But in this case the shot extended through the passage of the prop all the way past the camera, showing the mirror shattering.

_________________
...or not...

WayneO
-----------

[Krel]

[Bud Brewster]

________________________________

Well, dang me, I've finally got it straight, Wayne.

What had me so confused was that I didn't really know what you meant when you said "What we're seeing here is the meteor/spaceship prop crossing in front of the camera from the right as it collides with the mirror."

I understand now, but I didn't know that in addition to the reflection of the sphere racing towards the mirror, we see the actual sphere in that last instant as it streaks across the frame from right to left and smashes the mirror.

You described it perfectly, but somehow I misunderstood and came up with all that crap about the sphere itself smashing, and then the pieces of it and the mirror flying around, etc, etc.

It's a clear case of the "cyclorama syndrome" again (a reference only you will get, I'm afraid. )

Anyway, now that I've got all that straightened out, can you explain why there appears to be a second mirror showing on the left side in the original footage before it was "fixed" for the DVD?

(Corrected shot from the DVD)





(Original shot from the VHS tape and the trailer)





I know that your diagram of the method used to make the shot of the burning sphere is accurate, but I've never understood why there seems to be an image of another mirror IN the reflection caused by the mirror in your diagram!

Help me, Obi Wayne Orlicki! You're my only hope!
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)

[Maurice]

There's something odd going on in that shot. If it's a mirror as suggested it's reflecting some other piece of glass reflecting the same model. But wait a sec... the film was originally shot in 3D, so I wonder if that reflection is of some other element set up for shooting the other eye for the 3D process?

The ball sure looks like it's hanging from a hook.

The Wikipedia entry of the film quotes the DVD Commentary by film historian Tom Weaver commentary as claiming "The special effects created for the in-flight alien spacecraft consisted of a wire-mounted iron ball, with hollowed out 'windows,' with burning magnesium inside." Not certain how accurate this is, though.

The same source reinforces the note upthread about the Metaluna Mutant design originating in this film, as per, "Universal's make-up department submitted two alien designs for consideration by studio executives; the rejected design was saved and then later used as the 'Metaluna Mutant' in Universal's 1955 science fiction film This Island Earth."

There's a nice, brief writeup on the film at TCM: http://www.tcm.com/tcmdb/title/79482/It-Came-from-Outer-Space/articles.html
_________________
* * *
"The absence of limitations is the enemy of art."
― Orson Welles

[Bud Brewster]

________________________________

I've discovered a clue which I'm hoping we can use to figure out this strange mystery.

The phantom mirror is not visible at all until the last instant, then it comes into view like a ghost. Oddly enough, the phantom mirror on the left is not visible at all until the light from the approaching sphere increases the light level near the mirror which the camera is facing!

These screen shots were made only a fraction of a second apart. Notice how the phantom mirror has just started to appear in the first one, and it materializes progressively as the light from sphere brightens during its approach.









Suddenly I realized that this reminded me of the way a two-way mirror works, the type used in police interrogation rooms. It only allows objects which are located behind it to be visible if the light on the other side is bright enough to compete with the reflection caused by the light in front of it.

I'm not sure if my modified version of Wayne's diagram below is done correctly, but it shows a second mirror behind the main one. The increasing brightness of the light on the set (as the burning ball got closer to the main mirror) briefly allowed us to see the second mirror by looking right through the main one.

I have no idea WHY there would a second mirror behind the main one, but what we see in the trailer, when examined closely, seems to suggest there was. So, we're not seeing a reflection of it in the main mirror, we're seeing it right through the glass of the main mirror when the light gets bright enough.





___________ It Came From Outer Space - trailer


__________
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)

[Maurice]

One other oddity. As the second reflection passes in the ghost mirror it looks as if you might be seeing the supporting hook in profile, whereas the main image is head-on. Regardless, whatever this ghost mirror is, the image of the ship on it looks probably perpendicular to the path of the sphere, not in-line with it.

Studying these frames I'm not seeing any background shift at the moment the ball hits the mirror, nor in the reflected ghost image, which leads me to suspect the mirror was half-silvered all right, allowing the camera to see through it to the painted backdrop straight ahead AND the model coming at said mirror at the right-angle.

I believe many 3D films of the time were shot with two cameras, so, again, this might be an artifact of the setup for that. Hell, it might be artifact of the prism used in some 3D cameras.

Barring that, perhaps they were doing a two-fer here, with two beam splitters and two cameras to get the shot from two different angles, but caught a reflection of the second mirror setup as the model passed in front of it.
_________________
* * *
"The absence of limitations is the enemy of art."
― Orson Welles