WHAT IS THE NEXT STEP IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF ANIMATRONIC DESIGN IN THE ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY?

MICHAEL LLOYD

Extended Project Qualification Question 2017-2018

INTRODUCTION AND CONTENTS

DEFINING THE AUDIO ANIMATRONIC, STATING IT’S PURPOSE AND IT’S ROLE IN THE WORLD

The key feature of an animatronic which sets it aside from what we consider ‘robotic’ technology is the effect it has on people and how they are viewed in our society. I have chosen two robots, one fictional and one operating in the real world in order to address the issue of defining an animatronic

Figure. 1 KUKA 6 axis CNC robotic arm used in industrial Figure.2 R2-D2, a fictional Astromec Service processes such as milling, assembly and manufacture. droid appearing in the Star Wars films.

Image credit: KUKA Aktiengesellschaft Image credit: Sideshow Collectibles.com

Case Studies a and b: KUKA industrial robot and R2 -D2

On the surface, these ‘robots’ both serve similar goals. KUKA produces UK based industrial manufacture robotics which serve a number of different industries in order to complete given tasks and processes with a higher level of accuracy and speed to a human being Fig 1. Within the Star Wars canon, R2-D2 Fig 2 serves a similar purpose yet his design and personality is far removed from the sleek efficiency of service ‘droids’ in our reality

The reason which sets the robots of Star Wars far apart our own is the simple fact that, in a fictional setting, characters are designed to entertain audiences and explore new worlds. The priority to bring personality to a robot far outshines the need for R2-D2 to be entirely functional and efficient. As well as his appealingly stout, rounded shape, this droid also possesses a number of very human traits:

 The Voice: A collection of beeps and whistles programmed by sound designer Ben Burtt, who describes R2’s ‘voice’ as “a very human sounds (mixed) with the electronic sound. That way we’d have the character of a machine with the personality and emotion of a living organism”  The Movement: Despite being a primarily radio controlled (RC) , R2 was also puppeteered by actor Kenny Baker, who added a very strong

human aspect to the robot’s movements on screen Fig. 3 R2D2 Fan art

Love for the robots of Star Wars and other Science Fiction movies is most prominent Image credit: HillaryWhiteRabbit online, where an infinite amount of loving art and media created by fans Fig 3 is still DeviantArt.com being created to this day. The ‘R2-D2 builders club’ contains over 7000 active members and with the release of new Star Wars movies by the Company, R2 has found a purpose in our lives which has no relation to his intended function within the Star Wars canon

This is where the core purpose of an animatronic begins to develop. The definition you could conclude using the example of R2D2 could be:

A robot designed to prioritise personality over functionality

However, as you will see within the following case studies, there are a multitude of non-robotic characters and creatures in film and media. However these characters fall under the category of animatronics because of their purpose and role within our lives I have created this definition:

An animatronic is a character, designed specifically to create the illusion of life through computer technology or human input (such as puppetry)

As for the purpose of animatronics, we can once again conclude from our first two case studies that:

The purpose of an animatronic is to bring fantastical worlds and concepts into reality and create an appeal for characters which would otherwise not be noticed by an audience.

Within this project, I hope to use a number of case studies to explore the following:

1. The early developments of the fundamental aspects of animatronic design Case study: Pierre Jaquet-Droz’s ‘The writer’ automata 2. The development of audio animatronics by for the theme park industry Case studies: Walt Disney’s Enchanted Tiki room and Great moments with Mr. Lincoln 3. The development of animatronics by Stan Winston studios for the film industry Case study: Jurassic Park 4. The use of live puppetry by and Frank Oz Case studies: Little Shop of Horrors’ Audrey 2 and

Following these case studies, I will explore the modern state of special effects and puppetry and suggest the next logical step in the development of animatronic design within the entertainment industry, resulting in a proposal and review of my initial definitions for animatronics and their purpose.

PART 1: PIERRE JAQUET-DROZ

THE EARLY DEVELOPMENTS OF THE FUNDEMENTAL ASPECTS OF ANIMATRONICS AND THE GOLDEN AGE OF AUTOMATA

Before the Walt Disney Company developed the technology for modern audio animatronics, concepts and ideas relating heavily to the ethos of the purpose I proposed in the introduction.

Since the time of the ancient Greeks, the concept of creating the illusion of life has been a prominent field of exploration for engineers and artists alike however the biggest demand of automata came from nobles and rulers, who would employ skilled artists and engineers to build moving status symbols. As Mad Museum states in their history of automata:

“They felt that these wonders of mechanics increased their armoury of influence. Inventors were only too happy to indulge the wishes of their rulers”

It was not until the work of Pierre Jaquet-Droz, that automata began to enter the public eye and begin a long transition from the stuff of legend, to a part of many people’s daily entertainment.

Case Study 1: The Writer (1774)

The writer Fig 1 was one of three major automata built by Pierre Jaquet-Droz and his family in 1770s . As a watchmaker, Pierre used his automata as a way of advertising his craft and his skill. The automata would tour Europe, marvelling audiences with their complex motion and intricate design.

This was one of the first instances of a creator building an automata purely for their own gain and for the entertainment of a much wider audience. It could be seen the spark for the ‘Golden age of Automata’ in which Clockwork sculptures began to become widely available to the emerging middle class. With the height of the industrial revolution looming, Jaquet-Droz was ahead of his time in the field of automata and sealed it as a means of entertainment for the masses.

The Writer is an entirely self-contained character, meaning that all of its mechanical technology is neatly packed into its own interior, unlike earlier ‘writing’ automata which would sit on a large box full of clockwork. Later animatronic technology would attempt to follow this trend for years to come as it encouraged a more efficient use of space and an overall more impressive and transportable product.

The small boy sits at a wooden desk, armed with a quill, ink-well and a piece of paper. After activation, the arm and head of the boy begin to move and, after dipping his quill in the ink well, would write a name, phrase or image on the paper. On the surface, the mechanical technology needed to complete such a task sounds simple but the most revolutionary part of this automaton is that it can theoretically write an infinite range of words and draw an infinite number of pictures because Jaque-Droz designed the character to be programmable. This predates programmable computer technology by almost 50 years.

By selecting particular letters and shapes from a number of cams, the programming wheel of the boy can be filled out and as he writes, the wheel is turned and recognised by the clockwork. Each cam on the wheel relates to a particular ‘pre-programmed’ movement which is located on a central column where a spine would be. The use of customisable programming technology is another aspect of animatronics which was later adopted by the Disney Company and is still in use today.

The Writer, in my opinion, represents three fundamental aspects of the ethos of animatronics:

 Public appearance – relating to the ‘audience’ aspect of what I discussed in the introduction  Entirely Internal structure – The compact nature of The Writer’s technology  Programmable – A feature commonplace in modern animatronic technology

Although there is no proof that The Writer directly influences companies like the Walt Disney Company and Stan Winston Studios, it is evident that Jaquet-Droz’s work was a milestone in the development of the ethos and technology behind animatronic technology.

Figure 1 the writer. The use of a small boy as the character emphasises the Figure 2 the mechanical interior of the automata. Highlighted are the compact nature of the clockwork inside customisable programming wheel and pre-programmed ‘spine’ of data

Image credit: Jaquet Droz.com Image credit: Jaquet Droz.com

PART 2: WALT DISNEY STUDIOS

THE DEVELOPMENTOF AUDIO ANIMATRONICS BY THE WALT DISNEY COMPANY FOR THE THEME PARK INDUSTRY

The Walt Disney Company is regarded as the inventor of the modern animatronic, known, in full, as ‘Audio Animatronics’. The name is a contraction of three key technologies: 1) Audio – Characters are synchronised with sound and dialogue. 2) Animation – a specialty of Disney, being at the forefront of 2D animation techniques at the time. 3) Electronics – As opposed to clockwork and puppetry, animatronics use only electrical power to operate. Whilst these concepts may seem to be obvious to a modern day engineer, it was the Disney company who brought these technologies together first in order to bring life to characters in film and their theme parks.

Case Study 2: Walt Disney’s Enchanted Tiki Room (1963)

The Tiki room was designed to transport guests into a new world in the form of Polynesian culture. Contextually, exploration of different cultures was a relatively new avenue of entertainment for Disney; it would be a number of decades before Disney would begin to embrace more culturally diverse theming in movies. My point is that The Tiki Room was ahead of its time in its approach to transporting guests to another world, a key feature of the purpose of animatronics. The original show was the first to feature audio animatronic characters. This broke new ground in the field of entertainment and the company was keen to show it off before a single guest even enters the attraction. A 1930s style ‘Barker’ bird named José Fig 2 would move about on a perch above the Tiki Room entrance, encouraging guests into the attraction with short audio clips synchronised with his movements. Guests new to the technology would be instantly drawn into the pre-show garden where a number of simpler animatronics of different Tiki

Gods introduce themselves Fig 3. These animatronics use fire, water and audio animatronic movement to introduce guests to Polynesian culture and also present the technology in a very raw format. Guests then enter the ten minute floor show inside the attraction. The show uses 225 unique animatronic birds, flowers, totems and drummers Fig 1, all of which accompany a musical revue including music written by the legendary Sherman Brothers, who would go on to write the soundtrack to ‘Mary Poppins’ (1964), the first movie to contain an audio animatronic in the form of a small robin perched on Julie Andrews’ finger. The birds in the Tiki room were pneumatic, meaning they moved using pressurised air valves and cylinders. A common criticism of this technology in animatronics is that it gives characters very stiff and fast movements. It could be argued however that in the Tiki Room’s case, Fast and sharp movements play to the advantage of birds, which possess a similar style of movement in reality. Disney would later move to hydraulic technology, which I will explore in the following case study. The Tiki room was also pre-programmed and controlled from an external room, relating back to the Jaquet-Droz style of programmable characters. The show itself saw a number of thematic changes over the years which was made possible by the programmable nature of the attraction. Figure 1 The Tiki Room interior. Animatronics surround the guests on all sides, truly immersing the audience into an enchanted world of music and culture Image credit: easyWDW.com

Figure 2 Walt Disney and the original 'Barker Bird'. The size of the birds made their movements Figure 3 Pele, the Tiki God of volcanos. A character which uses especially impressive as they are too small to be manually puppetiered by hand live fire effects, much to the surprise of unsuspecting guests

Image credit: Disney Dispatch/Flickr Image credit: Elaskay - Flickr

Case Study 3: Great Moments with Mr. Lincoln (1964)

Lincoln remains a key milestone in the development of audio animatronics as he was the first humanoid character to be produced using the technologies we most associate with modern animatronics. Unlike the Tiki room, Great

Moments with Mr. Lincoln premiered at the New York World’s fair Fig 2, an Expo designed to showcase the technological achievements of nations around the world. Because of this, the attraction was much more ‘American’ than the Tiki room and drew attention to the spectacle of the technology rather than using it purely for the enjoyment of guests. The key differences between the Tiki room and Lincoln were as follows:

 Lincoln was a recreation of a real historical figure, making his appearance more open to scrutiny  The attraction was much more calm, relying purely on the performance of the character rather than the sound and lighting design  The Lincoln animatronic was hydraulic (using liquid rather than air to control his movements)

The benefits of hydraulic movement included more control over the movements and positioning of the character, a more fluid motion more akin to humans than pneumatic technology and a greater load bearing strength to the character. Lincoln began his performance sat down and stands up to speak, much to the appreciation of the audience Fig 1. A downside to hydraulics which is evident in Lincoln is that the gentle and flowing movements of the characters look somewhat unrealistic, as if the characters are suspended underwater.

Regardless, the use of hydraulic movement was quickly adopted by Disney as their main way of bringing life to characters. The method remained the same throughout the majority of Disney characters such as on the Pirates of the Caribbean’ ride (1967) and more recently the ‘Na’vi River Journey’ at Disney’s animal kingdom (2017) Fig 4. Lisa Girolami, executive producer at WDI (Walt Disney Imagineering), sums up this point very well in an online interview regarding the newest animatronics at Disney:

“There’s a direct line connecting Mr. Lincoln in the Hall of Presidents, the characters in Pirates of the Caribbean, and the Na’vi. We're just learning upon learning upon learning with that technology, but the key is we don't stop until that technology can't be seen”

This quotation truly emphasises the importance of the Lincoln animatronic. He is the starting point of all later Disney animatronics and every character created after him has been a variation and evolution of the same technologies. Stan Winston studios and other special effects companies would adopt the same techniques in film and television a few years later and to this day, developments are being made to make the technology ‘invisible’.

Unlike the Tiki room, which has seen little change through the years, Lincoln’s legacy can be seen in Disney’s Hall of Presidents, which features an ever growing number of animatronic presidents shown together in a ten minute show at Liberty Square in the Magic Kingdom. Every new president to feature in the show clearly shows how far the company has come in the realism of their characters and the fulfilment of my purpose of animatronics from the introduction Fig 3.

Figure 4: The three key animatronic based attractions mentioned in this case study, Lincoln, Pirates of the Caribbean and the Na’vi river journey. Whilst on the surface, these characters appear similar, the technology behind their movements and expression has continued to grow and improve

Image credit:s Junkyardwisdom.com, D23.com and Disney.go.com Figure 1: Lincoln as he appears at . Note the chair from which the animatronic stands up from during the show

Image credit: Jon Fiedler

Figure 2: The original Lincoln Figure 3: The newest Hall of Presidents show as of 2018, featuring the new animatronic Donald Trump. I was interested animatronic which premiered at the to find that the distinct character of the current US president was certainly dulled down and made more appealing for New York World’s fair. You can clearly public audiences, causing a number of controversial arguments about censorship and Disney’s tendency to redesign see the extent of the mechanisms history to better suit their brand. I am content with the changes made as it serves to ‘create an appeal to a character’ in housed within his body accordance with my pre-defined purpose of animatronic design.

Image credit: DigitalDisneyWorld.com Image credit: Screen capture from WDW Magic video ‘Donald Trump audio-animatronic figure at the new Hall of Presidents’

PART 3: STAN WINSTON STUDIOS

THE DEVELOPMENT OF ANIMATRONIC DESIGN AND CONTROL IN THE FILM INDUSTRY

Stan Winston was a revolutionary figure in the entertainment industry, starting in make-up and moving on to animatronics as the technology became available to the film industry. Whilst the use of hydraulics and self- contained characters are similar to the work of Disney, Stan Winston studios began to experiment with forms of live puppetry and truly pushed the technology to its limits with the largest animatronic character in the world at the time of its debut:

Case Study 4: Rexy – Jurassic Park (1993)

Winston’s twenty foot tall T-rex was featured as the central attraction in Steven Spielberg’s ‘Jurassic Park’ (1993) alongside an array of computer generated and live puppeteered dinosaur characters. The dinosaur, lovingly nicknamed ‘Rexy’ was partially shown in CGI (Computer generated imagery) for parts of the film, however the technology was still too limited to animate the entire cast of Dinosaurs so many practical techniques were implemented during filming Fig 1.

Rexy was built over eighteen weeks, artists first a life size clay T-rex using reference from ornithology and fossil records, then moulded the skin in rubber and wrapped it around a hydraulic ‘skeleton’ Fig 2. The technology had been tried and tested in the theme park industry but Stan Winston’s team was revolutionary in the scale and operation of the dinosaur. The studio opted for the use of hydraulics in order to maintain a level of control over the character, which was fully capable of doing a similar amount of damage as an actual dinosaur. The movements were also overseen by renowned sop motion animator Phil Tippett and Palaeontologist Jack Horner, which further added to the realism of the movements of the character.

The key difference however between Rexy and Disney’s Lincoln was the method of control and programming. Normally, an animatronic will be controlled by a desk of ‘sliders’ which each controlled an independent movement of the character such as a lip or an arm. These movements would be programmed so the character repeats the motions inputted by the programmer at the push of a button. Winston disliked the slider controls, as Richard Landon (one of the crew on Jurassic Park) stated:

“There was nothing intuitive about moving these sliders up and down, nothing that directly related to the movement of the T-rex”

Having worked primarily in make-up and puppetry during his earlier career, Winston was used to an actor or being able to directly input the movements of a character in relation to their own body. Because of this, the studio devised a 1/5th scale armature of the full sized animatronic which could be moved and positioned on a small scale, then the same movements could be mimicked in the full sized animatronic Fig 3. This element of live puppetry meant that shooting the T-rex was incredibly simple. The team would program the movements in real time on the small scale model, then just push a button and Rexy would spring into life with much more realism than any animatronic which was programmed by sliders, as is evident in many modern Disney characters which still use this method.

As will become clear in later case studies, puppetry is a very important aspect of animatronic design because it encourages a direct relationship between the programmer and the performing character. It also encourages personality in the character created as it tends to reflect the character of the puppeteer.

Figure 1: Rexy towers over the set of Jurassic Park. Acting alongside characters such as this was made all the easier by the realism of the character

Image credit: g33k-e.com

Figure 2: Sculpting the clay dinosaur, extensive research into real animals were implemented in the creation of all the dinosaurs in the movie, making the dinosaurs more akin to actual animals than the classic monsters of B-movies

Image credit: Imgrum

Figure 3: The armature used to animate the animatronic. The ‘live input’ method would later be used in animating the CGI dinosaurs in post-production as the majority of animators were more comfortable manipulating a real model rather than an onscreen character which Phil Tippett compared to ‘animating with boxing gloves on’

Image credit: The Winston effect (book scan)

PART 4: HENSON AND OZ: PUPPETRY

THE USE OF LIVE PUPPETRY IN FILM AND ITS ADVANTAGES OVER MECHANICAL AND ELECTRONICLY OPERATED ANIMATRONIC

The works of Jim Henson and Frank Oz are regarded as the pinnacle of puppetry in media and I chose to include their work not because of the complexity of the technology but more the effect it has on audiences. I feel that many modern animatronics could learn from the character and personality that Oz and Henson bring to their characters

Case Study 5: Audrey 2 – Little Shop of Horrors (1986)

Frank Oz is best known for his work on The Muppet Show alongside Henson, however his creation of Audrey ii, the room-sized man-eating plant of Little Shop of Horrors is by far one of his most ambitious and impressive works

Audrey 2 is a technical marvel, stunning even modern audiences who have grown accustomed to large monster characters being depicted in CGI technology. The puppet was built to be an entirely practical character with no

CGI since the technology required to do so was still in its infancy. The result was a gargantuan plant Fig 1 capable of pronouncing words and moving with the realism of a living character.

Audrey was cable operated, meaning that each ‘muscle’ of the plant was controlled by a metal lever located below the set. Similar to the slider method used in Disney animatronics but on a much larger and more manual scale The cables were distributed between a team of who, after weeks of rehearsal, were able to synchronise their movements to make the plant move, talk and sing.

As well as this, the effects team was able to give further realism to the character through the use of custom tendrils and an impressive range of expression Fig 3, designed to complement the incredibly expressive vocals of rock and roll singer Levi Stubbs, who provided Audrey 2’s voice. Mark Wilson, who controlled the character’s head stated:

“Every once in a while we would throw in a grimace or an expression — and if Frank liked it, we would keep it. Feed Me had a bit more mobility than the others, so we’d occasionally throw in a word out of the side of his mouth”

This loving focus on characterisation and expression is what makes Audrey 2 stand out among animatronic characters.

The Puppet also uses a technique used extensively in Oz and Henson’s other work called ‘sympathetic movement’. This refers to movement which a puppet is capable of independent of the puppeteer, the most common being feathers and fur which could wobble, bounce and flow along with the larger movements of the character, resulting in more realistic motion. Audrey 2 developed his idea by incorporating a pair of silicone rubber lips, which would accentuate the movements of the mouth and produce a fascinatingly realistic pronunciation of words Fig 2 which, in my opinion, makes Audrey ii stand out among Oz’s other characters.

Figure 1: The full sized Audrey 2 alongside actor Rick Moranis. The sheer size of the character is evident in this photo

Image credit: Monster Legcay.com

Figure 2: A close up of the Plant’s lips. Their thickness is due to the silicone Figure 3: Here we see an example of Audrey 2’s range of expression, rubber providing sympathetic movement to the character increasing his believability as a living character

Image source: Monster Legacy.com Image source: Monster Legacy.com

Case Study 6: Kermit the Frog (1955-1990)

Undoubtedly the most famous puppet in media, Kermit the Frog was puppeteered by Jim Henson between his first appearances on T.V in 1955 and 1990. His development occurred at the same time as Disney’s developments in animatronics but stands alone as an entirely separate method of bringing life to a character.

Unlike Audrey 2, Kermit is a character reliant on much more direct input, rather than a team of puppeteers operating cable mechanisms off-set, a Muppet requires only one or two ‘Muppetiers’ who stand directly below the character, bringing life to them using only their hands Fig 2.

The simplicity of Kermit’s design is highlighted by Henson himself in a 1990 interview:

“He's one of the simplest because inside his head there’s nothing in there but my hand … It’s just a little cloth pattern”

Kermit’s head was entirely hollow when Henson puppeteered him, meaning that when viewing the shape of the skull, one can clearly make out the knuckles and overall shape of a human hand. This gave Kermit a familiarity with audiences and an extremely broad range of expressions from nervous gulps Fig 1, to intense frustration.

Kermit is also extremely lightweight and only operated by one person. His arms are also very thin pieces of cloth controlled by rods, meaning that overall, Kermit is capable of extremely rapid movements. Coupled with his expression and Henson’s appealing characterisation, this creates a character which has won the hearts of children and adults alike to this day.

It is fascinating that a character which is essentially a sock puppet can rival even the most realistic animatronics. During Disney’s development of the ‘Living Character initiative’, the company worked with the Henson Company and produced a collection of Muppet animatronics including the Muppet Mobile Lab Fig 3, a ‘walk-around’ animatronic featuring Bunsen and Beaker. Whilst the animatronic holds a striking resemblance to the look and voices of the original characters, their movements are greatly reduced and appear much slower than an actual puppet. This clearly emphasises the importance of live input puppetry in creating a character over pre- programmed hydraulic mechanisms.

Although puppetry remains a popular method of bringing life to characters, there is still a lack of live puppetry outside children’s television and theatre. This could potentially suggest an avenue for the next step in animatronic technology in order to produce more appeal for characters

Henson and Oz brought a very different attitude to character creation. Rather than focusing entirely on realism, they gave a lot of care and effort to the characterisation of a character, resulting in the audience having a much more emotional connection with the puppets onscreen. This technique is very important to considering the next step in animatronics because, in a world where technological advances and CGI are everything, it could be an option to bring some more love into the creation of live character performers. Montse Ribe of DDT Special Effects put it very well in an editorial video on practical effects:

“Most digital characters lack a soul. If we look at 'The Muppets' they are just a sock but they have character and soul, however most digital characters are very cold”

Figure 1: A study of the facial expressions of Kermit. Notice that the expressions are not realistic enough to be human but they clearly convey a range of recognisable emotions

Image Credit: Bryan Shickley 2014

Figure 2: Henson and Kermit. Notice the simplicity of Kermit’s design and Figure 3: The Muppet Mobile Lab animatronic at Walt Disney World, featuring the use of rods to move his arms Dr. Bunsen Honeydew and Beaker

Image credit: Muppet Wiki Image Credit WDW News Today SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

EXPLORING THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS IN ANIMATRONIC TECHNOLOGY

When surveying the modern world of animatronics, there are a number of standout developments which relate to my previous case studies.

CGI: Case study a: Disney’s treatment of CGI in Star Wars

Whilst CGI remains the preferred method of character creation, I predict a revolution of practical technology from my recent viewings of the new Star Wars movies being produced by Disney. In The Force Awakens (2015), Phil Tippett of Jurassic Park returned to animate the stop-motion holochess set on the Millennium Falcon Fig 1 and more recently in The Last Jedi (2017), Frank Oz returned to puppet Yoda just as he did in The Empire Strikes Back (1980) over 30 years prior, This evident move back into more traditional methods was primarily used to please the fans of the Figure 1: Phil Tippett animates the Holochess original movies but could suggest a return of practical effects in future sequence for Star Wars Episode 7 Image credit: Norman Chan

Puppetry: Case study b: Barnaby Dixon and online puppetry

Figure 2: Dixon’s ‘Dabchick’ puppet Image Credit: Screen Figure 3: Dixon and his two hand puppet ‘Manu’ Figure 4: Dixon’s ‘Raptor’ puppet Image cap from Barnaby Dixon’s video ‘Dabchick ~17~ Bored at Image credit: Screen cap from Barnaby Dixon’s credit: Screen cap from Barnaby Dixon’s Heathrow’ (2016) video ‘New Puppet Concept’ (2016) video ‘Training a Dinosaur’ (2015)

Barnaby Dixon is an English puppeteer who has grown in popularity over the last ten years through his work into more unconventional forms of puppetry. Dixon uses a wire frame structure to attach whole characters to one or two of his hands and manipulates them with incredibly diverse and fluent motion, bearing a similarity to stop motion characters. As well as exploring revolutionary puppetry techniques, Dixon has also nurtured an online presence on YouTube, where his most popular puppet character, Dabchick serves as the main character of a number of Vlog (Video Log) Style segments. Not only does the puppets movement heavily distract from the puppeteer, but Dixon’s voice acting talent gives Dabchick a very distinct personality akin to the flair and charisma of a Muppet. The special effects community will likely be following Dixon’s work in future and hopefully he will be able to bring his work to the industry and media.

Animatronics: Case study c: Garner Holt’s Lincoln

Garner Holt is the current manufacturer of the majority of Disney’s theme park animatronics. They recently showcased an animatronic Abraham Lincoln which creates an immediate point of comparison between early animatronics and modern technologies. The new Lincoln is much more expressive, his movements are sharper and less ‘fluid’ than the original Lincoln, however he still struggles to properly pronounce words with the same accuracy as a human, which I find detracts somewhat from the impressiveness of the technology. Despite this, when he is not talking, the Figure 5: Garner Holt's Lincoln Image credit: Screen cap from Garner Holt productions' video: 'Animatronic Lincoln Expressive Humanoid Robot Head' character gives off a very strong personality through his expressions which makes Garner Holts work stand out among modern animatronic designers and manufacturers.

Theme Parks: Case study D: Disney’s Living character initiative

A lesser known aspect of Disney’s development into animatronic design, the living character initiative (LCI) has developed characters which directly interact with guests. The first was ‘Lucky’, the first walking animatronic. The Muppet Mobile Lab mentioned in an earlier case study is part of this initiative. The most recent addition is the ‘Meet Mickey’ attraction which features a Mickey mascot character capable of real time conversation with guests and facial movements through the use of a control room hidden behind a one way

mirror Fig 6. Whilst the technology is still in its earliest stage, I believe that this is a very important aspect of my conclusions regarding the future of animatronics.

Figure 6 Talking Mickey at Disneyland. Image source: Disney Parks.com

SUGGESTING THE NEXT STEP IN ANIMATRONIC DESIGN WITHIN THE ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY

From all the research I have conducted, I believe that the animatronics community will do as follows (Case Study references indicated with their respective number):

 The industry will likely proceed in refining the realism of their characters, focusing extensively on increased articulation 3. I believe that techniques such as sympathetic movement 5 and live input will be readopted and the slider method will begin to recede in favour of more realistic movements 4.  Potentially, 3D scanning technology used in the film industry may play a part in recording the movements of live actors which can then be transferred into an animatronic. The RSC for example already adopted a similar technique in their production of the Tempest, in which actors were motion tracked and displayed as a CGI character onstage Fig 7.  Following the positive reception from reusing practical techniques in the new Star Wars movies a, other film companies may begin to return to more traditional special effects techniques. Stop motion has experienced a recent resurgence following the increased Figure 7: RSC's production of the tempest. use of 3D printing and I expect live animatronics will do the same. The actor playing the Ariel hologram is  Puppetry is also a technique which has fallen behind in the hidden in the shadows while the puppeteered character takes centre stage. entertainment industry. Whilst it potentially cannot compete with the Image credit: RSC.com more realistic movements of CGI or computer controlled animatronics (Although evidence suggests otherwise 5, b), I believe that the ‘soul’ which is expressed in puppets should be readdressed. Maybe film studios should begin to consider the emotional appeal of characters over realism 5,6.

 Computers have reached a stage where they can almost compete with humans in realism. Rather than reject technology entirely in favour of puppetry, collaboration between puppetry and computers may be the best way forward. For example, a computer could focus on eye and facial movement whilst alive puppeteer moves the body and arms of a character.

So to conclude, the next step in animatronics is not one individual ‘step’ but a range of smaller developments which, when put together, greatly increase the realism and expression of a character

Those developments can be reduced to four main points:

1) The continued refinement of the realism of characters Whilst it is less of a priority, audiences will always remain critical of the realism of characters. The industry must remain to keep up with this scrutiny 2) Increased human input into the movement of characters Sliders and computed movement should give way to live input, motion tracking technology and armatures 3) A marriage between the puppetry techniques of the past and the technology of the present Technology is capable of adding an extra level of realism into the subtleties of characters, but human input keeps the personality which is required in an appealing character

And by far the most important in my opinion: 4) The entertainment industry should never lose sight of its most important goal: to entertain people This relates heavily to my defined purpose of animatronics. Animatronics were always intended to bring fantastical concepts into reality, to transport people into another world and make the impossible possible. Adam Savage sums up the philosophy when talking about Jim Henson

“(Henson has) the peripatetic, creative mind of someone who just never stopped looking at new avenues of really, bringing joy to people”

I hope that if the industry ever forgot this philosophy in the endless struggle to make characters more realistic, the animatronic as a concept would cease to exist and we would be left with theme parks full of KUKA industrial arms, with all the soul of a literal robot. Animatronics are not and will never be ‘robots’. They are characters, brought to life by us in the hope that someday, our dreams will become a reality.

BIBLIOGRAPHY INTRODUCTION AND CONTENTS

WEBSITE REFERENCES

KUKA.COM – ROBOT SYSTEMS, INDUSTRIAL ROBOTS

WOOKIEPEDIA.COM – R2-D2, ASTROMECH DROID, STAR WARS INSIDER

ASTROMECH.NET – FORUMS, DROIDWIKI

ACTIVE8ROBOTS.COM – ROBOTS

ROBOTS.COM – WHAT ARE SIX AXIS ROBOTS?

FILM/VIDEO/PODCAST REFERENCES

1977 FILM - STAR WARS: A NEW HOPE - GEORGE LUCAS

1980 FILM - STAR WARS: THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK - GEORGE LUCAS

1983 FILM - STAR WARS: RETURN OF THE JEDI - GEORGE LUCAS

1993 INTERVIEW – SOUND ADVICE: AN INTERVIEW WITH BEN BURTT

2008 FILM - WALL-E - ANDREW STANTON

2017 VIDEO ARTICLE – ADAM SAVAGE GETS SCANNED AND REPLICATED IN FOAM – TESTED.COM

2017 ENTERTAINMENT SPOT - I MADE 2000 UGLY HOLIDAY CARDS WITH A $100K ROBOT ARM – SIMONE GIERTZ

ARTICLE REFERENCES

1994 - DAN MADSEN – THE REAL R2-D2: KENNY BAKER - STAR WARS INSIDER

2009 – MIGUEL ISAZA – BEN BURTT SPECIAL: WALL-E, THE DEFINITIVE INTERVIEW

2012 – GEETA DAYAL – BEN BURTT ON STAR WARS, FORBIDDEN PLANET AND THE SOUND OF SCI-FI

2017 – PAUL HELLARD - THE ANIMATRONICS MAN: A PRACTICAL TAKE ON GUSTAV HOEGEN

BOOK REFERENCES

CHAPTER 1

WEBSITE REFERENCES

JAQUET DROZ.COM – THE STORY OF JAQUET DROZ

ATLAS OBSCURA.COM – JAQUET-DROZ AUTOMATA

THEMADMUSEUM.CO.UK – THE HISTORY OF AUTOMATA

FILM/VIDEO/PODCAST REFERENCES

1963 FILM - JASON AND THE ARGONAUTS - DON CHAFFEY

2013 DOCUMENTARY - SIMON SCHAFFER - MECHANICAL MARVELS, CLOCKWORK DREAMS - BBC 4

ARTICLE REFERENCES

2013 - CHRISTOPHER JOBSON - THE WRITER - THISISCOLLOSSAL.COM

BOOK REFERENCES 1896 - LEWIS RICHARD FARNELL - THE CULTS OF THE GREEK STATES, VOL. 1 OXFORD: CLARENDON PRESS

1915 - THEODORE ARTHUR BUENGER - CRETE IN THE GREEK TRADITION - UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA

1913 - J. DOUGLAS BRUCE - HUMAN AUTOMATA IN CLASSICAL TRADITION AND MEDIEVAL ROMANCE - MODERN PHILOLOGY

1893 - CONRAD WILLIAM COOKE - AUTOMATA OLD AND NEW - CHISWICK PRESS

CHAPTER 2

WEBSITE REFERENCES

MICECHAT.COM – GREAT MOMENTS WITH LINCOLN, TOKYO DISNEYLAND, NEW ZEALAND,

FILM/VIDEO/PODCAST REFERENCES

1964 FILM - MARY POPPINS - ROBERT STEVENSON

1992 FILM - ALADDIN - AND

1994 FILM - THE LION KING - ROGER ALLERS AND ROB MINKOFF

2016 FILM - MOANA - RON CLEMENTS AND JOHN MUSKER

2017 VIDEO ARTICLE – STORIES AND ABANDONED DISNEY PARK ATTRACTION EFFECTS AND RIDE ELEMENTS – YESTERWORLD ENTERTAINMENT

ARTICLE REFERENCES

1969 – LINCOLN SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION – A LOOK BEHIND THE SCENES, GREAT MOMENTS WITH MR. LINCOLN

2017 – BRYAN BISHOP - DISNEY’S MOST ADVANCED ANIMATRONIC EVER IS THE HIGHLIGHT OF THE AVATAR RIVER RIDE

2017 – GARRETT MARTIN - DONALD TRUMP AND THE HALL OF PRESIDENTS: DISNEY HAD NO GOOD OPTIONS

BOOK REFERENCES

2012 – AND JEFF HEIMBUNCH – IT’S KIND OF A CUTE STORY – BAMBOO FOREST PUBLISHING

RIDE/ATTRACTION REFERENCES

1963 RIDE - WALT DISNEY'S ENCHANTED TIKI ROOM – DISNEYLAND

1964 ATTRACTION - GREAT MOMENTS WITH MR. LINCOLN – NEW YORK WORLD’S FAIR

1965 RIDE - GREAT MOMENTS WITH MR. LINCOLN – DISNEYLAND

1971 RIDE – THE HALL OF PRESIDENTS - DISNEYLAND

CHAPTER 3

WEBSITE REFERENCES

FILM/VIDEO/PODCAST REFERENCES

1993 FILM - JURASSIC PARK - STEVEN SPIELBERG

2001 FILM - A.I. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE - STEVEN SPIELBERG

2015 FILM - JURASSIC WORLD - COLIN TREVORROW 1995 DOCUMENTARY – THE MAKING OF JURASSIC PARK – JOHN SCHILTZ

2012 DOCUMENTARY – SCULPTING A FULL-SIZE DINOSAUR – STAN WINSTON STUDIOS

2013 VIDEO ARTICLE – BUILDING AN ANIMATRONIC DINOSAUR – STAN WINSTON STUDIOS

2011 VIDEO ARTICLE – URSULA MOVES INTO HER LAIR – DISNEY PARKS

2017 VIDEO ARTICLE – JURASSIC PARK’S T-REX PADDOCK ATTACK – ART OF THE SCENE - CINEFIX

ARTICLE REFERENCES

2014 – NORMAN CHAN - WHAT JURASSIC PARK’S DINOSAURS WOULD HAVE LOOKED LIKE IN STOP MOTION

MONSTER LEGACY.NET – INDOMINUS REX

BOOK REFERENCES

1995 – BRIAN KNEP - DINOSAUR INPUT DEVICE - PAPER

2006 – JODY DUNCAN – THE WINSTON EFFECT – TITAN BOOKS LTD.

2008 – PAUL DUNCAN – STANLEY KUBRICK: THE COMPLETE FILMS – TASCHEN

CHAPTER 4

WEBSITE REFERENCES

BIOGRAPHY.COM – FRANK OZ

LYONPUPPETS.COM – RICK LYON

MUPPET WIKI –THE MUPPETS

FILM/VIDEO/PODCAST REFERENCES

1979 FILM - THE MUPPET MOVIE - JAMES FAWLEY

1982 FILM - THE DARK CRYSTAL - JIM HENSON AND FRANK OZ

1984 FILM - THE MUPPETS TAKE MANHATTEN - FRANK OZ

1986 FILM - LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS - FRANK OZ

1986 FILM - LABYRINTH - JIM HENSON

1990 INTERVIEW - JIM HENSON, FRANK OZ AND MICHAEL FRITH TALK ABOUT THE MUPPETS

1990 INTERVIEW - JIM HENSON, FRANK OZ AND MICHAEL FRITH TALK ABOUT THE MUPPETS

1990 FILM – JIM HENSON’S PUBLIC MEMORIAL

1996 FILM - MUPPET TREASURE ISLAND - BRIAN HENSON

2011 FILM – THE MUPPETS – JAMES BOBIN

2016 VIDEO ARTICLE – ADAM SAVAGE’S ONE DAY BUILDS: MAKING A PUPPET

2017 VIDEO ARTICLE – ADAM SAVAGE TOURS THE JIM HENSON EXHIBITION

2017 PODCAST – COSTUME CHANGES – STILL UNTITLED: THE ADAM SAVAGE PROJECT 2017 DOCUMENTARY – MEET THE MAN BEHIND HOLLYWOOD’S WEIRDEST CREATURES – VICE

2017 FILM - STAR WARS: THE LAST JEDI - RIAN JOHNSON

ARTICLE REFERENCES

MONSTER LEGACY.NET – SPECIAL: AUDREY II CONQUERS THE WORLD

MONSTER LEGCAY.NET – MEAN GREEN MOTHER FROM OUTER SPACE

2014 – BRYAN SHICKLEY – A STUDY OF KERMIT THE FROG - BLOGSPOT

2016 – CRAIG WILLIAMS - MUPPET MOBILE LABE RETURNS TO WALT DISNEY WORLD –WDWINFO.COM

BOOK REFERENCES

2013 – BRIAN JAY JONES – JIM HENSON: THE BIOGRAPHY

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

WEBSITE REFERENCES

BARNABY DIXON (YOUTUBE CHANNEL) – BARNABY DIXON

GARNER HOLT PRODUCTIONS, INC. – (YOUTUBE CHANNEL) – GARNER HOLT

GARNER HOLT.COM – GARNER HOLT

FILM/VIDEO/PODCAST REFERENCES

2015 VIDEO ARTICLE - MAKING OF HOLOCHESS FOR STAR WARS: THE FORCE AWAKENS – TESTED.COM

2017 VIDEO ARTICLE – GARNER HOLT’S ANIMATRONIC ABRAHAM LINCOLN – TESTED.COM

2017 VIDEO ARTICLE – A PORTRAIT OF THE PUPPET MASTER AS A YOUNG MAN

2017 VIDEO ARTICLE - FUN WITH BRITISH PUPPETEER BARNABY DIXON - DW ENGLISH

ARTICLE REFERENCES

2015 – NICK ROMANO - VFX GURU PHIL TIPPETT BRINGS BACK AN ICONIC MOMENT FOR ‘STAR WARS: THE FORCE AWAKENS’

2016 – ERIC GRUNDHAUSER – THE FUTURE OF ANIMATRONICS, FROM DISNEY TO THE U.S MILITARY – ATLAS OBSCURA

2016 – FIELDING BUCK – FAN CLUB WILL HONOUR GARNER HOLT

2017 – STEVE DOW - WITH RSC'S THE TEMPEST, THE DIGITAL THEATRE AGE HAS DAWNED – FINANCIAL REVIEW

THEATRE REFERENCES

2016 PRODUCTION - THE TEMPEST – GREGORY DORAN - ROYAL SHAKESPEARE COMPANY