It’s the 20th anniversary of the 2005 Fantastic Four. Here I’ve resurrected an old vfxblog interview I did with Spectral Motion co-founder and lead art director Mike Elizalde where he discusses his studio’s special make-up effects for the film, including construction of the The Thing suit.
Michael Chiklis ended up ‘looking’ really comfortable as The Thing. How did you achieve this?
Mike Elizalde: It’s probably 99% performance on Michael’s part and maybe 1% us trying to make him as comfortable as possible in the suit. In Michael’s recent interviews, one of the main things that he has mentioned is that the suit was extremely hot. It is an uncomfortable device in any situation. Typically what happens in these situations is that we hire a person who specialises in wearing prosthetic make-up and suits, to get better use out of that performer.
There are some people who actually train for this – that’s what they do. Whenever we have to take an A-list actor or principal performer and put them into that same situation, it’s always much more difficult for everyone. They’re simply not accustomed to it. They don’t really have anything on which to base having to handle the stresses of these devices. They just have to grow into it, as Michael did. He became comfortable as the character of The Thing.
Can you tell me about the suit?
Mike Elizalde: It’s basically a formula that’s been perfected over many years, that began in the early days of prosthetic make-up. It’s essentially foam latex – liquid latex material that is whipped to a very high consistent froth which is then injected into a mould. There’s a lot of chemicals and ingredients that go into this formula to make the rubber the right consistency and the right durability. It goes into a vulcanization process, which basically involves baking it in a large oven, until all the moisture has evaporated out of the foam and it becomes a solid material.
So the suit is constructed out of that for the exterior. The interior is a form-fitting body glove that the actor wears. The construction of the suit is a body-stocking, some rigid material that supports the suit and then the layer of the outer skin, which is this vulcanized elastic material. We went in and enhanced it a little bit further by creating areas of the suit that had harder plates, so it wouldn’t just wrinkle arbitrarily over the surface, which is supposed to be rock.
Then we had actor driven mechanical hands. The way Michael had to hold his hands is like the “Live long and prosper” symbol Mr Spock did in ‘Star Trek’. He put his fingers into these gloves, and then on the outside of his pinky there was an additional mechanical finger. So he had three fingers and a thumb. The third finger was driven by Michael’s own action. This allowed us to make his hands look bigger and wider. His feet were specifically engineered with the movement of Michael’s feet, so that when he took steps it would flex in the right place. Michael also wore prosthetic make-up. This was made up of a cowl piece, some foam inserts for the ears so he could hear, and some dentures.
So it was quite a process to get him in the suit and make-up. Once we hit our strides, it probably took about two hours to do.
What did the initial design process involve for The Thing?
Mike Elizalde: The first steps of getting the suit made were coming up with a make-up design to put on one of our people here. What Fox did, and subsequently what got us the project, was put us in a three-way competition with two other companies (one of which dropped out in the process). So it came down to us and another company. We submitted our design and they shot little video tests of it, and we got the contract. Based on that initial design we then adapted that to Michael Chiklis’ life cast.
You’ve done a lot of film characters. Is there still a lot of pressure to please not only the filmmakers, but the fans as well?
Mike Elizalde: Absolutely. Every job presents a different set of challenges. It’s not the type of business where you can rest on your laurels and let the previous job carry you. You have to strive for something better. In dealing with a lot of people and having different design ideas, it’s tough to sometimes corner that. But that’s our job. We have to figure out what it is the client is looking for, and deliver that.
Did you also work on the make-up effects for Dr Doom?
Mike Elizalde: Yes, we did all of the appliances for Dr Doom and the muscle suit he wears underneath his wardrobe. Once the make-up section was completed, the rest of the Dr Doom design, including the costume and mask, was done by Jose Fernandez. He also helped us in the initial process in getting the Thing design together. He’s a creature effects and make-up designer and brilliant sculptor. Jose was also the Costume Designer on Fantastic Four.
Here’s the CG versus practical question, which I’m sure you get asked all the time. What’s your stance on the CG/practical side of things?
Mike Elizalde: That’s a good question. It does get asked a lot because it’s sort of an obvious push and pull of the two technologies. I think that in some cases you walk into a situation where the visual effects department is your friend, and they want to assist you in any way they can, and it’s not that whole competitive kind of mentality (I always think that’s something better left for the soccer field). The collaborative spirit always helps to get a better product in the end anyway.
It’s pretty clear to me that each technology has its place. I don’t think one can replace the other completely. I think it’s always best when there’s a blend of the two technologies together. Obviously some things are better done in CG. There are always things that could be done practically, but they might not look right. They’d lose some of the magic if you tried to accomplish things in that way. For instance, Mr. Fantastic stretching is something that would have been really difficult to do via practical means. It’s much easier to do in CG. I don’t mean easier in terms of the actual work, I mean in terms of getting the look right. In almost every film that comes out these days with effects, there are places for both technologies, and there are golden moments where the two shine together.
Do you get excited by the fact that some of your creations are on film, and are also available as maquettes and collector’s items?
Mike Elizalde: For sure! That’s one of the great fringe benefits – to have an office full of maquettes. We also have a deal with Sideshow Collectibles to do prototype work for products they produce based on the films we work on. That’s always fun to see the toys out there that are generated from our studio and know that kids all over the world are playing with them, or collectors are looking at them on their shelves.
One of the first things that I ever did when I was in the business was that I created a series of model kits, for that very reason. I thought, ‘Wouldn’t it be cool if something I made and sculpted was a collector’s item and people were interested in it?’ So I did it and we had a fairly good degree success with that. That’s always been somewhat of a spark to drive things here.
