Comparing Jason and the Argounts and the time machine Jason and the Argounts were both made in the early 1960s and they both blended live action with animation, they both used object animation and were both stop motion animation. Both animations were advanced for their time. They both look very impressive and realistic. They look much better than animations like Bagpuss that has come after it. Both animations had very good use of sound. In Jason and the Argounts they really went into detail to make the skeletons walking in unison sound as realistic as possible. I do however think that they should have made the sound of the skeletons coming out of the ground louder because if it happened it would be a louder sound in real life. But that is just a subjective view they might have not agreed with. On the whole both films sound was pretty well thought through. The non diabetic theme music fitted perfectly with the onscreen action and was timed really accurately. In the time machine the sounds of the glass breaking sounded very realistic and was also timed perfectly however the sounds of the planks of wood being put up wasn’t in sync with the onscreen action as the sound of the planks occurred after the actually planks were all up. But they were working with film not digital, so their must have been restricted to how much editing they could do and how perfect they could get it. And again the audience didn’t have the high standards we set today with our modern editing. But everything was in sync and the right sounds were chosen to support the on screen action in the two films. The cinematography was also very important to keeping up the realism. The machine’s was very impressive, especially in the scene where the sky changes from night to day several times. You really got the feeling that it was changing from day to night. In the scene even the shots in which the main wasn’t shown still keep up the consistent quality as you can see the lighting changing. This
was also due to the excellent work of the cinematographer Paul Vogel. The changing of the backgrounds was very pioneering at the time. controlling the saturation was also something Paul should get credit for. It shows the advances made from when color first came into film mainstream American films in the late 1930s. Jason and the Argounts was both shot on location and artificial created added backgrounds. And the two didn’t always mix together well as you can see in the children of hydra scene, because in the long shot of the skeletons fighting Jason the sky is different from the more lush, well saturated sky in the medium close ups of Jason fighting. There is also a bit of a jump cut between those shots. Because it was 1963 they didn’t have the same technology as we do today so they might not have been able to achieve the same realism we’re able to now in films like Wallace and grommet and they wouldn’t have had our flexibility in the editing. Because they were both Hollywood films the camera work of both films was however very exciting and grand, lots of different camera angles were used to give great visuals. The actual objects they used to animate in Jason and the Argonauts well very well created. I think the making of Talus and the skeletons and the dragons was very good and lifelike. However the texture of the flowers wasn’t that great as you could obviously tell they were Claymation unlike Wallace and grommet where you forget it’s claymation. The same also applies to the lava. But such things as very hard to accurately recreate and they couldn’t use as many influences as we could today and it could also be because mixing live action with the claymation would obviously make the claymation stand out unlike in Wallace and Grommet. The movement of the characters as well as the props in both films was very important. In Jason and the Argounts the movement was very lifelike. The skeletons were all moving at the same time, there wasn’t any character standing still while the others were fighting. They reacted to getting hit like a person would get hit. Although I think they not have been as realistic as they could because I don’t
think skeletons would move that fluidly without cartilage, the same could be said for scene in the time machine where the building changes but you can’t see any builders. But it is a fictional film for mainstreamers who’ll just want some escapism so I don’t think they thought the audience would care that much. The time machine had great use of Claymation to achieve visuals that were impossible to create with live action. The animation brilliant aided the diegesis of the film. The candles burning looked really realistic, as did the flowers blooming. The lava flowing also has a smooth realistic motion. They paid very close attention to detail and I think that was because these films were also art as well as just Film. George pal was known for his love of animation which is clear when you see the detail in time machine, and it also won an Oscar for special effects to show the recognition he might have intentitally been aiming for. And it’s also clear to see Harry Husen’s love of animation since being a small boy considering it took 4 months to make the skeleton sequence that only look up three minutes of the film. This was in a time when films were made very quickly. However Jason and the Argounts wasn’t as consistent it’s detail and realism as the time machine because they still made mistakes like when the discus was thrown. It’s didn’t look anything like what would actually happen, the discus wouldn’t go over the rock from that angel but in 1960 the audience probably didn’t have the same standards of realism as they do today in a more modern age. But on the whole this were two very well crafted creative innovative pieces of work for the time. And because they were made in the 1960s after the studio system closed down and mainstream films weren’t as commercial as they were in the 1950s or again in the 1970s it allowed this innovation and creativity to happen and be seen by a big mainstream audience.
this an essay comparing jason and the argonauts and the time machine.