Andy Serkis

Q AND A WITH

December 22, 2005|By JAKE COYLE

NEW YORK -- In computer-generated bodies not his own, Andy Serkis has starred in two of the most humongously budgeted films of the decade.

Serkis, who stands 5 feet 8 inches, plays Kong in Peter Jackson's King Kong. As he did for the "precious"-hungry Gollum in Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy, Serkis' human performance has again been transformed by computer graphics into a fantastical creature.

As with Gollum/Smeagol, the actor's every movement was meticulously captured and enlarged into the computer-generated image that is the hulking Kong. Even Serkis' yawns and frowns were adapted to the gorilla's facial structure.

When Kong is thrashing dinosaurs and during other action sequences, he's more normally animated. But the crux of King Kong has always been the love story between Ann Darrow (Naomi Watts) and the giant ape - and for that, Serkis was key in fleshing out the relationship.

Serkis, 41, recently told the Associated Press it's still "just acting."

Does it feel as though this digitally transcribed acting is a specialty of yours?

Not necessarily. It's been an amazing journey, but in acting terms, it's not a different approach to the way I would act a conventional character. ... Gollum and Kong are slightly more physical, but normally my route into a character tends to be from a physical standpoint, even for conventional characters. I don't really think of it in any other way.

What was this high-tech gorilla suit that you wore for King Kong?

There were two stages to the performance of Kong. One was on set with Naomi where we created scenes together, and for that I wore a gorilla muscle suit. It was all the underlying muscles without the hair on top. To create Kong's presence on set, we used different things to get into the same head space. I wore gorilla dentures; I was [connected] to a sound system, which we ended up calling "the Kongolizer." It dropped my voice by about three octaves in real time and then it went through these huge speakers on set - so Naomi could react to roars and grunts and gorilla vocalizations that I learned from studying gorillas in Rwanda.

What did you take away from that research?

Two main things: how incredibly social they are ... which led me to understand Kong's loneliness more. ... The other thing was, I realized how individual they are. Studying gorillas is like studying human beings, in a way.

Aside from the motion capture, were your facial expressions transferred as well?

Absolutely. ... The main difference between Gollum and Kong was that with Gollum, my performance was done on 35 mm and the animators copied my facial expressions. But with this, we used facial motion capture, which was wearing 132 dots all over my face. The animators had to do work on the lower mouth area because the muzzle of a gorilla is slightly more immobile than a human mouth. But in terms of the expression and the transferring of emotion through facial features, all of the acting is transferred, particularly through the eyes, onto this [computer-generated] puppet.

The heart of King Kong is a love story, so I gather a big part of the reason for all of this effort was to humanize that emotion, rather than computerize it.

We were trying to find out any way to obliterate the technical obstructions and just focus in on each other to be able to create the moment-to-moment emotional changes. The scenes were created on set with Naomi, and the real actor connection was made so that she wasn't having to fake emotions. I was playing the character of Kong - she wasn't having to make decisions about the character because I was there.

Jake Coyle writes for the Associated Press.

Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.