logo
Real-Life Matchmaker Lauren Daddis Talks Accuracy Of ‘Materialists'

Real-Life Matchmaker Lauren Daddis Talks Accuracy Of ‘Materialists'

Forbes13 hours ago

Former Interscope Records publicist turned professional matchmaker Lauren Daddis.
Writer/director Celine Song famously went from matchmaking to Hollywood for the new film Materialists, the current rom-com starring Dakota Johnson, Pedro Pascal and Chris Evans based on her past life as a matchmaker.
Philly-based Lauren Daddis is the perfect person to respond to Materialists. A former music industry publicist at Interscope Records, among others, who worked with the likes of Eminem, Gwen Stefani and Black Eyed Peas, Daddis has been a matchmaker for the last eight years.
So, it was a lot of fun to get her insights on the accuracy of the film, its dialogue and how it compares to the current state of real-life matchmaking. Spoiler, she says it is pretty damn spot on. Warning, she also does give some spoilers on the film. You are warned before reading on.
Steve Baltin: How accurate was the movie?
Lauren Daddis: It was really good. I was laughing my ass off cause I'm a matchmaker. I was laughing about how right on some of the stuff was. She did a really good job of depicting a day in the life of a matchmaker and what kind of stuff comes up. So, for me that was very entertaining. It was very reminiscent of a '90s rom-com because it was more like relationship drama and less comedy. It was a very good balance between hearts and, obviously, the name of the movie is Materialists. She did a very good job of reflecting on real life. Her character was very kind of crass and transactional and it's different than like I feel like some of the women that are in rom-com's. They usually play the role of the sappy, lovesick [woman]
Baltin: Where are you based?
Daddis: As a matchmaker, I'm an outside of Philly. Working with clients in New York, it was really interesting to watch a matchmaker based in New York. I often say that New York is one of the hardest markets to match because there are so many people. They talk in the movie about referring to people as product, merchandise. There are so many people, there's always someone better, there's always someone else, so, it was interesting to watch it happen in New York. I think it was a great city to pick being a matchmaker. And she faces that: does she want the luxury life without true love with the unicorn guy? Or does she want a tough life where she's fighting over money, but they're madly in love? I think the whole movie just goes back and forth, but you never wonder who she's going to pick because at the end, that's what we all want, right? The true love. I know a lot of people actually pick the other. But I don't really think that they end up happy. I think trying to find love in a material world is very tricky.
Baltin: You said you thought it was accurate. How was the matchmaking dialogue?
Daddis: I loved the scenes where they did a lot of cut in and cut out of her with clients, client facing meetings where they're just sitting in front of her going, 'I want this and this and this because I deserve it.' Some of this stuff was just verbatim. "I won't date anyone over six feet.' "They have to make at least 500,000.' "They have to do this and this and this." To me, I was just laughing. It was very normal and everyday for me. It was funny, my boyfriend was with me. And to him, that was very normal cause I work from home. He hears these conversations all the time. It didn't shake us. But I kept wondering what the people behind me and around me in the theater thought. I wondered if they thought this was fake because it is so real. People do say I want this and I want all of these boxes checked and then as a matchmaker when you deliver someone sometimes it turns out awful. Sometimes it turns out great, you can deliver a product but it's all up to the person how it happens. One of the references they use that was really funny and I use all the time she was like giving ingredients. And Lucy the matchmaker cocks her head and she's like, 'I can't build your boyfriend for you, I'm not Frankenstein.' I lost it because I always say this isn't Build a Bear. We're not building a boyfriend We can't take ingredients, we're dealing with humans and people, and they come as they are.' So, I thought that was funny because she had that talk with one of her clients. They have the matchmaker part. I listened to a couple of interviews with the writer, and she was a matchmaker a long time ago. I was interested to see how much it's changed. It hasn't, everything was spot on. People have not changed what they're looking for, what they expect, what we value, how we perceive our own value. It's all the same.
Baltin: Why do you think that is because obviously society has changed so much?
Daddis: I think fundamentally all we really want is to find that true love. And some of the ways people go about trying to find it are people going to great lengths. One of the plots twists of the movie was Harry, which is Pedro Pascal's character, the unicorn, the rich guy. Well, it turns out we find out at the end of the movie-- it's a spoiler alert-- but there's the surgery that can add up to six inches to your height and at the end of the movie it comes out she sees the scars on his legs. He seems to be this perfect guy but it shows even the perfect people the lengths that they go to to make themselves a good catch. He had leg surgery and he used to be five six and so it really changes perception. At the end of the movie, you're like, "Wow, like we're watching women fawn over this guy, and he's perfect, and he's the unicorn of the movie, and all this, come to find out if he was five six, none of this would be available to him." He said, "I wouldn't have done better, and I wouldn't have done as well in business. Men respect me, women fawn over me." So, it was showing that even on the outside, the people who look like they have it all, and they're these unicorns, that he still went through this. He broke both of his legs and paid 200 grand for six inches. And he said it was the best decision he's ever made. I do think that's a good point that you made. I don't think it has changed. I think people want just to feel loved, but I feel like what I see as a matchmaker is I very much understood when Lucy talked a lot about it being very easy. It's math, it's just math. She spoke very clinically about partnering as if it were like an equation. And that was her response, it's just math. They come from a similar socioeconomic background. They both went to Ivy League schools. They refer to checking boxes, that's a lingo that we used a lot and the reality is yeah you can put two people together, their resumes, so to speak, and they check each other's boxes. He wants what she has and everything's perfect but when they meet each other it's all up to their chemistry, the energy they bring into the room, the kind of day they had, if they had a bad day, they're not going to bring their best self in, their nerves, what if one person has some kind of anxiety and they're not doing the best. There are so many things that can be off or what if just the woman walks in and just is not attracted to the guy or the man is rude to the waiter. There are so many things that can happen outside of the boxes and the personality traits and all those things that people are looking for, that I think people lose sight of what really matters. And one of the things they said in the movie was, it was like her pitch, she was at a wedding and like passing her card out and schmoozing. It was really funny. And she said, you're really finding at the end of the day, a nursing home roomie. Who are you going to be in the nursing home with? Who's going to do the long haul on the hard things. And that stuff you can't vet for. As a matchmaker, I can't find someone. If someone hires me and says find someone that's going to have a great relation with me and love me so much that they'll change my bedpan. I can't guarantee that I'm going to find that for you. I can try though.
Baltin: How did you go into matchmaking?
Daddis: I got married, had a baby and moved to the east coast. I had a few years of being a stay-at-home mom and eventually the plan was to get back to LA. I stayed on with a couple of smaller bands and toyed with the idea of working in NY. I never really meant to leave the music industry, and I was kind of miserable about it. I became a yoga teacher, got divorced and settled into the east coast for the foreseeable future. I met a matchmaker through a girlfriend of mine and she saw potential immediately in me. I was fascinated that this was even a job… a matchmaker? This was about eight years ago or so. We became really great friends. I eventually took a job at the company my friend worked for, and I learned from the ground up. It was a natural fit. I'm at a different company now and I work with mostly high income 'VIP' men. I couldn't imagine doing anything else. I absolutely love my job. It comes naturally, it's challenging and so rewarding. I still have the same hardcore work ethic and want to work at the best company and break ceilings. And I still do that but in the love industry.Writer/director Celine Song famously went from matchmaking to Hollywood for the new film Materialists, the current rom-com starring Dakota Johnson, Pedro Pascal and Chris Evans based on her past life as a matchmaker.
Philly-based Lauren Daddis is the perfect person to respond to Materialists. A former music industry publicist at Interscope Records, among others, who worked with the likes of Eminem, Gwen Stefani and Black Eyed Peas, Daddis has been a matchmaker for the last eight years.
So, it was a lot of fun to get her insights on the accuracy of the film, its dialogue and how it compares to the current state of real-life matchmaking. Spoiler, she says it is pretty damn spot on. Warning, she also does give some spoilers on the film. You are warned before reading on.
Steve Baltin: How accurate was the movie?
Lauren Daddis: It was really good. I was laughing my ass off cause I'm a matchmaker. I was laughing about how right on some of the stuff was. She did a really good job of depicting a day in the life of a matchmaker and what kind of stuff comes up. So, for me that was very entertaining. It was very reminiscent of a '90s rom-com because it was more like relationship drama and less comedy. It was a very good balance between hearts and, obviously, the name of the movie is Materialists. She did a very good job of reflecting on real life. Her character was very kind of crass and transactional and it's different than like I feel like some of the women that are in rom-com's. They usually play the role of the sappy, lovesick [woman] looking for her prince. It was interesting. It was also very predictable. You definitely within the first five minutes knew who she would pick. The whole story she's a matchmaker, and she's caught between the 'perfect match,' like the unicorn, the rich guy with the 12-million-dollar Manhattan apartment. He's over six feet and checks all the boxes, so to speak. Then there's the ex-boyfriend, who is a broke actor, cater waiter, but she loves him. So, you know in the end who she's going to pick.
Baltin: Where are you based?
Daddis: As a matchmaker, I'm an outside of Philly. Working with clients in New York, it was really interesting to watch a matchmaker based in New York. I often say that New York is one of the hardest markets to match because there are so many people. They talk in the movie about referring to people as product, merchandise. There are so many people, there's always someone better, there's always someone else, so, it was interesting to watch it happen in New York. I think it was a great city to pick being a matchmaker. And she faces that: does she want the luxury life without true love with the unicorn guy? Or does she want a tough life where she's fighting over money, but they're madly in love? I think the whole movie just goes back and forth, but you never wonder who she's going to pick because at the end, that's what we all want, right? The true love. I know a lot of people actually pick the other. But I don't really think that they end up happy. I think trying to find love in a material world is very tricky.
Baltin: You said you thought it was accurate. How was the matchmaking dialogue?
Daddis: I loved the scenes where they did a lot of cut in and cut out of her with clients, client facing meetings where they're just sitting in front of her going, 'I want this and this and this because I deserve it.' Some of this stuff was just verbatim. "I won't date anyone over six feet.' "They have to make at least 500,000.' "They have to do this and this and this." To me, I was just laughing. It was very normal and everyday for me. It was funny, my boyfriend was with me. And to him, that was very normal cause I work from home. He hears these conversations all the time. It didn't shake us. But I kept wondering what the people behind me and around me in the theater thought. I wondered if they thought this was fake because it is so real. People do say I want this and I want all of these boxes checked and then as a matchmaker when you deliver someone sometimes it turns out awful. Sometimes it turns out great, you can deliver a product but it's all up to the person how it happens. One of the references they use that was really funny and I use all the time she was like giving ingredients. And Lucy the matchmaker cocks her head and she's like, 'I can't build your boyfriend for you, I'm not Frankenstein.' I lost it because I always say this isn't Build a Bear. We're not building a boyfriend We can't take ingredients, we're dealing with humans and people, and they come as they are.' So, I thought that was funny because she had that talk with one of her clients. They have the matchmaker part. I listened to a couple of interviews with the writer, and she was a matchmaker a long time ago. I was interested to see how much it's changed. It hasn't, everything was spot on. People have not changed what they're looking for, what they expect, what we value, how we perceive our own value. It's all the same.
Baltin: Why do you think that is because obviously society has changed so much?
Daddis: I think fundamentally all we really want is to find that true love. And some of the ways people go about trying to find it are people going to great lengths. One of the plots twists of the movie was Harry, which is Pedro Pascal's character, the unicorn, the rich guy. Well, it turns out we find out at the end of the movie-- it's a spoiler alert-- but there's the surgery that can add up to six inches to your height and at the end of the movie it comes out she sees the scars on his legs. He seems to be this perfect guy but it shows even the perfect people the lengths that they go to to make themselves a good catch. He had leg surgery and he used to be five six and so it really changes perception. At the end of the movie, you're like, "Wow, like we're watching women fawn over this guy, and he's perfect, and he's the unicorn of the movie, and all this, come to find out if he was five six, none of this would be available to him." He said, "I wouldn't have done better, and I wouldn't have done as well in business. Men respect me, women fawn over me." So, it was showing that even on the outside, the people who look like they have it all, and they're these unicorns, that he still went through this. He broke both of his legs and paid 200 grand for six inches. And he said it was the best decision he's ever made. I do think that's a good point that you made. I don't think it has changed. I think people want just to feel loved, but I feel like what I see as a matchmaker is I very much understood when Lucy talked a lot about it being very easy. It's math, it's just math. She spoke very clinically about partnering as if it were like an equation. And that was her response, it's just math. They come from a similar socioeconomic background. They both went to Ivy League schools. They refer to checking boxes, that's a lingo that we used a lot and the reality is yeah you can put two people together, their resumes, so to speak, and they check each other's boxes. He wants what she has and everything's perfect but when they meet each other it's all up to their chemistry, the energy they bring into the room, the kind of day they had, if they had a bad day, they're not going to bring their best self in, their nerves, what if one person has some kind of anxiety and they're not doing the best. There are so many things that can be off or what if just the woman walks in and just is not attracted to the guy or the man is rude to the waiter. There are so many things that can happen outside of the boxes and the personality traits and all those things that people are looking for, that I think people lose sight of what really matters. And one of the things they said in the movie was, it was like her pitch, she was at a wedding and like passing her card out and schmoozing. It was really funny. And she said, you're really finding at the end of the day, a nursing home roomie. Who are you going to be in the nursing home with? Who's going to do the long haul on the hard things. And that stuff you can't vet for. As a matchmaker, I can't find someone. If someone hires me and says find someone that's going to have a great relation with me and love me so much that they'll change my bedpan. I can't guarantee that I'm going to find that for you. I can try though.
Baltin: How did you go into matchmaking?
Daddis: I got married, had a baby and moved to the east coast. I had a few years of being a stay-at-home mom and eventually the plan was to get back to LA. I stayed on with a couple of smaller bands and toyed with the idea of working in NY. I never really meant to leave the music industry, and I was kind of miserable about it. I became a yoga teacher, got divorced and settled into the east coast for the foreseeable future. I met a matchmaker through a girlfriend of mine and she saw potential immediately in me. I was fascinated that this was even a job… a matchmaker? This was about eight years ago or so. We became really great friends. I eventually took a job at the company my friend worked for, and I learned from the ground up. It was a natural fit. I'm at a different company now and I work with mostly high income 'VIP' men. I couldn't imagine doing anything else. I absolutely love my job. It comes naturally, it's challenging and so rewarding. I still have the same hardcore work ethic and want to work at the best company and break ceilings. And I still do that but in the love industry.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Tony Talk: Our extremely early 2026 awards predictions for ‘Ragtime,' ‘Waiting for Godot,' Kristin Chenoweth, and all the buzzy new shows
Tony Talk: Our extremely early 2026 awards predictions for ‘Ragtime,' ‘Waiting for Godot,' Kristin Chenoweth, and all the buzzy new shows

Yahoo

time31 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Tony Talk: Our extremely early 2026 awards predictions for ‘Ragtime,' ‘Waiting for Godot,' Kristin Chenoweth, and all the buzzy new shows

Welcome to Tony Talk, a column in which Gold Derby contributors Sam Eckmann and David Buchanan offer Tony Awards analysis. Two weeks after the 2025 Tonys, we discuss the upcoming Broadway season and forecast likely 2026 Tony contenders. David Buchanan: Last June, you and I offered our earliest predictions for what could contend and even win at the Tonys a whole 12 months in the future! Looking back at our extremely early 2025 predictions, we hit some nails on the head, including the Best Musical Revival and Best Actress in a Musical showdowns between Gypsy and Sunset Boulevard and stars Audra McDonald and Nicole Scherzinger, respectively. For the 2025-26 Broadway season — which has already kicked off with Jean Smart in the solo play Call Me Izzy — it looks like the revivals are once again front and center. We have remountings of musicals Ragtime, Chess, and The Rocky Horror Show forthcoming, as well as plays Art, Waiting for Godot, and Fallen Angels, among others. Do you think we have any potential winners in those lists? More from GoldDerby 'Rosemead,' starring Lucy Liu, takes top prize at Bentonville Film Festival 'The Last of Us': How the 'Lord of the Rings' VFX team (and marshmallows) made the Battle of Jackson 'Batman Forever' and 'Batman Begins' share an anniversary week - and a surprising Oscar connection Sam Eckmann: To your list of musical revivals, I would add Cats: The Jellicle Ball. This reimagining of the classic Andrew Lloyd Webber musical ditches the feline body suits and sets the story in the world of ballroom. The show was a sold-out hit off-Broadway and though a Broadway run isn't official, a cheeky new social media account for the show has been teasing a transfer for months. Should it transfer, it will be an immediate frontrunner in the Best Musical Revival category. That said, Ragtime, Chess, and The Rocky Horror Show (which will be directed by newly minted Tony winner Sam Pinkleton) are rarely seen but beloved musicals. So this category promises to be an epic showdown yet again! The race for Best Musical is harder to predict since so many new tuners have yet to officially announce their runs. But we do know that director Michael Arden (now a two-time Tony winner thanks to Parade and Maybe Happy Ending) will helm a pair of new musicals: The Queen of Versailles, starring Kristin Chenoweth, and a stage adaptation of The Lost Boys. Do you think Arden could add a third trophy to his mantle next year? Steve Eichner/Variety via Getty Images Buchanan: Next year, either Pinkleton or Arden could join the list of only eight directors in the history of the Tonys to win back-to-back trophies, like Danya Taymor tried to do this year with John Proctor Is the Villain, so that should make for a very exciting race! With his two Tony-winning projects plus Once on This Island and Deaf West's Spring Awakening, I know never to underestimate Arden. Queen of Versailles is a huge creative swing, and though I didn't see the Boston try-out, word of mouth suggests it needs some judicious tightening of its runtime and of its tone. Based on critics' reviews, it sounds like the show may be more of an awards contender for Chenoweth and composer Stephen Schwartz than for directing, despite the humongous scope and set of the musical, which centers on real-life billionaire Jackie Siegel and her dream to construct the largest private residence in America. The Lost Boys is the bigger question mark in my mind. Vampire musicals have an infamous track record on Broadway — Dance of the Vampires, Elton John's Lestat, to name just two — but the song officially released by the Rescues, who composed the score, is strong, as is Arden's creative team, so this could be a contender, sight unseen. But before we pivot to the play categories, let's stick with Chenoweth and dive into Best Actress in a Musical. Folks have called her performance as Siegel the best of her career, but she'll be potentially contending against Caissie Levy in Ragtime as Mother, a two-time Tony-nominated role for Marin Mazzie and Christiane Noll, plus Lea Michele in Chess as Florence, a Tony-nominated role for Judy Kuhn. Do you think we'll have as cutthroat a Best Actress race in 2026 as we did this year? SEE Tony Talk: Dissecting those shocking wins for 'Purpose,' Nicole Scherzinger, Darren Criss, and full show analysis Eckmann: You've already highlighted three formidable contenders who could make the lead actress race just as competitive as this year's. While we don't have a full picture of all the eligible contenders yet, it's hard to imagine a lineup without any of these women. That would mean that Levy and Michele score the first Tony nominations of their career. I believe Levy came close to a nomination with Hair and Frozen, and she is the type of Broadway mainstay that voters are eager to reward once the right part comes along. Michele is still riding high on a renewed sense of goodwill after rescuing the recent revival of Funny Girl, and the score to Chess is perfectly suited to her high belting capabilities. Speaking of Chess, Michele's costars should also find themselves hotly competitive. Most Broadway fans are already familiar with Tony winner Aaron Tveit, but I suspect the über-talented Nicholas Christopher to finally cement himself as a Broadway superstar with this revival. If you're a theater nerd whose never heard him sing before, prepare yourself for your new obsession. While there are far too many question marks with the musicals at this early stage — I desperately need to know who Pinkleton is going to cast as Frank 'N' Furter in Rocky Horror — we know much more about the plays since the fall is front-loaded with them. I attended Call Me Izzy, the first production of the 2025-26 season, the day before this year's Tony Awards. While the script itself may not be remembered a full year from now in the Best Play race, star Jean Smart is at the height of her powers, delivering a solo performance so devastating that voters will surely be able to remember it next spring. Other contenders for lead actress in a play will surely include whichever mystery actress is cast in Second Stage's revival of Marjorie Prime, which won accolades for star Lois Smith in the off-Broadway run — though at 94, I'm not expecting her to sign up for the Broadway staging. An audition notice has also spoiled that the play Little Bear Ridge is also aiming for Broadway this season. Laurie Metcalf starred in this Samuel D. Hunter play at Steppenwolf Theatre in Chicago. This could be Hunter's first play to transfer to Broadway, and Metcalf is a seemingly guaranteed Tony nominee should she reprise her role. Hunter's The Whale earned Shuler Hensley a Lucille Lortel Award, and the film adaptation scored an Oscar for Brendan Fraser. Perhaps he's written Metcalf a role worthy of Tony No. 3. What plays are you looking forward to next season? SEE 'Every beat is meticulously crafted': An oral history of the Pulitzer Prize- and Tony-winning play 'Purpose' Buchanan: It would be so wonderful to have Metcalf back on Broadway after her Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? shuttered prematurely due to COVID in March 2020. Yes, there are a lot of very exciting plays already announced for the season, from Marjorie Prime to fellow Pulitzer finalist Becky Shaw and Tony winner David Lindsay-Abaire's upper-crust satire The Balusters. I'm particularly interested in the U.K. transfers of Oedipus starring the absolutely fabulous Mark Strong and Lesley Manville in a modern, election night retelling of the classic Greek tragedy, as well as the true-story, chilling Punch. The announcement of Pulitzer winner Stephen Adly Guirgis's stage adaptation of Dog Day Afternoon caught me by surprise but seems like a brilliant work to adapt to the stage, especially with its two The Bear stars Ebon Moss-Bachrach and Jon Bernthal. Speaking of those performers, the Best Actor in a Play race already sounds competitive. We'll soon see Keanu Reeves and Alex Winter in Waiting for Godot, and I'll be especially curious to know what director Jamie Lloyd does with the play. He's been in a musical mode lately with this year's Tony winner Sunset Boulevard and now the London revival of Evita with Rachel Zegler, but I have been most taken with his staging of plays including Betrayal in 2019, and it'll be interesting to see how his minimalism matches this classic drama. Yasmina Reza's ART brings a trio of Tony-winning heavyweights back to Broadway with Bobby Cannavale, Neil Patrick Harris, and James Corden. Sight unseen, I'm already rooting for Strong to take home his first Tony, but I'm excited for surprises this Broadway season, too! SIGN UP for Gold Derby's free newsletter with latest predictions Best of GoldDerby 'Maybe Happy Ending' star Darren Criss on his Tony nomination for playing a robot: 'Getting to do this is the true win' Who Needs a Tony to Reach EGOT? Sadie Sink on her character's 'emotional rage' in 'John Proctor Is the Villain' and her reaction to 'Stranger Things: The First Shadow' Click here to read the full article.

‘The Last of Us': How the ‘Lord of the Rings' VFX team (and marshmallows) made the Battle of Jackson
‘The Last of Us': How the ‘Lord of the Rings' VFX team (and marshmallows) made the Battle of Jackson

Yahoo

time31 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

‘The Last of Us': How the ‘Lord of the Rings' VFX team (and marshmallows) made the Battle of Jackson

The Last of Us ended its first season on a high note. The finale, written by series cocreators Neil Druckmann and Craig Mazin, had the second-highest ratings among the first batch of episodes and proved that the cast and crew had done what was thought to be impossible. They had successfully (and faithfully) adapted a video game. More from GoldDerby 'Rosemead,' starring Lucy Liu, takes top prize at Bentonville Film Festival Tony Talk: Our extremely early 2026 awards predictions for 'Ragtime,' 'Waiting for Godot,' Kristin Chenoweth, and all the buzzy new shows 'Batman Forever' and 'Batman Begins' share an anniversary week - and a surprising Oscar connection Heading into Season 2, the Emmy-winning team behind the show, including the series' visual effect supervisor, Alex Wang, felt that they had proven their concept and were ready for something bigger. And on a show about surviving in a fungi-infested apocalypse, that means one thing. More infected. The VFX team had one big swarm under their belts — the infected's chaotic attack on a neighborhood cul-de-sac in Episode 5, "Endure and Survive." And for Season 2, there was only one direction in which to take things. "In the cul-de-sac, that was kind of the first glimpse of a horde of infected attacking, so we could get a sense of what we were capable of," Wang tells Gold Derby. "And Craig wanted to be bigger, and he wanted to really extend out in terms of scope for Season 2." What Mazin had in mind was something big and loud for the second episode, "Through the Valley," to counterbalance the gruesomely intimate drama playing out between Pedro Pascal's Joel and Kaitlyn Dever's Abby up at lodge. The solution Mazin came up with was a battle, embellishing a skirmish present in the game into something epic. And, to the eyes of Wang, epicly difficult. "When all the department heads read the script for Episode 2, we were gobsmacked," he recalls. "How were we going to pull this off? I mean, we were all like, 'No, this is, this is impossible. Guys, like, what? What are we doing here?'" But, as anyone who watched "Through the Valley" (and has the trauma to prove it) can attest, The Last of Us did indeed pull it off. And Gold Derby spoke with the team involved to find out just how they managed to do it. So why exactly did Wang's eyeballs nearly fall out of his head when he read the script for Episode 2? The goal of most visual effects shots is for the work to disappear and for the image that's being created to come to life. A battle sequence, especially one with hundreds of CGI characters, provides visual effects artists hundreds of opportunities to break the illusion. "Digital humans in this day and age are still difficult, especially when you're putting up a digital creature right next to a real person, because the question is not just, 'Does it look photoreal?'" Wang says. "Clearly we try to achieve that — and I hope we did — but also their movement. Performance is almost more important than how they look." And while the scripts alone were ambitious, Mazin's visual reference for the Battle of Jackson wasn't going to make the sequence any easier. "Craig definitely wanted his Two Towers," Wang says. If the visual effects team from The Last of Us was going to be able to evoke Helm's Deep for the proposed Battle of Jackson, Wang knew that there was one company better equipped than any other to take on the challenge: Weta FX. Director Peter Jackson founded the company, alongside Richard Taylor and Jamie Selkirk, and for The Lord of the Rings, the company pioneered technology that brought realistic, massive computer-generated simulated armies to the big screen for the first time, winning multiple Oscars along the way. Weta FX had done some work on Season 1 of The Last of Us, but the Battle of Jackson was going to test even the company's very experienced artists. Weta FX's Dennis Yoo, the animation supervisor on The Last of Us, originally moved to New Zealand, where he now lives, to work on The Return of the King. And he was able to explain how the old elves-versus-orcs tricks weren't going to work on the Battle of Jackson's recently thawed horde. The crowds running down the Wyoming mountainside couldn't be uniform like an army. They couldn't be all the same age. They couldn't wear the same clothes. And perhaps most importantly, they wouldn't move with military precision. "They're falling over each other," Yoo says. "They're tripping. They're pushing each other, and then there's this grander scale where it's almost like watching a huge mass of people reacting to different things." But even if the army of infected is moving right, they've got to look right too. Nick Epstein, the visual effects supervisor at Weta FX, and his team created a system to populate the digital throng with unique infected, based on scans of 30 stunt people in full prosthetics. Off of those bases, the team could add detail through a mix and match system that assigned specific hairstyles, wardrobe, and level of cordycep growth to each individual, resulting in a diverse mass. There's a major upside to staging a set piece like the Battle of Winterfell in the blackest of nights: It's harder to see detail. That wouldn't be the case with the Battle of Jackson, which would take place in daylight, albeit with some cover provided by a winter storm. "One of the only saving graces was that it was in the middle of a storm," Epstein says. "You'd have some visibility fall off at a certain point. But that doesn't help you with everything that's super close to camera. There's nowhere to hide at all. Blazing sunshine was definitely the worst." One of the first lines of defense for the people of Jackson, led by Gabriel Luna's Tommy Miller, are barrels of gasoline, which are shot and then lit aflame, sending the infected up with them. "Craig wanted performance changes, right?" Wang says. "The infected had to react to the fire, so here's a whole other type of mocap and animation from the animators that they had to consider." As the dead became deader and the corpses of the infected piled up outside the gates of Jackson, the visual effects team needs to account for what happens to those mounds, which are more logically complicated than you might imagine, or as Epstein describes them, his "biggest nightmare." Each pile of bodies wasn't one digital mass, but a collection of models, subject to ragdoll physics, which would fall on top of each other and then require their own simulated cloth to keep their clothing realistically moving. Multiply that 500 corpses, and it becomes easier to understand Epstein's struggle. For Tommy's 1-v-1 showdown with a bloater, Wang led his department on a journey to find the right visual reference for what it looks like when a massive mutated cordycep walks straight into a flamethrower. "We spent months doing research and trying physical burning of different materials, just to see what bubbling characteristics we wanted to include," Wang says. The team incinerated marshmallows and found macro photography YouTube videos of burning plastic, but ultimately found their favorite material in the produce section. "Tomato is actually one of the best things, because the skin would start to ripple and bubble and break apart," Wang says. "Then inside, there's all this juicy goodness that we wanted to match to. And it's basically what the skin of it represents, the skin of the bloater, because it had a hard shell, almost like armor." To a person, every visual effects artist who spoke with Gold Derby about the making of the Battle of Jackson agreed that it was the biggest challenge of their career. And each one of them reflected on the chaos they were able to render with genuine pride. "It was daunting to read the script," Wang says. "But everyone just wanted to give the script what it was calling for every single step." "This was just gnarly in terms of asset development, gnarly in terms of weather control, gnarly in terms of integration of our computer graphics with the plate," Epstein says. "It was really hard, really challenging, but also really rewarding, too." Best of GoldDerby Everything to know about 'The Pitt' Season 2 Adam Brody, Seth Rogen, Jason Segel, and the best of our Emmy Comedy Actor interviews Kristen Bell, Tina Fey, Bridget Everett, and the best of our Emmy Comedy Actress interviews Click here to read the full article.

‘Batman Forever' and ‘Batman Begins' share an anniversary week — and a surprising Oscar connection
‘Batman Forever' and ‘Batman Begins' share an anniversary week — and a surprising Oscar connection

Yahoo

time31 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

‘Batman Forever' and ‘Batman Begins' share an anniversary week — and a surprising Oscar connection

Holy double anniversary, Batman! Two Dark Knight features are celebrating milestone dates this week, as 1995's Batman Forever hits the big 3-0, while 2005's Batman Begins turns one year shy of legal drinking age. At first glance, it's tough to see what thses two very different Bat-movies might have in common apart from their summertime release dates and, of course, that masked vigilante with a lot of wonderful toys. But zoom out for a minute and the riddle of how the films connect becomes less difficult to solve. More from GoldDerby 'Rosemead,' starring Lucy Liu, takes top prize at Bentonville Film Festival Tony Talk: Our extremely early 2026 awards predictions for 'Ragtime,' 'Waiting for Godot,' Kristin Chenoweth, and all the buzzy new shows 'The Last of Us': How the 'Lord of the Rings' VFX team (and marshmallows) made the Battle of Jackson For starters, each movie famously placed a new actor under the cowl. Val Kilmer proved that Michael Keaton wouldn't be Batman forever, while Christian Bale provided the character with a new beginning after George Clooney botched his big Bat moment. Both films are also odd-numbered entries designed to undo the real and/or perceived errors of their even-numbered predecessors. Joel Schumacher's Batman Forever (released on June 16, 1995) followed Tim Burton's Batman Returns, a sequel that was considered 'too dark' upon its 1992 release, but arguably holds up as the best of the bunch. Warner Bros./courtesy Everett Collection Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins (released on June 15, 2005), meanwhile, was a course correction after Schumacher careened into day-glo nightmare territory with 1997's Batman & Robin, the fourth and final entry in the original Bat-cycle. (Not to be confused with that other Batcycle.) And here's a cinematographic connection you may have forgotten about: the two films were nominated for the same Oscar — Best Cinematography — exactly ten years apart. Batman Forever's director of photography, Stephen Goldblatt, received the second of his two nominations for the 68th Academy Awards. A decade later, the 78th Academy Awards brought Nolan's then-regular D.P. Wally Pfister the first of his four nominations. While neither cinematographer ended up taking home the statue, both nominations were significant notches on the utility belt for the Batman film franchise, not to mention comic book movies in general. Warner Bros./courtesy Everett Collection To date, only six comics-derived movies have been recognized in that category, and four of them are Caped Crusader-affiliated; The Dark Knight and Joker were later nominated in 2009 and 2020, respectively. (Dick Tracy and Road to Perdition round out that particular justice league.) In honor of this unique Bat-iversary, here's our rundown on how each movie earned — and lost — its shot at a Best Cinematography award. In Goldblatt's Gotham City, the night is dark and full of… colors. Primary reds, neon greens and deep purples abound in Batman Forever, which embraces both Silver Age comics and super-saturated '90s music videos. The embrace of Dick Tracy five years earlier showed that Academy voters at the time clearly preferred their comic book characters to inhabit a more colorful universe, and that's what Goldblatt delivered. 'Joel wanted to literally make it comic book looking …. For the lights, I didn't use normal rigging. It was all rock 'n' roll rigging. I had a concert lighting guy and his crew. I could adjust the color and the intensity, the direction and the diffusion of each lamp without having to go to each lamp. They were all fed down to consoles on the stage floor. We could move very, very quickly. The conventional way could have taken days. It gave it that rock 'n' roll comic book look' — as told to The Hollywood Reporter 'Schumacher's Batman Forever returns the story to its pop origins. It may be dark, but it ain't heavy.' — Hal Hinson, The Washington Post 'Batman Forever is a sound-and-light show that jumps from the screen and spreads itself out to every corner of the house.' — Mick LaSalle, San Francisco Chronicle 'The visuals seem less like images than like a light show. Quick cutting, garish costumes and visual special effects are not thrilling; they're numbing.' — Barbara Shulgasser, San Francisco Examiner Michael Coulter, Sense and Sensibility Emmanuel Lubezki, A Little Princess John Toll, Braveheart Lü Yue, Shanghai Triad In a devilish twist, Batman Forever's resident Riddler Jim Carrey was enlisted to present the Best Cinematography statue at that year's ceremony. Bringing a set of Toy Story action figures onstage with him, Carrey characteristically clowned around for a bit before getting to the nominees — and notably declined to mention his specific connection to Goldblatt. Ultimately, Toll took home the "lord of all knick-knacks" for his work on Mel Gibson's Best Picture-winning Scottish epic. Post-loss, Goldblatt reunited with Schumacher for Batman & Robin... a Bat-assignment that didn't return him to Oscar contention. Later credits included Closer, The Help and Red, White & Royal Blue; in recent years, he's stepped away from the film industry to focus on his photography. Relaunching a franchise is a monumental task, and Nolan constructed a monumental production that employed an army of skilled artisans committed to his vision of a grounded real-world take on a vintage comic character. In that way, Batman Begins was a notable contrast not just to previous Batman movies, but also ascendent superhero spectacles like Sam Raimi's Spider-Man and Bryan Singer's X-Men, which occupied heightened realities. Through Pfister's lens, Gotham resembled a real city... even if it had a big Bat problem. 'Tim Burton's Batman came from a very visionary and idiosyncratic view of the character… [and] they created an environment for Batman that was as exotic and extraordinary as Batman himself. That worked very well, but Batman has never had a film that portrayed him as an extraordinary figure [amid] a relatively ordinary and recognizable world. That was the thrill I've been seeking—the thrill of being amazed and of seeing the ordinary citizens of Gotham be as amazed about Batman as we are.' — as told to American Cinematographer 'Unlike the earlier films, which delighted in extravagant special-effects action, Batman Begins is shrouded in shadow; instead of high-detail, sharp-edged special effects, we get obscure developments in fog and smoke, reinforced by a superb sound-effects design.' Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times 'Half the time Batman stalks his criminal quarry unseen, or as a barely glimpsed, utterly ominous shadow; there are echoes of Fritz Lang's Dr. Mabuse series, not to mention Metropolis, and the cinematography by Nolan regular Wally Pfister is noir and then some.' Marc Savlov, Austin Chronicle 'The film accurately, and refreshingly, refuses to shy away from the slightly deranged madness of its titular hero. Such harshness is reflected in Wally Pfister's night-swathed cinematography and Nathan Crowley's production design, which casts Gotham as an open urban sore in which poverty, crime, and squalor co-exist in virulent symbiosis,' Nick Schager, Slant Dion Beebe, Memoirs of a Geisha Robert Elswit, Good Night, and Good Luck Emmauel Lubezki, The New World Rodrigo Prieto, Brokeback Mountain As the lone contemporary blockbuster among the nominees, Batman Begins found itself in a pitched battle with four period pieces. And the past ended up triumphing over the present. John Travolta presented the Oscar to Beebe, who transported audiences back to pre-World War II era Japan in Memoirs of a Geisha, directed by Rob Marshall. (Another cool coincidence: Emmanuel Lubezki was a repeat Bat-foe, nominated for A Little Princess in 1995 and The New World in 2005.) Unlike Goldblatt, Pfister's Batman follow-up awarded him a repeat trip to the Oscars. Released in 2008, The Dark Knight built on the promise of Batman Begins and remains the most-nominated Batman-centric movie to date—although it controversially missed out on a Best Picture nod, inspiring a category expansion that continues to this day. Pfister eventually won an Oscar for Inception and collaborated with Nolan on the trilogy-capper The Dark Knight Rises before striking out on his own as a of GoldDerby Tom Cruise movies: 17 greatest films ranked worst to best 'It was wonderful to be on that ride': Christian Slater talks his beloved roles, from cult classics ('Heathers,' 'True Romance') to TV hits ('Mr. Robot,' 'Dexter: Original Sin') 'It almost killed me': Horror maestro Mike Flanagan looks back at career-making hits from 'Gerald's Game' to 'Hill House' to 'Life of Chuck' Click here to read the full article.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store