A real life SW experience?

[underdone]

https://news.airbnb.com/polly-pocket/





"For 35 years, Polly PocketTM has always been, well, pocket-sized—that is, until now. This summer, Polly’s iconic home straight out of a ‘90s dream is now open for an adventure of life-sized proportions, only on Airbnb.

To celebrate Polly Pocket’s 35th birthday, the pocket-sized doll is becoming an Airbnb host and opening her vintage-themed, two-story Slumber Party Fun compact, bringing to life a tiny world where imagination has no bounds. The pad is packed with nostalgic surprises to take guests right back to their childhoods while getting the 411 on the pocket-sized life.

“I can’t wait for you to visit and help celebrate my birthday in my most epic compact ever,” said Polly. “Let’s have some serious slumber party fun in my hometown of Littleton, where we make the ordinary extraordinary. There’s adventure to be had from my closet full of nostalgic fashion fun to the surprises I’ve left hidden around the compact. The fun is endless!”"









--

[DocRick]

Does it come with a giant robot for the whole experience?

[Heny]

No. A real life SW experience would be if I could hold the miniature woman in my hand.

[DocRick]

No. A real life SW experience would be if I could hold the miniature woman in my hand.

True for you, but it sounds like this one if for the ladies to fulfill their fantasy.

[DocRick]

[pokonota]

The only human to be a real-life SW is Jessica Lange, who really was placed in giant hands that actually toyed with her body. Well, not exactly SW, but it's the closest irl imho

[Prof Sai]

That can't be a real photo. The trees are wildly out of scale with the "building".

[DocRick]

That can't be a real photo. The trees are wildly out of scale with the "building".

It is. It's located in Littleton, Massachusetts.

[DocRick]

The only human to be a real-life SW is Jessica Lange, who really was placed in giant hands that actually toyed with her body. Well, not exactly SW, but it's the closest irl imho

Fay Wray was also held in a giant hand, though it didn't have articulating fingers so yes, Jessica got the "real" SW experience. But weren't there handhelds in "King Kong Lives"? There was a promo picture of Linda Hamilton in the "hand" but I don't think it was in the movie. Only an "SM" in Mrs. Kong's hand.

[Little Sally]

The only human to be a real-life SW is Jessica Lange, who really was placed in giant hands that actually toyed with her body. Well, not exactly SW, but it's the closest irl imho

Fay Wray was also held in a giant hand, though it didn't have articulating fingers so yes, Jessica got the "real" SW experience. But weren't there handhelds in "King Kong Lives"? There was a promo picture of Linda Hamilton in the "hand" but I don't think it was in the movie. Only an "SM" in Mrs. Kong's hand.

They tested an articulated 1933 Kong hand in the studio, with the help of a female employee (see pic). And I'm sure there were handhelds in Japanese variants of the theme. "King Kong Escapes" being one that definitely had some.

[Little Sally]

That can't be a real photo. The trees are wildly out of scale with the "building".

It is. It's located in Littleton, Massachusetts.

Apparently so!

Americans might struggle to find presidential candidates.. But hey! They can excel at building a Barbie house!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJceD1jg-fE&t=88s

[DocRick]

They tested an articulated 1933 Kong hand in the studio, with the help of a female employee (see pic). And I'm sure there were handhelds in Japanese variants of the theme. "King Kong Escapes" being one that definitely had some.

I watched a special on monster movies a while back. They said '33 Kong hand was just a hollow fist and Ms. Wray was strapped into it with a cable. I remember a lot of handhelds in the Japanese Kong movies, but most were either green screen or just a flat palm of a hand. Nothing like the hand in '77 Kong. The handheld scene where she pushes the index finger off of her breasts wasn't in the script. She just did it and the director liked how it looked like she was struggling so hard, so he kept it in the final cut.

[Little Sally]

They tested an articulated 1933 Kong hand in the studio, with the help of a female employee (see pic). And I'm sure there were handhelds in Japanese variants of the theme. "King Kong Escapes" being one that definitely had some.

I watched a special on monster movies a while back. They said '33 Kong hand was just a hollow fist and Ms. Wray was strapped into it with a cable. I remember a lot of handhelds in the Japanese Kong movies, but most were either green screen or just a flat palm of a hand. Nothing like the hand in '77 Kong. The handheld scene where she pushes the index finger off of her breasts wasn't in the script. She just did it and the director liked how it looked like she was struggling so hard, so he kept it in the final cut.

Well I'm not disputing whether 'mechanical' giant hands were used or not in the various Kong films, but more about if the effects they used justified the end result. Where to me the original movie of '33 scores the highest in my book, considering the technical limitations of the period. Plus the scale of the woman in relation to the size of King Kong's hands was just about perfect in the original, and just how it was meant to be.

'76 with Jessica? Pretty good. But if we're talking about handhelds (which I thought we were), they should have gone for the scale of '33.

[DocRick]

Well I'm not disputing whether 'mechanical' giant hands were used or not in the various Kong films, but more about if the effects they used justified the end result. Where to me the original movie of '33 scores the highest in my book, considering the technical limitations of the period. Plus the scale of the woman in relation to the size of King Kong's hands was just about perfect in the original, and just how it was meant to be.

'76 with Jessica? Pretty good. But if we're talking about handhelds (which I thought we were), they should have gone for the scale of '33.

Jessica was half the comparative size of '33 Jane. But I think the scenes of her sitting in Kong's hand wouldn't have worked as well if she was "larger", but I am a little bit biased, preferring the 5-6 inch SWs. I think the point pokanota was raising that Jessica got to be "handled" by fairly realistic giant articulating hands giving her an SW experience more so than the following CGI movies or the previous movies that probably just used big nonmoving rubber hands. Jessica did get her breasts fondled and exposed by Kong's fingertip, though that scene was cut from most showings of the movie.

[Little Sally]

Well I'm not disputing whether 'mechanical' giant hands were used or not in the various Kong films, but more about if the effects they used justified the end result. Where to me the original movie of '33 scores the highest in my book, considering the technical limitations of the period. Plus the scale of the woman in relation to the size of King Kong's hands was just about perfect in the original, and just how it was meant to be.

'76 with Jessica? Pretty good. But if we're talking about handhelds (which I thought we were), they should have gone for the scale of '33.

Jessica was half the comparative size of '33 Jane. But I think the scenes of her sitting in Kong's hand wouldn't have worked as well if she was "larger", but I am a little bit biased, preferring the 5-6 inch SWs.

Well we can't get away from the usual reference about size preferences, and I agree. If you need to portray a woman squatting in the palm of a hand, then she needs to be of a certain size to make that work. Saying that, she could maybe have been a tad larger, but not by much.

But as a result of having her that size, you lose the aesthetic of an appealing handheld where she's actually in Kong's grasp, with his fingers around her. Where they almost totally enclose her, and conceal most of her body. But if that's the kind of size you like your small women to be, then I guess it doesn't matter.

On a purely artistic note, it's much easier to create imagery of shrunken women at the smaller size scales, where a so called 'handheld' often passes as having them sat on a giant palm in many cases. Or if actually held in a hand, just giving a view of their little head and shoulders (and possibly arms) poking out above some clenched fingers. Which is hardly what you'd call demanding or inventive to achieve.

I think the point pokanota was raising that Jessica got to be "handled" by fairly realistic giant articulating hands giving her an SW experience more so than the following CGI movies or the previous movies that probably just used big nonmoving rubber hands. Jessica did get her breasts fondled and exposed by Kong's fingertip, though that scene was cut from most showings of the movie.

Yes, I think there's some imagery available of those cut scenes. And don't get me wrong, I thought Jessica was superb in making those handling sequences work well. It can't have been easy being poked by a mechanical hairy log, and attempting to make it seem seductive.

My actual favourite parts was where she was attempting to escape (ie, making a run for it), with Kong easily reaching out and recapturing her. I thought the helpless frustration she displayed when that happened, was very erotic.

Yes '76 certainly had its moments, and only missed for me personally because of the size scales. The erotic nature of Fay Wray's unconscious undressing in the original movie, still has to be surpassed for me.

[DocRick]

I guess it's just a matter of preference. I suppose you played with Barbie dolls as a child so maybe that's why you prefer the larger size SW aspect. As for me, it was LOTG and '76 Kong, so the 5"-6" size has it's hold on me. As I got older, I was more impressed with the making of '33 Kong, the wonderful affects they created with the technology available in the infancy of movie making. This said, it's the same reason I'm far from impressed with the later King Kong movies made with vast amounts of CGI, such as the Naomi Watts and Jack Black Kong. For the same reason, I prefer collaging to AI.

I agree, the simple act of placing a tiny woman in the palm of a hand doesn't take much effort or imagination, though sometimes it does fit the storyline. I like to use hands with curled fingers, whether the curled fingers represent a cage for a captive SW or "guardrails" for a more romantic SW scene, so I usually have to use the layering of the fingers as the SW is in usually in front of the thumb and behind the some of the fingers.

The undressing scene is '33 was well done and the later scene when she falls off the cliff into the ocean was way over the edge for times.



This scene in '76, to me at least, was just as well done, though again, the frame exposing her breasts was cut from many copies of the movie. As you can see in this shot, her dress is down to her waist, so she is totally exposed up top.



The attempted escape scene was also one of my favorite scenes, and the waterfall scene that follows. Really shows the tender side of Kong and you get the feeling he is in love with her, though frustrated by her "rejection" of his advances.





This is one of my favorite pictures from the movie when I first saw it on the cover of a TIME magazine. I've been attempting to recreate it as an SW scene ever since, from freehand drawing to literal "cut and paste" to now collaging. Still haven't been able to accomplish a decent image. The top part of the SW is easy, but I just can't get the legs right. There is a collage out there titled "poking her" that if they had reversed the SW image, it may have accomplished what I've been trying to do.



No one is right or wrong, whether micro or macro SW, it's whatever floats your boat. Sadly, our current society seems to make some people think that if you do not like what they like, you're being insensitive. Hey, I prefer Jeeps to Land Rovers, but I won't badmouth anyone who drives a Land Rover.

[Little Sally]

I guess it's just a matter of preference. I suppose you played with Barbie dolls as a child so maybe that's why you prefer the larger size SW aspect. As for me, it was LOTG and '76 Kong, so the 5"-6" size has it's hold on me. As I got older, I was more impressed with the making of '33 Kong, the wonderful affects they created with the technology available in the infancy of movie making. This said, it's the same reason I'm far from impressed with the later King Kong movies made with vast amounts of CGI, such as the Naomi Watts and Jack Black Kong. For the same reason, I prefer collaging to AI.

Oh yes of course, size preference has always been a divisive thing in this hobby, but I'm far more tolerant about it nowadays (as long as it's not too small that the woman is practically invisible). I agree mostly with what you say about the films too, with '33 and '76 both fine examples of their time. Got to say I did enjoy the Naomi Watts portrayal also, which told the original story pretty well. Though it was nothing like as erotic as '33 and '76. Plus I guess I'm more accepting of (movie) CGI, and I can easily fool myself it's real imagery for the duration I'm watching. Not so with the kind of AI stuff that gets posted on places like this though (but let's not go there).

I agree, the simple act of placing a tiny woman in the palm of a hand doesn't take much effort or imagination, though sometimes it does fit the storyline. I like to use hands with curled fingers, whether the curled fingers represent a cage for a captive SW or "guardrails" for a more romantic SW scene, so I usually have to use the layering of the fingers as the SW is in usually in front of the thumb and behind the some of the fingers.

Of course, simple scenes have their place. Also, I wasn't referring to your own stuff. You know enough about what you're doing now to recognise what works and what doesn't, and what you've described shows you've got the right ideas.

This is one of my favorite pictures from the movie when I first saw it on the cover of a TIME magazine. I've been attempting to recreate it as an SW scene ever since, from freehand drawing to literal "cut and paste" to now collaging. Still haven't been able to accomplish a decent image. The top part of the SW is easy, but I just can't get the legs right. There is a collage out there titled "poking her" that if they had reversed the SW image, it may have accomplished what I've been trying to do.

Ok. I recognise the shot as being the one where she's initially captured (from between the ropes on the altar). But what is it you're actually wanting to do? Create a similar pic where the subject (but not her) is in the same kind of pose, but in a human hand?

Or use Jessica in that pose in a human hand?

Let me know it sounds interesting.

The only effort I've made to use a '76 shot for something else is the one below. Which involved removing Jessica from it (yes I know, that is sacrilege haha!). It was just a silly idea entitled "Never take a run on Skull Island", but I think it worked.

No one is right or wrong, whether micro or macro SW, it's whatever floats your boat. Sadly, our current society seems to make some people think that if you do not like what they like, you're being insensitive. Hey, I prefer Jeeps to Land Rovers, but I won't badmouth anyone who drives a Land Rover.

I couldn't agree more. It's become like treading on egg shells trying not to offend people on here, and it's just supposed to be a silly fantasy!

[DocRick]

I couldn't agree more. It's become like treading on egg shells trying not to offend people on here, and it's just supposed to be a silly fantasy!

Exactly. A difference of opinion doesn't mean either side is wrong. The guy who runs the animal shelter I volunteer at says even giving instructions is taken as criticism by the younger employees. So glad I'm retired so I don't have to deal with them.

[Little Sally]

I couldn't agree more. It's become like treading on egg shells trying not to offend people on here, and it's just supposed to be a silly fantasy!

Exactly. A difference of opinion doesn't mean either side is wrong. The guy who runs the animal shelter I volunteer at says even giving instructions is taken as criticism by the younger employees. So glad I'm retired so I don't have to deal with them.

Yes, I can understand that, and I'm planning on retiring myself. Not from my r/l job unfortunately, but retiring from these fantasies lol!

Btw. You didn't answer the question in my previous post regarding the Jessica pic.

[DocRick]

Btw. You didn't answer the question in my previous post regarding the Jessica pic.

Sorry, I blame old age. No, it would have to be Jessica from the picture, just a female (or two halves of females, top with arms up in front of chest and legs with one straight and one bent backwards) and a fist.

[Little Sally]

Btw. You didn't answer the question in my previous post regarding the Jessica pic.

Sorry, I blame old age. No, it would have to be Jessica from the picture, just a female (or two halves of females, top with arms up in front of chest and legs with one straight and one bent backwards) and a fist.

I think what I'd try is create a human hand shape to mimic that of Kong (as in the picture), and work from that. Then maybe select what's visible of Jessica in the pic, and create a png of it, and have your new (human) hand in png form as the recipient. Does that make sense?

If you use your own hand as the "hand" subject you can keep trying until you get it to match the shape of Kong's hand. Where you could "layer" it on to the original picture to get as close to Kong's hand shape as possible (like using Kong's hand as a template). Then once you have your Jessica image and the hand as two seperate png images, normal collaging procedures can apply. Would that work with the program you use?

[DocRick]

I think what I'd try is create a human hand shape to mimic that of Kong (as in the picture), and work from that. Then maybe select what's visible of Jessica in the pic, and create a png of it, and have your new (human) hand in png form as the recipient. Does that make sense?

If you use your own hand as the "hand" subject you can keep trying until you get it to match the shape of Kong's hand. Where you could "layer" it on to the original picture to get as close to Kong's hand shape as possible (like using Kong's hand as a template). Then once you have your Jessica image and the hand as two seperate png images, normal collaging procedures can apply. Would that work with the program you use?

I just haven't been able to find the right pictures to make it work.

[Little Sally]

I think what I'd try is create a human hand shape to mimic that of Kong (as in the picture), and work from that. Then maybe select what's visible of Jessica in the pic, and create a png of it, and have your new (human) hand in png form as the recipient. Does that make sense?

If you use your own hand as the "hand" subject you can keep trying until you get it to match the shape of Kong's hand. Where you could "layer" it on to the original picture to get as close to Kong's hand shape as possible (like using Kong's hand as a template). Then once you have your Jessica image and the hand as two seperate png images, normal collaging procedures can apply. Would that work with the program you use?

I just haven't been able to find the right pictures to make it work.

I'll maybe have a go at it for you when I have some time.

[Little Sally]

Btw. You didn't answer the question in my previous post regarding the Jessica pic.

Sorry, I blame old age. No, it would have to be Jessica from the picture, just a female (or two halves of females, top with arms up in front of chest and legs with one straight and one bent backwards) and a fist.

Is this one the kind of image you had in mind?

[DocRick]

Btw. You didn't answer the question in my previous post regarding the Jessica pic.

Sorry, I blame old age. No, it would have to be Jessica from the picture, just a female (or two halves of females, top with arms up in front of chest and legs with one straight and one bent backwards) and a fist.

Is this one the kind of image you had in mind?

Yes. One leg encircled by the fingers and the other leg free and kicking. Below is a rough example of one I'm working on.




Changed the head