The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

[jye4ever]

Wow, my wife has an aunt with the same name, how awesome.

 

[Morgul Matt]

Is he wearing lipstick

Real men wear lipstick!


Isn't that right, fellas?


..........


No. Just me then.

 

[DiFabio]

that's why I suggested a tv show. getting a 13 "Hour" episode run on LOTR stuff is More than enough time to do all they want with it.



well... to be honest he is kind of getting there. He might be a better director and a better storyteller but the hobbit movies are not that far off from the ST prequels. CGI everywhere...

Oh please. The Hobbit isn't even close to the SW prequels when it comes to CGI. And LotR has more in it than people care to admit.

Seeing parts of actual NZ in the hobbit trilogy is akin to Bilbo climbing the tree in Mirkwood and getting a breath of fresh air.

It was made in one of the most beautiful places on earth yet most of could have been shot on an LA soundstage.

I need to find the article I was reading, basically it was PJ saying how he wished he had today's tech for making lotr and that all the orcs in that would have been CG also, just so depressing to read.
I'm so glad they made rings when they did.

Not all the CGI is bad. I think Gollum/Smeagol in the Hobbit was absolute perfection. Seriously, I had this lump in my throat when he was on screen from the work they did with his life filled eyes. The skin texture, the glossiness of his skin from being in the caves for so long, were superb. In fact, the effects for him were better than what they were in LOTR. Then there was Smaug, he looked just like how I imagined he would be, but better. He's one of the best film dragon/effects creatures I've seen and had real character. There are also some locations that are completely CG that looked fantastic, the mirkwood forest being the prime example. The spiders were well done and that little moment where Bilbo is above the tree line, taking a breath of fresh air felt real.

The things that I think are awful are all the other creatures and orcs. I agree with the criticisms. The orcs and goblins look awful in these movies compared to LOTR and the lack of practical effects have a lot to do with it. I've hated the look of Azog and Co. since day one. Things like Radghast's bunny sled, the shots of huge armies, and ninja floatin' Bombur are truly horrific in my eyes and reek of Jackson being too reliant on special effects. The absolute worst thing though is the glowing light effect going on these movies. Everything from locations to character are emitting this soft, glowing light like they're all ****ing elves! Why? Because 90% of what we're seeing is green and blue screen. Fake ****. In LOTR, this was used at a minimum, especially in the first two. The only things that really emitted this light were . . . the elves. It made sense. Arwen was retouched in post production, Galadriel, etc. Nobody is denying that those films had CGI visual effects done to them, but there was a better balance. Things started to look fake and artificial towards Return of the King, especially once you get to Minas Tirith, the Paths of the Dead and Pelennor fields, but not like this. I remember cringing when Legolas did his Oliphant stunt in Return of the King (which is fortunately saved by Gimli's "only counts as one" line) and a few shots of Aragorn's coronation, but the Hobbit movies have these multiplied by 10. The color grading and effects are way too saturated in the Hobbit movies and the locations and miniatures are far and few between. It's like Gandalf the White or Galadriel are emitting in every scene in the Hobbit movies to the point where it never feels real or gritty. The great thing about LOTR is it had a nice mix of practical and CGI work. We had huge miniatures, prosthetic monsters, huge sets, and a lot of on location shooting. Think of all the hand made work and hours that went into the Uruk armor, the chain mail, the moveable masks, the performances, that are nonexistent in the Hobbit that are simply made in a computer. The main CGI elements in LOTR were characters that couldn't be done for real (Balrog, Gollum, etc.) and "doubles" like the Fellowship crossing the bridge of Khazad Dum or 10,000 Uruk Hai at Helms Deep. You know what though? Those were integrated with real settings from models, matte paintings and other tricks. Hobbit is over relies on effects and abuse them, this is especially evident when you look at the making of/behind the scenes documentaries.


Aragorn said it best,


Viggo Mortensen Criticizes Peter Jackson, CGI and The Hobbit - IGN


Sometimes limitations are good things. It forces you to be more creative and stretch your boundaries. When you can make anything you want, things will start to look sterile and unnatural. That's where the Star Wars prequel comparisons come from.

 

[Irvy]

Absolutley, not everything can be done practically ie Gollum and Smaug, giant spiders etc which all look fantastic in the hobbit films btw.

I love watching the extra discs on the lotr EE and all the amazing miniature and prop work they crafted at weta.

One of the most heartbreaking things on the AUJ extras is the part when McKellan breaks down and cries out of frustration when he was forced to act in a greenscreen void by himself because of scale issues with the dwarfs. Headscratching when in Fellowship they cleverly used scaled props and forced perspective to get around it.

Jackson is skipping down the path of Jim Cameron as a tech obsessed weirdo.

 

[Adolfo]

Cgi is the present and future and forever will be. It will be used more and more, period. There is no stopping it. Especially when it's a part where you need hundreds or maybe thousands of extras. Plus new worlds being created all the time, etc,etc.

 

[DEADDACK_33]

Oh....my.....God

Smaug Attacks

 

[Brainiac]

Oh....my.....God

Smaug Attacks

That was cool, thanks for the link

 

[The Ween]

I don't have any problem with CGI. I agree with Adolfo, it's here to stay and will be used more and more.

As much as I love Viggo, he is a bit.......artsy, fartsy. He probably would've never even been in LotR if it wasn't for his son, Harry, who talked him into it. He prefers independent films and films that have a message. The "mess" he talked about won an Oscar and has become a treasure to many people.

And I love King Kong.

 

[crows]

Seeing parts of actual NZ in the hobbit trilogy is akin to Bilbo climbing the tree in Mirkwood and getting a breath of fresh air.

It was made in one of the most beautiful places on earth yet most of could have been shot on an LA soundstage.

I need to find the article I was reading, basically it was PJ saying how he wished he had today's tech for making lotr and that all the orcs in that would have been CG also, just so depressing to read.
I'm so glad they made rings when they did.

this. I meant to quote this before. what was the point of going all the way over there since they could easily do the entire movie with green screen

basically the only reason they went back there was so that the fans wouldn't lose their crap and for the nostalgia factor. they had no reason whatsoever to go back. good old Peter Lucas could have made the whole thing in a studio lol

 

[rushmore223]

this. I meant to quote this before. what was the point of going all the way over there since they could easily do the entire movie with green screen

basically the only reason they went back there was so that the fans wouldn't lose their crap and for the nostalgia factor. they had no reason whatsoever to go back. good old Peter Lucas could have made the whole thing in a studio lol

That, and I'm sure giving New Zealand the economic boon by having the production there was important to him.

 

[jye4ever]

Want to see really crappy CG, go to ROTK when one of the big rocks is catapulted from MT towards the battlefield, go watch that rock land.

Yikes, worst CG from any of the movies.

 

[jye4ever]

I don't have any problem with CGI. I agree with Adolfo, it's here to stay and will be used more and more.

As much as I love Viggo, he is a bit.......artsy, fartsy. He probably would've never even been in LotR if it wasn't for his son, Harry, who talked him into it. He prefers independent films and films that have a message. The "mess" he talked about won an Oscar and has become a treasure to many people.

And I love King Kong.

I agree, very artsy fartsy, but no denying that Fellowship has an incredibly organic look to it, that movie could be taking place in my backyard.

 

[The Ween]

That, and I'm sure giving New Zealand the economic boon by having the production there was important to him.

Especially since he's from there, Weta is there, and a lot of the actors are from there.

 

[The Ween]

I agree, very artsy fartsy, but no denying that Fellowship has an incredibly organic look to it, that movie could be taking place in my backyard.

Hobbiton.....

Jye's backyard.....

 

[jye4ever]

My wife's shrubs needs some trimming, sheesh.

 

[Jokes & Bats]

The things that I think are awful are all the other creatures and orcs. I agree with the criticisms. The orcs and goblins look awful in these movies compared to LOTR and the lack of practical effects have a lot to do with it. I've hated the look of Azog and Co. since day one. Things like Radghast's bunny sled, the shots of huge armies, and ninja floatin' Bombur are truly horrific in my eyes and reek of Jackson being too reliant on special effects. The absolute worst thing though is the glowing light effect going on these movies. Everything from locations to character are emitting this soft, glowing light like they're all ****ing elves! Why? Because 90% of what we're seeing is green and blue screen. Fake ****. In LOTR, this was used at a minimum, especially in the first two. The only things that really emitted this light were . . . the elves. It made sense. Arwen was retouched in post production, Galadriel, etc. Nobody is denying that those films had CGI visual effects done to them, but there was a better balance. Things started to look fake and artificial towards Return of the King, especially once you get to Minas Tirith, the Paths of the Dead and Pelennor fields, but not like this. I remember cringing when Legolas did his Oliphant stunt in Return of the King (which is fortunately saved by Gimli's "only counts as one" line) and a few shots of Aragorn's coronation, but the Hobbit movies have these multiplied by 10. The color grading and effects are way too saturated in the Hobbit movies and the locations and miniatures are far and few between. It's like Gandalf the White or Galadriel are emitting in every scene in the Hobbit movies to the point where it never feels real or gritty. The great thing about LOTR is it had a nice mix of practical and CGI work. We had huge miniatures, prosthetic monsters, huge sets, and a lot of on location shooting. Think of all the hand made work and hours that went into the Uruk armor, the chain mail, the moveable masks, the performances, that are nonexistent in the Hobbit that are simply made in a computer. The main CGI elements in LOTR were characters that couldn't be done for real (Balrog, Gollum, etc.) and "doubles" like the Fellowship crossing the bridge of Khazad Dum or 10,000 Uruk Hai at Helms Deep. You know what though? Those were integrated with real settings from models, matte paintings and other tricks. Hobbit is over relies on effects and abuse them, this is especially evident when you look at the making of/behind the scenes documentaries.


Aragorn said it best,


Viggo Mortensen Criticizes Peter Jackson, CGI and The Hobbit - IGN


Sometimes limitations are good things. It forces you to be more creative and stretch your boundaries. When you can make anything you want, things will start to look sterile and unnatural. That's where the Star Wars prequel comparisons come from.

Perfectly put.

 

[Irvy]

Want to see really crappy CG, go to ROTK when one of the big rocks is catapulted from MT towards the battlefield, go watch that rock land.

Yikes, worst CG from any of the movies.

Or the skull avalanche...

 

[Darth Snoopy]

Hobbiton.....

Jye's backyard.....

 

[The Ween]

My wife's shrubs needs some trimming, sheesh.

Ni!

 

[spindrift]

First reviews are in and not good- looks like a bad finish...we will see.