Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I was not very impressed by the trailer. I really wanted to be and I enjoyed the first movie but this had some problems. The main one being the CGI, which did not look particularly great and made the thing look even more cartoonish which was an issue I had with An Unexpected Journey. I understand that the source material is lighter than that of other Tolkien works but there's way to do that in a film without forgoing tactility and blowing up every scene to huge proportions. Hopefully the CG will be greatly improved by the time it is released.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 18k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • BloodBoal

    2943

  • Incanus

    1810

  • #SnowyVernalSpringsEternal

    1537

  • Jay

    1305

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Well I'll say that my excitement is reaching fever pitch. In one week I'll be returning to Middle-Earth with a great group of people in the theater. A slightly different Middle-Earth than I might wis

I don't like the giant dwarf statue by the way....again, dwarves don't make great statues, and they just look all the more fake.

I protest! How do you know they do not make gigantic statues?

-Mikko who is also rather disheartened by the trailer, but can handle some giant statues- ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shut up, Boal. CG isn't automatically horrible every time it's used

When did I say that? I just said that the CGI in the trailer look bad (the CG elves, Smaug's head, Ninjump Tauriel...). Never said CG is always horrible.

you misunderstand the effects process if you think these shots aren't full of mattes and hand crafted elements, even though they aren't real location shots.

Again, when did I say that? Just because I prefer real locations over CG locations doesn't mean I automatically reject every CG location. I'm just saying the CG locations in this trailer don't look really good to me. Yes, I know, it's just a teaser trailer, they have 5 to 6 months to improve these shots, but let's face it, even with the same amount of time, the first film had its fair share of bad CG (Radgy's sled, anyone?). Of course, I'd love to be proven wrong and be impressed by the CG in the final film. But so far, nothing in that trailer impressed me. That is all.

Dude, the idea that CG is always bad is exactly what you conveyed. Chaac and I complemented the locales and you sarcastically responded "which CG locales are you referring to?" But whatever. Thanks for clearing it up. And no, I didn't think everything in the trailer was great.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude, the idea that CG is always bad is exactly what you conveyed. Chaac and I complemented the locales and you sarcastically responded "which CG locales are you referring to?"

Yes, I said that because it seems 90% of the locales seen in the trailer are CG. That is all. If there is anything I wanted to convey, it was more than I'm sad there are so little actual locations compared to CG ones.

And no, I didn't think everything in the trailer was great.

I never said that you did.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect him to gracefully compose over the flaws of the film, like in the first one.

The more pressing question is how much will be tracked from AUJ. And if PJ will use the Rohan theme for Laketown :mrgreen:

That would be far too suitable. Instead Jackson will jar my head on my neck with the Lighting of the Beacons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't mean it like that. I meant giant statues don't look good with dwarves. They don't suit them. Feels cheap.

If dwarves existed I bet they'd be ok with giant statues of themselves.

Doesn't make them look any less stupid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of stuff in that trailer could be done with miniatures. Lake Town for example. You CGI the water and have the buildings be miniatures.

The CGI Lonely Mountain over the lake takes me out of the shot.

But some sets themselves also feel far too obvious. When Balin says that it's a dragon the set looks so set-like and the background of Balin so green-screen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So many shots of the actors look like CG, I'm starting to wonder if a few of the shots might use real actors with some kind of processing that gives them that same smooth, plastic look. For example, toward the end when Legolas is firing arrows, or some of the shots of the dwarves in barrels.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In other news, the MPAA has rated the extended cut of AUJ. I'm presuming (or rather, hoping) this means Howard Shore has done the new score bits and revisions already? If Shore wasn't required to do new recordings I'd be extremely concerned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what it look like. Whatever happened to Jackson having Middle-Earth in his backyard?

This film really needs miniatures. If only the Hobbit had the limitations that were present when LotR was made.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Katie Jackson tweets that a new vlog is coming soon

@Jennyenydot The next Hobbit production vlog will be up within the next 2 weeks so keep an eye out!

https://twitter.com/Katiejackson96/status/343623534842630144

I wanna know when Jackson is going to answer the 20 questions he promised

Link to post
Share on other sites

Subtract Azog from this trilogy, and I bet you'd have a tighter and less predictable film.

This. You're already extending a story that's short and sweet into a simultaneous exploration of Middle Earth's backstory...you don't also need a completely new villain that adds nothing. I actually would have loved The Hobbit if he wasn't in there at all...or at least if he and his band was killed at the end. I mean, it's not like the score wasn't good, or the performances.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea, redbox is $1, I dunno why anyone would buy a film they've never seen before when you can rent the blu for a buck first

Plus even if you do like it, don't you like boxsets? You know there's gonna be one

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we are more likely to get a super-extended, one-movie cut of all 3 films combined together than any shorter cuts

I want the remaining unreleased deleted scenes from the LOTR trilogy more, honestly

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unexpected Journey should not have an extended edition, it should have a reduced edition

Perhaps. But I still have a small hope that the EE might have parallels to the TTT situation, where the theatrical edit was shortened so much that it felt disjointed, the characters didn't work and as a result the film actually felt longer/more dragged out than the extended cut.

UJ's main problem, aside from the stupid bits sprinkled throughout the movie, is that it's littered with so many pointless action scenes that it lacks breathing space. Perhaps there's actually a good deal of worthwhile story material that was dropped in favour of the action. Adding that might make at least some things work better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought UJ looked beautifully shot in its final theatrical version, but DOS looks far too digital in its theatrical teaser. I hate how Jackson ditched most of the miniatures and in-camera trickery here.

I pray that Jackson doesn't make the second film as bloated as UJ was. Make it a tight 2-hour cut, and save all the bloat for the EE DVD/Blu-ray editions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no going back now. Wasn't there talk shortly after or shortly before AUJ's release (I think by Boyens) that DoS was going to be a shorter film? Even though shorter doesn't automatically mean "not bloated".

@ BloodB ... Tauriel

What would be the point then of Gandalf visiting Dol Guldur?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...