Jump to content

The Battle of the Five Armies SPOILERS ALLOWED Discussion Thread


gkgyver

Recommended Posts

Minas Tirith looked disappointingly fake, due to the weird lighting. Compared to Helms Deep it looked rubbish.

FOTR is the most natural looking with TTT as a close second, apart from Fangorn and Osgiliath. From ROTK onwards it all looked like artificial mythology. But I feel no need to constantly bitch about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The daylight street scenes in Minas Tirith did look soap operaish for some reason. In general though RotK was graded but in moderation. They didn't go to town on it but rather manipulated the lighting in different ways in order to enhance the mood of a scene. In the Hobbit movies its like they threw tins of glow paint at the screen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Minas Tirith looked disappointingly fake, due to the weird lighting. Compared to Helms Deep it looked rubbish.

FOTR is the most natural looking with TTT as a close second, apart from Fangorn and Osgiliath. From ROTK onwards it all looked like artificial mythology. But I feel no need to constantly bitch about it.

The daylight street scenes in Minas Tirith did look soap operaish for some reason. In general though RotK was graded but in moderation. They didn't go to town on it but rather manipulated the lighting in different ways in order to enhance the mood of a scene. In the Hobbit movies its like they threw tins of glow paint at the screen.

I agree, there were some fake looking moments, but there were far more moments where it just looked fucking beautiful.

minas-tirith.jpg

3049074-1978729860-minas.jpg

Minas_Tirith_2.jpg

Far better than the plastic shine of Erebor.

And RotK showed the first signs of PJ's lack of control when it came to colour grading, I'll give you that. Some of the battle scenes were over done. But in the Hobbit, suddenly the whole film became awful, articial splashes of colour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks flat and weirdly out of focus. Many of the shots of the, admittedly impressive design, seem swathed in this fake light. Like the city itself is somehow illuminated.

Unlike Helms deep it never felt like a real location to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said, I agree with you in regards to the actual street locales. I wonder if Jackson was trying to achieve a hot and sunny climate aesthetic, but went about it the wrong way. It looks bleached.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of pure curiosity, as for now I haven't got much interest in seeing the film, how is Smaug death handled? I mean, is it like in the animated version where he just collapses into the lake and that's it? Or those he have some final words or something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just realized that the whole fuss about the Arkenstone was completely pointless. Especially the point the DoS prologue makes, namely that only the one wielding the stone can summon and command the dwarf armies, because Thorin doesn't have the stone in the film, and Dain's army shows up and fights anyway.

The film also misses the opportunity of showing an epic scene of Thorin being crowned on the broken throne.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The difference between a "realistic"looking Minas Tirith and the one we say in ROTK is pretty much like this for me.

2014-12-14212155_zps1ebc0128.jpg

FullSizeRender_zpse23b654a.jpg

Worst comparison example ever

.

The film also misses the opportunity of showing an epic scene of Thorin being crowned on the broken throne.

Thank Christ. The movie already suffers from too many endings syndrome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just realized that the whole fuss about the Arkenstone was completely pointless. Especially the point the DoS prologue makes, namely that only the one wielding the stone can summon and command the dwarf armies, because Thorin doesn't have the stone in the film, and Dain's army shows up and fights anyway.

The film also misses the opportunity of showing an epic scene of Thorin being crowned on the broken throne.

Theoretically the raven could have conveyed the message that the Arkenstone has been found. But even then....

Ofcourse the point on the Quest was never to slay the dragon, but to reclaim the Arkenstone so that Thorin would be in his right to raise the armies of the 7 Kingdoms.

This is in fact a bit stronger then the books motivation. Simply steal back some of the gold.

But since Smaug dies, and Erebor is retaken, the whole Arkenstone granting Thorin certain rights gets no pay off. Like many things in this film.

The difference between a "realistic"looking Minas Tirith and the one we say in ROTK is pretty much like this for me.

2014-12-14212155_zps1ebc0128.jpg

FullSizeRender_zpse23b654a.jpg

Worst comparison example ever

How dare you! I dug out my model especially for you! Even mopped the desk a bit!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MORE bloom! MORE teal and orange! Where is Gandalf's CG double?!

The fact that Steef finds so much of LotR (including FotR) to look artificial, even more artificial than the Hobbit films, just about made him lose all credibility in judgement of these films.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The CGI ents for one looked fake, not to mention the fire on them. There is just as much looking fake in LotR as in the Hobbit, just with miniature work instead of CGI. The only difference is the better drama.

Oh, and: of all the things in DoS, Lake-Town didn't look real? The fuck?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The CGI ents for one looked fake, not to mention the fire on them. There is just as much looking fake in LotR as in the Hobbit, just with miniature work instead of CGI. The only difference is the better drama.

That's not true and you know it. Plenty of fake stuff for sure, but as a whole, the film and journey feels truly tangible. Not like The Hobbit,me here you really can't be bothered to believe any of it. Partly because there's just a lot more location shooting, and it doesn't look like the entire film was filmed in a studio. There is a real sense of high production values. And the real stuff in the Hobbit is altered to such a degree that it looks fake anyway!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do not... tempt me!

don-t-tempt-me-frodo-o.gif

This image is all wrong... it looks so... natural... WTF is happening?!

:lol:

Yes the Hobbit films look somewhat fake. In 2D I can just about take it but 3D HD and HFR it looks just like a TV movie with a huge amounts of CG and it makes it feel plastic. It is not a good sign when I see a scene and start thinking immediately "Is any of this actually real, the sets, the characters anything? Or am I seeing a video game footage, albeit good quality video game footage."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ironically, Jackson killed any possibility of a HFR revolution ever happening with his unnatural movies. If Nolan or Abrams had deployed the technology before Jacko we'd probably be seeing 48fps cinema becoming the norm by now.

The fact that Steef finds so much of LotR (including FotR) to look artificial, even more artificial than the Hobbit films, just about made him lose all credibility in judgement of these films.

I love it how some people like Stiff who used to really love LOTR, when hearing others critizicing the Hobbit films, are all like: "The LOTR films weren't that good either, anyway. They also looked fake, Gollum was ugly CG, the characters were meh...". It's as if, running out of arguments to prove that the Hobbit films have good things in them, they decided the best strategy was to trash LOTR instead.

It seems that this is a trend of late with more and more people following it. How long before you say things like that too, KK?

Yes, Steef has really established himself as a Hobbit fanboy here. Standing shoulder to shoulder with gkgyver, always.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that Steef finds so much of LotR (including FotR) to look artificial, even more artificial than the Hobbit films, just about made him lose all credibility in judgement of these films.

I love it how some people like Stiff who used to really love LOTR, when hearing others critizicing the Hobbit films, are all like: "The LOTR films weren't that good either, anyway. They also looked fake, Gollum was ugly CG, the characters were meh...". It's as if, running out of arguments to prove that the Hobbit films have good things in them, they decided the best strategy was to trash LOTR instead.

It seems that this is a trend of late with more and more people following it. How long before you say things like that too, KK?

I love the LOTR films and I always will! But effects wise they were never flawless.

WETA doesn't know how to do fire. Even today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me the worst effects shot in the entire LotR trilogy was the one right after the moment Gandalf says, "To the Bridge of Kazad-dum!" It's poor CGI.

And yet I love it anyway. Coz dat music.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10850189_10152887131667298_6817425395583

How could you leave this out Peter...Shore's music for this scene SHOULD (the key word) be spectacular. I'm thinking something along the lines of Dwarrowdelf with a House of Durin, Erebor and Thorin spin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I prefer the at times naff CGI in the Hobbit over the digitally flawless but totally sterile special effects in the recent Marvel films for some reason.

It's difficult to notice poor cgi when the weird lighting and grading is already holding my attention. Maybe that's how they could bring the budgets down on big summer movies. Use cheap cgi and post-process the living shit out of everything else.

Link to comment
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...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.