PDA

View Full Version : Just Saw Rotk



archiea
12-17-2003, 06:45 AM
12:01 AM SCREENING... IT WAS WORTH IT....

You can see the improvements for Gollum... even better acted in this one... which is saying alot as in the TT he was great...

Scope wise, the second and third film suffer in that their pacing is continous... they just keep hitting you like waves of orc armies. The first film had periods of action and depth and would slow doen on occasion....

In the end, you forgive it as its too good a story and too good a performance from the cast to bear any grudges. And those 3.5 hours fly by.

Also the films have been so operatic, I can see why people just love it. Between the Surreal color correction and the emotive score, you are definitely out of this world...

The FX work was just amazing... The white city (minas Tirith I think) had such scale and splendor. You are reminded of the magic of miniatures in lieu of the near braggart nature of digital FX as of late. Its a bit of a reminder of what separates a filmmaker from a CG geek. Having that eye to utilize the best toolset. While I'm a fan of Zoic, Eden and Area 51 and other LW houses, sometimes their work looks a bit inbreed, i.e. LW space ships looking like LW space ships. Perhaps this movie will inspire them to new heights.

That being said, the work on gollum, especially the facial animation blows away anything that you have seen in the second movie. While CG played a role in that, I still believe that it was Sirkis' perfomance that made gollum.

Compositing wise I saw just a couple of integration issues, mainly the affect of darkening the original skys in the BG while the FG parts stillhaving rim light, even backlit translucency. Other than that, there were seamlees, breathtaking shots incorporating epic vistas of minatures with Massive generated troops in the mid ground and rotoed FG live action that gave the film this lived in feel... with the camera wildly panning about, there was no change in the dir style of cinematography to indicate an FX shot. This is perhaps where the film best sells its illusion.

Lastly, you wonder where storytelling goes from here... So enjoyable are these immersive stories.... where by means of a trilogy or miniseries, you are allowed to tell a sweeping story... and with current visual effects, you can tell it so completely and near without compromise of imagination. I find it harder and harder to just sit through a 90 minute film. it feels so incomplete. With the recent productions of the Dune miniseries, the conclusion of the LOTR's, and to a lesser extend the harry potter and SW movies.... how do we approach storytelling these days.

I think that the current trends in the film business makes it even harder for a gem to surface. Consider the cost of a typical FX flick.... studios are hesitant to try anything original... so they go for cliche storytelling (made even more necessary by the 90 min, three act boundaries of a typical movie), and attach name stars to key films (Cruise in Samurai) and turn an art form into widget making...

My bets are on cable... with a paid viewership, they bear no restrictions brought forth by advertisers. They scheduleing permits the flexibility of telling a story as a movie, miniseries or a serial. Their resouces for storytelling (budget, choice of directors, etc) grows as people see it as the only option for unique and unconventional storytelling.

I hope the LOTR series inspires producers to trust their filmmakers, and to explore other means of storytelling thats outside the 90 min box...

Beamtracer
12-17-2003, 09:45 AM
Originally posted by archiea
12:01 AM SCREENING... IT WAS WORTH IT I'm surprised you didn't fly to New Zealand to see the world premiere two weeks ago!

scott_krehbiel
12-17-2003, 10:45 AM
Originally posted by archiea
12:01 AM SCREENING... IT WAS WORTH IT....
Lastly, you wonder where storytelling goes from here...
*lotsa quoted material deleted*
how do we approach storytelling these days.


Storytelling? What do you mean by "storytelling"?
Oh! You mean explosions!

Just use hypervoxels. :p


Seriously, I totally agree with you, and don't
find it all that amazing to see some 1-dimensional
character say cheesy lines in front of a digital
(read heartless) world.

I'm into set design, and I love the sets of the
original Episode 4 (before the remake)
as the sets seemed to tell half of the story.
The Star Wars universe itself was fantastic to
the point of being mind-blowing.

So my point is that all of the filmmaking crafts
can and should have some heart in them.
I fear the day when we see a movie of
poser characters in a bryce world.

batzilla
12-17-2003, 02:56 PM
"I fear the day when we see a movie of
poser characters in a bryce world."

Amen to that. Theres nothing I hate more than Poser figures and when I see them rendered in Bryce I almost barf. : )

And what kills me is there are like a zillion people who get into this Poser/Bryce/Vue D Esprit thing. yuck....

archiea
12-17-2003, 03:39 PM
Beam, If I could of I wouldhave!!!!

Scott, I think thats why the SW books have been so successful... the stories are FAR superior and they take place after ep 6.

I just saw the trailer for The Mask 2... its all done with this CG baby... looking all rubbery and sh*t. And I'm thinking, not again.....

Zach
12-17-2003, 08:46 PM
good fx, flat acting, too long for 12:15am. It just wouldn't end!-(

Nice stuff to look at though, but many of the scenes were gratuitous and lacked relevance within the story.

still, it was pretty like the rest.

riki
12-17-2003, 09:42 PM
Is it released yet in sydney?? I'm looking forward to 'Lost in Translation' which I think comes out on the 27th??

Alliante
12-18-2003, 07:55 AM
I hope I can do catapult/trebuchet dynamics with Lightwave 8 like that!


The film was the best of the three so far and one of my top 5 right now.

I suggest anyone who can handle sitting in a big dark room with a bunch of primates to go watch it! :D

Hiraghm
12-18-2003, 09:08 AM
I had Poser a few years ago, and toyed around with it.

I don't understand the hatred for Poser, though? I'm not defending poser; I've never rendered anything with it. But I would like to know what the great flaws in it are that rate such contempt from so many people.

riki
12-18-2003, 03:12 PM
I don't understand the hatred for Poser, though?

It's becuase this sector of the arts is acutely focused on technical and artistic skill.

Whereas other areas such as design are more intune with ideas and presentation. Just as contemporary arts sector is focused conceptual art theory.

Triple G
12-18-2003, 04:20 PM
Originally posted by Zach
good fx, flat acting, too long for 12:15am. It just wouldn't end!-(

Flat acting?! You've got to be kidding me! There were at least two scenes where nearly the entire theatre was moved to tears when I went to see it. Granted, it was a pretty long film, but hey....it's a long book. To do it justice and present the story with the kind of detail and richness of character and environments that a classic novel like this deserves, I feel that the length of the movie is completely justified.