|
Octy posted:Let's talk about Viggo some more. Apparently during the filming of the scene when Aragorn is drifting down the rapids, they miscalculated just how strong the water was so that Viggo was in fact pulled about fifteen feet underwater. It was only by pure luck when he accidentally kicked against a rock that he was able to propel himself to the surface. I love in the special features when he talks about one of the hobbit stunt doubles suddenly saying to him WHILE they're in the boats going down the river that he can't swim and if he goes over the side to just let him drown so it doesn't wreck the shot, and Viggo's  reaction.
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 08:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 17:58 |
|
|
Octy posted:I don't think I ever said it ruined everything, but okay.  Octy posted:I'm hoping to see my uncle appear on camera as one of the extras in the next production video, but then, he caught a cold after three days of filming and had to stop. Above Our Own fucked around with this message at 09:12 on Feb 19, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 09:09
|
|
|
Octy posted:I watched The Two Towers last night for the first time in about five years. I cannot believe one of the child extras at Helm's Deep also played a Hobbit child in the first movie. Worst casting decision ever. You will not like deadwood, in which two important roles are played by the same actor. Anyway, those kids are not the only ones that do this in the film, Peter Jackson is in every film (He bites from a carrot in Bree, is a guy in helms deep with an eye patch that throws a stone at the Uruk Hai, and he is a pirate that gets shot by Legolas. John Rhys Davies plays Gimli and is also the voice of Treebeard (quite clearly on some occasions)
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 10:39
|
|
|
I too want to believe that these are documentaries, not films but Jackson seems intent on loving this up. Not this time, please, Peter. Not this time. Seriously though, I can understand a bit but LOTR's thematic style, while attempting to represent a lot of credible detail, sometimes allows for broad brush strokes if you get my meaning. But on the other hand you have the Wilhelm scream. DEAD MAN'S SHOE fucked around with this message at 15:49 on Feb 19, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 15:43
|
|
|
kanonvandekempen posted:You will not like deadwood, in which two important roles are played by the same actor. I did not notice this the first time I watched it, because I am apparently dumb.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 16:16
|
|
|
That did bug me in Deadwood, to be honest, despite Garret Dilahunt being a pretty great actor. But as for LotR, all three movies have tons of crew cameos in them. Someone mentioned Jackson being the pirate Legolas klls in RotK, but every other pirate on the ship is someone involved in the production of the movie. Also Howard Shore is in the drinking contest scene in Edoras and Dan Hennah is in Helm's Deep. I wouldn't say seeing them ruins my immersion, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 18:22
|
|
|
Octy, were those serious posts? "My immersion" is a terrible thing to bring up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 18:40
|
|
|
I do think the increasing number of cameos as the trilogy goes on is a sign of the filmmakers ceasing to see LOTR as the work they're adapting and coming to see it as their story to do what they want with. Like, they've read the story x number of times, so it's theirs now. I think that's also why additions (not just changes) to the story get bigger and more grievous (to me) as the films go on. They stopped having a reverence or respect for the story as something created by Tolkien and more something they were authorized to gently caress with. And in a sense I guess they were, but I think that adaptation gives one license to take away and alter, but not to add excessively. Especially with such a huge story as LOTR. How many cool moments that were actually in the text were cut out so that, for instance, Sam could abandon Frodo at shelob's lair? Or so that Aragorn could fall off a cliff and make out with a horse? Adding action sequences or shuffling characters for brevity/tension is one thing, and fabricating story elements (sometimes ruining characters) kind of crosses a line for me, when there's no reason they couldn't have taken that same amount of time to tell the actual story. edit: i love the movies, but I also think the quality lessens overall as they go, in part due to the unnecessary liberties they take with the story.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 18:44
|
|
|
Huntersoninski posted:I do think the increasing number of cameos as the trilogy goes on is a sign of the filmmakers ceasing to see LOTR as the work they're adapting and coming to see it as their story to do what they want with. Like, they've read the story x number of times, so it's theirs now. I hope they felt like it was their movie on the first day they decided they would maybe like to adapt it. Making "your" movie and having respect for the source material aren't mutually exclusive and anyone who would claim these film makers weren't respectful of the source material is delusional.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 20:19
|
|
|
Whenever I see someone bring up 'Peter Jackson's kids!? My immersion!' or 'Ugh, why'd they change this!?!?', try as I might, I can't think of anything but someone clawing at a computer screen, clutching an out of print edition of the Lord of the Rings to their chest and shedding a tear for Tom Bomba-whothefuckcares. Sometimes they bring up good points, but it's an image and preconception I'm stuck with all the same. That said, I think claiming that the issues with the later movie/s stems from Peter and co. losing 'respect' for the books is innacurate and patently absurd giving how utterly, clearly respectful they were all the way through production. When you have a trilogy, particularly one that's one huge book split up, and you're adapting it, of course the adaptions and adjustments at the start don't appear as egregious or staggering. These things ripple outwards, down the chronology. Exponential cause and effect. Like the butterfly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 20:33
|
|
|
I hate when my immersion is thrown off by completely irrelevant background extras that don't matter and are meant to be the equivalent of a matte painting. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 21:02
|
|
|
Geekboy posted:I hope they felt like it was their movie on the first day they decided they would maybe like to adapt it. Look I said I liked the movies. I feel like they lost track of where they were going with them. The first movie is amazing, and in the behind-the-scenes interviews, they mention how, if they ever felt the film was getting to confusing or bogged down, they'd take it back to the way the book had it and it suddenly got less messy. In the interviews from the last two movies, it was more "and I felt like Tolkien wouldn't mind if I did X and Y to this scene," or even worse, "I felt like Tom Bombadil wouldn't mind me giving his lines to Treebeard..." I don't care that they changed poo poo, with a book that big you have to change poo poo. but I feel they got careless about the poo poo they added unnecessarily. All together they're amazing films, I just think they sort of went a bit astray toward the end. It's not like they had a set script in mind from day one, there were literally rewrites constantly, every week, throughout the whole production. I guess that makes me a crazed fan clawing at my keyboard? I just think that if they hadn't invented their own weird storylines, it'd have left room for the actual original storylines and that would have been better. It was amazing. It might have been better. v  vfake edit: like for instance the Anne of Green Gables films changed poo poo around constantly, especially by combining characters, but I'd call them incredibly true to the books. You can tell they did their best to keep everything as close to the books and the events therein as they could, without inventing anything of their own at the expense of the story unless they really had to. Real edit: I didn't mean they lost respect for Tolkien as in they started literally wiping their asses with the book. I'm saying they lost some of that original respect as they got more comfortable editing the story. Obviously they respected it a great deal or there wouldn't have been such immense work put into it. Maybe "reverence" would have been a better word choice, but oh well. But nobody will ever convince me that Sam leaving Frodo was in any way worth the screentime it took to show it. There were better things to have done with that time, is my point. Rat Patrol fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Feb 19, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 21:51
|
|
|
I've just spent the weekend watching the entire extended edition of the trilogy, for the first time in years (FotR and RotK extended for the first time), and I really don't think any of the cameos ruined my immersion. I mean, I did notice PJ in Bree, and I think as one of the guys plundering the Westfold, but it didn't bother me. I sat down to watch them to try and ease the waiting for December, but it's only made it worse  . I was weeping for the first half hour of Fellowship, out of pure nostalgia. The Hobbit premiere is going to be a nightmare.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 22:28
|
|
|
Supersheep posted:The Hobbit premiere is going to be a nightmare. I remember going to the midnight screening for the first day of Fellowship's release, and feeling incredibly tense that I was finally going to see this movie. After the preview trailers were done, the lights went down and everybody went absolutely silent, and the Lord of the Rings title came up on screen.... and somebody took a picture of the screen. Everybody burst out laughing and all the tension just flew out of the room, and everybody relaxed and settled in for a loving amazing movie experience that ended with,"Let's hunt orc!"  God bless you, Mr. Photo Man, whoever you were.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 23:02
|
|
|
"Take a picture of the noise, honey!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 23:16
|
|
|
Supersheep posted:I've just spent the weekend watching the entire extended edition of the trilogy, for the first time in years (FotR and RotK extended for the first time), and I really don't think any of the cameos ruined my immersion. It's far worse if you're from NZ, because so many of the bit parts are filled by actors from our horrible local soap/drama. Eg. It's pretty fuckin hard to take Haldir seriously when all you are seeing is Guy Warner from Shortland St. Or That Rohirrim mum sidequest in Two Towers. Best known for being a crazy foul mouthed Bogan Mum on telly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 23:57
|
|
|
Actually Haldir is now Claudius Glaber, mortal enemy of Spartacus.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 00:07
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:Octy, were those serious posts? "My immersion" is a terrible thing to bring up. Not the 'my immersion' part. I only tacked that on because somebody else mentioned it and I had no credible argument without it. I don't care about it as much as my posts might suggest. In fact, within a few days I'm going to forget about it and perhaps even miss seeing the kids the next time I watch the movies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 00:10
|
|
|
FrensaGeran posted:Actually Haldir is now Claudius Glaber, mortal enemy of Spartacus. Oh, man! I watched the whole first season of that goddamn show and was like 'I know this dude', but never comprehended where I knew him from. Goddamn.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 00:17
|
|
|
Huntersoninski posted:But nobody will ever convince me that Sam leaving Frodo was in any way worth the screentime it took to show it. There were better things to have done with that time, is my point. Allow me to try; in the film the development and resolution of the Sam-Frodo-Gollum triangle is at the heart of their journey. Frodo's switch of allegiance, betrayal and continued forgiveness makes his character stand out, as does Sam's reaction to being sent away. It's a unique moment of character development. As for length of time.. it's paced well and gives that narrative sorely need room to breathe amongst the poo poo tons of carnage in the scenes surrounding it. ..However one thing that does bug me a bit about that section (in the EE at least) is how, well after the green goo kicks rear end and all is quiet on the fields with lots of slow-mo and gandalf's reaction shots over the horrors of war, we cut to what is effectively a bar-room fight in the orc tower. It's kind of jarring.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 00:37
|
|
|
Supersheep posted:The Hobbit premiere is going to be a nightmare. Oh gently caress... That just reminded me that I won't be able to watch The Hobbbit at a pre-premiere screening with a well behaved audience like I did the LOTR trilogy...
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 01:15
|
|
|
DEAD MAN'S SHOE posted:Allow me to try; in the film the development and resolution of the Sam-Frodo-Gollum triangle is at the heart of their journey. Frodo's switch of allegiance, betrayal and continued forgiveness makes his character stand out, as does Sam's reaction to being sent away. It's a unique moment of character development. Right. I never said I had a problem with Frodo sending Sam away. In the book, most of Frodo's trauma is all in his head so that was a great way of outwardly showing that Frodo was losing his grip. What I have a problem with is Sam Leaving. From the very first movie, Sam was always "I made a promise. Don't you leave him, Samwise. And I don't mean to." To have Frodo send Sam away made sense as an alteration. To have Sam leave, in my opinion, undercut his entire character. Yeah, he would have sat and cried, but he would then have continue to follow in secret, because he made a promise and he wasn't the kind of loving moron who needs to find some bread on a rock before he remembers who the bad guy is.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 01:20
|
|
|
Yeah, I can see that. Still it's "more human" if he cries and runs away like a little goon in a fit of passion before remembering. I guarantee that's the kind of rationale behind it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 01:29
|
|
|
There was a clear drive to making the Hobbits closer to children than they were in the book - pretty obviously w/r/t casting - but this continues in the way their characters are interpreted. I believe this works out for the better, even if Merry comes off as a spaz in some parts of ROTK.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 01:39
|
|
|
mind the walrus posted:Yeah, I can see that. Still it's "more human" if he cries and runs away like a little goon in a fit of passion before remembering. I guarantee that's the kind of rationale behind it. Yeah but I'd argue it would have been "more badass" for him to follow behind and pop out just when needed. Honestly, having him find the bread and suddenly  oh yeah...gollum was lying! I guess I didn't eat the bread after all, we've been horribly tricked!edit: furthermore, how in the hell was he going to get home? It just made him seem retarded. Honestly most the changes made in the story only kind of bothered me, but this one came mighty close to ruining rotk for me. Sam's character was always steadfast and loyal, from his first scenes. To rip that away was really a terrible decision, especially considering how important a character Sam is. edit: yes, he's also my favorite character from the books. Rat Patrol fucked around with this message at 01:59 on Feb 20, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 01:57
|
|
|
wheatpuppy posted:I seem to recall that the Jackson kids also appear somewhere in RotK, so now you can worry about them breaking your immersion there too. The man is just a class act. I suppose one of the benfits of living in a small town is that no one makes a ton of noise or talks during the movies here. I had a fantastic LotR experiance in the theatres.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 02:01
|
|
|
Great thing about FOTR it takes only about half a minute at the start to realise you are in good hands. And another 10 minutes to be completely in the universe.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 03:15
|
|
|
FrensaGeran posted:Actually Haldir is now Claudius Glaber, mortal enemy of Spartacus. And has much better job benefits working in Spartacus than for Lord of the Rings.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 04:35
|
|
|
etalian posted:And has much better job benefits working in Spartacus than for Lord of the Rings. No loving way. That just blew my mind. I think it's the hair, because I've always been pretty good at noticing that kind of thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 04:44
|
|
|
Parachute Underwear posted:No loving way. That just blew my mind. I think it's the hair, because I've always been pretty good at noticing that kind of thing. Number one job benefit: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 05:11
|
|
|
wheatpuppy posted:However, he also bought Arwen's horse as a gift for Jane Abbot, Liv Tyler's riding double. She had fallen in love with the horse but couldn't afford it so he gave it to her as a surprise gift. THat was one of my favorite "feel good" moments in all the hours of supplementary materials -- watching Jane Abbot talk about how she put in a buy request on the horse, but KNEW she was WAY WAY WAY down on the totem pole list of people who might get him, and then she heard that someone "higher up the food chain" had bought the horse outright. And then Viggo goes up to her and gives him to her. :3
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 05:26
|
|
|
On the note of suddenly recognizing actors, I saw some Xena: Warrior Princess a while ago and had a HOLY poo poo CUPID IS EOMER moment. It was pretty trippy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 07:18
|
|
|
Wank posted:Great thing about FOTR it takes only about half a minute at the start to realise you are in good hands. And another 10 minutes to be completely in the universe. That is very comforting, especially when you compare it to something like Indiana Jones 4 where as soon as you see those CGI gophers you know you are in Lucas' hands again and god dammit I remember being intrigued as to how they were going to introduce LOTR and they really nailed it with that intro. Probably one of my favorite intros of any film I've seen. It's a fantastic kick off to the movie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 08:13
|
|
|
I'm excited they're doing 2 movies. It means parts like Tom Bombadil and the battle of the shire, that were woefully left out of the trology will be present. I'm also very interested to see characters like Beorn and the guy who shoots smaug have more of a story, and Gandalfs story line when he leaves before mirkwood and meets up with the crew to beat up sauran. I feel like the movie is in excellent hands and its going to be awesome! The battle of five armies will be amazing, and I bet the first movies climax will be a giant wizzard battle and the dwarves stranded in mirkwood. You know they'll take creative liscense with saurans stuff, but its going to be epic. Umph fucked around with this message at 08:30 on Feb 20, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 08:26
|
|
|
P Funk Chainsaw posted:It's far worse if you're from NZ, because so many of the bit parts are filled by actors from our horrible local soap/drama. drat. I'm probably going to move to Auckland in August (from Norway), and this is going to be really weird. Then again, I'll be in NZ when the movie premiers 
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 08:36
|
|
|
P Funk Chainsaw posted:It's far worse if you're from NZ, because so many of the bit parts are filled by actors from our horrible local soap/drama. Haha, I can just imagine that. I'm glad I'm not from NZ. I think LOTR suffered from weak casting in general. I'm not a fan of Haldir's guy. He looks too. . . much like a bitch. I know elves are effeminate and "fair" but. . . not feeling Haldir. Would have liked at least one bad rear end, Glorfindel-esque casting, someone who resonated elflord.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 10:04
|
|
|
Kemchimikemkem posted:Haha, I can just imagine that. I'm glad I'm not from NZ. I thought Hugo Weaving as Elrond was pretty good, even though we only see him as the badass warrior at the start.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 10:58
|
|
|
Octy posted:I thought Hugo Weaving as Elrond was pretty good, even though we only see him as the badass warrior at the start. Oh yeah, I thought some of the choices were great. Elrond, Legolas, Boromir, Gandalf of course, more. Wasn't feeling Denethor, Faramir, Arwen, Bilbo, many more. My opinion. I find it hard to fault The Hobbit though, all the choices feel right. It'll be cool to see how they play out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 11:24
|
|
|
Bring in early 70s Klaus Kinski to play Glorfindel, leave everybody confused and Peter Jackson bald from tearing his hair out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 11:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 17:58 |
|
|
Hugo Weaving should be some sort of Nathan Fillion/Bruce Campbell/Nic Cage/Samuel L Jackson internet nerd idol with his past roles. It's weird that he doesn't have a very vocal fanbase considering he's touched Transformers, The Matrix, Lord Of The Rings, Captain America and V For Vendetta.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2012 11:49
|
|
