The Desolation of Smaug anticipation thread [SPOILERS]

[Smaug's voice]

A comparison of the relative amount of dialogues in the two Hobbit films, sorted character-by-character.

http://lotrproject.com/blog/2014/04/08/ ... -of-smaug/

And DOS has 30% less dialogue than AUJ.

I think it is interesting to note that even Gandalf has more dialogue than Bilbo.

[Smaug's voice]

New video showing the use of CGI in DoS. Apparently, 1/4th of scenes were CGI.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=85LO9tH2Khc

[Passdagas the Brown]

That commentator stated that 1/4 of the film consisted of ALL CG shots. That means entire sequences created in CG environments. Wow...

[Elentári]

Unbelievable...

I find it even more depressing when PJ says things like he wishes he could go back in time and CGI more stuff in LotR (such as the Black Riders)

[Passdagas the Brown]

While I generally find this hyper-CGI trend deplorable, I do think the black riders could have benefited from some CGI enhancement. As is, they are significantly less frightening than the Grim Reaper from Monty Python's Meaning of Life.

PJ is still the same filmmaker. It's just that he can do whatever the heck he wants now, and that loss of discipline has severely negative consequences.

But for someone who hated PJ's directorial style to begin with, I almost prefer his "whole hog" approach with DoS, where he doesn't even attempt to show restraint. It's just all Jackson, all the time.

It's the clumsy, muddy mix of Jackson and Tolkien in the LOTR films that really sets my teeth on edge.

[Elentári]

As a film buff you may prefer DoS for Jackson's unrestrained style, but as a Tolkien fan I can't share that preference.

I do appreciate your informed, technical views on film-making, but for me appreciating a movie is always on a more emotive, visceral level...

[Smaug's voice]

I do appreciate your informed, technical views on film-making, but for me appreciating a movie is always on a more emotive, visceral
level...

Oh, but nearly all the emotions in he LR films are cheesy, melodramatic, soppy drama with extremely bad writing and rubbish acting.

DoS however has so realistic emotions, so vastly superior to everything from LR that they are nigh incomparable.

ETA: Not only as a Tolkien fan but as normal guy who watches lots of films as well, I consider LR much better than TH.

[Smaug's voice]

Unbelievable...



I find it even more depressing when PJ says things like he wishes he
could go back in time and CGI more stuff in LotR (such as the Black
Riders)

I honestly do not believe, if he had the current techno back then, he would have made an LotR of which 1/4 would be CGI.
He was very keen on realism IIRC. Otherwise why would he bother with force perspective and all that when sizing issues was still easy to do on computers?

[yovargas]

I do think the black riders could have benefited from some CGI enhancement. As is, they are significantly less frightening than the Grim Reaper from Monty Python's Meaning of Life.

[Smaug's voice]

I have noticed that those who have held a preconception for the Nazgûl were generally disappointed by their film versions. While those coming from outside, totally unawares, do find them scary. (all be it, somewhat less creepy than how they are in the books )

[Passdagas the Brown]

As a film buff you may prefer DoS for Jackson's unrestrained style, but as a Tolkien fan I can't share that preference.

I do appreciate your informed, technical views on film-making, but for me appreciating a movie is always on a more emotive, visceral level...

Elen,

Thanks, but I'm a little puzzled at this assertion that I have a technical view on film-making. For me, I love a film if it hits me on an emotional level. It's just that different things stir our emotions (i.e. it's all subjective!).

Calmer paces, muted music, the predominance of the sounds of nature (over operatic music), the more stately beauty of still camera shots, subtle acting/ directing, a sense of wonder and adventure, etc. all combine to create an emotional response in me.

But I don't approach it as an engineer does looking at a structure. I try to let films wash over me, and not pay explicit attention to the craft. And if it has those elements above, and the story is good, I respond emotionally.

It's actually those films where the technical film-making is obvious and visible that bother me. And PJ's poorly-staged dialogue, melodramatic heart-string tugging and generally overwrought style is simply too obvious, IMO. Like Tolkien, I like to come to an emotion and a response without having my arm twisted by the writer or director.

In short, it's the films where I forget about the technicalities while watching them that grab me. It's only afterwards, when I get on forums like this one, that I start exploring some of the technical reasons of why I enjoyed a film.

[Elentári]

Okay...sorry for that misapprehension. Must be your persuasive and authoritative posting style that makes your subjective opinions sound like they are based on objective technical expertise!

It's actually those films where the technical film-making is obvious and visible that bother me. And PJ's poorly-staged dialogue, melodramatic heart-string tugging and generally overwrought style is simply too obvious, IMO. Like Tolkien, I like to come to an emotion and a response without having my arm twisted by the writer or director.

You know, it's weird, but for me, your comments above apply equally strongly to TH, whereas, as you stated previously, PJ was more restrained by Tolkien with LotR. It was at least more tonally consistent, which is one of the major problems with the Hobbit adaptation, particularly in AUJ. I certainly don't prefer his "whole hog" approach! It's almost enough to make me wish someone else had taken control of the project when GdT pulled out...however, I am entirely thankful at least for the consistencies with LotR that we have got - music, art and production design, returning actors, etc.

Must keep thinking about the positives...

[Passdagas the Brown]

It's just easier to accept DOS as a fun adventure movie, rather than as an adaptation of Tolkien, when the tone is so consistently Jacksonian!

That said, I also really wish someone else had taken the reins. Specifically, Alfon...well, everyone knows what I'm about to say, so I'll stop there.

[Smaug's voice]

But you certainly did say DoS was a good adaptation of The Hobbit.

[Alatar]

Its worth pointing out that PJ had already used a lot of CGI for Death in the Frighteners, so the Black Riders were obviously more physical by choice.

[Passdagas the Brown]

SV,

I actually do think DOS is a decent adaptation of The Hobbit, though more on an impressionistic and thematic level than anything else. In terms of script and execution, it is very different than the book. But to me it somehow feels right, and captures the main Bilbo vs. Thorin/ humility vs. pride theme reasonably well (though it would have benefited from more Bilbo in that regard).

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I assume you meant to address that to "S" not to "V". Since I didn't say anything about DoS as an adaptation and S did. Although, I had considered saying much the same thing that you said.

[Smaug's voice]

Well, at least we agree that Bilbo's presence was shortened for other more superfluous stuff.

Since I didn't say anything about DoS as an adaptation and S did.

The prediction I made yesterday was spot on it seems.

[Passdagas the Brown]

Sorry, yes, that was for SV!

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Since I didn't say anything about DoS as an adaptation and S did.

The prediction I made yesterday was spot on it seems.

I was just following your wishes.