Skip to comments.Viggo Mortensen criticizes ‘Lord of the Rings’ films Jackson discovered CGI ‘he never looked back’
Posted on 05/16/2014 4:31:40 AM PDT by Perdogg
So much for that fellowship of the ring.
Viggo Mortensen took a shot at Peter Jackson's dependence on visual effects in the "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy films, which are widely considered to have launched the actor's career to a higher level.
In a frank interview with London's The Telegraph, the 55-year-old star of the upcoming "Two Faces of January" gave a thumbs-down to every J.R.R. Tolkien adaptation his former director has made since the first installment, 2001's "The Fellowship of the Ring."
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
Without CGI, those films would never have even been made, I think.
I’ll agree when it comes to “The Hobbit” - the endless reliance on ever-perposterous CGI has destroyed the creative story-telling process.
I think Vigo’s criticisms are right on. I also think the headline writer is trying to create more of a controversy than Vigo probably intended. PJ went way over the top on special effects, and in the Hobbit, the effects are now driving the story, at the expense of the plot and characters.
The third movie ... the battle was too much "shaky cam" for me. Had it been in 3-D, I would've been nauseous. That said, I can see the advantage of producing them on the cheap to get them finished on the budget they had and they reworking it later.
That's silly - anybody can make small movies. All you need is an idea and small amounts of funding. It's the epic ones that are difficult to make, because of the gargantuan costs.
The worst thing to happen to film: CGI.
That’s how I felt Lucas ruined the Star Wars triology when he re-released them with all sorts of new stuff including the Titanic of CGI, Jar Jar Binks. Once they get their hands on this stuff the story line too easily becomes: ‘Aren’t I so cute and clever?’
You remind me of people who don’t read and yet think short stories are easier to write than novels.
There is one potential upside to CGI, dead actors can come back and star in new films and living, insufferable actors can go away in poverty and silence.
Sure, we need more movies about teenaged murderesses. Stuff like that is always “critically lauded,” especially if it has homosexual elements, too.
I have often told people that the magic of movies was killed off by computers. The ingenuity it took to pull off effects is extinct. You will never hear someone say, as they walk out if a theater: “Geez, how did they DO that?!”
Kids are amazed if you show them a Keaton or Lloyd movie and say “yes, they really did that stunt - it wasn’t created by CGI.” Of course, the problem with CGI is that is looks so unbelievably phony. Even watching the spectaculars from the 50s like “The Ten Commandments,” show enormous energy and talent to create those effects.
Audrey Hepburn and Marilyn Monroe will be in porn films. Our society uses new technology is used in the worst possible ways.
To write either a short story or a novel requires only months or years of effort by a single person. Movies are completely different things. Movies require financing and that in itself is a major undertaking. Directors are like generals planning military campaigns. They need to worry about logistics, timing, equipment, location, expenses and so on. Small movies don't require nearly as much management effort, meaning that sheer artistic vision has a better chance of shining through. Peter Jackson should leave the small movies to the up-and-comers.
The chase in the goblin cavern is too much video game and too little movie sequence.
Well, if you think the important thing is all the work and sweat behind the scenes, bully for you. I happen to think it’s the work up on the screen that matters and nothing else. Small dramas and good comedies are what are needed in film today not more overblown CGI crap.
I’ll stick with the classics and the foreign movies until things change. Which will never happen.
The movie producer should be handling the money and keeping the director in check.
When a person wears both hats, it is harder than wearing just one.
That said, a $100 million project is not necessarily more stressful than a $10 million project, or even a $1 million project. For example, the person that has their entire life wrapped into a $1 million project is likely to feel a lot more stress than a person contracted to manage a $10 million contract.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.