Viggo Mortensen criticizes ‘Lord of the Rings’ films Jackson discovered CGI ‘he never looked back’

NY Daily News ^

[Free Vulcan]

I was neither a fan of his portrayal or Jackson’s directing in general. Sadly that was filmed during the Clinton years when retro earth-hippie was cool again, and Jackson admitted that that was his approach, which he kind of mingled with medieval imagery and lowbrow slapstick humor. It completely left out the regalness of the book and the Numenorean/Elvish high culture.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

-— Jackson admitted that that was his approach, which he kind of mingled with medieval imagery and lowbrow slapstick humor -—

Seems about right. It’s even more apparent with the Hobbit.

The characters are flat, so the movies have no heart. This explains why Gollum stands out. He’s the only complex character.

Still, the CGI is off the charts.

[shibumi]

"...a greasy, unkempt mumbler who showed little of the regal bearing required of Tolkien’s Aragorn."

"I was going to note that Dunedain were beardless, being of partial Elvish extraction. Maybe CGI can replace Mortenson..."

I first read Tolkien's books (the four of them) back in 1966 and did an immediate re-read along with two other re-readings over the ensuing decade. I approached this film effort with great trepidation.

The first film, FOTR won me over and I actually got excited about seeing the rest. (My tolerance for modern, CGI dependent, explosion a minute films is very limited.)

Mortenson was without a question the weakest link in the chain of characters and that greasy, unkempt aura never quite gave way to anything resembling regal, especially alongside the superb kingly acting effected in the person of Theoden, King of Rohan. Mortenson left me with a vague feeling not only of not being kingly, but sexually ambiguous. It seemed like all the romantic effort was coming from Arwen.

Maybe my fantasies are running away with me here, but I think if I had been that close to Liv Tyler I could have mustered up a more impassioned response.

[staytrue]

This sounds like some old silent film actors.

When the movie studios discovered “talkies” they never looked back.

[Chickensoup]

I don’t see the connection between Tinkerbell and MM.

_________

I think Tink was being compared to Audrey Hepburn

[TheOldLady]

I could not get past the wormy-wiggly hair on the shorts-wearing Hobbits’ legs. It overshadowed every scene where we could see their hairy little legs.

[Resolute Conservative]

I agree there were basically no live scenes in the Hobbit. There were a few more in Smaug. The first 3 were awesome and had just the right amount of CGI to make the story work.

[IronJack]

I actually think Jackson paid great fealty to Tolkien’s vision. Sure, he took some cinematic license, but in the main, he screened characters that embodied the virtues (and failings) of the Tolkien cast pretty well ... with the notable exception of Aragorn.

For example, Brad Dourif’s Grima was every bit the despicable opportunist Tolkien painted. And Sam — though occasionally heavy-handed — came through as an archetypal hero who doesn’t even comprehend his own heroism.

But probably the truest characterization was Ian McKellen’s stellar portrayal of Gandalf. An epic performance in an epic role he was born to. Too bad he’s a poof ...

[Steely Tom]

I think Tink was being compared to Audrey Hepburn

I see! Very good!

[Mr Rogers]

I didn’t like the character of Aragorn in the movies, but that is the way it was written by Jackson & Co. I also think VM is a dork, but he is spot on about what Jackson has done. The Hobbit films (films? YGBSM!) are hideous caricatures of what Tolkien wrote. Jackson knows nothing about plotting or stories, only overwhelming CGI.

[cld51860]

I watched Keaton’s “The General” with my son. He didn’t want to watch it at first, but after a few minutes he got into it, then ended up loving it. I told him that Buster did all of his own stunts and none of it was “special effects” and he was just blown away by that.

[COBOL2Java]

It's an urban legend, but I included it tongue-in-cheek. If you want to read further, you can look here: Tinker Bell

Excerpt:

---

There is an urban legend that the original animated version of Tinker Bell was modeled after Marilyn Monroe. However, Disney animator Marc Davis's reference was actress Margaret Kerry. He illustrated Tinker Bell as a young, attractive, blonde haired, big blue eyed, white female, with an exaggerated hour-glass figure. She is clad in a short lime-green dress with a rigid trim, and green slippers with white puffs. She is trailed by small amounts of pixie dust when she moves, and this dust can help humans fly if they think happy thoughts.

[Godzilla]

Go to a Raiders home football game. . . . . .

[miss marmelstein]

Great movie. Try Steamboat Bill, Jr. He’ll never enjoy CGI again!

[Perdogg]

Yes, but Gollum was great.

[cld51860]

We will! I think I saw it listed on Netflix. In my college days I was amazed how many people chafed at the idea of watching the old silent films, but when they watched them they ended up loving them. Seeing my son at only 8 going through that is a real joy.

[LibertarianLiz]

But probably the truest characterization was Ian McKellen’s stellar portrayal of Gandalf.

I had never read any of these books until the movies came out. However, I have ended up really disliking Gandalf. My husband was shocked the first time I told him that I hated Gandalf.

He is bored, so he gets some innocent people and puts them in grave danger all for his own entertainment. Yeah, yeah, he is helping them "grow" and become more than they ever thought they could be. And then, when things are the most dire, he disappears. Bah!

[IronJack]

That’s an interpretation of Gandalf I can’t say I’ve ever heard before.

[IronJack]

I have seen only one of the “Hobbits” movies and I was completely underwhelmed. However, the “Rings” trilogy belies your assertion that Jackson et. al. know nothing about story or plot. There is enough CGI in them to make the story epic, but not so much it detracts from the tale itself.

[Mr Rogers]

I disagree. I thought he screwed up many of the characters. Frodo comes across as a weakling, Aragorn is torn & divided, Arwen starts off as Xena and turns into a limp, soulful mush-eyed girl, etc.