|
Pham Nuwen posted:Agreed, they did a really good job with the hobbits and although I know a bit about the forced perspective tricks and what-not, I'd love to watch a really good technical making-of for the movies if anybody knows one. The extended edition box sets basically have as much of this kind of thing as you could ever want.
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2021 17:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 12:43 |
|
|
The NYT circa release of FotR in 2001 posted:The project was ''well insured,'' as Mr. Lynne put it. New Line will distribute the films in North America, but the other regions of the globe have been licensed to foreign partners, bringing in about $55 million a film. Another $11 million a film came from Burger King, JVC Electronics, Barnes & Noble and other toy and merchandise companies. And a final $10 million a film came in tax incentives from the government of New Zealand, where the films were shot. ''All of that is cash money,'' Mr. Lynne said. And it means that New Line is vulnerable for less than 20 percent of each film's production costs. I guess when you make three movies at once you get to lock people into deals for all three.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2021 18:00
|
|
|
PJ’s commentary track explains most of it
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2021 18:27
|
|
|
Pham Nuwen posted:Agreed, they did a really good job with the hobbits and although I know a bit about the forced perspective tricks and what-not, I'd love to watch a really good technical making-of for the movies if anybody knows one. The appendices on the extended cut versions covers pretty much everything about how the movies were made.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2021 19:08
|
|
|
Lol new line ended up screwing up because after FotR they could have asked for triple the money in licensing. But yeah the movies are the best we could possibly get.i don't think there was any other director in the world who could have done what he did with the budget he had.maybe George Miller. Peter Jackson having a tight budget is maybe the answer to him making good movies because the ones where he has unlimited money haven't been good.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2021 19:26
|
|
|
Antifa Poltergeist posted:Lol new line ended up screwing up because after FotR they could have asked for triple the money in licensing. It's hard to think of a single "this director or actor had a huge unexpected hit on a tight budget so let's give them unlimited money for their pet project" that actually worked out. '1941' 'After Earth' 'Battlefield Earth' 'King Kong' 'Grindhouse' 'Heaven's Gate' 'Waterworld' 'Under the Cherry Moon' 'The Alamo' 'Hudson Hawk' 'Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets' Everything George Lucas did after 'Star Wars' Everything Francis Ford Coppola did after 'Apocalypse Now' Everything the Wachowskis did after 'The Matrix' Etc, etc. There's actually a theory that creativity is based on limitations -- limitations of skill, of budget, of time, of technology, etc. I heard Jack White talking about it in the documentary 'This Might Get Loud', and from then on whenever I think about the idea I think of the White Stripes song "Little Room": Little Room posted:Well, you're in your little room
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2021 20:38
|
|
|
Imagined posted:It's hard to think of a single "this director or actor had a huge unexpected hit on a tight budget so let's give them unlimited money for their pet project" that actually worked out. I love Lynch's Dune but I'd say by all accounts it disappointed both director and studio.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2021 20:53
|
|
|
Arguably George Miller, Nolan and James Gunn did "better" with bigger budgets but yeah, I think there's some merit to the idea that creativity also feeds from restrain, but most importantly it also depends on the scope of your vision and the limitations on implementing it. Fury road is a amazing movie that costed 150 million and it still feels like it used every single dollar perfectly. I can't even imagine what a George Miller lotr would have looked like, but it would have been glorious.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2021 21:17
|
|
|
Peter Weir imo
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2021 21:23
|
|
|
Plus well, Jackson is a huge Tolkien nerd. Not sure how much of one Miller et al are, or how much that actually matters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2021 21:51
|
|
|
Let’s not erase Boyens and Walsh who were intimately involved in all aspects I do it myself
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2021 22:27
|
|
|
skasion posted:Peter Weir imo Lucas also if he was interested If Spielbergo did it they would have been 25 hours long
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2021 22:28
|
|
|
Patty Jenkins and Taika Waititi too
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2021 22:30
|
|
|
Alternate universe Miller films where everything's filmed in Australia.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2021 22:31
|
|
|
Werner Herzog lotr, a 4 hour movie on the internal conflicts of boromir, his downfall and redemption.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 01:45
|
|
|
Antifa Poltergeist posted:Werner Herzog lotr, a 4 hour movie on the internal conflicts of boromir, his downfall and redemption. The first two hours is just him getting to Rivendell on the most miserable solo camping trip ever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 02:03
|
|
|
Antifa Poltergeist posted:Werner Herzog lotr, a 4 hour movie on the internal conflicts of boromir, his downfall and redemption. All on the Anduin
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 02:05
|
|
|
I dunno but I would love it if the soundtrack to the LOTR movies was done by '70s Popul Vuh.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 02:15
|
|
|
Antifa Poltergeist posted:Werner Herzog lotr, a 4 hour movie on the internal conflicts of boromir, his downfall and redemption. I'd watch it
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 03:11
|
|
|
90 minutes of it would take place while he was dying
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 03:48
|
|
|
Pham Nuwen posted:Agreed, they did a really good job with the hobbits and although I know a bit about the forced perspective tricks and what-not, I'd love to watch a really good technical making-of for the movies if anybody knows one. As others have said the extended commentaries and BTS docos on the dvds or blu-rays are your best bet. But having watched all of them I will say: the forced perspective stuff got all of the publicity at the time, but most of the heavy lifting was done by doubles and green screens. There’s a few hero shots early on in Fellowship where they used that stuff (Frodo and Gandalf in the cart, Gandalf and Bilbo having tea is another - they built a slightly rotating set so the camera can move and keep the perspective trick), but after that your mind accepts the “Hobbits are small” thing and stops looking for it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 04:49
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:The first two hours is just him getting to Rivendell on the most miserable solo camping trip ever. Serendipitously, those are all just shots of Sean Bean trekking to the set cause he wouldn't get in a helicopter
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 07:37
|
|
|
Phy posted:Serendipitously, those are all just shots of Sean Bean trekking to the set cause he wouldn't get in a helicopter That remains one of the funniest set stories for the films. Sean Bean free climbing a goddamn mountain in his Boromir costume because it's somehow less scary than riding a helicopter up to the shooting location.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 08:35
|
|
|
Imagined posted:It's hard to think of a single "this director or actor had a huge unexpected hit on a tight budget so let's give them unlimited money for their pet project" that actually worked out. There's a really fun podcast on this called Blank Check with Griffin & David. It started out focused on the Star Wars prequels, then expanded out to any director who was given a blank check to do whatever they wanted after a wildly successful film.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 13:45
|
|
|
Imagined posted:
I don't know. Apocalypse Now was basically a pet project that had almost an unlimited budget as he said himself: quote:There were too many of us, we had access to too much equipment, too much money, and little by little we went insane.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 18:09
|
|
|
Imagined posted:It's hard to think of a single "this director or actor had a huge unexpected hit on a tight budget so let's give them unlimited money for their pet project" that actually worked out. Meet the feebles was good, though?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 21:35
|
|
|
Imagined posted:I dunno but I would love it if the soundtrack to the LOTR movies was done by '70s Popul Vuh. Make it Tangerine Dream and I'll second it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIfubrDZnQ0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJIn7batAtc
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2021 05:51
|
|
|
I've never been able to watch all the LOTR movies from start to finish, never even saw the last one. But I got the audiobooks now and they are sounding a lot more interesting than the movies tbh so far. Just at the stage where they threw the ring into the fire now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2021 09:45
|
|
|
His Divine Shadow posted:I've never been able to watch all the LOTR movies from start to finish, never even saw the last one. But I got the audiobooks now and they are sounding a lot more interesting than the movies tbh so far. Just at the stage where they threw the ring into the fire now. The movies simplified and tweaked some stuff; the books are definitely better. Is your audiobook version read or full-cast?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2021 10:21
|
|
|
Full cast, with music at times too
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2021 10:45
|
|
|
His Divine Shadow posted:Full cast, with music at times too The BBC one? That's great stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2021 14:28
|
|
|
It's good, but massively abridged. However, if you like audiobooks, the Rob Inglis unabridged versions are perfection imho. I've listened to them in their entirety a half-dozen times. They're perfect audio comfort food, and I think you could argue that because of Tolkien's consciously mock-epic writing style and tone and the prominence of songs and poetry in the text, listening to a master storyteller read the books out loud might even be the ideal way to consume the books.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2021 15:39
|
|
|
I did not like the voice cast version at all. Much like Jackson's movies, it's an issue of tonal mismatch to me. The books have a delicate balance of warmth and austerity that is difficult to embody, and I don't think either of those adaptations nail it. Would definitely recommend the Inglis one instead.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2021 15:50
|
|
|
feedmyleg posted:Would definitely recommend the Inglis one instead. Inglis is fantastic but I had to skip through all his renditions of elf songs. You can't really expect him to have sat down and rehearsed them, and of course they're "translations" presented without any notation for rhythm etc., but they just don't come out well. I did enjoy how he did Sam's troll song, and I think he did pretty good with Bombadil.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2021 17:14
|
|
|
Definitely agreed on that. Wish we had Tolkien recordings for all of them—I know we have some, but it would be great to splice them in.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2021 17:25
|
|
|
Gats Akimbo posted:The BBC one? That's great stuff. It's supposed to be by a Phil Dragash.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2021 18:21
|
|
|
I think the problem with Inglis’ songs is they all tend to sound the same or at least similar after awhile. And his singing voice is very breathy to the point of almost being comical sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2021 18:57
|
|
|
That's all true, but imho they still hang together as actual songs better than what I had come up with in my own head before I heard his versions. When I was a kid reading the books for the first time I had no idea how one might possibly fit some of those words into even a semblance of a melody. It blew my mind when I heard some of Tolkien's own renditions and realized that this crazy son-of-a-gun had actually apparently had real melodies in mind the whole time when he wrote that stuff. Now that I know more about him I think, "Of course he did."
Imagined fucked around with this message at 19:11 on Jun 7, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2021 19:09
|
|
|
It's kind of painful to listen to someone trying to sing one of the Rohan/Anglo-Saxon alliterative verse poems without realizing what they're supposed to be.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2021 19:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 12:43 |
|
|
inglis' songs were good enough for an audiobook, and he's a great reader
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2021 14:54
|
|
