The Lord of the Rings: The Motion Picture Trilogy (Extended Edition) (2001-2003)

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by Agent Bond

lol @ complaints of the graphics looked dated. People, Fellowship of The Ring is almost a 10 year old film now!

That was my point. Even the CGI from some recent films looks questionable. I watched Red Riding Hood last night and the wolf did not look even remotely real.

[The Big Blue]

All of which makes Jurassic Park even more amazing.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by The Big Blue

All of which makes Jurassic Park even more amazing.

Indeed, since it was made several years earlier.

[laie_techie]

Originally Posted by DIGITALBATH

Hello everyone! I was thinking about reading all of the books before the Hobbit comes out. I gather that the best order is the Simillarion, Hobit, LOTR trilogy and lastly unfinished tales. Is there any works I am missing and can anyone comment on The Simillarion, and Unfinished Tales? Thanks.

If you were a die-hard fan, you'd also include the Book of Lost Tales (both volume I and II).

[mlittle3]

Originally Posted by Boone_Carlyle

I'm still Waiting for someone to mention what movies have had better cgi than lord of the rings.

Um, Star Wars, Avatar, Transformers, Jurassic Park and countless others.

[Andrewtst]

Originally Posted by Boone_Carlyle

I'm still Waiting for someone to mention what movies have had better cgi than lord of the rings.

Better CGI? A lot! Example: Avatar, Tron Legacy, Transformers.

[tama]

Originally Posted by The Big Blue

Tama? Would that be the drum maker?

Yes, they used all sorts of fx techniques in JP. The CG was some of the first and has held up quite well.

Yes it would

[mlittle3]

Originally Posted by Boone_Carlyle

Definitely not star wars. The cgi in those movies have always looked cartoonish. Avatar and transformers is also debatable. The aliens and plantlife alike are cartoonish and being native American types, they are a bit too clean. Gollum at least was dirty. I dont know about you, but I don't find the cgi of transformers convincing. They don't interact with the actors at all.

Lord of the Rings has terrible, dated CGI. Even many die-hard fans admit this. There is not one moment in the movies where the CGI is up to today's standards. Comparing LOTR's CGI to the ground-breaking work in Avatar and Transformers is like comparing a Ford Focus to a Lamborghini. There simply is no comparison. Love or hate the movies, the special effects in the trilogy look very antiquated now.

[frogmort]

Originally Posted by Boone_Carlyle

Definitely not star wars. The cgi in those movies have always looked cartoonish. Avatar and transformers is also debatable. The aliens and plantlife alike are cartoonish and being native American types, they are a bit too clean. Gollum at least was dirty. I dont know about you, but I don't find the cgi of transformers convincing. They don't interact with the actors at all.

As for tron, is there even anything in that movie to compare to lotr? Making neon lights and motorcycles isn't the same as creating elephants and horses.

Hey buddy!

I agree. Physical beings are much harder to render correctly I'm sure.

Although I do think Avatar looks incredible, it is a bit too clean.

I love all the Star Wars movies, but Jar-Jar looks much more cartoony than Gollum. Maybe they'll fix that for the BD.

The Transformers movies are not some of my favorites, and that's putting it very lightly.

[Petyr_Baelish]

Originally Posted by frogmort

Hey buddy!

I agree. Physical beings are much harder to render correctly I'm sure.

Although I do think Avatar looks incredible, it is a bit too clean.

I love all the Star Wars movies, but Jar-Jar looks much more cartoony than Gollum. Maybe they'll fix that for the BD.

The Transformers movies are not some of my favorites, and that's putting it very lightly.

Yeah I got banned again so I'll keep this discussion to a minimum. I think there is an assumption that because lotr was made 10 years ago, that the cgi must be dated. But the truth is that better technology has to actually exist and I don't think it does. When I saw the lotr I didn't question the reality of the cgi because it was the best possible. When I saw avatar I thought: this is the best they can do? Nothing in avatar looked real to me and it certainly didn't help to have the cgi characters interact with cgi environments.

[nightcrawler]

Originally Posted by mlittle3

Lord of the Rings has terrible, dated CGI. Even many die-hard fans admit this. There is not one moment in the movies where the CGI is up to today's standards. Comparing LOTR's CGI to the ground-breaking work in Avatar and Transformers is like comparing a Ford Focus to a Lamborghini. There simply is no comparison. Love or hate the movies, the special effects in the trilogy look very antiquated now.

I'm sure when the likes of Avatar and Transformers are 8-10 years old (the age of the LOTR trilogy) they too will look "antiquated".

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by nightcrawler

I'm sure when the likes of Avatar and Transformers are 8-10 years old (the age of the LOTR trilogy) they too will look "antiquated".

The LOTR is now 11-12 years old.

[AintNoSin]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

The LOTR is now 11-12 years old.

FOTR released in 2001 (10 years ago). ROTK released in 2003 (8 years ago).

Hence, 8 to 10 years. FOTR might have been shooting 12 years ago (1999), but the effects shots weren't being finished until right before the release date.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by AintNoSin

FOTR released in 2001 (10 years ago). ROTK released in 2003 (8 years ago).

Hence, 8 to 10 years. FOTR might have been shooting 12 years ago (1999), but the effects shots weren't being finished until right before the release date.

No, filming and editing was done in 1999 and 2000. Are you really going to question someone with the Balrog as their avatar?

[greg_achen]

Originally Posted by Boone_Carlyle

I'm still Waiting for someone to mention what movies have had better cgi than lord of the rings.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest. Davy Jones is not only the most photo real CGI character to date, but there is a subtlety and nuance to his movements that is unbelievably real. With that said, Gollum is still a far better character than Davy Jones, and Pirates of the Caribbean isn't even in the same league as Lord of the Rings compared to everything else. But Davy Jones, to my eyes, is the pinnacle of CGI character animation at this point and time.

Outdated effects do not bother me. Is the CGI in Lord of the Rings a little dated? Sure. But I somehow always look past that when watching the movies because the story is so engrossing. If the filmmakers have done their jobs as filmmakers, audiences will ALWAYS be able to forgive dated effects. Hence why films like Jaws remain classics to this day.

[greg_achen]

Originally Posted by Troy73

I just took a moment to go and educate myself and you were 100% right. All this time I thought it was prosthetics enhanced with CGI. I'm sorry I doubted your post.

No harm, no foul. It's a testament to ILM's quality CGI work. Like I said, I was shocked when I first found out he was completely CGI too.

But let's get back on topic. The CGI in Lord of the Rings, while dated, doesn't detract from the film or make it any less a masterpiece of cinematic work... IMO.

[crazyBLUE]

I thought I clicked on the LOTR EE Thread. Must have clicked on the wrong thread

[Underworld54]

Originally Posted by crazyBLUE

I thought I clicked on the LOTR EE Thread. Must have clicked on the wrong thread

Whoops Now back to LOTR

[Mandalorian]

We can't talk about CGI (which is a big part of the series)? Or did I miss an earlier off-topic discussion...

[crazyBLUE]

Originally Posted by RJ Smoove

We can't talk about CGI (which is a big part of the series)? Or did I miss an earlier off-topic discussion...

Why can't you talk about CGI on the LOTR EE. I just saw nothing posted about in a page or 2