[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYeQNH6gJhE[/media]
Edit:
Sorry, I believe I should have titled it "VFX reel" and not "breakdown". Doesn't really go into details, but amazing nonetheless.
That's pretty fucking amazing.
I might as well just be entirely an animated film holy batman tits.
[QUOTE=ZombieDawgs;39591847]I might as well just be entirely an animated film holy batman tits.[/QUOTE]
It's pretty amazing to see that some of the shots I thought were live action turn out to be entirely digital and vice versa.
It must take some serious imagination to properly act out the entering an empty greenscreen stage and pretend you're in an amazing city with waterfalls and everything. Also Gollum just gets creepier and creppier
Makes me wonder why choose NZ when most of the shots are in studio anyway.
Wow bag end was CGI? I thought they built a replica bag-end in some studio.
[QUOTE=Dysgalt;39594661]Wow bag end was CGI? I thought they built a replica bag-end in some studio.[/QUOTE]
They did; most scenes with both Gandalf and the Dwarves on screen at the same time were shot separately then composited together
I think the entire spectacle of the movie was ruined by how awful the dragon's head clips through the gold at the end.
[QUOTE=Maloof?;39594933]They did; most scenes with both Gandalf and the Dwarves on screen at the same time were shot separately then composited together[/QUOTE]
They were actually shot at the same time in bag end:
[img]http://www.popularmechanics.com/cm/popularmechanics/images/tZ/hobbit-how-it-works-00-1212-lgn.jpg[/img]
[url]http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/digital/visual-effects/how-director-peter-jackson-shrank-the-hobbit-actors#slide-1[/url]
Still thought this movie had waaaaaaaaay too much CGI that hurt the look that was established in the previous films.
[QUOTE=Tudd;39598156]Still thought this movie had waaaaaaaaay too much CGI that hurt the look that was established in the previous films.[/QUOTE]
For some it hurt the look that was established in the previous films.
For the others it actually fits even more to The Hobbit, because the story itself is a fairy tale and makes you see that Middleearth is a non-existent but beautiful world.
[QUOTE=Tudd;39598156]Still thought this movie had waaaaaaaaay too much CGI that hurt the look that was established in the previous films.[/QUOTE]
I kind of liked the CGI. It was really good, and made everything look a lot less grim than the first three movies.
The only CGI that really bothered me was the Orcs
You go from having some of the best makeup artists in the industry creating the most belivable looking "monsters" in a movie, to making them entirely CG in the new trilogy?
I mean, its painfully obvious just how much better the orc actors looked in LOTR than they did in the Hobbit. Pure CG characters in a non-CG acted movie will never look that great compared to doing it with makup or doing hybrids (actors using a mix of makeup and CG to get their look. It was a shame to see Peter Jackson take the pure CG route for the orcs considering he's made such amazing looking orcs for the previous films that looks entirely believable and realistic through make up.
IMO the only thing that sometimes lacks is that the black is not "dark" enough (only during the day, nights are usually fine) It's super uncanny sometimes. I've been noticing that a lot in recent all-CGI movies.
I guess I have shit eyes then, because scenes that I thought were sets turned out to be CGI, and scenes that clearly could only have been done with CGI seemed ridiculously realistic.
I wouldn't have said this before but video games won't have this level of detail for a looong time.
I just can't see it happening with the amount of stuff modern games have to cut using low FoV and limited render distance.
[QUOTE=KorJax;39598683]The only CGI that really bothered me was the Orcs
You go from having some of the best makeup artists in the industry creating the most belivable looking "monsters" in a movie, to making them entirely CG in the new trilogy?
I mean, its painfully obvious just how much better the orc actors looked in LOTR than they did in the Hobbit. Pure CG characters in a non-CG acted movie will never look that great compared to doing it with makup or doing hybrids (actors using a mix of makeup and CG to get their look. It was a shame to see Peter Jackson take the pure CG route for the orcs considering he's made such amazing looking orcs for the previous films that looks entirely believable and realistic through make up.[/QUOTE]
maybe if where' lucky he'll do that for the next Make up Ocrs and all
[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;39600876]maybe if where' lucky he'll do that for the next Make up Ocrs and all[/QUOTE]
The movies are already finished.
I wonder how weird it must feel being an actor acting on a green screen set and then watching the final product of you interacting with a digital world with all these unreal creatures around you.
[QUOTE=KorJax;39598683]The only CGI that really bothered me was the Orcs
You go from having some of the best makeup artists in the industry creating the most belivable looking "monsters" in a movie, to making them entirely CG in the new trilogy?
I mean, its painfully obvious just how much better the orc actors looked in LOTR than they did in the Hobbit. Pure CG characters in a non-CG acted movie will never look that great compared to doing it with makup or doing hybrids (actors using a mix of makeup and CG to get their look. It was a shame to see Peter Jackson take the pure CG route for the orcs considering he's made such amazing looking orcs for the previous films that looks entirely believable and realistic through make up.[/QUOTE]
They had a problem with the suits limiting what they could do in terms of design. With a human face you got the triangle (eyes and nose), so the mask has to fit to those proportions. By going CG they could use motion-capture and make the goblins looks exactly like they wanted. Suits were still used though, but mostly for wide shots and background. Example from the video:
[thumb]http://i.imgur.com/GxvIkTuh.jpg[/thumb]
[thumb]http://i.imgur.com/SYl3acKh.jpg[/thumb]
The reason for Azog being CGI is due to a last minute change. Jackson didn't like the original design, so only a couple of months before the movie was due to premiere they went with a motion-captured Azog who could simply be added over the already existing footage of the former Azog performer in a suit.
Prosthetics also create problems for facial emotion when it comes to speaking characters, and even more with the 48fps/4K. Take Yazneg (the main Azog minion) as an example. You could easily tell it was an actor with prosthetics added, and that put me more off than any of the CG characters.
i don't like how peter jackson makes the actors talk to white X's on a green wall, i would have had some random guy in a full green suit act out as the CGI character would, makes the acting feel more real.
[IMG]http://images.halloweencostumes.com/green-man-costume.jpg[/IMG]
they discussed this in the harry plinkett star wars reviews
[QUOTE=meppers;39605100]i don't like how peter jackson makes the actors talk to white X's on a green wall, i would have had some random guy in a full green suit act out as the CGI character would, makes the acting feel more real.
[IMG]http://images.halloweencostumes.com/green-man-costume.jpg[/IMG]
they discussed this in the harry plinkett star wars reviews[/QUOTE]
A lot more work to do; all those creases and shadowed parts of the costume would be constantly moving and changing shape as the green actor acted, unlike a set which doesn't really move or change a lot. The shadowed parts would have to be masked by hand in every frame, due to a their difference in brightness from the rest of the green.
[QUOTE=Maloof?;39605152]A lot more work to do; all those creases and shadowed parts of the costume would be constantly moving and changing shape as the green actor acted, unlike a set which doesn't really move or change a lot. The shadowed parts would have to be masked by hand in every frame, due to a their difference in brightness from the rest of the green.[/QUOTE]
oh i would only do this in scenes where the camera angles allow me to have a green suit guy stan completely in front of a green screen.
for example when one actor is in a full 100% green room
[QUOTE=meppers;39605100]i don't like how peter jackson makes the actors talk to white X's on a green wall, i would have had some random guy in a full green suit act out as the CGI character would, makes the acting feel more real.
[IMG]http://images.halloweencostumes.com/green-man-costume.jpg[/IMG]
they discussed this in the harry plinkett star wars reviews[/QUOTE]
Actors were probably having a hard time keeping a straight face talking to someone in a body suit. I know I would
[QUOTE=meppers;39605174]oh i would only do this in scenes where the camera angles allow me to have a green suit guy stan completely in front of a green screen.
for example when one actor is in a full 100% green room[/QUOTE]
Ah but even then, if the green actor is behind the main actor you've still got to go in real close and manually mask out the shadowey bits that the keying software couldn't get
It would be an interesting thing to experiment with!
[QUOTE=SpasticPinoy;39605185]Actors were probably having a hard time keeping a straight face talking to someone in a body suit. I know I would[/QUOTE]
I really doubt it. They are actors after all, if they'd laugh at something like that then they'd laugh at costumes in general they would think look silly, which isn't a very likely attribute that someone who is acting as their profession to have.
This movie is so all over the place with set pieces, it's like it was made just to prove a point :v:
The CGI eagles looks crap. Especially when flying over the mountains.
My god, gollum looks so real, its really unsettling.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
