Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Sandman on January 05, 2003, 09:28:31 PM
-
I have one complaint... Gollum.
Really well done CG, no question, but mixing with live actors is still something that they can't seem to do seemlessly.
I also couldn't get over how much he looks like Steve Buscemi which also had me wondering why they just didn't cast him.
(http://i.timeinc.net/people/images/specials/goldenglobes2002/newhots/sbuscemi.jpg)
-
Shaddap... :D
Gollum was the best character in the movie, I'd prolly go see it again just to see how funny he is. Really well done and not in way distracting or far fetched like another recent big franchise movie cgi character.
-
.
-
You mean this one:
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/390000/images/_394542_jar_jar150.jpg)
:D
-
ugghhhh...
-
I never noticed that Sandman! lol
"Donny, you're out of your element!!"
-
Sandman he kinda looks like steve Buschemi because the actor, Andy Serkis, who "plays" Gollum/Smeagol looks sorta like him. Gollum is just a cgi over a recording of the actor inclunding I think some elements of his face - plus we will see Gollum as the hobbit Smeagol in ROTK.
-
(http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Ss/0167261/lotr2_andyserkis-NY.jpg)
Yeah... I know... but Gollum looks more like Buscemi than Serkis. :)
-
lol We stopped and saw the movie in San Antonio otw home from the rehab. This is one of the best movies I've ever seen. I liked it a lot more than the first. I did think Golum looked like Steve B. too :) But it didn't bother me at all. I can't wait to see it again!
-
James Carville. :D
-
During the multiple personality confrontation against himself, I though the was very funny at first.
Then it became really pathetic and I actually fell sad for him.
A really well done character. I dont see how they could have made him better.
-
Originally posted by Animal
During the multiple personality confrontation against himself, I though the was very funny at first.
Then it became really pathetic and I actually fell sad for him.
A really well done character. I dont see how they could have made him better.
I found myself feeling very sorry for him....
-
i agree that they got gollum's character down real well. i felt more pity for him watching the movie then i felt during the book, which is maybe what tolkien was trying to accomplish (because it made more sense that way)
now it'll be interesting to see what happens in ROTK as they cross into mordor. (i wont spoil the surprise for those who havent read the book)
-
I was a superb film, and much better than the first (which was pretty good anyway). Gollum ellicited mixed feelings from me - one was pity, one was revulsion. The confusion of the two was quite uncomfortable, which was cool.
The battle scene was great. But why build a wall with a great big breach in it? And why leave the bridge to the keep still standing, knowing it would be attacked?
People have mentioned how Lord of the Rings could be an anology for the rise of Hitler and WW2. I can see echoes of it - the tree things could be like America - a huge force unwilling to be involved until it is attacked itself. I dunno.
-
Fantastic movie in all regards, IMNSHO. Andy Serkis deserves an Oscar for his work as Gollum/Smeagol. Some have suggested that a special Oscar be created just for this (because his was a CGI charactor), but I don't think so. If you think about it, the CGI was nothing more than the costume and makeup Serkis "wore" on screen. It was his voice and his body language (he acted out in person every scene his charactor was in, much of it with a motion-capture suit on), so there's no need for a special award. Best Supporting Actor I think would be appropriate, I think. By the way, that Carvel picture is funny as heck...spitting image of Gollum.
-
Originally posted by Dowding (Work)
I was a superb film, and much better than the first (which was pretty good anyway). Gollum ellicited mixed feelings from me - one was pity, one was revulsion. The confusion of the two was quite uncomfortable, which was cool.
The battle scene was great. But why build a wall with a great big breach in it? And why leave the bridge to the keep still standing, knowing it would be attacked?
People have mentioned how Lord of the Rings could be an anology for the rise of Hitler and WW2. I can see echoes of it - the tree things could be like America - a huge force unwilling to be involved until it is attacked itself. I dunno.
The "Ring" represents the Machine. Could be...
-
"Gollum is just a cgi over a recording of the actor inclunding I think some elements of his face "
*just*?. While they certainly did film the actor in the shots and used motion capture, it's more used as a reference than anything else...the 'some' elements of his face, included over 400 invidual facial controls and is by far the best facial animation ever done.
The animators have tried to capture the performance of Andy Serkis, but they pretty much always do that with voice actors, whether it's 2D or 3D animation.
Daff
-
Loved it!
I don't think there was ANYthing I didn't like about this movie!
-
Originally posted by Turdboy
Loved it!
I don't think there was ANYthing I didn't like about this movie!
Didn't like - The Arwen might leave angle.... BS! Are we too stupid as movie goers to understanf Eowyn's unrequited love for Aragorn and the affect it will have on her in the future? This struck me as a "dumbing down of the book".
Otherwise it was a damn good movie!
-
Originally posted by Dowding (Work)
People have mentioned how Lord of the Rings could be an anology for the rise of Hitler and WW2. I can see echoes of it - the tree things could be like America - a huge force unwilling to be involved until it is attacked itself. I dunno.
Tolkin never intended any analogy with any real events in the world present or past. "It is neither allegorical nor topical" From the Forward in my copy of the second edition. It was ment for the reader to be able to fill in the meaning from events in their lives, not to represent any specific event.
But in a sence , your are correct, if thats what you got from it :)
edit: I loved gollum, and totally agree, an oscar is definatly deserved. The only thing that sucked about the movie is I have to wait another year for the next one.
-
Some of Tolkeins experience in the battle of the Sonne in WW1 has been placed into the book however.
-
MT,
The Battle of the Sonne? Never heard of that one. ;)
Shuckins
-
alot of tolkiens life experiences is in the book
religion....war....love.....f riends
-
Originally posted by H. Godwineson
MT,
The Battle of the Sonne? Never heard of that one. ;)
Shuckins
Well, the N is right next to the M... sheesh!
SOMME SOMME SOMME........
-
I agree MT. Parts were magnificent beyond words, stunning, awe inspiring, better than my imagination. Then there were the elves at Helm's deep, the The Arwen might leave angle, Theoden as a cautious fool, Farimar's detour to get to the same mental place he was at in the book, and the reluctant Elrond and Elrond the sitcom daddy (though the Aragorn/Arwen angle was covered in the appendicies). The Arwen episode did give me a chance to drain the bladder though. Ultimately not major deviations, but not needed for clarity or compression purposes either.
Charon
-
aggreed. didnt add anything to the movie at all and hard to imagine why they strayed from the story in the ways they did..
but very good movie.
-
Pongo,
I agree. The original story was strong enough to stand on its own. Modern directors cannot resist the temptation to diddle with a story line.
Shuckins
-
Originally posted by Turdboy
Loved it!
I don't think there was ANYthing I didn't like about this movie!
a few things spring to mind,
Shield-Skating Legolas
Gimli ridiculized at every chance, he is basicaly a fighting Alf.
Frodo offering the ring to the Nazgul :eek:
Aragornīs wet dreams.
The complete lack of actual love scenes between Frodo/Sam & Legolas/Gimli & Eomer/Horse
But overall it was decent enough, amazing Battle scenes.
And amazing graphics, liked the way they included Alan Lee and Ted Nasmith (spelling?) artwork (olifant, etc)
-
bad news for you LOTR fans: http://www.bbspot.com/News/2003/01/jaromir.html
-
bwahahahahaah!!! jar-jaromir.
priceless!
-
Originally posted by Animal
During the multiple personality confrontation against himself, I though the was very funny at first.
Then it became really pathetic and I actually fell sad for him.
A really well done character. I dont see how they could have made him better.
Yep, EXACTLY. Although I didn't find it funny at first. My first impression was, Boy, he's a donut short of a 6-pack. Yikes!!!Poor bastage. Then I felt sorry for him. IMO, a very well done character.
Of course, after the movie, I damn near drove my girlfried to slit her wrists after the umpteenth time of hissing
"my precious, precious.... the masters trickted us's"
I got the hint after she smacked me in the head. :D