Thread: Lets talk directors vision
<<       
I thought this thread was, "Let's talk directors vision"? Not, "Let's talk about spicy Balrog wings"! What! We have an intelligent old geezer like Oldgit join up and compliment us about us being such 'literary' intelligent types, and then you come out with all this silliness! Surely you know by now how much I hate this kind of thing! Grow up!
Surely we can be "intelligent" and silly at different times...
That said, I think the films would be much better if spicy Balrog wings were part of the director's vision.
... what if PJ's reading this....? Why must you encourage him, Eldo!?
indeed, think how much better Middle Earth would be off if Balrog Wings were delicious. Balrogs would have gone from darkening the sky by the 1000s, as they did in the Sil, to an endangered species as they were hunted as delicacies.
Balrog wings, huh? Well, I supppose I'd try 'em, providing someone else was silly enough to hunt 'em....
The great debate has finally been resolved! Balrogs [i:20q30s3c]used[/i:20q30s3c] to have wings, but they have all been cut off and eaten, so the few surviving Balrogs are now wingless (presumably Durin's Bane was released after the wings were hacked off, as happens in shark-fin-fishing).
See what amazing things we discover on these forums
I'd be amazed if you guys could stay on thread!
To sort of bring this back to topic I was quite disappointed in TT with the way Fangorn Forest looked on screen, it looked like a set. Given that in Tolkiens own drawings Mirkwood and Fangorn are very similar in appearance and not unlike in description how should they do it? How 'dark' should Mirkwood be? Should it all be shot on a set or should they try to find a real forest to shoot some of it in? (NZ seems to be lacking in the sort of woods and forests ME is populated in, this was a problem for them shooting Fangorn and Lothlorien in the trilogy and meant they had to bring in fake trees of the right sort of stature). Or should they CGI the entire place?
Hmmm, you mean take a "leaf" out of James Cameron's book
? Could work.
I thought Fangorn looked pretty good in TTT, personally. Lothlorien I didn't like, but the sets for Fangorn looked very gnarled, old, and cool to me.
That said, I think the CGI technology used in Avatar [i:2gbv3ckq]could[/i:2gbv3ckq] be used to make a realistic forest (obviously it wasn't, but I think the potential is there). I'd rather see more actual sets than CGI, though.
I prefer sets to CGI myself Eldo, but finding, let alone filming in, a forest as dark and tangled and downright moody as Mirkwood could be tricky, especially in NZ- not noted for its dense forests. So its seems more likely they will build studio sets for the majority of it- this worries me as I don't think their track record on this is good. I didn't like the artificial look of Fangorn and with the exception of the long shot of Lothlorien as they approach its nothing like the book. Indeed its no wonder they left out Sam's line "I thought elves were all for moon and starlight, but this place is more elvish," (excuse me if that's not exact, going on memory here!) but the point here is PJ and co made Lothlorien the opposite, very dark, moonlit etc when in fact it should have been like a constant spring or summer, full of sunlight and green grass. I really hope they don't screw up Mirkwwod as badly.
Maybe they should borrow some of the old Dagobah sets
GB- I thought they'd already done that for the Lothlorien set!!!!
[quote="pettytyrant101":1v2rxj9g]I didn't like the artificial look of Fangorn[/quote:1v2rxj9g]
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by that; I didn't think Fangorn looked artificial except for one or two shots (mainly at the edges).
[quote:1v2rxj9g]with the exception of the long shot of Lothlorien as they approach its nothing like the book[/quote:1v2rxj9g]
I'm not sure how this reflects on the skill of the set-builders. Were they given ideas/designs more like the book I think they could have made more faithful sets, but as it is I think they still look pretty good. While Lothlorien wasn't much like the book, I thought it was a well-built and visually impressive setting. I have no doubt that they [i:1v2rxj9g]could[/i:1v2rxj9g] make good [i:1v2rxj9g]and[/i:1v2rxj9g] faithful sets.
What I meant by artificial Eldo is that for me it doesn't look like a real place- it looks like a film set. Particularly as you noted round the edges in wide shots where some of the blending with matte paintings looks rushed.
I concede your point on Lothlorien not being the fault of those who built it (I just can't pass up the chance to have a go at some of PJ's absurdities).
But with Lothlorien, even in the outlying woods when they are with Haldir, the set builders had to make fake tree trunks to get the sort of width needed as NZ has the wrong sot of trees for it. Presumably this will be the same again for Mirkwood, and whilst its not the set builders fault it does restrict how a scene can be shot- obv if your trees stop 10ft up then that's as high as you can shoot them without a lot of expensive CGI. Mirkwood is a significant bit of the story in terms of atmosphere I would just hate for it to end up looking like a film set in the way I felt Fangorn did.
[quote="pettytyrant101":1k3er0lr]What I meant by artificial Eldo is that for me it doesn't look like a real place- it looks like a film set.[/quote:1k3er0lr]
I thought it looked realistic, myself. It's a pretty subjective experience though, so I'm not going to try to convince you.
[quote:1k3er0lr]But with Lothlorien, even in the outlying woods when they are with Haldir, the set builders had to make fake tree trunks to get the sort of width needed as NZ has the wrong sot of trees for it. Presumably this will be the same again for Mirkwood, and whilst its not the set builders fault it does restrict how a scene can be shot- obv if your trees stop 10ft up then that's as high as you can shoot them without a lot of expensive CGI.[/quote:1k3er0lr]
I agree that its unfortunate that they don't have forests better suited to Tolkien's stories, though as mentioned above I'm a bit more optimistic than you, I think. I suspect that many of the Mirkwood scenes will be shot on stages. On the other hand, the Lothlorien fake trees were constructed because they needed to be huge. I don't think Mirkwood's trees are necessarily as wide, so that might open up some possibilities for filming in an actual forest.
I actually thought Fangorn looked more like the Dagobah set than Lothlorien, and i thought it was excellent. I actually live within walking distance of some fairly thick redwood and mixed forests and Fangorn seemed quite realistic to me in comparison.
Lothlorien seemed to be shown in two phases: First in daylight in obviously real woods, light and airy (even "Spring"-like), then in the thick, and clearly more ancient part of the forest, apparently at night under moonlight and starlight--and as the housing-structures of the Elves seemed to be built around the trees themselves blending with the environment, it was obviously a set, but filmed in such an ethereal "magical" manner that one could suspend disbelief, i.e. it was [b:1ecyo0as]supposed[/b:1ecyo0as] to look surreal at that point.
My guess is that Mirkwood will need to be more realistic like Fangorn, and that has been done quite well with sets. But I wouldn't be surprised to see a mixture of real woods, sets, and CGI to bring off Mirkwood, depending on the needs of any given scene.
Been a while since I dropped into the Star wars universe, got confused- Dagobah's Yoda's hideout isn't it? I was thinking of Endor!
Funnily enough Endor was actually filmed in California's redwood forests much like those nearby my neighborhood
. Dagobah was indeed Yoda's hangout, and [b:t0d2z6sj]some[/b:t0d2z6sj] portions of it more closely resembled the swampy forests and bayous of Louisiana and the Florida Everglades. The main point of comparison with Fangorn for me, is the relative realism of Fangorn in comparison to actual thickly forested areas with Old Growth Trees.
Endor is actually a fairly good comparison to Lothlorien, what with the housing being built into the tree structures in a similar manner. Obviously those were sets also. But again, filmed in such a way as to make it believable. Though In the case of Endor the sets were made to look like primitive dwellings rather than sophisticated and elegant structures.
For me Endor was more believable as a real forest than either Lothlorien or Fangorn in the films. And I think I know why. With Endor they had the good sense to film all the on-ground stuff in an actual forest. Fangorn on the other hand only ever existed as sets and in a computer, none of it is shot in a real forest. And for me even in the finished film it still looked like a set and lacked that sense of realism Endor captured.
One of the things Endor shows is that if you shoot in a real forest when you come to build the sets you have something real to try to match- Fangorn looked unreal perhaps because they had nothing but artistry to base it upon, thats fine for a month on a picture in the Tolien calendar but less convincing as reality in action on film.
My worry is that with NZ lacking the right sort of trees for a Mirkwood it will also only exist as sets and and computer effects and it too will lack the sense of realism. Tolkien put so much painstaking effort into making the physical landscape of ME feel real and proper, the film-makers should not ignore this side of his writing and try to represent it too on screen.
As much as PJ's support for NZ and its film industry is praiseworthy I would much prefer that they filmed Mirkwood elsewhere in the world where a suitable forest could be found.
Well, my preference is for Real forests too, but moving an entire production for what would be a large part of the film would be prohibitively expensive. And anyway, I was very happy with the way Fangorn turned out, having my own real old growth forests to compare it to. I'm really not too concerned about the look of Mirkwood in the end. I think it will turn out fine.
I'm sure they'll depict Mirkwood okay. It's Dol Guldur I'm worried about. I can't imagine [i:2x7dmplm]that[/i:2x7dmplm] in Mirkwood!
I thought they did a decent job of depicting Dol Guldur in the Born to Hope film and as they were using designs based on the LoTR films I imagine it may not be dissimilar with the same horned tower style seen in Baradur of the films repeated but on a smaller scale. (Without the fiery big eye one would assume-its a dead give away for a Dark Lord trying to live in secret).
Wait, Dol Guldur was in [i:22a23oyx]Born of Hope[/i:22a23oyx]? My recollection was that the entire film was set in Eriador.
I haven't seen it in a while, though, and only once.
There's one shot of it, a long shot showing it sitting on a stony outcrop of hill rising from the wood- can't remember offhand where exactly in the film it is, sorry. I think it might be during one of the voice over pieces but I'm really not certain.
I believe you, but I honestly don't remember that. I hope that they take a different route than the Barad-dur. A non-tower-having fortress on a rocky hill in the middle of the forest, perhaps with some crebain flying around, would be perfect.
That said, the crebain might not be canon to have in Mirkwood. They came to mind for me, though, because the distinctive crow-call has become inextricably linked to the villains of Middle-earth in my mind due to the video game of [i:1l8hd9jp]The Two Towers[/i:1l8hd9jp], which was one of my first experiences with Tolkien/adaptations thereof.
You know, I don't remember Dol Guldur in Born of Hope either
Now I'm going to have to go and watch it again just to prove to myself I didn't dream it!!!
Nor do i... what part did u c it???
Fortunately it turned out to be near the start, about 3minutes 20secs in right after the 'water becomes a torrent' speech.
I see, I haven't seen it in a while... but I remember liking it alot, I believe.....
I enjoyed it more than I did PJ's film efforts. And I think their Dol Guldur looks fine, seems to be quite close to how I remember it being described.
[quote="pettytyrant101":a5wwvvcb]Fortunately it turned out to be near the start, about 3minutes 20secs in right after the 'water becomes a torrent' speech.
Awesome! Thanks for checking, petty; I'll go re-watch the first few minutes myself.
Wow, too cool
. I can't believe I forgot that
. It must have been very brief on-screen. I'll definitely have to watch it again too.
Guillemo del Toro gone. I'm suddenly less excited about this movie.
I'm sure whoever the new director is in will bring their own vision to the films, but elements of GDT's will probably still be noticeable since he was involved deeply with writing the scripts and with pre-production in general.
Can there be a direction when there is no Director?
Well they managed to make LotR with a director and no direction so it is possible- its just the end result that might not be so good.
Poor PJ. He must get upset at all this hating.
Now, now Ally I don't hate PJ, I..um....hang on, I'll get back to you!
[quote="Ally":1hlbiqgc]Poor PJ. He must get upset at all this hating.
I'm sure his fortune, mansion, estate with on-site hobbit holes, and small fleet of vintage WWI planes more than makes up for it.
<<       
But if he did things honorably, at least he could lie straight in bed - even if his bed was a sheet of tin in a shanty town! Dignity! He would have his dignity!