Gollum says "Hi."

Turrible, this movie was.

Touche

but still I wish the Orcs were guys in costumes/makeup and not cgi creatures. It looks like they half assed it this time around and now the orcs look like something out of a Playstation game

The Orcs look fake? Could someone show me what a real life Orc looks like?

Last photo of Ian as Gandy. He's done.

http://oyster.ignimgs.com/wordpress/...on-610x457.jpg

GOODBYE ORLANDO LMAO

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/5NGguk8VXYc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/rgNNb8bm_b8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

i came

Meh. Can't end soon enough

This is the last one, right?

The LOTR trilogy was a hell of a lot better, and IMO at least partly because they didn't rely SO MUCH on digital effects.

I wouldn't say it was better. LOTR trilogy was super serious. I like the light-hearted moments of the Hobbit.

Smaug is just incredible. A great digital achievement than Gollum for me.

Smaug is cool. But I remember the book...I don't remember the need for 3 ****in' movies. It's a money grab, and we're standing there with our wallets open...

...I wonder if Jackson works for the Chiefs...

...because...just like the Chiefs...I'll keep shelling out the dough. Man, I suck...

I have more of an issue with how they stretched out the source material. The theatrical releases for the lotro movies felt like things were missing and I looked forward to the expanded editions. Whereas the hobbit movies leaving me wishing for abridged editions that cut out the excess fat.

Viggo agrees



Mortensen thinks – rightly – that The Fellowship of the Ring turned out the best of the three, perhaps largely because it was shot in one go. “It was very confusing, we were going at such a pace, and they had so many units shooting, it was really insane. But it’s true that the first script was better organised,” he says. “Also, Peter was always a geek in terms of technology but, once he had the means to do it, and the evolution of the technology really took off, he never looked back. In the first movie, yes, there’s Rivendell, and Mordor, but there’s sort of an organic quality to it, actors acting with each other, and real landscapes; it’s grittier. The second movie already started ballooning, for my taste, and then by the third one, there were a lot of special effects. It was grandiose, and all that, but whatever was subtle, in the first movie, gradually got lost in the second and third. Now with The Hobbit, one and two, it’s like that to the power of 10.


“I guess Peter became like Ridley Scott – this one-man industry now, with all these people depending on him,” Mortensen adds. “But you can make a choice, I think. I asked Ridley when I worked with him (on 1997’s GI Jane), 'Why don’t you do another film like The Duellists [Scott’s 1977 debut, from a Joseph Conrad short story]?’ And Peter, I was sure he would do another intimately scaled film like Heavenly Creatures, maybe with this project about New Zealanders in the First World War he wanted to make. But then he did King Kong. And then he did The Lovely Bones – and I thought that would be his smaller movie. But the problem is, he did it on a $90 million budget. That should have been a $15 million movie. The special effects thing, the genie, was out of the bottle, and it has him. And he’s happy, I think…”


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/f...y-for-CGI.html