>Lord of the Rings pussies out by avoiding hair or cloth on its CGI>Harry Potter unashamedly has hair/fur and cloth simulation >not as good as Star Wars obviously, but still looks amazing to this day
>>221202245That looks like shit though.
>>221202245Is that Joe Rogan?
>still looks amazingpic unrelated
>>221202328>>221202359t. Lord of the Rings defenders.they'd make this a bald dude in a loin cloth with a deformed head because it's like, MEANT to look bad!both trilogies suffer from dark-blue syndrome but that was just the style at the time.only George Lucas had the stones to show Jar Jar Binks out in broad daylight, reacting to objects and casting shadows.Peter Jackson said he wanted Gollum to look as good as Jar Jar because that's what audiences expected. every time Gollum is on-screen, it ruins my suspension of disbelief.
>>221202245>avoiding hair or cloth on its CGIHuh? LOTR uses both on Gollum and both on the CGI inserts that make up a bunch of the extra and in-betweens of action sequences, ie Legolas on the troll or the Rohirrim eating arrows in their charge. LOTR just knew (sometimes) not to push their luck with it and do shots like this
>>221202245that looks like a really cool ps1 game but this is /tv/ not /v/ so if you want to discuss old games take it there
BIGCENTAURCOCK
>>221202410I don't give a shit about lord of the ringsStop putting words in my mouth.The image OP posted looks like shit.I even looked up the scene on youtube just to be sure and yep, sure enough, it looks like shit.
>>221202425This, the Hobbit trilogy using CGI for everything makes it look like PS3 cutscenes.
>>221202425>ie Legolas on the troll where he suddenly transforms into a Stretch Armstrong faceless mannequin flying about like he's made of rubber?The Phantom Menace managed whole creatures with faces, eyes, and realistic skin texture (human-like, lizard-like, whatever).it's like those films constantly shift from 'actor mode' to 'PlayStation game mode'. it's why the second one is so difficult to watch, because of the Gollum creature.Andy Serkis in the transformation make-up looks amazing, they should have just used that for Gollum the whole time.
>>221202445I mean sick burn and all but take a look at what PS1 games actually looked like.
>>221202606lol the cgi in phantom menace looks like shit
>>221202644nope, looks amazing. those modern Marvel films don't look anywhere near as good as Jar Jar Binks (not talking about the character or the voice, just the effect).i was old enough to go see The Phantom Menace at the time (unlike you) so i was reading all the magazine articles on the technology involved. the SIGGRAPH conference journals from 1997-2001 are freely available on archive.org, so you don't have to lie, anon.
>>221202606He transforms into a citizen from whoville.
>>221202245This centaur was white and blond in the books btw
>>221202886Jar Jar looks like ass, even people back in '99 were saying it looks like shit.I'm not even going to respond to you any more because you're clearly a retard.
>>221202245A lot of lotr cgis doesn’t hold up. Furs or not. That’s why the 1st one is the most rewatchable to me.
>>221202245reminder that Firenze in the books is basically a czech gay porn hunk. blond, smooth, muscular, irresistible. not a hairy manbeast
>>221203777oh fuck off that is some lazy revisionism. criticize the plot, the characters, whatever.we all know CGI = le bad now (and i even agree, it's become some trivial it's lazy, like solid animation vs a Korean workhouse).but we're talking about ILM making some really fucking impressive tech, for the first time ever, and it looks amazing on-screen. i think Ray Harryhausen's skeletons and dinosaurs look jerky and have bad paint jobs. i admire the craft. Jar Jar is both ways: the 'craft' is good and the execution is stellar.watch the Tatooine scenes. you can see how light sources in the real world reflect off him, he casts shadows onto physical buildings (and no, it's not just the actor in the mask/helmet thing).there was a whole point where CGI was cool and cutting edge and a selling point. i think Van Helsing was the first film where i clocked '...yeah, this looks a bit shit.'but what you're doing is pure contrarian nonsense. like saying 'the spaceship models in the 1977 Star Wars look shitty' when nah, they look really good. so does Boss Nass.
>>221202245its so strange to me that the lotr movies have become the target for generational rivalry slop.
>>221204040people are finally brave enough to call out the slop that lotr has always been. the books are seriously one of the worst bits of copy cat fantasy drivel that exists. not a single original thought went into them. hell, Spiderman has deeper lore than lotr. Even Spongebob is more profound and philosophical than anything Tolkien ever copied and sold as his own ideas.
>>221202606>they should have just used that for Gollum the whole time.
>>221204414What did Tolkien copy?
>>221204588he probably just means 'it's just <x> mythology, you ever listened to Wagner, bro???' like yeah no shit it's all from fairytales, to the point you can trace the (real-world) etymology of the words he came up with.at some point that's every story, but Tolkien was never saying, 'this is wholly original, entirely alien, nothing like this on Earth has ever been conjured by the minds of man', he explicitly said the opposite.frankly he just needed a better editor, and that's why the 1981 BBC Radio adaptation is the best version.
>>221204711>>221204588he literally copied entire poems like Aurvandil and "just change it a bit up" into Eärendilevery character is like a cutout from a european folktale with zero actual changes to their mission and character quirks.you can see his lack of originality with Mordor, where he actually did try to do something himself, but failed and we got a square mountain range and bare bones lore that is excused away by "well they couldn't chart Mordor, so it's just vague"not even the central mcguffin of the rings is original
>>221202245Which ps1 game is this?
>>221204891Ok, so what Tolkien characters were copied from what European folktale characters?
>>221202606Andy in those final two shots does look kino, I'll grant you that. I think the only problem is all the crawling. There's no fucking way for Andy to crawl on all fours and climb shit hyper quickly like Gollum does, so a fully practical Gollum would be nerfed in physicality and agility, unless they bounced back and forth between real man and CGI man kind of like in spiderman but he's mostly CGI when swinging and jumping and climbing.
>>221205023You only need him for face and dialog shots. If you don't see the face it's a body double, so it doesn't matter. I have to ffwd every fucking Gollum scene when I watch this because the Roger Rabbit Gollum is so awful to watch.
>>221204891>pre-copyright, public domain sources he never claimed to have been the originator of those authors must have been absolutely LIVID, lad. surprised they all didn't sue for such blatant-yet-subtle plagiarism.i'd better cease work on my Robin Hood in the 25th Century cartoon idea, just in case the Earl of Huntingdon files a DMCA.
>>221205023tbfair this is a series that famously used every trick in the book to make normal-sized people look small or huge.given he was prancing around rocks, i'm sure they could find a kid or a midget who looked gaunt enough for the wide shots. just occasionally film Serkis stopped down in a ditch or behind a boulder, for the 'beauty' shots.they did the old CGI trick of making him 'shiny' and i guess the justification is he was somehow still slick and slimy all the time, but it looks so fake.
