Can someone explain to me why the CGI in the Hobbit trilogy is shamefully bad and worse than that in the LotR trilogy?

Can someone explain to me why the CGI in the Hobbit trilogy is shamefully bad and worse than that in the LotR trilogy?

Also general THT hate thread.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=6SGengnqNIM
youtube.com/watch?v=nM7byUTrSZA
youtube.com/watch?v=TpsFWBzDHkk
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

I found the first one pretty enjoyable, good set up, Bilbo wasn't as terrible as I expected and got better as he went on, they added a bunch of unnecessary stuff in the second movies all of which are pretty forgettable.

>88
Nice dubz

Also An Unexpected Journey had a pretty nice soundtrack too, lots of memorable tunes.

>That scene where the dwarves all sit around Bilbo's fireplace singing about how they lost their home and want it back
Fucking incredible. There's nothing like that in the two sequels and a lot of it is largely ruined by the comic relief, Alfred or whatever his name was, Stephen Fry was alright though. Not great or anything just okay.

because there's much more of it, its lazier, and it was not a labor of love like lotr

also 48fps was a total fucking disaster

It felt like a FotR remake with bits from the other two thrown in.

I still can't believe they included a joke about Stephen Fry's homosexuality but whatever.

>Fucking incredible

The second I saw that the dwarves were either cartoony goofball characters or edgy male models, I knew the films were going to suck. I've never seen the second or third, and I'm never going to.

The song was pretty nice, sure. But I was so upset that they turned the dwarves into either gimmicks or eyecandy, that I couldn't enjoy it.

The CGI is far better than it is in LoTR, not worse. I noticed a trend of retarded neckbeards here though who for some reason believe the sort of CGI you see in movies like LoTR, Jurassic Park, Starship Troopers, etc. looks more real than modern CGI. It seems to be a very specific kind of bad CGI that utterly tricks them. Not sure how to explain it except to say that you're really fucking stupid.

They didn't even look like dwarves to begin with but small humans, they should've looked closer to Gimli in terms of design.

>The CGI is far better than it is in LoTR,
Peter, pls.

It is objectively far better, it's literally a factor of technology. You're stupid as fuck.

The best things about the hobbit are all derived from the source. The shit that bogs it down are all filler the Jews insisted on.

An Unexpected Journey was pretty comfy

Worst part of the films for me were, obviously, Alfred. But also Stephen Fry as some weird King with the silly paintings of himself in his bedroom and the whole feel of it just seemed like some stupid Disney movie rather than something that belonged in the LotR universe.

But, again, how the FUCK did Alfred get so much screen time? I swear he got more screen time than Bilbo

I liked the first two

The quality varied wildly. Smaug looked fantastic. The Orc guy looked okay. The Dwarves running around surfing on molten gold looked like something straight out of The Mummy.

I'm not even memeing when I say that Battle of the Five Armies is one of the worst films I've ever seen

I genuinely found the film an insult

A central focus of the movie should have been an expose into the cultural and racial traits and characteristics of dwarves.

The 1970's animated version is so much better. It has such a more poignant feel of wonder, mystery, and adventure. Maybe just my nostalgia goggles. But in the animated version, dwarves were dwarves and wizards were wizards. Everything all bleeds together in the CGI monstrosity and loses meaning

The CGI might be technically "better" but it is poorly implemented. LOTR is more visually pleasing because they only used CGI for what they absolutely had to. For example, they actually cast extras and put them in armor and makeup to play soldiers in the large armies, only using CGI for large overhead crowd shots. The hobbit pretty much just uses CGI for everything and it looks gaudy and fake as fuck

>he thinks the Hobbit movies look good
Here's a lesson, kid, the reason the original LOTR trilogy and other movies (like Jurassic Park) look better than the Hobbit bullshit, is because those older movies didn't have 90% of their scenes shot in front of green screen. They used CGI to compliment expert practical effects. There is an animatronic T-rex head that attacks people in Jurassic Park, and that inspires a better performance than a big green ball, and a director saying "Ok now the T-rex is trying to bite you".

In The Two Towers they cut between live characters in Uruk-hai makeup and real armor, with real weapons and shields, and wide shots of CGI armies with pikes and torches.

In the Hobbit movies, even the close ups during the battle scenes feature such bad CGI and cartoony action sequences that it totally breaks any immersion the audience might feel. This effect is exacerbated by the fact that the story, writing, and characters are all terrible and so there isn't much immersion to begin with.

So, honestly bro, if you really think CGI orcs look good then by all means go get your advance ticket for the next 5 Avatar movies in 3D IMAX, but please leave this board to the patricians, you dirty fucking pleb

It's not though. Nothing in LotR compares to that shitty sleigh ride in the first Hobbit film.

>this is far better than LOTR
youtube.com/watch?v=6SGengnqNIM

wew

Recognise the quints!

quints of wew

>Absolute carnage in the background
>They are having a nice little chat

nice digits, and I've seen vidya cut scenes that looked better than this shit

it is though...My complaint is that there's way too much of it and there's that weird bloom effect.

Ya, after that is where they started filling it with garbage, like corny Legloas and Ev Lily elf, and that stupid alfred faggot.


The hobbit used many practical orcs as well, you know not of what you speak

>mfw there was nothing wrong with The Hobbit

Desolation was such a damn good movie and it had no right to be. The Hobbit was well received for what it was; a children's book that received a minor tweaking to fix Gollum's character for LotR.

The movies were so much better than I expected them to be, especially the extended cuts.

I think Sup Forums often forgets how awful the fantasy genre generally is on film. GoT, Eragon, Seventh Son, etc...

I wonder if Tolkien's estate will release the rights to The Silmarillion when Christopher dies. I'd love a miniseries about select plotlines from it.

>I wonder if Tolkien's estate will release the rights to The Silmarillion when Christopher dies
I pray to God they don't. I couldn't handle The Silmarillion getting The Hobbit treatment

>worse than that in the LotR trilogy?

blatant untruth

Then you're a God damn idiot.

>Not wanting to see what filmmakers bring to the table

It's like you don't even like movies/television. The Silmarillion isn't sacred, LotR isn't sacred, The Hobbit isn't sacred. If someone missteps in their adaption, it doesn't taint the original.

Is that you, Christopher? Remember when you disowned your son over a disagreement about LotR? You're a fanatic in the worst way.

>The Hobbit used many practical orcs as well
not for major speaking roles, see pic related

Just because the rest of the genre sucks balls, doesn't mean the Hobbit movies are good. They aren't the worst fantasy movies Hollywood has churned out, but they are still bloated, boring, CGI-filled shit

I think if Peter learns from his mistakes on the Hobbit, has enough time to prepare for it, got rid of shitty Phillipa Boyens and had little pressure from the studio it could be great. I doubt he'd want to do it though....

they def will, the guy whose going to inherit it had a cameo in the hobbit

I would rather have no one attempt an adaptation rather than consume an abortive one

*ur

sometimes they looked great other times they looked like shit

Dumb bastard

bait

They used fucking gopro footage in some scenes.
youtube.com/watch?v=nM7byUTrSZA

I got the feeling that they did that goofy Mayor shit because it's based on a children's book, so obviously it has to be filled with at least one character who drinks from a clownshoe. Or at least that's what PJ thought.

The thing is that The Hobbit was only a children's book in how its prose was written. It was more of a jolly bedtime story and full of Dr Seuss esque lines that all kids love. Translating that to the screen is literally impossible.

>"Fifteen birds in five firtrees,
their feathers were fanned in a fiery breeze!
But, funny little birds, they had no wings!
O what shall we do with the funny little things?
Roast 'em alive, or stew them in a pot;
fry them, boil them and eat them hot?"

- Typical The Hobbit prose.

The result if you do try to replicate that feeling is just a cheap knock-off of Grima's relationship with Saruman. Mayor is the megalomaniac and the other guy is the doormat servant yes-man.

shut it before Azog fucks your faggot ass to a bloody mess

>cares about spelling on Sup Forums
>tries to correct said spelling
>fails horribly

that has to be some contract they had with gopro. No way Peter wouldve aloud that to go through otherwise...

You're a rabid fanboi, aren't you?

youtube.com/watch?v=TpsFWBzDHkk

was jackson fucking trolling with scenes like this?

the only good parts of The Hobbit are when Smaug is on screen. BotFA was so bad that I fucking fell asleep in the theater for 45 minutes after he died

I didn't love Unexpected Journey, but I still had hope that the trilogy could be pretty good. Then this scene happened, and I knew there wasn't going to be any redemption for these movies

>be me
>used to casually speak about got with a cute grill
>one day she tells me she likes lotr too and is watching the first hobbit
>i say something like "thats cool too bad peter jackson completely fucked up the hobbit trilogy"
>she tells me she preffers the hobbit trilogy and they are much better than the first trilogy
what the fuck bitch
there are people who really think that?

>replies
or were you just pretending to be retarded?

Did you burn her face off?

no, I just didn't think the movies were complete shit. sorry if you're triggered

Okay, Peter. No need to be upset.

>no ur upset
xD

Peter, pls.

she either didn't watch the lotr trilogy or has a low IQ

Or the user is lying.

gay as shit films. self-indulgent twaddle. jackson clearly didn't have the heart for the book like he did lord of the rings.

Maybe you need a better tv and copy the cg in the hobbit is better than in lotr. Lotr has aged signficantly. This isnt me saying the hpbbot cg is great just that the lotr cg is pretty weak now save somes stuff in fellowship and rotk. But its ok fellowship is still perfect.

Hobbit cg 7/10
Lotr cg 6/10

m8 most of the soundtrack was literally just edited LotR music.

>Go see Hobbit when it came out
>Alright pretty good and nice to see familiar places and faces
>They escape the CGI orc and the mountain looms in the horizon
>I'm like oh yeah finally!
>Credits roll

I literally had no idea it was going to be a trilogy. Needless to be said, I pirated the two sequels. Imagine my disappointment.

He wasn't going to be the one to make The Hobbit films, I think it was Del Toro but he dropped out, Jackson really wasn't happy with Hobbit at all himself

What's sad is if they did two films it could have worked.

>tfw still havent finshed the 3rd one

2 was just so terrible i couldn't go on.

>worse than that in the LotR trilogy

It's not, though. The Hobbit has some inexplicably bad CGI for CURRENT_YEAR, but LOTR hasn't aged well at all.

The first 8 9 minutes are good if not great

LOTR recast reboot

Who would you cast as Saruman.

I would cast Jason Issacs

Idris Elba

Alfred has more screentime and lines than Smaug.
Because hes a funnier character than they've ever had before, so they needed to get Alfred working.

Alfrid was shit

What's your name on reddit?

Then I doubt he'll be inheriting it you fucking retard. It's not male pattern baldness.

How the fuck is that prose? Do you think prose means any words printed on a page? Stop trying to sound intelligent you stupid child.

Cocksmoker1999x

...

...

>Tfw Americans appropriate Anglo-Saxon culture

They probably wanted to make them more relatable, specially Thorin.

It might have something to do with the entire third film only having like 2 paragraphs of source material.

knobhead

MODS MODS MODS
please spoiler this ,you don't know how triggering this is

fanny

I'm a teacher and ALL my kids prefer the Hobbit.

gay school

>series about pre-historic mythical Europe is dominately European