1977 animaton with a $3 million budget is better than a live action trilogy with a $600 million budget

>1977 animaton with a $3 million budget is better than a live action trilogy with a $600 million budget

how did peter jackson fuck up this bad?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=2dQ5c5SIYnc
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

but $3 million in 1977 is now worth more than 1 billion

by not having the great songs

...

$3 mil is worth $12,021,732.67 in 2017 and $11,366,039.60 in 2012.

the hobbit is much more suited to animation, you can give it a more "childrens story book fairy tale" as well as have total control over the visual style without it looking like utter garbage

yeah the songs are better in 1977 for sure

one thing i like about the 1977 version is that it doesn't take 500 hours for the dwarves to arrive and then to go on the adventure. takes like 20 minutes in 1977 version

yeah, the whole movie works better as a single piece, because that's how it was written. also, for some reason whatever company owns the soundtrack won't re-release or let it be posted online.

the entire soundtrack is on youtube at least

The animation wasn't that good, and wasn't some of it rotoscopped?

Not in The Hobbit and why are you asking leading questions when you haven't seen it? Doesn't that make you a fucking punk fuccboi poseur?

always these money comparisons. The fault obviously lies with the script, not the productionvalues

I saw it a while ago, but I do remember having some rotoscope, I think I'm confusing it with the lord of the rings cartoon.

DOWN DOWN TO GOBLIN TOWN DOWN DOWN TO GOBLIN TOWN

That film is fucking kino

You're thinking of the 1978 LOTR.

they probably didnt pay their animators. happen a lot

those art betas are too pussy to do anything about it

>That rotoscoped balrog in LOTR 1978
Fucking kill me.

This.

I've said it before but The Hobbit should've been a single 2 & a half hour (3+ hour extended) movie done the same way as Tintin

They could've kept the actors and their likenesses and the links to LOTR while being able to also be much more childish and cartoony without it coming off so wrong as it did.

Also PJ needed to remember Bilbo was the main character. Focusing so much on side shit like Bard not only reminded me of the worst stuff from his King Kong (like the kid on the boat etc) but Bard using his son's face to fire an arrow just came off as retarded not heart warming and I don't think PJ realised this while making it

was, it got taken down the day after I youttube to FLAC'd it

i just listened to it though
topkek on your lossless

When will we get a film adaptation of the truest Tolkino?

Lena Dunham is even ugly as a cartoon.

I know multiple animators that would uppercut you to the moon, clown. Shut the fuck up before I give them a call.

I think Jackson's Hobbit wouldn't have been nearly as bad if the jews hadn't forced him to make it a trilogy. Otherwise he wouldn't have had to put in so much filler shit.

If you compare Jackson's LotR to the Bakshi version, Jackson is the clear winner.

getting stoned to this film is really something else

youtube.com/watch?v=2dQ5c5SIYnc

agreed, the lotr trilogy is incredible.
I do enjoy the animated ones as well though, they're well done (including rotoscope), sound, voice and story progression are all good. Solid movies but nowhere near peter jacksons

I literally bully animators for a living. They don't do shit.