Revisiting The Lord of the Rings films

Posted by Jason Ihle | No Comments

I’ve spent the last two days not feeling so great, formatting my hard drive and re-installing Windows on my computer (what a big pain in the ass that is!). So to help ease the time and boredom while installing drivers and software and trying to figure out how the hell to reconnect to my WiFi router I’ve finally listened to 1 of the 4 (!!) commentary tracks on The Fellowship of the Ring. I’ve only owned this DVD for 6 1/2 years.

The first track is by co-writer/director/producer Peter Jackson, co-writer Philippa Boyens and co-writer Fran Walsh. Among the usual blather about the actors, technical aspects of shooting particular scenes and adapting the novel, I learned some surprising facts about the FX. Many things that I always thought were brilliantly executed CGI were actually miniatures. Of course the film is loaded with CGI and although I thought at the time and still believe today that it’s among the best CGI I’ve seen in a live-action film, many of the seams are still visible.

But it’s the use of miniatures that pleases me so.

If you know me and you’ve ever heard me speak about George Lucas, his fetish with all digital technology and his Star Wars prequel trilogy then you’ve heard me give this rant before:

CGI is no replacement for miniatures, rubber masks and latex makeup. All of The Phantom Menace looks to me like a computer animated film with some actors in the foreground. The effects make the film rather than serve it. Jar Jar Binks (his annoyingly pandering character traits aside) looks like a cartoon because his head was constructed with CGI. Darth Maul was created with makeup and looks phenomenal.

You need only compare the use of models and rubber masks in the original trilogy to the prequels to realize how models give genuine texture to a scene. They have a physical presence that CGI still can not replicate in the same way. When real time is taken and lots of money is spent on CGI, I will admit that it can look great. Peter Jackson’s King Kong is a great example. However, even in that film it’s really only the gorilla that I think looks truly amazing. Unfortunately very few studios and directors will put forth the effort it really takes to make it look great. James Cameron is another director who always does well by digital effects. Witness his Terminator 2, groundbreaking in its use of CGI, and Titanic which combined a 90% scale model of the Titanic split in half lengthwise with CGI to build the other half.

It’s not just miniatures, but rather any physically present effects that look better than CGI. Compare Raiders of the Lost Ark with that ‘real’ boulder rolling behind Harrison Ford or the ‘real’ snakes in the pit where they find the ark to Kingdom of the Crystal Skull which relies very heavily on CGI for its action sequences. Compare also Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, directed by Alfonso Cuarón, to the other HP films. PofA uses real objects and old-fashioned tricks for many of its simple effects. For all the flap the first HP received for it’s ‘incredible’ Quidditch sequence, I thought it looked blatantly awful.

Surely the people creating and utilizing CGI who keep talking about how wonderful it looks are able to see that it actually doesn’t look nearly as good as the old school FX. I think it’s a bit of Emperor’s New Clothes syndrome. Everybody wants to be in on the new technology and touting the new, the hip, the cheap.

I recognize that CGI is used for its cost-effectiveness. But it’s also used far too often. Much can be left to the imagination by employing traditional effects without the use of CGI. The best example of this is the Mos Eisley sequence in the original Star Wars (and don’t get me started on how I have to refer to it as ‘original’ for people to know which film I’m talking about) which was a simple establishing shot with a few sets. In Lucas’s masturbatory Special Edition he included an aerial CGI shot of the city of Mos Eisley. Okay, he gives the city some scope with the new shot, but it looks dreadful, doesn’t match the other effects in the film and ultimately isn’t really necessary.

So I’m thrilled to learn 7 years after the fact that Peter Jackson used miniatures in his LotR trilogy. It’s an indication that he’s a director who is more concerned with using effects to aid in his telling a good story than with simply making the newest, biggest and best cartoon adventure.

By the way, James Cameron’s Avatar has been in the works for 10 years and is due in December. Should be pretty substantial.

Comments