If I had one question I could ask Peter Jackson...

… it would be:

“Jackson, have you ever been outside at nighttime? Because I know you sure-as-hell have never been in a cave.” :mad:

The electric lighting during the Buckleberry Ferry run in Fellowship of the Ring was so obvious and over-bright, it drove me nuts! Weathertop was even worse! That lighting reminds me 1940’s movies’ soundstage scenes where people had not quite figured out that, hey, we’re filming in color now and can’t get away with that stuff anymore.

Jesus! Don’t even get me started on Moria! :smack: Obviously done in the tradition of the Star Trek school of cave lighting!

Is it too late to start a Please-Don’t-Screw-Up-Shelob petition? Has that already been filmed?

I closed my eyes and pretended.
Not one bit of offensive light touched my retinas.
I thought of it as artistic purity.

“The viewers must be able to watch the program, Andy.”

That is your big complaint? At least there are no Bug Meteors in your book to movie, you crybaby!

Yep. They go to such extremes as to get the right number of pores in Gandalf’s nose but they can’t film a horseman in the woods at night without it looking like he’s standing next to a streetlamp? It’s just silly. But it has become almost standard in films today. The days of naturalistic lighting are over.

Exception: The 13th Warrior. Say what you will about it, but it this is one film for a change in which night looks like night, and a cave like a cave. **

I have no idea what this means.

If I had one question I could ask Peter Jackson…
I’d ask for Viggo’s phone number.

Are there goning to be any more of those wnderful/dreadful splatter gore movies you used to do so beautifully (Meet the Feebles/Braindead et al)?

I think that TT is talking about Starship Troopers, where source material was little more than a suggestion.

Amen! Actually, I’d just settle for better DVD releases of them. I understand the original cut of Braindead lost some gore when it became the stateside release of Dead Alive, and dammit, it’s not right to know there’s a version out there with even ridiculously more amounts!

In any case, I want special editions of his early films, with commentary primarily.

My question would be WHY DID YOU ASSASINATE FARMIR’S CHARACTER!? He was so good and noble and in the movie he was just like Borimir, until sam’s god-awful speech convinced him to let the hobbits run free.

Dam you Peter Jackson

and that other girl for HEAVENLY CREATURES II?

oh yeah, and throw in some hobbits! RUNNING!!!


“When you made ‘Meet the Feebles’, what were you THINKING?!”
That thing traumatised me. So very unsavoury. It bothered my much more than Braindead did. Of course I was always a big Muppets and Fraggle Rock fan. . .

Rarely have I seen a post whose point is so clearly to stir up argument.

Actually, I’ve seen it quite often but it bugs me and I like to be dramatic.

My guess is, because a black screen with peoples’ voices would be boring. Because, you realize, without the artificial lighting, that’s all we’d get.

That is, assuming that there were no moon out. If there were a full moon, say, then the net effect would be about like a person standing under a streetlight. The moon is a lot brighter than most folks realize.

Erm…not assassinate-assassinate, but rather character-assassinate. If that make sense.

Farimir was always one of my favourite characters in the books, and I hated what he became in the movie, plus I can’t really see why it was done…

There’ve been only two cases in the movies so far where the lighting bugged me: one was in Bree, and the other was in Lothlorien. And in both of them, it was because it was too dark, just so dark as to be annoying. I got the sense that there were these elaborate set pieces and/or matte paintings that had taken months to finish, and the camera would linger on them for a bit to serve as an establishing shot, but I couldn’t quite make out what I was looking at.

For the rest of the movies, it’s not naturalistic lighting at all, but I took that as a conscious artistic decision. In the case of the Black Riders’ being lit by a convenient flood lamp just over the horizon, it’s to make the silhouette stand out for dramatic purposes. And for the other scenes (especially Weathertop), it gives it a strange, otherworldly feeling. The contrast is a little too high, the shadows a little too dark, etc.

[sarcasm]Yeah, wicked, wicked Faramir, capturing Sam and Frodo, interrogating them and threatening to shoot Gollum (kind of like in the book), and then risking disgrace and death by setting the Hobbits free. Hisss! The fact that he almost made the wrong decision in an effort to save his people is completely unforgiveable. Who knows what abominations he’ll commit in the next film?[/sarcasm]

I’m glad that some events play out differently in the film. If you prefer things to happen exactly as they did in the book, you can always read the book again. Re: SolGrundy’s comment on naturalism, there’s an interesting article in today’s L.A. Times reporting that almost every color in every frame was digitally altered, in part to increase the “otherworldliness” of Middle Earth.

My question might be, “Does all the nitpicking ever get to you, or do the critical plaudits and piles of money make up for it?”

A sequel to Heavenly Creatures?

Well now, that would be interesting. Not. Unless he made it up completely. Then he could have hobbits as well.

Ditto :smiley: