Peter Jackson returns to the fantasy genre

[sithgoblin]

Erm...there wasn't actualy a great deal of directorial skill in LOTR, the films were acting, SFX and story based, not really directorially challenging or intriguing.

And who do you think was responsible for coaxing those performances out of the actors? Or for setting the pace and rhythm of each scene, allowing such performances to exist?

 

[Cyrusbales]

And who do you think was responsible for coaxing those performances out of the actors? Or for setting the pace and rhythm of each scene, allowing such performances to exist?

The crew is more than just the director in films like this, and just because one person managed it, doesn't mean other couldn't, and even do it better!

 

[The Shape]

Directing is to put the story over combining the visual with the narrative,not everything has to have symbolism in it to be good and exciting direction
PJ put stunning visuals onscreen and coaxed and crafted great performaces out of his cast,i'll take that over a bunch of fancy fades and edits and some "this shot represents religious whatyamacallit" symbolism

Peter Jackson's directing is average. He proved that with LOTR and King Kong. Now he'll do it again with this lame series.

Okay, so he can make an expensive cartoon series based on prexisting, beloved material that makes billions of dollars. Big deal. He then chose to do pretty much the same thing with King Kong, only he was much less successful.

I'd like to seem him make a smaller film that requires no serious effects shots, and we'll see how successful he is.

The point of a movie is to bring a story to life. Anyone can do that. ****ing Uwe Boll can put his screenplay on the goddamn screen. But the way you bring it to life is what makes it interesting, and creates a great movie. Trying something new and original, or something old and forgotten.

Peter Jackson certainly can bring his stories to life (which are always stories that are already famous or somewhat famous). But what does he do that's so amazing that makes him above average? It's not as if he himself creates all of these stunning CGI shots he has to use in every scene. There's a whole team of people for that.

Until he shows me he can do something else with his directing skills, he's average. At best.

 

[sithgoblin]

The crew is more than just the director in films like this, and just because one person managed it, doesn't mean other couldn't, and even do it better!

What the hell? Without a single vision guiding the direction of the film, it would have been a jumbled mess. And that applies to ANY film.

 

[sithgoblin]

Peter Jackson's directing is average. He proved that with LOTR and King Kong. Now he'll do it again with this lame series.

Okay, so he can make an expensive cartoon series based on prexisting, beloved material that makes billions of dollars. Big deal. He then chose to do pretty much the same thing with King Kong, only he was much less successful.

The problem with King Kong was in editing. Jackson was responsible for that, true, but editing is not the same as directing. He can and does get good performances from his actors.

 

[Cyrusbales]

What the hell? Without a single vision guiding the direction of the film, it would have been a jumbled mess. And that applies to ANY film.

A film needs actors, director and crew. Yes a single vision is important, but with films like this, the costume dep, takes a load of the work, CGI takes even more, leaves PJ with almots nothing to do.

 

[The Shape]

The problem with King Kong was in editing. Jackson was responsible for that, true, but editing is not the same as directing. He can and does get good performances from his actors.

Why is it that everyon seems like acting is the most important aspect of film? While it is certainly important, great acting does not always make a film great.

Plus, look at the actor's PJ's had for his recent cartoons. It's no wonder why he got good performances.

 

[SilentType]

A film needs actors, director and crew. Yes a single vision is important, but with films like this, the costume dep, takes a load of the work, CGI takes even more, leaves PJ with almots nothing to do.

Are you kidding? The guy worked like crazy on his films, through the writing, pre production, directing, editing…. You can like him or not, but you can't say he didn't do much.

 

[Cyrusbales]

Are you kidding? The guy worked like crazy on his films, through the writing, pre production, directing, editing…. You can like him or not, but you can't say he didn't do much.

I know exactly what it's like to work very hard in every aspect of a film. He didn't do the CG, he had to shoot around the CG so that the special effects would work. This limited his creative scope! HE didn't design any of the costumes, Directors are SUPPOSED to work hard, it's not like he's the only director who can work hard. The only way people can recognise his films lately is by the running time, he has no individual style or anything! He is not unique!

 

[Hunter Rider]

Trying to tell me what does and doesn't make a good director is a bad route to take,i don't bother much when ppl state their view as a fact
PJ has proven his quality with the way he handled LOTR to me,it has it's detractors and that's all good but he has earned respect from the people who matter and im sure that is more important to him

BTW if you want smaller films from him check out Heavenly creatures

 

[deathshead2]

Trying to tell me what does and doesn't make a good director is a bad route to take,i don't bother much when ppl state their view as a fact
PJ has proven his quality with the way he handled LOTR to me,it has it's detractors and that's all good but he has earned respect from the people who matter and im sure that is more important to him

BTW if you want smaller films from him check out Heavenly creatures

Didn't he get nomanated for an award for that one.

 

[sithgoblin]

A film needs actors, director and crew. Yes a single vision is important, but with films like this, the costume dep, takes a load of the work, CGI takes even more, leaves PJ with almots nothing to do.

You really don't know what you're talking about. I don't like having to repeat myself, but here we go again.

Peter Jackson decided how the films would look and feel in pre-production. He decided what to cut out, what to leave in, and what to alter. He cast the film, chose locations, and guided the art departments to create the look he wanted.

During production, he worked with the actors to get the best performances possible out of them. If you think actors can give great performances without great directing, you are gravely mistaken. As I said, he set the rhythmn and pacing for each scene. He decided how to compose each shot, and I'm not just talking about the angle, I'm talking about the blocking, the composition. Everything that was in frame was placed there by him.

During post, he oversaw the editing and effects work, keeping it on track to keep with HIS vision.

No offense, but in epic productions like this, strong directing is more important than ever.

 

[sithgoblin]

Why is it that everyon seems like acting is the most important aspect of film? While it is certainly important, great acting does not always make a film great.

Um, because acting IS the most important aspect of a film. Pretty pictures and good technical production mean nothing if the acting is poor. Whereas good acting can save a poorly framed shot.

 

[Cyrusbales]

surely he followed tolkeins vision not his own? lol. I do know what i'm talking about actually, I never said PJ was a bad director, he's just a very bland one.

 

[sithgoblin]

surely he followed tolkeins vision not his own? lol. I do know what i'm talking about actually, I never said PJ was a bad director, he's just a very bland one.

No, he followed his own vision of how he thought Tolkein's books should be translated. You can't direct someone else's vision.

 

[SilentType]

I know exactly what it's like to work very hard in every aspect of a film. He didn't do the CG, he had to shoot around the CG so that the special effects would work. This limited his creative scope! HE didn't design any of the costumes, Directors are SUPPOSED to work hard, it's not like he's the only director who can work hard. The only way people can recognise his films lately is by the running time, he has no individual style or anything! He is not unique!

Every single director has a visual effects and costume department. Your saying the director should personally design and create the costumes? Or write the code for the CG? I don't understand where your going with this.

 

[Cyrusbales]

Every single director has a visual effects and costume department. Your saying the director should personally design and create the costumes? Or write the code for the CG? I don't understand where your going with this.

He doesn't need to write the code and stuff, but he needs a more active input. And some directors do design the costumes and stuff. There is nothing innovative or exceptional about any of his work! He hasn't proved himself to be a great director, he's proved that money makes films. No surprise there! If these films had no budget, and he made it good, then he'd be a great director. An example of innovative directing would be Sam Raimi, his early low budgets, actually made him develop his creative side, whereas PJ seems to have forgot all he learnt with his early films

 

[sithgoblin]

I love it how some punk ass 18 year old thinks he knows more than an academy award winning director.

 

[Cyrusbales]

I love it how some punk ass 18 year old thinks he knows more than an academy award winning director.

Punk ass kid, who just happens to run a film production company? I like the way you resorted to insults there, really mature

 

[SilentType]

He doesn't need to write the code and stuff, but he needs a more active input. And some directors do design the costumes and stuff.

I've seen nothing to indicate he had less "Active Input" than any other director or producer.

Punk ass kid, who just happens to run a film production company? I like the way you resorted to insults there, really mature

What have you made?

 

[Cyrusbales]

I've seen nothing to indicate he had less "Active Input" than any other director or producer.

What have you made?

well he loses input over things as he uses effects etc, that's why people like fellini who didn't use effects are heralded as the great film directors. www.cyrusbalesfilms.co.uk

 

[JLBats]

Dude, I agree that he's not a great director, and his films are largely dictated by the source material, but anybody who says he didn't put in a TON of work on those films is just crazy.

 

[Cyrusbales]

Dude, I agree that he's not a great director, and his films are largely dictated by the source material, but anybody who says he didn't put in a TON of work on those films is just crazy.

i never sed he didnt put loadsa work into it, I'm just saying he's a dull director

 

[SilentType]

i never sed he didnt put loadsa work into it, I'm just saying he's a dull director

OK, try to detect where you gave out that impression...

A film needs actors, director and crew. Yes a single vision is important, but with films like this, the costume dep, takes a load of the work, CGI takes even more, leaves PJ with almots nothing to do.

 

[SilentType]

www.cyrusbalesfilms.co.uk

Have you finished anything yet?