This news story from Imraldis. This could very well be Weathertop, but here’s one theory: IF it is Weathertop, then they cannot be filming Gandalf there, so we will not see that in the film. a) because Ian Mckellen isn’t there, and won’t be there for another 2 and 1/2 months. b) They’d never set up a set for just the Hobbits + Aragorn, tear it down, and then rebuild it again in January for McKellen, you can’t do that. So that means that IF this is Weathertop, we will not see Gandalf’s lightening fight there, unless they use a stand in. Or Unless this isn’t Weathertop, but some other scene…
It appears that part of the film will be shot at Harcourt Park in Upper Hutt, in the next couple of weeks. It appears to be a small battle scene, as they have bought in a number of trees which have been cut up to reflect lightning strikes. There are also a couple of large trees that have been mounted on pivorts, so they can fall after being hit by lightning.
I suspect it may be when the ringwraiths attacked Gandalf at Weathertop, thats the only occassion I can recall large pyrotechnics outdoors in the movie. If anyone has a digital camera you can pretty much just walk in and take some pictures. I was shooed off by a security man, but its a public park so there are no access issues at the moment.
He said it would all be gone in a couple of weeks, so I assume the filming will be taking place fairly soon.
There is a great in depth article on the team behind the LOTR project.
Dreaming Rings Part I
interview by Sam Wiley
When I start to think about the upcoming LotR movies from Peter Jackson and New Line Cinema, my mind goes into overload mode. The Lord of the Rings is my favorite trilogy of books, and my favorite piece of literature, period. The plot is epic and heroic, sweeping and grand, written in eloquent prose and presented in a deep world that has its own mythology and historic background. These three movies could very well become a high watermark for all fantasy films, and I can’t stop thinking about them, considering all their facets, and wondering, wondering…
J the notorious Ringer Spy from LA, has sent me something amusing and rather odd to ponder. Apparently Sean Connery’s stand-in has posed for some photos where he’s dressed as a certain Grey Wizard we all know and love. Now why would he do this is beyond me, but check ’em out in The Spy Reports. And don’t worry about seeing that ‘Notorious’ pic, I added some spoiler space…
Interesting debate over the Hobbiton pic. However, I’m pretty sure we’ll find that the pic is compoletely authentic and un-retouched. Whatever abnormalities people seem to think they’re seeing would seem to be the result of a poor scan off a poorly reproduced newsprint photo, with the printing on the flip-side of the paper coming through the image somewhat and, of course, the always prevalent “conspiracy”-conscious element on the internet. Particularly ID4 seems to be barking up the wrong tree, in identifying the damp dirt at the entry gate as being an odd-looking shadow. Or why would anybody wonder why there’s a greensman in the photograph, dressing the set? I work in the Los Angeles visual effects industry and we’re shaking our heads at these efforts to “debunk” a probably perfectly genuine photo. Ah well…
Anyway, do you want to have a little fun with the easily excitable Tolkien net community? Well, if so, here’s a pic of a gentleman named David Manning, a frequent stand-in for Sean Connery, in full wizard regalia, that turned up at the casting office that handles him. What to make of this? There’s also a couple of full-body pics, however there seems to be something wrong with the scans I was sent (perhaps he’s animated in CGI too?…). I leave it to you to decide what you want to make of this.
Otherwise, I’ve been greatly enjoying the continuing coverage on your site.
Best, J
What to make of this? Why would a Sean Connery stand in pose for these pics? Who knows, spoiler space below for those who don’t want to see the ‘Notorious’ pic.
ok, this is probably the LAST thing I’m going to post on this subject. So here it is:
From: Tiny
Tiny has had a ton of experience with CG and film effects in general, he has taught at sheridan college in the advanced computer animation and fx course and has been involved in many pertinant projects.
I’d like to make some observations about the photo of bag end and say that it in fact could be a photo (as for pete’s sake, I think it is!).
First of all, ID4’s observations. The chimneys shadow looks pretty bang on for the shape of the hill, if you notice, the hill has a lip and it follows it to a tee.
Cyan – I don’t know what shadow he is talking about, but if it is the gates, you can see that the actual gate is off the ground which causes the shadow to be farther back than the bottom of the gate. If it’s the darker splotch on the ground, well, if you take a look at what the *real* man is doing in the photo (remember, it was snuck, not a promotional peice) he’s busy planting plants. What do you do when you are planting plants, but pour water into the hole, lots of it. The ground tends to get saturated with water, and we all know that when dry dirt gets wet, it gets darker. You can actually see the hose just infront of his closest leg and to the left of that.
Blue – I am pretty sure the gate has texture, but at the resolution and what compression the image has been trough I am sure the sublte details have been lost. Plus, when something is in shadow, texture tends not to show as much because the light doesn’t vary of the surface as much. I am pretty sure that man is inthe photo, he’s happily planting away, unless the final film will have those fresh from the store look plants just sitting, dying above ground, just right of his head. The glow on his leg is actually rim or back lighting, in CG we call it global illumination or radiosty effects where light energy causes a nice soft rim, it co incides with the direction of the sun. Again, if you think it’s CG because of the size of the doors, what about the size of the actual house and the chimney. If I remember correctly, a lot of the concept work for the film is being done by john howe, take a look at the one painting of his from inside a hobbit’s hole looking out into the shire, notice how big the door is – he’s the concept guy, get it? Plus, the extra area that the dimensions of the circle adds to the door makes it look bigger.
Last but not least, if they we’re taking this image in secret, would they not be farther away than what appears, could the actual camera have had a telephoto lense on it? I really don’t think the location of the photographer was from the perceived vantage point of the photo.
I think the physical effects crew are doing a great job! The sets look wonderful.
See ya.
BTW – with there being so many other aspects of the films being done digitally, why would the film makers go through the trouble of producing the shire as all CG, maybe for a long shot but for close ups, especially a shot like this, wouldn’t you think it would be easier for the actors to act within the natural environment – unless of course you’d like the movie to look like EP1. All the roto work and matte pulling would take a team of at least 10 folks, and out of the 80 that is said to be the talent count for the weta digital team, I don’t think they could afford 10 folks just pulling mattes and pushing splines around the screen.
Another note -> as nice as the image that was an example of something made to look real in CG (the one with the house infront of the trees) – it exhibits one of the key problems of lighting a CG scene, solid black hard shadows. You would at least see some colour in the shadows on the yellow slats at the front of the house (take a look at the shadows of the trees in the background and the nice soft transparent shadow it casts on the ground).
To check out the pics, head on over to the Spy Reports, SPOILER WARNING!
After asking around I recieved yet another in depth look at the phototgraph. I won’t post the pic he sent, but basically I’ll tell you where to look. Take a look at the worker’s um, behind, 🙂 and if you zoom in on a photo editor, you can see a halo around the guy, as if it was smudged.
yellow arrows: compare the highlights on the man to the direction in which the chimney’s shadow is thrown. inconsistent, as ID4 pointed out about other parts of the scene.
red: the man looks as though he’s been composited into the image–he’s essentially been outlined…almost as if he was cut and pasted, and then smoothed over to take care of aliasing around the edges…most people don’t emit a glow by themselves 🙂
proportions: here’s something that has been overlooked.
(1) look at the size of the man compared to the size of the doors. a six foot hobbit hole? (but then again, the actors will be ‘cut in half’ via CGI techniques, so that might be a tad more likely than not)
(2) look at the size of the gates compared to the size of the doors. assuming the hole is roughly as tall as a hobbit (it’d have to be, if you look at the position of the window), the fence would come up to their knees. does that seem likely?
(3) look at the angle from which this picture was taken. I’m wondering how a spy got 20 or 30 feet into the air above this thing…he’d have to be standing on one hell of a hill.
Just more possible evidence for you to take into consideration. granted, I could be (and most likely am) wrong, and maybe the image is authentic. maybe some of it’s just bad compression or weird tricks of light…imperfections of nature, but it just doesn’t seem likely to me. when you spend enough time critizing CGI work, you take for granted everything you see in the real world…and I don’t see most of that in this picture.it just doesn’t feel right to me. my two cents. take it or leave it.
.evil bob.
Note from Xoanon: Now I’ve been getting some pretty heated emails ove rthis, and let me tell you, I wish and HOPE this image IS real! Because it rocks! So don’t think I’m trying to bash all your hopes.
