Simon Young

Sorry, let me make myself crystal clear:

The QuickTime HD versions of the trailer have been squashed vertically. Compare any shot in the trailer with the same shot in the teaser - the actors' faces look out-of-proportion.

I re-scaled the trailer to match the proportions of the teaser, and found that the trailer's aspect ratio should be approximately 2.25:1, not 2.35:1. I suspect that the source material supplied to Apple was either under-matted or cropped at the sides (I suspect the latter, as the new trailer is missing information from the sides compared to the teaser) and Apple simply scaled it to 2.35:1 during the compression process.

I do realise that the aspect ratio of a trailer can vary from that of the finished film. The teaser for "King Kong" was clearly open-matte, whereas the full trailer reflects how the finished film will be matted. All I'm saying is that someone at Apple made a mistake, and the trailer is approximately 4% shorter than it should be.

my favourite movies

Sam Davatchi

As much as I love Peter Jackson and LOTR, I have some doubts about the *look*. From the trailer, the movie doesn’t look as realistic as I would have expected from Peter Jackson. And I’m not talking about the creature effects! Talking just about the sets and costumes, especially the NY scenes. It has the dreaded Scorsese-Leo we-just-made-these-and-actors-are-trying-them-for-the-first-time feel! But of course I reserve judgment until I see the thing!

Holadem

This jumped at me immediately when I saw it. Everything looks fatter.

--
H

Yumbo

skinnier?

yes, something I wanted to query - what is the ratio of the MOVIE?

the 480p looks like 2.40.

Yumbiosis - all things Yumbo

TerryRL

Regarding the whole ILM/Weta debate, ILM has won 14 Oscars since 1977, their last coming in 1994 for "Forrest Gump". Weta is the only other FX house to win more than one FX Oscar during ILM's reign. Weta won for all three LOTR flicks.

Weta is considered one of the top four FX houses in the biz, the other two top shops (Digital Domain and Sony Imageworks) have two FX Oscars combined. DD won for "Titanic" and Sony took the prize last year for "Spider-Man 2". It is funny considering that Weta is smallest of the "Big Four" and yet has more Oscars than either DD or Sony.

Though I do think ILM's work in "The Perfect Storm" should've been rewarded ("Gladiator" won that year), I still think the Academy chose deserving winners in '99 and '02. ILM hasn't won since 'Gump', but they have been nominated every year since (at times receiving multiple nods in the category) and I think 2005 will be no exception.

ILM will get a nod for ROTS, while Weta will more than likely snag a nod for 'Kong'. Who will take the third nomination is unclear as 'The Chronicles of Narnia', "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire", and "War of the Worlds" will all no doubt contend for it.

The VES is a great barometer to predict where the voters are leaning in terms of Oscar consideration. Still, it may all come down between who was more successful at the box office. Since 1977, the Best FX Oscar has gone to the most financially successful film in the category 15 of 23 times. The #2 box office flick in the category won the other eight prizes.

This doesn't count the years of 1978, 1980, 1983, 1986, and 1990 when "Special Achievement" Oscars went the "Superman: The Movie", "The Empire Strikes Back", "Return of the Jedi", "Aliens", and "Total Recall" for Visual Effects. Of those five winners, three of them finished as the top grossing movie of its respective year of release.

Most believe it'll come down between ROTS and 'Kong' for the Oscar, but ya never know. The FX work in "War of the Worlds" was top notch, and the work done in both 'Chronicles' and 'Goblet of Fire' are said to be amazing. We'll see what happens.

"Quite an experience to live in fear isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave."

Kevin Grey

Hmmm, the feel I get from these scenes is that PJ is going for a more nostalgic, fantasy vision of the 30s than something more authentic.

And I'm with Chuck on the visual effects debate- The Matrix still holds up wonderfully while I find that Episode 1 has aged a bit.

Jose Martinez

Well, I've seen the new King Kong trailer multiple times online and once in the theater (before Jarhead). I just have to say that it (the FX) looks more "real" on the big screen!

Live Free or DIE!!!!!

PeterTHX

Shows what a joke the Oscars have become. Over "I, Robot" or "The Day After Tomorrow"? Ridiculous. Spidey looked like he belonged in a Pixar flick most of the time. Digital Domain was robbed on that one.



Serve the story perhaps. Broke new ground? It was in GAP ads and the like beforehand. "Episode I" broke new ground in set extension, miniatures & bluescreen composites. More films have benefited from that than "bullet time".

I also think "A.I." has held up better than LOTR:FOTR" (2001's Oscar winner).

Chuck Mayer

High praise, consider Pixar's character animation is leagues ahead of anybody else, including WETA and ILM. As for TDAT, I didn't see the film, but even my parent's complained about some CG wolves in that film.

FYI, digital set extensions were first done on Under Siege 2: Dark Territory, years before TPM.

As for breaking new ground, one of the real innovations of The Matrix was all-digital sets, allowing the camera to roam free. Bullet-time was merely an instantiation of that VFX philosophy.

But the Oscars aren't about innovation...they are about SERVING THE FILM. This is why The Matrix won, deserved to win in 1999, and deserves to win now.

This is the real threat of KONG to ROTS and WotW. If it's a better film, it might get the leg up. And I think that's quite likely.

Take care,
Chuck

EDIT: I'm actually a big fan of the effects in TPM, AOTC, and ROTS (ROTS quite a bit more than AOTC and TPM). But I'm glad the films that won those years (1999, 2001-2004) won...I don't have to trash quality work to try and make other films look better.

DavidPla

Spielberg is one of the few directors that knows how to incorporate special effects realistically into his films with "A.I.", "Minority Report" and now "War of the Worlds" being great examples.

Lou Sytsma

So true and so often forgotten in discussions here. Which is also why the win by LOTR in 2001 over other films like the aforementioned A.I.

Every man is my superior, in that I may learn from him.