Kami? Anyone? Has anyone ever calculated the number of hours spent making LOTR Trilogy?

vi edit

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 28, 1999
62,201
7,579
126
I watched the special features section of the LOTR DVD last night. I checked out the "makings of" sections. I am in complete awe at the sheer amount of time spent making these movies happen. From the pre-production scouting, set building, prop/costume design, actual filming, special effects editing, post-production editing, ect. ect. ect. I can not comprehend how much effort and man hours that were put into this thing.

Has anyone ever released a figure at how many combined hours all of the people making these movies put in? I'm curious to know, but scared to find out at the same time.

Thanks!
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
66
91
I imagine the total production time is less than one tenth of the amount of time spent posting on AT about it! ;)
 

Stark

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2000
7,735
0
0
LOTR sure makes SW 1&2 look cheap. Let's see... build all the sets, weapons, costumes, etc by hand or just shoot against bluescreen? Which is more epic?

Jackson may just be making the greatest series of movies ever.
 

ThePresence

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
27,730
16
81
Originally posted by: Stark
LOTR sure makes SW 1&2 look cheap. Let's see... build all the sets, weapons, costumes, etc by hand or just shoot against bluescreen? Which is more epic?

Jackson may just be making the greatest series of movies ever.
Can you imagine Ebay after they're finished with the props (I guess they already are)? Every sword, every link of armor used, etc. will be on there. :)

 

pulse8

Lifer
May 3, 2000
20,860
1
81
Jackson may just be making the greatest series of movies ever.
I doubt that, but I am in favor of as real a location you can make without using a keying effect.
 

vi edit

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 28, 1999
62,201
7,579
126
I equate Jacksons devotion to this movie with a womans obsession of having the perfect wedding. Everything has to be PERFECT right down to the number of peanuts that go in the snack dishes on the table.

I couldn't beleive that he actually hired a linquist/language expert to help create the elven dialog. That, and the master craftsman that they hired to actually forge the weapons, and armorsmiths to piece together chain link armor. No wooden knock offs in this movie :)
 

arod

Diamond Member
Sep 26, 2000
4,236
0
76
Originally posted by: pulse8
Jackson may just be making the greatest series of movies ever.
I doubt that, but I am in favor of as real a location you can make without using a keying effect.
I dont know about the series yet because its not complete yet but based on the first one it will be the best IMO. It probably wont outlast time but theres not doubt this will be in the top10 for a VERY long while. On another note I know you cant really compare the two but I think lotr is sooo much better than the orig starwars trilogy. But I am too young have seen it when it came out to really understand that with the technology of the time but lotr is about as close to the perfect movie as you can get IMO. The acting is superb, the locations are perfect, theres nothing that I didnt enjoy about this movie.
 

kami

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
17,627
4
81
man hours? Phenonemal amount...millions? hundreds of thousands at least.

The earliest work began in 1997. Peter Jackson himself will spend about 8-9 years on the project. He lives and breathes LOTR.

BTW, the making-of's on the 2 disc set are nothing compared to the upcoming 4 disc. They shot almost 1000 hours of behind the scenes footage just for DVDs. The making-ofs will be the best ever.
 

BigJohnKC

Platinum Member
Aug 15, 2001
2,448
1
0
Originally posted by: Stark
LOTR sure makes SW 1&2 look cheap. Let's see... build all the sets, weapons, costumes, etc by hand or just shoot against bluescreen? Which is more epic?

Jackson may just be making the greatest series of movies ever.
Oh come on, give me a break. Yeah, Lucas is supposed to make "real" flying cars and lightsabers by hand so it's more real. The comparison cannot be made. I agree that LOTR kicked both of the new star wars movies' asses, but to say that it looked cheap because the sets weren't hand-built is just plain silly.
 

kami

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
17,627
4
81
Originally posted by: BigJohnKC
Originally posted by: Stark
LOTR sure makes SW 1&2 look cheap. Let's see... build all the sets, weapons, costumes, etc by hand or just shoot against bluescreen? Which is more epic?

Jackson may just be making the greatest series of movies ever.
Oh come on, give me a break. Yeah, Lucas is supposed to make "real" flying cars and lightsabers by hand so it's more real. The comparison cannot be made. I agree that LOTR kicked both of the new star wars movies' asses, but to say that it looked cheap because the sets weren't hand-built is just plain silly.
It's true to an extent. Most of the stuff you see in LOTR is actually miniatures (or as PJ tends to call them "bigatures"). The two pillars of argonath (huge statues) were miniatures. The whole Moria staircase sequence was miniatures Isengard is a miniature (though it's still several stories tall even has a miniature), Mount Doom is a miniature, etc. etc.

They had a team of people who spent months just designing Sauron's armor (like a real armor smith or sword smith would...by heating real metal). No other film has had such painstaking detail.
 

kami

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
17,627
4
81
Also, fi you want some actual numbers...

a team of about 2400 people worked on the film, and there have been over 25,000 extras used at some point. Don't think it's possible to calculate the man hours!

They did all of it for under $300 million...but if they would've made them all seperately the cost would probably spiraled towards a billion. most ambitious movie project EVER! :)
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
66
91
Jackson may just be making the greatest series of movies ever.

Okay, that is clearly one step WAY too far. To me it is laughable to compare LOTR to The Godfather 1&2, which are leagues better and more emotionally compelling than LOTR could ever dream of being (though obviously this is an apples-to-oranges comparison).
 

Stark

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2000
7,735
0
0
Oh come on, give me a break. Yeah, Lucas is supposed to make "real" flying cars and lightsabers by hand so it's more real. The comparison cannot be made. I agree that LOTR kicked both of the new star wars movies' asses, but to say that it looked cheap because the sets weren't hand-built is just plain silly.
I thought Star Wars would never be topped in terms of movie franchises, but the more movies Lucas makes, the less "magic" there seems to be. Something about knowing that what you're watching isn't real takes away from the whole experience.

That's what's so amazing about LOTR: the scenery is all real. Some of the sets are miniatures and some are CG, but where they blend with reality are less apparent.
 

Stark

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2000
7,735
0
0
Okay, that is clearly one step WAY too far. To me it is laughable to compare LOTR to The Godfather 1&2, which are leagues better and more emotionally compelling than LOTR could ever dream of being (though obviously this is an apples-to-oranges comparison).
Yes, but you forgot one thing: Godfather 3.

If Jackson makes 3 greats, he wins. :p
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
66
91
Yes, but you forgot one thing: Godfather 3.

If Jackson makes 3 greats, he wins. :p
I can't argue with you about Godfather 3 - unfortunately Coppola has never been the same since his son died. I actually thought Return of the Jedi was a similar dropoff in quality compared to the first two, but personally I feel Star Wars, Empire Strikes Back, and Godfather 1 and 2 are all worlds more compelling than LOTR.

I admit I can't think of a single "series" of films that did not have one or more major clinkers, so if LOTR is your thing (it isn't mine), it probably will be the most consistent series of films ever made, quality wise. I certainly admire and applaud Peter Jackson's dedication, even if I don't care for the films themselves.

 

BigJohnKC

Platinum Member
Aug 15, 2001
2,448
1
0
Originally posted by: Stark
Oh come on, give me a break. Yeah, Lucas is supposed to make "real" flying cars and lightsabers by hand so it's more real. The comparison cannot be made. I agree that LOTR kicked both of the new star wars movies' asses, but to say that it looked cheap because the sets weren't hand-built is just plain silly.
I thought Star Wars would never be topped in terms of movie franchises, but the more movies Lucas makes, the less "magic" there seems to be. Something about knowing that what you're watching isn't real takes away from the whole experience.

That's what's so amazing about LOTR: the scenery is all real. Some of the sets are miniatures and some are CG, but where they blend with reality are less apparent.
I'll agree with that. Lucas will never top the opening scene of the original. He uses so many CG characters now, and so many special effects. The last two have seemed so formulaic. I remember watching Empire for the first time and having that feeling at the end like, they escaped, but life still sucks for them. Somehow, the sad end of Ep. 2 didn't seem so real. But there were a lot of scenes in 2 that I just loved, even though they were CG. The battle scene of all the jedis in the arena was just plain awesome. If you noticed in the background there were jedis with dual sabers, just dancing and chopping away. Awesome.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY