Christy Grosz is Editor of AwardsLine.
Although the wait is nearly over for the familiar goblins and mystical forests of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, senior visual-effects supervisor Joe Letteri says the only thing that remains the same for this iteration of Peter Jackson’s fantasy films is on the surface. The digital tools that brought countless Orcs to life and gave Gollum his distinctive distorted face are virtually unrecognizable from those used a decade ago for the The Lord of the Rings trilogy.
“It’s changed almost completely,” Letteri says. “On the outside, you want Gollum to look like the same character, but he’s completely different” underneath.
Related: Distinguishing Best Visual Effects Not As Easy As It Looks
The biggest change from the first set of films is the way that actor Andy Serkis’ performance is captured and analyzed in order to create the digital character, according to visual-effects supervisor Eric Saindon. “Our facial capture has progressed leaps and bounds,” he says. “Now we actually capture all of Andy’s performance, when he’s acting with Martin (Freeman) in Gollum’s cage on set. We have a small camera attached in front of his face that captures his exact facial performance. Rather than an animator going in and doing it frame-by-frame, the computer analyzes Andy’s performance and then fires Gollum’s muscles to do the exact same thing. So the first half of the animation, which is the raw mo-cap data, is really Andy.”
“We know so much more about how the face works,” Letteri adds. “When people communicate face to face there are so many things that are going on that you really have to study now and put into the characters. We hope that people recognize that there’s this extra layer of depth.”
While Gollum takes a bit of a back seat to the other myriad creatures in The Hobbit, the film’s team at Weta had plenty of other digital characters to create, including the formidable stone-giant and its complex sequence. The crew shot the actors on a very small set climbing a hill along a rock wall, and every other element was added digitally after the fact, including the rain (images at right). “We did try to capture rain on set; it worked OK, but it was very easy to get rain on the mirror for the 3D, and then the stereo breaks instantly. The lighting was (also) very hard to control with the rain. So we did it for about a day and then we decided that it would be better just to do the rain in post. Then we added the stone giants, which are basically these mountains that come to life to have a thunder battle.”
Saindon admits that sometimes it’s tough to tell the practical effects from the digital, which is exactly the level of detail the team hopes to achieve.“Your eye is not easily fooled,” Letteri says. “We all go to the movies because we want to be fooled, but on the other hand we want to be fooled really well.”


Good stuff.
It’s an interesting admission that as wonderful as Andy Serkis is, a LOT of Gollum’s performance in the Lord of the Rings films was actually the animators’ work and not his.
No admission: That’s been known since the movies were shot, and they talk about it in detail on the DVD special features. And it doesn’t take anything away from Serkis’ work, since the facial animation was modeled extremely closely to his performance.
Rewatch the behind the scenes featurettes on the process. There’s a split screen comparison of the mo-cap filming and the final product, which makes it crystal clear that the animators were working directly off Andy’s performance. Now translating that performance into digital is an artwork of it’s own, but Andy is the main artist here, the animators the tracers translating it into a digital medium.
Actually motion editor not animator. What they do is they get very accurate facial tracking from mocap guys, and they solve the motion. Animators get pretty much finished facial animation, and they then do some fine tweaks, eyelines, or nothing.
Hank
For the most part No.
The majority of all of Gollum’s body and facial work was and is based off of Andy’s performance. Just because they now use a computer program instead of key frame artist to meld it into a computer image doesn’t change the fact that the vast majority was based off of Andy’s performance. Be it during principal photography, or Mo-Cap later in production.
Though there were a handful of shots that didn’t (for various reasons) use Andy. A famous one was Gollum’s death. Has they filmed Andy falling, but the body naturally behaves in a way that they didn’t want to use for his death.
Cant poke fun at this nonsense. Nothing good rhymes with Hobbit.
Lorena Bobbit?
Thanks for this article!!!
Hank, the animators’ job was not to create Gollum’s performance but to render Serkis’ performance faithfully. It’s his performance rendered as closely as possible by the animators and digital effects department.
What Mark and Jet said, this is how it’s done. Only it’s mainly the motion editors that would do that, not the animators.
There’s plenty of credit to go around, I really don’t know what this bickering is all about. Andy’s performance was wonderful as always, he’s simply the best when it comes to this stuff. I don’t think there could be any doubt about that now.
Now, the motion editors have this great performance to work with. Of course, it won’t just work just as it is. Gollum’s proportions are not the same as Andy’s, there are differences in the environments, and a bunch of things that just doesn’t translate through. It’s now their job to make the motion work and look great on Gollum, while being faithful to Andy’s performance.
“Now you’re looking for the secret. But you won’t find it because of course, you’re not really looking. You don’t really want to work it out. You want to be fooled.” – The Prestige (Another Serkis film that I absolutely love)