• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The Hobbit - Official Thread of Officially In Production

Status
Not open for further replies.
Is there anywhere you can listen to the full "Misty Mountain" song? Anywhere I'm finding on YouTube either seems to be digitally extended from the trailer or a mash of a load of LoTR music. Either that or I am listening to the original track and I just don't know it...
 
Yeah, the only addition I like on the first disc is the scene between Gandalf and Aragorn:
Saruman: I want them armed and ready to march within two weeks.

Hurrdurr: But mah lord there are too many. They cannot all be armed in time we don't have the means!

Saruman: Build a dam, block the stream, work the furnaces night and day.

Hurrdurr: We don't have enough fuel to feed the fires.

Saruman: The Forest of Fangorn lies on our doorstep. Burn it.

Hurrdurr: YEEES!

Also the guy swearing to fight for Saruman. Urukhai/orc scenes. Always a delight to see lil more of the villains :).
 
It's in the can.

Peter Jackson has finished his final cut of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, just days out from the film's premiere in Wellington.

Jackson's spokesman Matt Dravitzki said the director had approved the final version of the film yesterday, to the relief of its sleep-deprived post-production crew.

"There has definitely been some tired people getting some much-needed sleep. And there was a few celebratory drinks, with some bubbles."

http://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/236588/jackson-races-finish-final-cut-hobbit

One advanced screening had already taken place "somewhere on the (Miramar) peninsula".

"There are a lot of very tired and very happy people around," he said.

More than 100 international media were in Wellington for the premiere, Dravitzki said.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/film/7998128/Key-hasn-t-read-up-on-The-Hobbit
 

MrCheez

President/Creative Director of Grumpyface Studios
It's in the can.

ehlxld.gif
 

Kud Dukan

Member
Wellington. Screening for press tonight, cast & crew screening is tomorrow I think. It's 1pm there now.

Very cool! Crazy to think that within the next couple days we'll start to hear about the film in one form or another (reviews are embargoed, but that never stopped people from giving out strongly worded hints on Twitter).
 

Ether_Snake

安安安安安安安安安安安安安安安
Does Samuel L Jackson have a role in the movie this time?
 

Noema

Member
Am I the only one who isn't terribly excited about movies being shot at 48fps? I understand the advantages (reduced judder and stutter) and technical reasons, but darn, I worry that it'll end up looking like a cheap straight to DVD movie shot on video.

We've all seen what these newer 120Hz TVs do to movies when they use Motion Interpolation to introduce intermediate frames to movies that were shot at 24fps, introducing the infamous Soap-Opera effect.

I suppose Jackson and company know what they are doing, but I'm skeptical myself. Jackson says:

”Nobody is going to stop. This technology is going to keep evolving. At first it’s unusual because you’ve never seen a movie like this before.… It’s literally a new experience, but you know, that doesn’t last the entire experience of the film; not by any stretch, after 10 minutes or so. That’s a different experience than if you see a fast-cutting montage at a technical presentation.… There can only ever be a real reaction, a truthful reaction, when people actually have a chance to see a complete narrative on a particular film.… You settle into it.”

Actially we've seen movies like this before: whenever you walk to a department store and there's a wall of LED displays all playing the Avengers or whatever interpolated to 120Hz. Makes me want to vomit. And as someone who has been forced to sit through entire movies that have been defiled by this abomination at a friend's house, I can say that no, I don't "settle into it" after 10 minutes. You can't ever unsee it.


What do you guys think? Unlike interpolated movies, The Hobbit was actually shot at 48fps, so maybe that makes a difference, actually removing judder and stuttering, without ending up looking like cheap TV. So far opinions have been mixed.. I guess 48fps makes better sense in 3D.

Apologies if this has already been discussed in the thread before.
 
Am I the only one who isn't terribly excited about movies being shot at 48fps? I understand the advantages (reduced judder and stutter) and technical reasons, but darn, I worry that it'll end up looking like a cheap straight to DVD movie shot on video.

We've all seen what these newer 120Hz TVs do to movies when they use Motion Interpolation to introduce intermediate frames to movies that were shot at 24fps, introducing the infamous Soap-Opera effect.

I suppose Jackson and company know what they are doing, but I'm skeptical myself. Jackson says:

”Nobody is going to stop. This technology is going to keep evolving. At first it’s unusual because you’ve never seen a movie like this before.… It’s literally a new experience, but you know, that doesn’t last the entire experience of the film; not by any stretch, after 10 minutes or so. That’s a different experience than if you see a fast-cutting montage at a technical presentation.… There can only ever be a real reaction, a truthful reaction, when people actually have a chance to see a complete narrative on a particular film.… You settle into it.”

Actially we've seen movies like this before: whenever you walk to a department store and there's a wall of LED displays all playing the Avengers or whatever interpolated to 120Hz. Makes me want to vomit. And as someone who has been forced to sit through entire movies that have been defiled by this abomination at a friend's house, I can say that no, I don't "settle into it" after 10 minutes. You can't ever unsee it.


What do you guys think? Unlike interpolated movies, The Hobbit was actually shot at 48fps, so maybe that makes a difference, actually removing judder and stuttering, without ending up looking like cheap TV. So far opinions have been mixed.

Apologies if this has already been discussed in the thread before.
a7huk.jpg
 
Lol everyones overlooking 3D + 48fps.. you've never seen this in real life anywhere. Only way to know is to see it for yourself. I'm sure there will be some people who dislike it as it has been described as overwhelming. The soap opera effect was used as the film was still very early so grading of the shots looked unfinished/therefore propish/makeupish/and like a set/stage.
 

Kud Dukan

Member
Lol everyones overlooking 3D + 48fps.. you've never seen this in real life anywhere. Only way to know is to see it for yourself. I'm sure there will be some people who dislike it as it has been described as overwhelming. The soap opera effect was used as the film was still very early so grading of the shots looked unfinished/therefore propish/makeupish/and like a set/stage.

If more people knew about the bolded part, then that entire controversy when that first bit of footage was shown would have been extremely minimized. I think the people reporting on the event really dropped the ball there. Ungraded, unfinished footage looks vastly different from the final product.
 
I don't think it had much to do with the color timing being unfinished. I think it has more to do with most people seeing something jarringly different and not being willing to accept a change from what they're used to identifying movies as. For many movie-goers I think it is just going to seem 'wrong' and that is as far as their thinking will take them.
 
I just hope it get's better. When you change the way you capture an image, you also have to change what's being captured. When you don't, you get that phony soap opera look, where the sets are clearly sets instead of worlds you can get invested in. You're constructing a 24fps world in a 48fps view, and it doesn't work. It's fake. It's phony. It's false. It's wrong.
 

jett

D-Member
Aw snap, seems I'll be getting the 48fps version of this shit. Being listed as "HFR", which I can only assume means high framerate.
 
First reaction from the screening from a Spanish journalist. Had to use google translate.

The technique of the 48 fps is spectacular but I do not know such a modernity marries with the "regal" and "classical" essence of the series

Great wisdom of casting Richard Armitage, packing and gives mastery to Thorin regal... But once again Andy Serkis-Gollum! Oscar now!

edit : he has now deleted the tweets about his thoughts on the film.

Despite the fact he said he couldn't talk about it because he just signed this, lol.

k5Ve1.jpg


@GonzalodelPrado
 
Edmond Dantès;44756094 said:
An Oscar for a
miniscule role
like that, not a chance.

I agree, unless
they expand his role to include more screentime
, plus a nomination could be seen more as being for the culmination of Andry Serkis' work.
 
I'm still planning to see the film twice- once in 2D 24-fps (maybe 3-D actually) and then a second time in 3D 48-fps. Superior set up for me, since the first viewing gives me the chance to watch the film for its story and characters, with the visuals how I would normally see them, making for an easy comparison with 48-fps.

I'm expecting the CGI to look a lot better in 48, given CGI can often look to lose and fast moving (see the CGI hedgehog in the trailer). We'll see though.

This is all providing Liverpool Odeon is actually showing it in 48fps.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom