Combichristoffersen
Combovers don't work when there is no hair
I prefer the EEs of FotR and RotK. TTT is mostly boring regardless of what version I watch, so that one's a wash.
-
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
- Thread starter WyndhamPrice
- Start date
- Status
I prefer the EEs of FotR and RotK. TTT is mostly boring regardless of what version I watch, so that one's a wash.
Ixion
Member
The Boromir scene is great, but overall I would say it's worse. The middle of TTT already drags a bit, and the EE adds even more slow scenes.
Edmond Dantès
Dantès the White
More UK cinema locations confirmed for HFR 3D screenings.
Cineworld
Aberdeen Union Square
Ashford
Ashton Under Lyne
Birmingham
Boldon
Bolton
Brighton
Bury St Edmunds
Cardiff
Castleford
Cheltenham
Chichester
Crawley
Didsbury
Dublin
Dundee
Edinburgh
Enfield
Feltham
Glasgow Renfrew Street
Greenwich 02
Huntingdon
Ipswich
Middlesbrough
Milton Keynes
Newport
Northampton
Nottingham
Sheffield
Solihull
Stevenage
Wandsworth
West India Quays
Yeovil
Cineworld
Aberdeen Union Square
Ashford
Ashton Under Lyne
Birmingham
Boldon
Bolton
Brighton
Bury St Edmunds
Cardiff
Castleford
Cheltenham
Chichester
Crawley
Didsbury
Dublin
Dundee
Edinburgh
Enfield
Feltham
Glasgow Renfrew Street
Greenwich 02
Huntingdon
Ipswich
Middlesbrough
Milton Keynes
Newport
Northampton
Nottingham
Sheffield
Solihull
Stevenage
Wandsworth
West India Quays
Yeovil
Gozer the Gozerian
Member
J.R.R. Tolkien came to me in a dream he told me Guillermo should've directed.
Combichristoffersen
Combovers don't work when there is no hair
After Hellboy 2 I think I prefer Del Toro to just stay away from anything I like.
JRR Tolkien would have hated both directors visions.
Edmond Dantès
Dantès the White
A David Lean directed Tolkien film.
Bilbo of Middle-earth.
"El Bilbos is best"
Bilbo of Middle-earth.
"El Bilbos is best"
Gozer the Gozerian
Member
Shut up it was going to end with a freezeframe of Bilbo's face when he found out he was gunna be father was going to be great
Edmond Dantès
Dantès the White
Tauriel, that hussy.Shut up it was going to end with a freezeframe of Bilbo's face when he found out he was gunna be father was going to be great
Combichristoffersen
Combovers don't work when there is no hair
Shut up it was going to end with a freezeframe of Bilbo's face when he found out he was gunna be father was going to be great
but who was babby??????
Edmond Dantès
Dantès the White
Shut up it was going to end with a freezeframe of Bilbo's face when he found out he was gunna be father was going to be great
Edmond Dantès;45053061 said:
Figwit
with matt damian as bilbo?
Edmond Dantès
Dantès the White
Edmond Dantès;45053348 said:
Best Peter Jackson creation. I may or may not be joking.
Her nose and hair. His eyes and youthful innocence.
Figwit chose the immortal life, goes off to Valinor. Bilbo gets a free ride to be with his son!
I just did an image search for Tauriel, someone has already made a Skyrim Companion mod of her.
Edmond Dantès
Dantès the White
maquiladora
Member
I loved Pan' Labyrinth, but yeah Hellboy 2 was horrible.
James Rocchi is getting some flak on twitter for his Hobbit review.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
I don't know whether I regret or miss the days when I tied my emotional well-being to the quality or reception of franchise movies. I miss getting SERIOUSLY psyched for these things, but then I find myself appreciative of nearly all movies in some way these days, their problems are often as interesting to me as their triumphs.
It sounds flawed but okay-to-pretty-good-to-occasionally-great. Intrigued to find out for myself.
It sounds flawed but okay-to-pretty-good-to-occasionally-great. Intrigued to find out for myself.
Combichristoffersen
Combovers don't work when there is no hair
I loved the visual direction in Pan's Labyrinth, but the story never really did much for me :/ I wanted to like it so badly though.
You should really watch the first Hellboy, it's pretty great. Lovecraftian monsters and robot nazis all up in that bitch.
Hellboy 2 had a sourpuss elf who got sand in his vagina because who the fuck knows. Shit just sucked compared to the first movie.
BannedEpisode
Member
You guys didnt like Hellboy 2?
Admittedly, I never saw the first film and I dont know the source material well but I thought the movie was a lot of fun without going too stupid.
Admittedly, I never saw the first film and I dont know the source material well but I thought the movie was a lot of fun without going too stupid.
Worst review of them all.
Hellboy 2 was great, another showcase for Del Toro's imagination with some great fight scenes and fun character interaction. I thought it was pretty well liked online so these replies surprise me too. Got great reviews as well.
Dreamwriter
Member
Wait, what articles about people getting sick? First I've heard of this, the only thing I've heard about people getting sick was a single tweet after the premier
maquiladora
Member
Examining criticisms of The Hobbit - NZ reporter examines and sometimes rebuts some of the criticism.
maquiladora
Member
There was one Sunday Times article and it got picked up and it's been recycled into about 100 other articles I've seen all over the place. I'm not saying its true, I'm saying there is a lot of negative stories out there even before these reviews.
Not true, Batman Begins was great and that was a prequel to Batman Forever
Neffarias_Bredd
Member
I liked Hellboy 2 a lot
These reviews are pretty terrible. Personally, I am Jack's lack of surprise. Last good movie Jackson released was 11 years ago. I'll still watch Hobbit day one but mostly because of the 48fps factor, which I'm really curious about. I'm concerned though with the one reviewer that stated it seemed like the projector was playing at 1.5X speed, I hope i don't have any issues in my theater.
Dabookerman
Member
Got a 4/5 by Swedish Aftonbladet. Sounds good, not that their opinion is one that I hold in the highest regard.
The first half sounds heavy on the exposition and setting things up, but let's not forget that's how Fellowship was too and many still insist that's the best LOTR movie (Two Towers for me is superior).
Imo with so many new characters to introduce, a whole new trilogy to set the stage for, how could the first movie (or atleast part of it) be a bit slow and expository? That's how it SHOULD be, as long as it's still interesting and well done of course. Which it sounds like it is.
The main criticism for the LOTR movies have always been "long" and "boring" or variations on those two, so as long as those are still the main problems people have with The Hobbit I guess I'm going to love the hell out of it.
The first half sounds heavy on the exposition and setting things up, but let's not forget that's how Fellowship was too and many still insist that's the best LOTR movie (Two Towers for me is superior).
Imo with so many new characters to introduce, a whole new trilogy to set the stage for, how could the first movie (or atleast part of it) be a bit slow and expository? That's how it SHOULD be, as long as it's still interesting and well done of course. Which it sounds like it is.
The main criticism for the LOTR movies have always been "long" and "boring" or variations on those two, so as long as those are still the main problems people have with The Hobbit I guess I'm going to love the hell out of it.
Dreamwriter
Member
Folks and reviews suggesting that this movie had events stretched to make it last for three movies should remember that all footage shot to date was made under the assumption of *two* movies. At most it may have had some editing changes based on the decision, but the decision to add a third movie wasn't made until after shooting was complete.
Having said that, the original plan (long ago) was for the events of The Hobbit to be just one movie, and then a second movie was supposed to be all new material linking The Hobbit to Lord of the Rings. It'd be interesting to see how that alternate reality would have worked out.
Having said that, the original plan (long ago) was for the events of The Hobbit to be just one movie, and then a second movie was supposed to be all new material linking The Hobbit to Lord of the Rings. It'd be interesting to see how that alternate reality would have worked out.
I shudder to think at how weird stuffing the Hobbit into a single film would've felt.
Those are a truly dense 300 pages, and the pacing would've been so unlike anything from Jackson's earlier trilogy..The end result would've probably been a slightly better critical reception, but I bet fans would've turned their heads...and I bet the bridge film wouldve been a disjointed disaster.
They made the right decision to jump to two films. Jury's still out on whether there's enough heft for three. After all, critics might kick this one around a bit, but the next two could easily wow.
Discotheque
Banned
I kind of regret purchasing tickets to the 48 fps showing. I'd probably prefer watching it traditional for the first time.
Dabookerman
Member
Edmond, I'm a bit sad but I didn't know you had a lot pent up regarding PJ and co's involvement with Lotr and now Hobbit
maquiladora
Member
Same here. But I am really curious to see it 48fps, just wish I didn't have tickets for opening day so I could have watched it in non-benny hill mode first.
wow this used to be me as well. i miss the excitement
Count Dookkake
Member
4 days...
maquiladora
Member
It's gotten quite a few 4/5's.
I've sat in on a demo of 3D footage presented in 48fps and 60fps, and I second the sped-up motion thing. It's a weird sensation because the footage is obviously not sped up, but it looks so much smoother than the way our eyes perceive motion at 24fps that it kind of looks like it's on 1.5x playback. I don't know if there's any truth to this statement, but it actually kind of felt even smoother than the way my eyes perceive motion in the real world. It was a REALLY jarring sensation. Hyper-real motion. Your eyes DO adjust, but it still feels less cinematic to me overall. The demo was presented by James Cameron, and there was footage of a sword-fight scene he filmed. It was honestly like watching two guys fight it out on stage or something. Everything was in focus, no blur, and this weird "motion-smoothing" effect...like you were standing in the room watching them, rather than watching a cinematic representation of it...had a real impact on the otherwise visceral blocking.
maquiladora
Member
I suppose when your brain to used to seeing films in 24fps all your life, you have an idea of what normal motion looks like at that rate. But then with this you're processing double the frames in the same time, so I can see how the brain would get confused.
A lot of reviewers said that after a few minutes it felt more natural but some said they couldn't get used it at all. I wonder could it be a generational thing and younger audiences might have less of a problem.
I think part of it is that at 48 fps, your brain is able to process really tiny micro-movements and nuanced motions that would have been hidden by blur and strobing at 24 frames. Being able to process these movements contributes to the footage appearing jerky, like it's been sped up. At least, that was how I perceived the sensation.
Edit:
Strangely enough, at the presentation, there were a couple mentions of potentially ADDING motion blur back into the footage. That way, filmmakers could gain ALL the benefits of 48 fps, while also effectively gaining control over motion blur as a tool that can be used when necessary, and done away with when not. For example, we were shown examples of certain shots that were clearly better projected at 48 fps with no motion blur..whereas at 24 they would've been unacceptable because of too much strobing. That was the most exciting part of the presentation to me.. The idea that filmmakers gain control over motion blur..using it as a tool rather than staring it down as an unavoidable reality. They're given the possibility to use it in scales, adding blur where they see fit, while ditching blur and taking advantage of the more nuanced perception of motion that comes from 48 fps for more dynamic shots.
maquiladora
Member
Interesting. One thing I don't get from some of the comments is how it can look like an old 70s BBC TV show. That just seems like a contradiction.
It really depends on your attitude going into the movie I think, treat it like a standard cinema fair and to escape into the world and its going to be distracting. But if you go into the 48fps knowings its 'intended' to be a different experience and let your mind adjust to this cinema format then you should be fine. I am still looking forward to it, none of the negative reviews of the format are going dissuade me because I called this stuff happening when Peter announced the change to higher frame rate. Higher frame rate, much like 3D, adds so much extra immersive material that if there is anything off or wrong with the image, its immediately noticeable, and that includes some of the tricks of the trade that are normally hidden in cinema under the guise of lesser clarity, "Movie experience" if you will, of 24 fps. From what I am hearing the 'real' shots of the outdoors are stunning and certain CGI shots (like Gollum etc.) are also fairly impressive, but the less impressive CGI stands out like a sore thumb, bad makeup begins to show and indoor scenery that are clearly sets, look like sets even if they are coated in their own digital makeup. I think for the future of 48fps they need to make movies predominantly in real locations and mix with CGI, or make the most life like set imaginable. They can't skimp on details in 48fps. Hopefully with the first movie finished whatever struggles they had going into the new format are alleviated in the next 2 movies by learning from past mistakes. Change of compositing technique, greatly increasing the details of the CGI etc. (they obviously can't do much about the set and makeup issues, but there is no excuse for poor CGI in this day and age).
As for the negative qualities people are pushing on the actual movie itself, it seems like FotR rehash all over again (in terms of criticism) so I will wait till I have seen the movie myself before believing this movie is somehow different and worse by comparison.
Ixion
Member
Let's predict the RottenTomatoes consensus:
Peter Jackson's return to Middle-Earth is full of visual wizardry, awe-inspiring cinematography, and comical characters, ultimately resulting in a thrilling and colorful fantasy adventure. However, this journey lacks the emotional weight and strong focus of the Lord of the Rings trilogy.
Peter Jackson's return to Middle-Earth is full of visual wizardry, awe-inspiring cinematography, and comical characters, ultimately resulting in a thrilling and colorful fantasy adventure. However, this journey lacks the emotional weight and strong focus of the Lord of the Rings trilogy.
- Status