RadioactiveLobster
Member
I don't think so, but I wish it did.
It would be awesome if they did all 27 verses with the dwarf cast.
-
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 don't think so, but I wish it did.
It would be awesome if they did all 27 verses with the dwarf cast.
Well, as I understand it..television in PAL regions used to broadcast at 50 fps...which looked jarring to North American audiences who were used to 24 fps on film, and 30 fps max on television (correct me if I'm wrong). Combined with the really low production values of..say.. 70's television, I think many people have created an association between the "cheap" look, and a higher frame rate.
It's a false association.
It's like someone who's grown up with 48 fps saying something like "The Hobbit at 24 fps looks really blurry and cheap! It reminds me of Remington Steel! Why? Well, it's because that's really the only thing I've ever seen broadcast at 24fps, and since it generally had low production values, I'm unable to separate 24 fps from what I perceive as cheap-looking!"
This as well. It makes it harder to hide the "trickery". Then again, the same is true of any fidelity-related technological innovation, and it's not something I'd worry about with something on the scale of The Hobbit..
I hope...
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
That seems pretty consistent with the issues, in that the clarity of the picture and framerate seems to work against conventional set and lighting design, sometimes. When people are complaining it looks "cheap" they mean the artificiality of the production looks obvious (like a soap opera or old BBC show), not that it looks like low-resolution videotape.
My overarching worry (as before) is that there just isn't enough material to work with for three movies, but the first movie exists in a strange place for me at the moment. The reviews and this thread make it sound like misery, yet what bits and pieces I've seen of the movie have done nothing to dampen my enthusiasm for it. Slow burners are right up my alley, and the characters and setting appeal to me such (self-described Tolkien junkie) that spending a lot of time with them is a clear positive in my eyes. So in that respect, the movie would have to be extremely self indulgent in choices of style and not in time to draw my ire. Critical mass of elves skateboarding down stone steps? Then we have problems.
The criticisms seems pretty similar to the first part of The Deathly Hallows adaptation, and people generally thought that was one of the highest peaks for Potter.
Critics almost always see strict adaptations as indulgent..especially if they divide the source material.
maquiladora
Member
The end of a review on Theonering.net
http://www.theonering.net/torwp/201...-expected-masterpiece-in-a-distracting-frame/
http://www.theonering.net/torwp/201...-expected-masterpiece-in-a-distracting-frame/
Soap Opera - When your TV tries to be smarter than you, but has no faculty to fool you.
I've heard this argument a lot but I don't think people react to things so mechanically. No one thinks "oh this looks like that other thing that looked cheap so I don't like it". They don't like it because it just doesn't work for them. I think maybe this format works better for television shows or more realistic films, I don't know. I am still excited to see it for myself, don't really care too much about the actual film at this point. If it is good it will be an added bonus. Something about these clips feel off, I can't put my finger on it, and it obviously has nothing to do with frame rates since it is a you tube clip.
Yah, I'm with you. I think that argument constitutes a false association. If you read my impressions of 48 fps projection on the last page, I'm definitely not on board, but my reasons have nothing to do with it looking cheap.
I was just trying to shed light on that criticism in particular. I don't think arguing that it's "cheap looking" works as a legitimate knock against HFR.
Anton Sugar
Member
Seeing it in glorious 2D 24 fps first. I chose...wisely.
I'll still give HFR a shot, though.
Throw in obligatory praise for Ian McKellen's performance and I'd say this is spot on.
I like how this girl sings the whole song:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ME5urFBf0kk
I am not sure if there is an official version though.
CrunchyFrog
Member
This is generally what I seem to be getting out of it. Might be a good idea then maybe to not see it in HFR. It makes sense though. Higher fidelity means the flaws are more obvious, it's the same impression I got from that 60fps Uncharted 3 vid someone posted in another thread (just made the flaws in the animations a bit more prominent). It's akin to re-rendering PS1 games in an emulator at HD resolutions without the natural filter of SD CRT TV's of the day. I still think 48fps could work, but like videogames this gen it means budgets will have to go up as the details gain more and more prominence, and then you run the risk of other film aspects falling to the wayside, homogenization of the market to reduce risk, etc. Very slippery slope.
And with regards to the slow pace, I absolutely love drinking in the details in Tolkien's writing, so it sounds more like a plus to me, but I'll reserve full judgment obviously til I see the movie. The EE's of the OT are all I can watch nowadays, there's just such a breadth and depth to the world and characters missing without all those little moments, even if they might detract from screen time of the main plot. If the scenes themselves are shit then the movie is shit, but as long as what's on screen is quality then I couldn't care less about pacing. The excessive CG complaints are the one thing that have me truly disappointed, though, as the practical effects of the OT were what I really thought made them stand out.
Messypandas
Member
Less Lord-of-the-Rings and more Bored-of-the-Thing; Jackson's indulgent, self-fellating lack of restraint has once again resulted in a mess more bloated than his waistline. 7/10
Gozer the Gozerian
Member
If I like Fawlty Towers is this movie for me?
Messypandas
Member
The BBC comment makes perfect sense to me, particularly as how jarring the transition was from sitcoms that shot outside to inside.
maquiladora
Member
Fawlty Two Towers, amirite.
Combichristoffersen
Combovers don't work when there is no hair
No, because Fawlty Towers was written by someone who could string a coherent plot together, unlike HACKson and that Tolkien blowhard.
Those Tolkien books burn mighty fine BTW. Watching my three-volume Complete HoMe box set crackle and pop on the bonfire as we speak. Jolly good. I'll read Twilight instead.
Or Woman?
Did I read right that this first film covers only the first six chapters of the book? Because that's pretty damn indulgent for a movie this long.
Discotheque
Banned
I was 14 when I saw the first LotR.
11 here lol
Edmond Dantès
Dantès the White
The 'hack' comments were just me been silly. I care a great deal about the LOTR trilogy and will always be thankful to Peter and his team for their efforts, but I've always felt that The Hobbit was one step too far in Middle-earth for Peter and his team and that a fresh vision of Middle-earth was needed. That's why I Iament Guillermo's departure from the project, he would have injected a much needed bit of freshness and frankly I feel those around Peter are reluctanct to question his decisions, not out of fear, but because of their enthusiasm for him and the project has suffered as result.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
The stars alligned for them during their first attempt to bring Middle-earth to life. It's hard to replicate something like that.
Secret Fawful
Member
I'm okay with the movie looking fake and like a set. It will hearken back to older Hollywood where these big fantasy films did look fake and did look like they were on a set. It will be a breath of fresh air.
They are using additional material not covered explicitly in the hobbit book (and thus technically more then just 6 chapters), and the nature of the hobbit book in itself needs to be 'adapted' as the break neck pace and lack of characterization would not even remotely fit the feel of the universe the previous 3 movies created which they are trying to 'bridge' into. This of course brings the main problem with making the split they did, its still 3 movies from 1 book and the beats of the book were not designed to be stretched like this where one could consider '3' conclusions. I think I will wait till the second movie to decide if this was a wise decision as I still under the belief that two movies would have been perfect and the conceptual ending they had for this first movie would have been so much better place to end.
Anton Sugar
Member
Edmond Dantès;45059305 said:
Oh my god.
The Lucas cycle.
Dabookerman
Member
Edmond Dantès;45059305 said:
I certainly agree on the Guillermo point, but if it wasn't going to be him, then it had to be PJ.
I guess to me, it was simply a case of trading something that was a bit more weird and exciting for a world I'd knew i'd be comfortable with.
I think this project in particular would have been 10x more pressure than LOTR. Easily.
TangoAlphaLima
Member
Only if Radagast is involved in a fart joke.
maquiladora
Member
Edmond Dantès;45059305 said:
I think that's the reason why he didn't want to come back to direct The Hobbit originally. If the mess with MGM had been wrapped up sooner, things would have turned out very differently...
Still though, I'm not going to judge this without seeing it myself.
Ape Gone Insane
Member
Man, just imagine Del Toro doing the atmosphere, look and creatures of Mirkwood.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
They still wouldn't know how to light 48 fps movies so they don't look like obviously fake sets.
Karma Kramer
Banned
lol you guys haven't even seen the movie yet
Edmond Dantès
Dantès the White
His ideas for Smaug were pretty interesting. Think Saruman of Many Colours.
I hope Guillermo's material is released with the eventual extended edition trilogy boxset.
Edmond Dantès;45059305 said:
I'm somewhat torn. Because I agree that a fresh vision would be good. However, since it serves as a prequel to Peter Jackson's LotR, I didn't want anyone else working in that universe and messing stuff up. Del Toro or some other director doing their own standalone Hobbit would be a better option to me, if they had to have a different director.
maquiladora
Member
No, but a few of the reviews were really negative and we're just ignoring the positive ones.
It's much easier to selectively choose another persons opinion to decide what you think of the film rather than wait to see it yourself.
Edmond Dantès
Dantès the White
It might have been slightly jarring, yes, but it would have been fascinating to see his vision of Middle-earth on screen and I hope the conceptual work done during his reign over the project survives.
Edmond Dantès
Dantès the White
Funny thing is, Guillermo actually frequented the OneRing.net forums when he was in charge of the project, but was driven away by some negative comments towards his ideas.
Lol
Good Job Bob
Member
At the very least Del Toro wouldn't have tried to milk the book for a trilogy.
Karma Kramer
Banned
Lol could you all please wait and see the movie for yourself before claiming PJ ruined it, the reviews arent even that negative ffs
Dabookerman
Member
Edmond Dantès;45060570 said:
Do you have a list, or page anywhere that details what his ideas were?
Do people think The Hobbit would've looked like Pan's Labyrinth or something if Del Toro was the director? John Howe and Alan Lee woud've still been the lead concept artists and the whole team would had still been the same, people seem to act like Del Toro would had drawn every piece of concept art himself.
Maybe we should see the movie first before the Jackson bashing.
Maybe we should see the movie first before the Jackson bashing.
Edmond Dantès
Dantès the White
Just what I remember from that period;
The Smaug idea mentioned above,
Grython like Wargs,
Horned helmets for all of the Dwarves. Thorin's horns in particular were meant to be quite something.
Like I said, I hope his work on The Hobbit is included in the extras.
The bad reviews from the movie aren't attacking the book except for one. In fact most say the bloat ruined what was a classic novel.
Anticitizen One
Banned
IGN gave it a less than stellar review and you can say what you want but for the most part i've felt their reviews have been fairly candid. It's going to be Phantom Menace all over again haha.
Unlikely. Episode I's plot is fundamentally unsound. We already know the basic Hobbit story. It's fine.
Gimli farts in Return of the King Extended Edition.
We also know the basic King Kong story as well. That didn't stop PJ from making it a bloated, unwatchable mess.
- Status