The Hobbit - Official Thread of Officially In Production

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dude at badass digest put this together

http://badassdigest.com/2012/12/04/does-anybody-like-48fps-in-the-hobbit/

oh and if you guys know who Jen Yamato is read her review. She goes in on the 48fps.

Some, like Jeremy Smith and Drew McWeeny, feel the tech isn't ready yet; I'm not sure what else needs to be done to get it ready, since HFR is simply a faster capture and projection rate*. Our eyes are what's not ready; this is an aesthetic choice aimed directly at 13 year olds who have grown up in a world of motion smoothing TVs and 60fps video games. This is a post-film aesthetic, and it's not for us.

"RAAARFHGL BLARGHHH GET OFF OF MY LAWN"

Please stop holding back cinema tech, troglodytes.
 
"RAAARFHGL BLARGHHH GET OFF OF MY LAWN"

Please stop holding back cinema tech, troglodytes.

Did you even read it? Cause if you did you would have noticed this part

What has to change is not technology but rather every bit of art design in movies. The HFR makes movie sets look like sets; the illusions that work at 24fps don't work at 48. Production design, set construction, prop making, costume fabrication - all of this will have to change drastically, like the change from black and white to color.

That's exactly what I said when the movie was announced and sculli called me dumb because of it. Most of the big name directors in the 40 and 50's didn't make the jump to color until they knew how to light the sets. Jackson seems to be so fascinated with being "FIRST!" that he didn't even get that right.
 
Avatar 2 should be the real example of HFR because its primarily digital, I am planning on seeing the Hobbit first in regular 2D then after see it in HFR 3D.
 
Did you even read it? Cause if you did you would have noticed this part



That's exactly what I said when the movie was announced and sculli called me dumb because of it. Most of the big name directors in the 40 and 50's didn't make the jump to color until they knew how to light the sets. Jackson seems to be so fascinated with being "FIRST!" that he didn't even get that right.

They actually did make some changes to set the design, you see it in production video 1 or 2 I think, it obviously wasn't perfect (from what I am hearing). I don't think Peter Jackson believed he would get it perfect, but he wanted to pioneer a movement to make it an acceptable proposition for larger film, no movie theater is going to upgrade their equipment for a small time release and no films on even the most experimental level would ever get greenlighted without a venue to display them. Someone had to be the first and he decided to take the plunge instead of waiting for someone like Cameron to do it years later with the second Avatar movie. The nice thing about this work is he has 2 more films to work on perfecting and adjusting some of the troublesome elements of HFR and paving the way for other filmmakers to try it or at least look at his production and discover the changes that need to be made to make it better.
 
They actually did make some changes to set the design, you see it in production video 1 or 2 I think, it obviously wasn't perfect (from what I am hearing). I don't think Peter Jackson believed he would get it perfect, but he wanted to pioneer a movement to make it an acceptable proposition for larger film, no movie theater is going to upgrade their equipment for a small time release and no films on even the most experimental level would ever get greenlighted without a venue to display them. Someone had to be the first and he decided to take the plunge instead of waiting for someone like Cameron to do it years later with the second Avatar movie. The nice thing about this work is he has 2 more films to work on perfecting and adjusting some of the troublesome elements of HFR and paving the way for other filmmakers to try it or at least look at his production and discover the changes that need to be made to make it better.

Good point, I am fully on board for HFR 3D... Ive seen too many short instances where 3D is beautiful and where 24fps hurts action sequences.
 
Did you even read it? Cause if you did you would have noticed this part

That's exactly what I said when the movie was announced and sculli called me dumb because of it. Most of the big name directors in the 40 and 50's didn't make the jump to color until they knew how to light the sets. Jackson seems to be so fascinated with being "FIRST!" that he didn't even get that right.

You're never going to get everything right on the first try no matter how long you wait. It's not like PJ and co lit and designed the sets exactly the same as a 24fps production. You can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
 
Did you even read it? Cause if you did you would have noticed this part

That part doesn't discount what he said. It was explaining "what else needs to be done to get it ready". He still thinks HFR is only for 13 year olds with ADD and not film lovers.

Of course, this is the worst kind of critic, who'se critiquing the technology without actually having seen it - OK, so he's seen the Cinemacon footage, but just about everyone who saw The Hobbit in HFR (including those who didn't like it) who mentioned seeing the Cinemacon footage has said that it is far better than what was shown at Cinemacon, with all the post-production as well as just giving your brain a chance to get used to it.
 
from this article:
Q: Is Peter Jackson right that, even if it takes some time to get used to watching a film in 48 frames per second, you eventually do grow accustomed to it?

A: Yes and no. First, never once did I not notice that I was watching a film in a different format. Sometimes this is a good thing and sometimes this is a bad thing. But the most troubling aspect was that the first 10 minutes of the film looked sped-up.

Q: Sped-up?

A: Have you ever watched old footage of Babe Ruth running the bases back in 1927? Well, imagine that, only with the clearest picture that you've ever seen. After my screening, I talked to other writers who had noticed the same thing. My understanding is that it took our brains a few minutes to adjust to the new format, and this was the resulting sensation. It's really quite a trip -- because it's not like the voices are sped up. And the voices certainly sync with the video, but, still, everything looks fast. Then, after a few minutes, the speed returned to normal.

Man, that sounds so bizarre. I wonder if the film would benefit from having a non-Hobbit related short film play before the movie in 48fps, giving the audience some time to adjust beforehand. That way they can enjoy the movie without feeling so distracted.
 
from this article:


Man, that sounds so bizarre. I wonder if the film would benefit from having a non-Hobbit related short film play before the movie in 48fps, giving the audience some time to adjust beforehand. That way they can enjoy the movie without feeling so distracted.

It would certainly go a long way in educating the audience about they are about to watch. I'm worried some people might go to the HFR version and think its just normal 3D and wondering what the hell is going on.
 
Aren't we reading a little too much into the HFR thing by taking the opinions of film critics? Of course they are going to notice a big difference, they spend a ton of time in theaters watching movies. I haven't been to a theater since Avengers. I'm not so sure I'm going to notice HFR as much without the context of a heavy movie-watching diet.
 
Just quoting myself from the other thread so you can all watch 48fps if you want.

Okay guys, got the video files uploaded for ya.

24fps

48fps - Link fixed.


Remember that 48fps will seem VERY jarring to what you're used to seeing recorded. It will almost seem like it's being sped up. But watch it a few more times and get used to it and remember it's just closer to what real motion looks like (a good reminder of perspective is to wave your hand in front of your face afterward and recognize how wrong the blur of 24fps is).

Once you go back to 24fps it will seem downright choppy.
 
You're never going to get everything right on the first try no matter how long you wait. It's not like PJ and co lit and designed the sets exactly the same as a 24fps production. You can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

CMkrQ.jpg
 
Edmond Dantès;45067034 said:
Glad to see more praise for Martin. He'll be the best thing to come out of this, which is fitting considering Bilbo's fate in the novel.

Bilbo Baggins indeed.

Yep.

And Freeman encapsulates that throughout, without mugging or winking. His Bilbo does take his predicament seriously, and while this is the jauntiest —at times silliest, at times funniest, certainly the most child-friendly— Middle-earth movie yet, Freeman remains its emotional lodestone.
 
Aren't we reading a little too much into the HFR thing by taking the opinions of film critics? Of course they are going to notice a big difference, they spend a ton of time in theaters watching movies. I haven't been to a theater since Avengers. I'm not so sure I'm going to notice HFR as much without the context of a heavy movie-watching diet.

Yeah Avengers is the only movie you've seen this year than you are probably the target audience for this.
 
It's being hyped as the "event" movie of the winter.

Ah, I see. I assumed it was some kind of veiled dig at me. My fault.

I've got a career, wife, kids, house, etc. I don't get out to the movies often anymore, so it's pretty much for "appointment viewing" only. The Hobbit absolutely qualifies, as did Avengers. I missed Dark Knight Rises, unfortunately, as my second child was born around that time and life was too busy. I may yet see Skyfall and Django Unchained in theaters, but there's no way I'm missing The Hobbit.
 
So it takes a while to get going and 48fps looks weird?

Well FoTR extended takes like 50 minutes to really get going and I wasn't looking forward to 48fps weirdness anyway, so still looking good to me. Overuse of CG is concerning though if stuff starts feeling weightless and fake.
 
You're never going to get everything right on the first try no matter how long you wait. It's not like PJ and co lit and designed the sets exactly the same as a 24fps production. You can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

I don't think anyone's saying that. However, people are responding to the movie as it's presented, and you can't dictate audience reaction just because you think they should process a film differently. Critics can't review the movie that would have been made if the filmmakers had done things differently, they can only review the movie they got. While it's true that new tech will of course have growing pains, asking moviegoers to have sympathy for their plight when they're ponying up $15+ to a show isn't a great argument. For that money they expect to be entertained and enthralled, not to be guinea pigs in a science experiment.
 
If you go back and watch the original LOTR trilogy I think many here will be surprised how much better it appeared back when it came out. The stuff in the Goblin Chase is imo a step up both in editing of action sequences and compositing of CGI elements. Also looks like a lot of fun and reminded me of Donkey Kong Country SNES on the mining cart levels. :)
 
Effects in that goblin video look great to me. Very dynamic and imaginative, if a bit over the top and silly. If that's representative of the action in the film then it looks like fun to me. Should be a good ride in 3D.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom