|
tetrapyloctomy posted:Holy poo poo, it's only forty days until this is in theaters. So this is what it felt like for Jesus in the wilderness. No, this is what it felt like waiting for LOTR.
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 00:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 20:42 |
|
|
Is there any indication that any elements of The Silmarillion will be incorporated into these movies?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 00:31
|
|
|
MooselanderII posted:Is there any indication that any elements of The Silmarillion will be incorporated into these movies? They dont own the rights to that book so no.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 00:47
|
|
|
MooselanderII posted:Is there any indication that any elements of The Silmarillion will be incorporated into these movies? Only those parts of it which were also featured in the appendices to Lord of the Rings proper.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 00:58
|
|
|
Mr. Gibbycrumbles posted:There is no way anybody's vision of the Dwarves will match Jackson's because Tolkien's characterisation of them pretty much started and stopped at "he had a yellow hood". I'm particularly eager to to hear more rage from Warhammer nerds. "WHERE ARE THE BEEEAARDS!?!"
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 02:25
|
|
|
Not sure if  , but the soundtrack is starting to leak out.It's quite different in tone, but that LotR "feeling" still comes across, clear as day. Also, it's brillant.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 05:44
|
|
|
I feel bad for reading so many spoilers but I can't stop.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 07:08
|
|
|
Cross-Section posted:Not sure if What language is that in the song? It doesn't sound like anything like Elvish.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 08:50
|
|
|
Cross-Section posted:Not sure if Jesus, got goosebumps soon as the vocals started. I'm not sure about the bit after the vocals, but it definitely reminds me of Lord of the Rings. Octy fucked around with this message at 09:13 on Nov 5, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 09:09
|
|
|
Cross-Section posted:Not sure if Wow - holy poo poo, that did the trick.  Also, did anyone else notice the Shelob theme at 2:30? Mirkwood spider stuff surely (fits with the trailer shot of a spider breaking into Radagast's house).
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 10:11
|
|
|
Now the article that Onering.net pointed us to about the HObbit 48 makes it sound like IMAX and 48fps are mutually exclusive...does anyone know if this is the case? Here is the article: http://regmovies.com/The-Hobbit-48 It would be nice if you could watch 48fps on an IMAX screen, but I am not sure if this is the case...
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 23:19
|
|
|
48fps and IMAX are not mutually exclusive and there WILL be showings at 48fps in IMAX theaters. Got that info straight from the horse's mouth.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 23:34
|
|
|
kiimo posted:Got that info straight from the horse's mouth. Talking Horses are par for the course in this world, so I can see that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2012 01:40
|
|
|
TheBigBudgetSequel posted:Talking Horses are par for the course in this world, so I can see that. I consider myself a close and personal friend of a certain pony who shall remain anonymous, not to drop names or anything.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2012 01:45
|
|
|
kiimo posted:I consider myself a close and personal friend of a certain pony who shall remain anonymous, not to drop names or anything. Can you ask your pony if there'll be 48FPS screenings in Australia? I mean, I'll probably see it in 24FPS first but it's nice to have the option since we do have an IMAX theatre in my city.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2012 02:14
|
|
|
Gimmedaroot posted:Now the article that Onering.net pointed us to about the HObbit 48 makes it sound like IMAX and 48fps are mutually exclusive...does anyone know if this is the case? Here is the article: Are these the only theaters with the 48FPS, or is this just the Regal theaters?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2012 03:55
|
|
|
GonSmithe posted:Are these the only theaters with the 48FPS, or is this just the Regal theaters? As that is a Regal site, I assume it's the Regal theaters that can show it. AMC will probably do something similar, and other chains may tag along if they can show it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2012 03:58
|
|
|
TheBigBudgetSequel posted:As that is a Regal site, I assume it's the Regal theaters that can show it. AMC will probably do something similar, and other chains may tag along if they can show it. Yeah, that's what I figured. I just want to know if I'm going to have to get a friend to drive into Boston to see it or not.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2012 04:10
|
|
|
Octy posted:Can you ask your pony if there'll be 48FPS screenings in Australia? I mean, I'll probably see it in 24FPS first but it's nice to have the option since we do have an IMAX theatre in my city. Imax Sydney is not 48fps, I know that. I really hope somewhere in Sydney is 48fps somewhere, I really want to see it in that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2012 10:57
|
|
|
Wank posted:Imax Sydney is not 48fps, I know that. I really hope somewhere in Sydney is 48fps somewhere, I really want to see it in that. I'm pretty sure most, if not all, IMAX projectors are capable of running at 48fps. Alternatively, even if they're not, they can still show the film at 48fps in 3d by running two projectors at the same screen.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2012 14:51
|
|
|
kiimo posted:I consider myself a close and personal friend of a certain pony who shall remain anonymous, not to drop names or anything. I'm taking this as confirmed evidence that Bill will make an appearance.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2012 17:57
|
|
|
Tickets are on sale in Australia now. I suppose the rest of the world will do it when they catch up to us future people. It seems Event Cinemas is showing The Hobbit in 48FPS. They're calling it HFR (High Frame Rate). In fact, I'm finding it hard to find a session that's just a regular screening, at least near me. Octy fucked around with this message at 23:36 on Nov 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2012 23:28
|
|
|
kiimo posted:I consider myself a close and personal friend of a certain pony who shall remain anonymous, not to drop names or anything. Fatty Lumpkins?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 01:23
|
|
|
Octy posted:Tickets are on sale in Australia now. I suppose the rest of the world will do it when they catch up to us future people. Is anyone doing 48fps and 3d? It's both or neither for me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 02:45
|
|
|
All 48fps IMAX are 3D I think.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 03:17
|
|
|
kiimo posted:All 48fps IMAX are 3D I think. Sorry I meant in Australia, we don't get nice things.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 03:20
|
|
|
Lizard Combatant posted:Is anyone doing 48fps and 3d? It's both or neither for me. It seems to be the case. Event George Street has got all their screenings in 3D and 48FPS. IMAX is doing 24FPS it seems. Octy fucked around with this message at 05:24 on Nov 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 05:19
|
|
|
Oh, they have a new TV spot that has a couple of slightly new shots that show a sequence that will get all the purist spergs' knickers in a twist, namely: When the Company climbs the Misty Mountains, they end up unwittingly climbing up a Stone Giant. Then the giant starts moving and the Company are holding on for dear life as they are taken for a "giant ride". A bit like an extreme version of Pippin climbing up Treebeard. http://youtu.be/MoG51YA-7qc
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 09:36
|
|
|
Octy posted:It seems to be the case. Event George Street has got all their screenings in 3D and 48FPS. IMAX is doing 24FPS it seems. gently caress yeah! Thanks. Sydney IMAX Facebook page says 24fps only. Looks like no boxing day midnight screenings though which means I won't see this until the new year. I can wait. Nowhere near as excited for this as I was LOTR.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 11:48
|
|
|
Just bought my tickets. 11am on Boxing Day. Still 12 days after the rest of world, of course. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 12:07
|
|
|
Octy posted:Just bought my tickets. 11am on Boxing Day. Still 12 days after the rest of world, of course. I can't find any 48fps in my city, we have no IMAX  Hopefully they'll be announced closer to the date. Lizard Combatant fucked around with this message at 12:13 on Nov 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 12:10
|
|
|
Mr. Gibbycrumbles posted:Oh, they have a new TV spot that has a couple of slightly new shots that show a sequence that will get all the purist spergs' knickers in a twist, namely: Hang on, why would Tolkien purists sperge about mountain giants when Middle Earth has balrogs, trolls, dragons, giant spiders, etc etc? What's so out there about giants?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 12:14
|
|
|
Maybe because that entire sequence wasn't in the book. There was a bit about giants throwing boulders at eachother that was said in passing but that's about it. I'm almost positive that since it's a retelling by Bilbo himself that he equated the sounds of thunder and the earth shaking to being said giants.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 15:35
|
|
|
Hedrigall posted:Hang on, why would Tolkien purists sperge about mountain giants when Middle Earth has balrogs, trolls, dragons, giant spiders, etc etc? What's so out there about giants? The Stone Giants are only mentioned once, in the misty mountains section of the Hobbit. Since they're not mentioned anywhere else in the middle earth books purists prefer to dismiss them as not a proper part of the mythos (since The Hobbit was originally unrelated) or try to explain them away as a metaphor for a storm. This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever and requires this one passage of a book full of literal dragons, goblins and wizards to be completely out-of-sync with the rest of the work. That, and Thorin openly worries about being picked up by the Giants and used as a football.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 15:48
|
|
|
People need to stop treating it like Herodotus, it's a children's fantasty story. But a drat good one.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 15:56
|
|
|
Mr. Gibbycrumbles posted:There is no way anybody's vision of the Dwarves will match Jackson's because Tolkien's characterisation of them pretty much started and stopped at "he had a yellow hood". True, he didn't go into much detail about the way the dwarves looked. I haven't read the book in over a decade, but I still remember all the names of the dwarves, as well as some minor characteristics Tolkien chose to provide them with. Thorin - The leader. He's prideful and warlike, but honorable. Balin - He's the most friendly to Bilbo, and the most thoughtful dwarf. Eventually dies leading a party into Moria. Dwalin - Brother of Balin. Don't remember much else. Oin - Brother of Gloin. Probably the elder brother, but not sure. Gloin - Father of Gimli. I always pictured him as being very much like Gimli. Bifur - Brother of the three "funny" dwarves. Probably will be comic relief. Bofur - Another "funny dwarf" brother of Bifur and Bombur. Bombur - The last funny dwarf brother of Bofur and Bifur, he's the fat one. Dori - Don't remember much about him, he's the brother of Ori and Nori. Nori - Brother of Dori and Ori, not much else to go on. Ori - Brother of Dori and Nori. They're just background characters. Fili - One of the younger dwarves. Adventurous and energetic. Kili - Brother of Fili, pretty much fits the same description as his sibling. Gianthogweed fucked around with this message at 18:12 on Nov 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 18:06
|
|
|
Some new pics, including one of the infamous Overbite Elf. http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=69760
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 21:41
|
|
|
ZeusJupitar posted:The Stone Giants are only mentioned once, in the misty mountains section of the Hobbit. Since they're not mentioned anywhere else in the middle earth books purists prefer to dismiss them as not a proper part of the mythos (since The Hobbit was originally unrelated) or try to explain them away as a metaphor for a storm. This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever and requires this one passage of a book full of literal dragons, goblins and wizards to be completely out-of-sync with the rest of the work. That, and Thorin openly worries about being picked up by the Giants and used as a football. I tend to believe the Stone-giants are actual creatures of Middle-earth, although I never envisaged them as being literally made of stone. I personally think that Jackson's design for these is very bland and obvious, as if he just worked entirely within the parameters of that single one-line mention that Tolkien provided. I'd have gone with something a bit more interesting. Shadow of the Colossus-interesting. Oh well. Anyway, my point with the sperg comment is that the Company never got close to the giants in the books - they just saw them in the distance throwing rocks at each other. Here they are literally "all up in their poo poo", as the young 'uns say. For the record, it doesn't bother me; it's a minor departure at best.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 22:28
|
|
|
Mr. Gibbycrumbles posted:For the record, it doesn't bother me; it's a minor departure at best. Yeah I would have thought these people would be more concerned about all the Gandalf poo poo that isn't in the book than what is probably a few minutes long scene of some cool giant peril. I'm slightly concerned myself, as a lot of the non-Tolkien bits in the LOTR movies were a bit weak.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 22:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 20:42 |
|
|
marktheando posted:Yeah I would have thought these people would be more concerned about all the Gandalf poo poo that isn't in the book than what is probably a few minutes long scene of some cool giant peril. I'm slightly concerned myself, as a lot of the non-Tolkien bits in the LOTR movies were a bit weak. But Tolkien did actually write all the Gandalf poo poo; it's in the RotK Appendices, and Unfinished Tales. Not in an enormously descriptive manner, but it's pretty much there. Mr. Gibbycrumbles fucked around with this message at 23:09 on Nov 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 23:07
|
|