|
That is one goddamn gorgeous looking movie.
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2011 04:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 13:48 |
|
|
GonSmithe posted:What? Someone mentioned earlier that Jackson was talking about how they got a silkier overall look by converting it from 48 to 24, as well as the way they shot it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2011 05:13
|
|
|
Fayez Butts posted:I can be a hundred percent safe in saying that the trailer is not being shown in 48 frames per second. In fact it's not being shown in 24 frames per second either, so please stop making stupid arguments. Nobody said it was playing at 48 fps. People are just talking about the effect of downconverting it from 48.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2011 07:17
|
|
|
That's pretty awesome if true, and much more interesting any explanation than I was thinking.keep punching joe posted:Remember that Bilbo is an unreliable narrator which explains away any and all differences between how things look and act in the Hobbit and LOTR. This is exactly what Bilbo's dialogue at the beginning of the trailer is implying. I also hope they never go and replace the young Bilbo scene in LOTR for the same reasons: it could be read as his subjective flashback, and he's placing (a younger version of) his current self in the role.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2011 16:52
|
|
|
the Bunt posted:I wonder if any of Del Toro's concepts carried over when Jackson took over the reigns. Del Toro was really really hyping up his concept of Smaug and I'm curious what he had planned. Same here. Del Toro said they were doing Smaug at least partially with practical effects and that they were built and looked amazing. I'm wondering if Jackson scratched all that or not.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2011 19:40
|
|
|
Peter Jackson on Facebook posted:Hi everyone! This year is the tenth anniversary of the release of The Fellowship of the Ring, and we wanted to give the fans a Christmas treat ahead of the release of the two Hobbit movies in Dec 2012 and 2013. Stay tuned for more. Cheers! Anyone have any idea what this is about? It was posted well after the trailer.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2011 20:16
|
|
|
Yes, I hope they took some inspiration from the animated film's Smaug dialogue.Red Robin Hood posted:Seriously. I think I may have watched the trailer 4 times... that singing is loving awesome! While the movies were coming out during high school, I had a girlfriend that was really into the songs of Tolkien and wrote music for a lot of them. I'll be damned if I don't still have a huge soft spot in my heart for listening to Tolkien's words set to music, because that song was fantastic. And as far as I'm concerned they can just go ahead and just re-use the music from the animated film for Misty Mountains Cold because of nostalgia 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2011 21:58
|
|
|
spixxor posted:Edit: Also I was all ready to have to adjust to Freeman as Bilbo but damned if he doesn't seem eerily spot on. Minor spurge though-didn't Bilbo essentially stop aging once he found the ring? How do we explain the fact that he looks older in the LOTR movies, then? That finger he puts up after he says "I'm a Baggins of Bag End" is just spot on. The only thing I wish we'd seen out of that trailer is 300% more Bilbo being flustered. Two moments is not enough!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2011 23:44
|
|
|
Zero One posted:Saw the trailer in 3D (in front of Tintin) today. I was really bummed that it wasn't on my theater's print of Tintin. Neither was Prometheus  However, MIB3 looked like balls and I could barely even tell was in 3D.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2011 05:34
|
|
|
Why don't they just do a direct to DVD animated Lost Tales/Abridged Silmarillion in the style of Animatrix or the Batman one?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2011 23:55
|
|
|
Rawk Hawk posted:This was going to be my attempt to steer the conversation in a less insane direction: how does everybody think this information will get passed along? I don't think the tone of the movie will allow for the thrush to physically talk to Bard and if anything this is a change that I think could really work. Maybe not him, but some other elf. Thoughts? I don't know, Gandalf whispered sweet nothings into a moth's ear in LoTR, so I don't see it being that big of a stretch. I can see the bird just flying over, squawking into a his ear, and then him having a surprised look on his face. e: Nihonniboku 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2012 22:00
|
|
|
If an arrow can take down an Oliphaunt it can take down Smaug. No need to overly complicate things for the sake of realism.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2012 22:16
|
|
|
Viridiant posted:Outside of missing its mark, isn't it also pretty unusual for an arrow to be able to be consistently retrieved unbroken after being used? I don't know arrows that well so I could definitely be wrong, but it seemed like a thing to me. It was forged by master smiths Under the Mountain. It doesn't have to be magical to be a drat well crafted arrow.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2012 16:23
|
|
|
Vigilance posted:They should have gone with David Bowie as Elrond  That would have been amazing.Weaving was great, though. In the prologue especially. "ISILDUR!!"
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2012 22:17
|
|
|
Just Animatrix it and everyone can be happy. Ah, what am I talking about, we're nerds. Nobody would be totally happy.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2012 06:32
|
|
|
Doubt it's indicative of the actual look, but the dragon on the back of their 127 days hoodie is Tolkien's drawing or at least very similar. e: Those catering guys are awesome. feedmyleg fucked around with this message at 21:38 on Mar 1, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2012 21:33
|
|
|
Kemchimikemkem posted:Sounds like a cool place to work. Viggo's the poo poo. Seems really down to Earth. Everywhere he goes, must get those, "Isn't that that one. . . It is!" looks. And you hugged the guy. Jesus. Viggo is mostly known for Lord of the Rings in the public eye, and he barely looks like the same guy without the beard/scruff and shorter hair. Or at least enough that most people wouldn't bat an eye when they pass him by.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2012 23:20
|
|
|
etalian posted:Conan is really awesome despite the sometimes cheesy pulpy nature of the writing. I started reading some Conan recently, too. I love it because of the cheesy pulpy nature of the writing, but overall it's really solid. It has way more character to it than a lot of its contemporary pulp stuff. Also they should call the pub The Furry-Footed Burrower.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2012 18:14
|
|
|
Yes, you are crazy. Everything about him in the trailer was perfect and he has a fantastic track record of playing similar characters.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2012 19:08
|
|
|
Hamiltonian Bicycle posted:I don't really get it. People are weirded out because it's not choppy enough? Have you ever watched a movie on an HDTV that's been calibrated to run in a higher hertz mode for sports? It makes films look more real, like it's just on the other side of your TV, and like it was filmed in a teenager's basement. I remember being at a bar where half the TVs were in one mode and half were in another, and even whatever excellently shot film was playing looked like garbage. From these reactions, I imagine it's not too far off of that look even though it's for a different reason.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2012 21:00
|
|
|
Here's the first lengthy and well-articulated writeup I've seen, by Devin Faraci over at Badass Digest where he calls it "a hi-def version of the 1970s I, Claudius." He also confirms my earlier suspicions: "People on Twitter have asked if it has that soap opera look you get from badly calibrated TVs at Best Buy, and the answer is an emphatic YES." Ouch. He gives a brief rundown of what was shown in the footage as well. feedmyleg fucked around with this message at 21:30 on Apr 24, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2012 21:20
|
|
|
Hamiltonian Bicycle posted:I can't read that article because the server is broken, but yeah, I don't really buy it. I haven't seen anyone say anything that wasn't essentially "ugh this being at high fps reminds me of [cheap poo poo that is commonly shot and broadcast at high fps]", and what people have been quoting from it sounds like more of the same; so at this point I'm still suspecting that's all there is to it. My problem with it is that it makes the lighting look more artificial. I don't know how, but the illusion of the on-set lighting looking natural just vanishes. I suspect that's why Devin said that the shots of landscapes look incredible and that everything else doesn't: because we've been lighting for 24fps for a century and we didn't actually realize it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2012 21:44
|
|
|
Bob Quixote posted:So, is 48 fps going to be the New Thing that we're going to have to adjust to and 24 fps going the way of black and white? I doubt it, not anytime soon at least. This entire event was to convince theater owners to adopt the technology and it doesn't sound like anyone came away impressed.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2012 01:16
|
|
|
dissss posted:If I understand correctly its a relatively cheap upgrade for modern projection equipment anyway. From what I've read, $10,000 for any projector made after 2008. Before that and you've got to buy a new projector. Sounds like 4K projectors can already do it, so I don't mind if this means that we get more 4K projectors around regardless of framerate.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2012 14:59
|
|
|
Crappy Jack posted:Yeah, when people are saying it's "too real", it's as in "I am now innately aware that this movie was filmed on a soundstage and all these trees are made of foam and plastic". It's not like you're really there in Middle-Earth so much as you're really there on the soundstage the movie was filmed at. I already thought a few of the scenes looked a bit too sound-stagey in the trailer as-is. I think I'll give this a shot in 48fps, but only after I see it normally first. Are all 48fps screenings also going to be 3D? I really hate watching things in 3D, but I'll sit through it if that's the only way.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2012 15:17
|
|
|
Steve Yun posted:I have a feeling that it's actually going to be very difficult to find a theater showing it in 48fps when it cones out. All AMC theaters will have the ability to project at 48fps.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2012 18:20
|
|
|
Gimmedaroot posted:I always got that the scenes looked like sets because they weren't completed yet. If it looks very detailed, I say that sounds great. I'm pretty sure Jackson can tell when his shots look like film sets. With some tweaking done, it should look incredible. The sign that they weren't done should have been apparent when you have Christopher Lee performing in front of a green screen. Plenty of exteriors in LotR looked like sets to me, too.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2012 05:40
|
|
|
Coming Soon has a new gallery of 11 Hobbit pictures from EW.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2012 16:16
|
|
|
Oh gently caress yes. That is really poorly put together, but goddamn does it look exactly like The Hobbit. e: Though I think that looks pretty definitively like the plot of the first film in a linear way. I think we can assume it ends in about the same place as the film will. feedmyleg fucked around with this message at 22:01 on Jul 9, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2012 21:58
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Why do goons get so excited for Fassbender? He's got a fairly magnetic screen presence and has been in a handful of geek-friendly films and is handsome. Hey guys while we're at it let's cast the Silmarillion too! And all the Unfinished Tales! Ron Pearlman for Ungoliant!!!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2012 20:23
|
|
|
Only thing that kept bugging me in the video is how the Dwarves' nose prosthetics are so rigid. I can see that coming off at limiting their expressions enough that it bothers me on screen when they're so prevalent.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2012 18:30
|
|
|
I don't think it's a little early, as Jackson has stated that it would be a bridge film. A bridge film is going to be fan fiction, no matter what. Sure, it may or may not make for an interesting movie, but that automatically takes it down a peg from the other films.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2012 15:52
|
|
|
With that wording it sounds like it will not be a bridge film, which is great news. Sounds like they're just filling in even more of the gaps.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2012 16:47
|
|
|
Possible titles for the film are pretty revealing:quote:http://whois.domaintools.com/desolationofsmaug.com Riddles in the Dark is a much better name than Desolation of Smaug, but neither of them are particularly good.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2012 17:56
|
|
|
kiimo posted:But I'm reminded what the studio said when he was making King Kong and how the nearly four hour running time was so awesome because that film was so epic and all that other poo poo they said. Uh I think you missed the part where the boat captain and his friend whose name and role I can't remember but who took up at least 45 minutes with their subplot were an incredibly crucial part of the film 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2012 19:05
|
|
|
MANIFEST DESTINY posted:Well that's absurd. The Hobbit should have been a single film if they even remotely wanted to be in the spirit of the book. Instead what we're getting is the proverbial nerd poo poo "moar plz!", which the studio is all too happy to dump into our trough. Just because Tolkein's supplements and appendices give you a never ending supply of material, doesn't mean you should throw all sense of storytelling decorum out the window. Tolkein knew better, Jackson knows better, hell even the kids who grew up reading our having The Hobbit read to them ought to know better. I don't have an issue with Jackson expanding the films, as long as there is significant narrative purpose. Tolkien wanted to rewrite the hobbit to be more in tune with Lord of the Rings at different points, I'm sure that would have significantly expanded the book as well.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2012 19:12
|
|
|
I really liked that year where Hollywood tried to sell us Adrien Brody as an action hero.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2012 05:17
|
|
|
Szmitten posted:...How serious are you? You don't understand jokes.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2012 14:54
|
|
|
Thank god I'm seeing it in 2D.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2012 15:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 13:48 |
|
|
kiimo posted:It's like they somehow managed to fuse 80s special-education glasses with chem lab goggles and filter the entire thing through Middle-Earth. If Lord of the Rings never existed as a film franchise these would be the most supreme dork identifier since getting a tattoo of your Rolemaster character. To me I don't even associate those glasses with a Middle Earth look, more like a 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2012 17:26
|
|