Official 'The Hobbit' Thread - Part 4

[redhawk23]

I think people are pinning all of their complaints on the 48 fps, when I think the 5K resolution is just as much a culprit.

When you increase the resolution, you put the image under a higher level of scrutiny. In other words, the more real the image looks, the more conscious you become of the fake stuff (wigs, fake beards, makeup/prosthetics, sets). It’s not a coincidence that people universally praised the landscape shots, but were turned off by anything that involved artificially-produced sets and characters. The quality of the makeup, prosthetics, wigs, fake beards, and the polystyrene rocks and trees just don’t hold up to this level of resolution. The more life-like movements allowed by the 48 fps only aggravates this issue.

I know it doesn't really apply, but resolution wise how does 5 K compare to film, especially something like IMAX?

[Kane52630]

I think everyone needs to revisit Peter Jackson's video blog about 3D again. :oldrazz:

gHF536TJ0iE

[Excelsior.]

I know it doesn't really apply, but resolution wise how does 5 K compare to film, especially something like IMAX?

Yeah. Imax is like over 10K (being film you can't accurately pin it down to a specific number).

[Whiskey Tango]

not the same. the problem with lens flares in movies from JJ is that they force lens flares where there wouldnt be lens flares. for example you have a white light with a extreme blue lens flare.

Peter Jackson,Cameron,Spielberg used a lot of fake lens flares. but only where it would make sense.

Wasn't talking about whether it's used properly. The point is they are adding in with CG the very things that the tech itself is eliminating. Whether it's lens flare or motion blur, it seems a bit silly.

"We have this great new tech that eliminates these old quirks that we can't live without because it looks fake without them so we must recreate those old quirks immediately."

[dark_b]

we humans see a lot of bloom (glowing) from bright objects. sometimes even primitve shapes similar to lens flares. so they need to add them in some parts.

but i understand what you mean.

[Destructus86]

I'm confused. what was the trailer shot in? Because the trailed looks amazing. Is it not the same?

[Kane52630]

I'm confused. what was the trailer shot in? Because the trailed looks amazing. Is it not the same?

It's the same, it was just converted down to 24 fps which can be done. So if you guys do watch it in 2D and some in 3D (depending on your theater) it will be in 24 fps.

[Destructus86]

So why did they convert the trailer down and not just show it how they expect to show it in theaters?

[redhawk23]

^ Because the trailer is being projected in theaters that aren't set up for 48 fps yet.

[matrix_ghost]

I know it doesn't really apply, but resolution wise how does 5 K compare to film, especially something like IMAX?

Imax has a resolution of 18K. Nothing can be rendered at that resolution at this stage. Shooting something in imax format is gret till vfx work comes in. Every image needs to be rendered at the highesy resolution possible. The bigger the shot , the more time it takes to render something at that format

[Marvin]

like I said,

something about every property that get's revisited always ends up tainting the whole thing.

[Kane52630]

Not really, it's just a format change. I don't expect half of theaters to be prepared for the 48 fps. Plus once it's released on blu ray I can assure you nobody will be complaining about this.

[redhawk23]

Has it ever occurred to Peter Jackson that maybe people won't just "get used to it"? That the aesthetic difference may ultimately be a matter of taste and that he may be in a very small minority. I mean he's free to make his films how he wants I guess but its weird to just assume people will be chill with this after 15 minutes or something.

[Kane52630]

Well that was the whole point of going to cinemacon was to see peoples reaction, im sure they will have to take in consideration of what to do to with the 48 fps.

[Doctor Jones]

Has it ever occurred to Peter Jackson that maybe people won't just "get used to it"? That the aesthetic difference may ultimately be a matter of taste and that he may be in a very small minority. I mean he's free to make his films how he wants I guess but its weird to just assume people will be chill with this after 15 minutes or something.

People will get used to it throughout the years if and when this catches on. It's just a new thing and people always react negatively to change.

I'm sure people said, "We don't need color. Black and white is perfectly fine to tell a story" when technicolor first came out.

Plus there's a difference between wanting to get used to it and not wanting to get used to it. There's probably some psychological aspect of it. People just don't want to get used to it therefore they see it as something that they won't become used to and it doesn't change. We have become prety sued to 24 fps over the past 100 years. What if in the next 100, we become used to 48 fps?

[Octoberist]

It depends on the context ecause people didn't get used to 'New Coke' so they went back to old 'Coca Cola'. (Flash Fact: Hence calling it Coca Cola Classic in the 80's)

[rogue_agent]

So suppose this does turn out to be finally 48fps, does this mean that when I watch it on Bluray, it will be 48fps?

[Kane52630]

I think it will be similar to the 3D blu rays/regular blu rays and have the 48 fps in only the 3D blu ray discs.

[Boom]

Peter Jackson responds to complaints about 'The Hobbit' footage:

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2012/04/27/peter-jackson-responds-hobbit/

[redhawk23]

People will get used to it throughout the years if and when this catches on. It's just a new thing and people always react negatively to change.

I'm sure people said, "We don't need color. Black and white is perfectly fine to tell a story" when technicolor first came out.

Plus there's a difference between wanting to get used to it and not wanting to get used to it. There's probably some psychological aspect of it. People just don't want to get used to it therefore they see it as something that they won't become used to and it doesn't change. We have become prety sued to 24 fps over the past 100 years. What if in the next 100, we become used to 48 fps?

The deal with color film was that the process got better, not necessarily that people just got used to it.

Technicolor could be pretty goofy looking, garish even and the process of compositing it all was pretty nuts. Eventually different processes for color were deveolped that were easier and looked better.


Similar problems production wise with the new technology forcing them to change the way they make things.

That's largely the problem I have with it though. Just watching the production vids and showing the difficulty they're having with make up and set design not just from the higher resolution and frame rate, which fine that might be something to aspire to, but just from the cameras adding way too much yellow to everything. They have to go through so much extra work to just reach the baseline of quality thats already achievable with the technology of the past 100 years.

What's the point?

Also the whole 48 frames thing isn't completely foreign to everyone. You can watch one of those tvs everyday and still think it looks like crap. Not the best comparison I know, but I'm just saying.

[Armored Avenger]

As much as I am disappointed with the negative reaction to the 48fps, it is the changes to the mythology of Middle-Earth that were suggested in the footage that have me far more concerned. I just posted this on the One Ring, in response to the apparent inclusion of the Witch-king and the Ringwraiths and that they have been magically entombed since the fall of Angmar:

Entombing the Witch-king after his defeat in the Battle of Fornost completely changes the history of Middle-Earth.
After the battle the Witch-king fled south and later (with the other Nazgul) attacked Minas Ithil, taking the city and leading to it becoming known as Minas Morgul. He is also directly responsible for the end of the royal line in Gondor, due to his challenge of single combat to the childless Eärnur. When Eärnur accepted, he rode to Minas Morgul and was never seen again, leading to the Stewards assuming control of Gondor.
This talk of "the Men of the North" imprisoning the Witch-king after the fall of Angmar completely contradicts everything Tolkien wrote about the character after his defeat and creates massive plot holes (if the Witch-king was imprisoned for all this time, how did Minas Ithil fall? How did Gondor lose its Kings? Who has been preparing Mordor for Sauron's return and leading his forces while he regains power?).

While the inclusion of the Nazgul in the Dol Guldur/Necromancer subplot may seem like a minor and reasonable change, the way they have handled it pretty much butchers the later half of the Third Age.

[Bruce Malone]

I think the real issue i have with jackson pushing 48fps is it's connection to its 3d showings. Apparently its grand purpose is to make the 3d viewing better even if that comes at the expense of its 2d viewing i suppose.

People have already discovered that the whole 3d trend is just the latest incarnation of the 3d fad that comes and goes. 3d revenues are down across the board for 3d films and 2d going back up. People are realizing paying 5$ to wear sunglasses in a theatre is not the most enjoyable experience. Don't get me started on the failed 3d tv push.

I think guys like jackson and cameron are making mistakes staking so much in 3d still. Someone like chris nolan will look very smart 10 years from now imo.

[Boom]

As much as I am disappointed with the negative reaction to the 48fps, it is the changes to the mythology of Middle-Earth that were suggested in the footage that have me far more concerned. I just posted this on the One Ring, in response to the apparent inclusion of the Witch-king and the Ringwraiths and that they have been magically entombed since the fall of Angmar:

Entombing the Witch-king after his defeat in the Battle of Fornost completely changes the history of Middle-Earth.
After the battle the Witch-king fled south and later (with the other Nazgul) attacked Minas Ithil, taking the city and leading to it becoming known as Minas Morgul. He is also directly responsible for the end of the royal line in Gondor, due to his challenge of single combat to the childless Eärnur. When Eärnur accepted, he rode to Minas Morgul and was never seen again, leading to the Stewards assuming control of Gondor.
This talk of "the Men of the North" imprisoning the Witch-king after the fall of Angmar completely contradicts everything Tolkien wrote about the character after his defeat and creates massive plot holes (if the Witch-king was imprisoned for all this time, how did Minas Ithil fall? How did Gondor lose its Kings? Who has been preparing Mordor for Sauron's return and leading his forces while he regains power?).

While the inclusion of the Nazgul in the Dol Guldur/Necromancer subplot may seem like a minor and reasonable change, the way they have handled it pretty much butchers the later half of the Third Age.
Agreed with everything you said. And I'm sure the posters at TheOneRing told you that because none of this information was mentioned/established in the trilogy, it is okay for Jackson to change it.

I'm just about ready to quit posting on TheOneRing. Some of those posters' loyalty to Jackson borders on ignorance sometimes. I know we're all excited to finally be getting an adaptation of this book, but let's not put the man on a pedestal so high that he is immune to criticism.

A few of these changes just stink of fan fiction. How does one entomb a disembodied spirit anyway?

[regwec]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/ee/Ghostbusters_logo.svg/220px-Ghostbusters_logo.svg.png

[Boom]

Goddamnit, regwec :lmao:.

[dark_b]

That's largely the problem I have with it though. Just watching the production vids and showing the difficulty they're having with make up and set design not just from the higher resolution and frame rate, which fine that might be something to aspire to, but just from the cameras adding way too much yellow to everything. They have to go through so much extra work to just reach the baseline of quality thats already achievable with the technology of the past 100 years.
.hahah that was a joke . if your camera adds to much yellow you can on the computer fix it.they use Nuke where they have 5 different color correction tools. its about color timing and color balance(white balance) .
its wrong by default. because noone else using digital cameras is using more red on sets and faces.

[Tequilla]

Probably it was already noted by someone , but the issue here is not so much the 48fps , but the combination of 48fps with a 270 degrees shutter (what Jackson is using). Many people remember Public Enemies photography , which also suffered from an artistic choice by Mann in the shutter. And that movie was 24fps , and most people didn’t enjoy it. Being this a fantasy movie , obviously the backlash is even bigger

Its perfectly normal that we cant adapt immediately to a different standard. Its decades of 24pfs with 1/48s shutter speeds. The motion blur is actually something we perceive in real life. But 3d doesn’t go well with blur , the lack of frames , the movement and dimmer image of 3d projections , makes the experience quite horrible in action.

I feel that the future will be something in the lines of what Trumbull experimented with showscan (in the 80’s , 60 fps !!!). We will see movies with framerates variations , during different scenes (especially scenes with lots of movements and incompetent camera handlers who simply cant adjust the panning…which is the problem with a lot of American movies !!!).
3d will benefit a lot from higher framerates. But I don’t think it’s the future. 3d is a gimmick with two 2d projections , and ours brains do the rest. There’s no depth input in the photography. On the other hand , yes I would compare higher framerates , with sound and color. They’re a simple evolution of photography and others techniques used in movies. 3d not so much.

[rogue_agent]

I think it will be similar to the 3D blu rays/regular blu rays and have the 48 fps in only the 3D blu ray discs.

Oh, that's a relief. Oh well, looks like it won't affect me :oldrazz:.

[Doctor Jones]

The deal with color film was that the process got better, not necessarily that people just got used to it.

Technicolor could be pretty goofy looking, garish even and the process of compositing it all was pretty nuts. Eventually different processes for color were deveolped that were easier and looked better.


Similar problems production wise with the new technology forcing them to change the way they make things.

That's largely the problem I have with it though. Just watching the production vids and showing the difficulty they're having with make up and set design not just from the higher resolution and frame rate, which fine that might be something to aspire to, but just from the cameras adding way too much yellow to everything. They have to go through so much extra work to just reach the baseline of quality thats already achievable with the technology of the past 100 years.

What's the point?

Also the whole 48 frames thing isn't completely foreign to everyone. You can watch one of those tvs everyday and still think it looks like crap. Not the best comparison I know, but I'm just saying.

So this is the beginning stages for cinematic 48 fps and yes, the technology can only get better. It's fine that technology has worked for 100 years, but why not try something new for once? We can't know if it will work if we don't keep developing and instead of just giving up saying, "Can't be done, and people won't get used to it or just don't prefer it."

[Kane52630]

So this is the beginning stages for cinematic 48 fps and yes, the technology can only get better. It's fine that technology has worked for 100 years, but why not try something new for once? We can't know if it will work if we don't keep developing and instead of just giving up saying, "Can't be done, and people won't get used to it or just don't prefer it."

Exactly my point. :up:

[Whiskey Tango]

Maybe it's not so much "Let's not experiment with this new thing" as it is "Let's not experiment with this new thing on a movie I'm really anticipating like The Hobbit". Because no one really cares if Michael Bay or Paul W.S. Anderson wreck their next film with untried tech that no one knows the workarounds and tricks for. Those guys will just be along with another crapfest soon enough. But we're only getting one shot at The Hobbit.

just my 2¢

[Marvolo]

Maybe it's not so much "Let's not experiment with this new thing" as it is "Let's not experiment with this new thing on a movie I'm really anticipating like The Hobbit". Because no one really cares if Michael Bay or Paul W.S. Anderson wreck their next film with untried tech that no one knows the workarounds and tricks for. Those guys will just be along with another crapfest soon enough. But we're only getting one shot at The Hobbit.

just my 2¢

My feelings exactly.

[Doctor Jones]

Maybe it's not so much "Let's not experiment with this new thing" as it is "Let's not experiment with this new thing on a movie I'm really anticipating like The Hobbit". Because no one really cares if Michael Bay or Paul W.S. Anderson wreck their next film with untried tech that no one knows the workarounds and tricks for. Those guys will just be along with another crapfest soon enough. But we're only getting one shot at The Hobbit.

just my 2¢

If there's one film I want to be completely immersed in, it's Middle-Earth. The Hobbit is that one film I'd want to spearhead the 48 FPS. I love the fact that it's going to be done on a huge film.

[Bruce Malone]

^^^

I very much disagree with that as I and others have brought up the hobbit is a fantasy film. There is a certain gloss and veneer you want to see in it. A fantasy film should be like looking at an intricate painting not a hi-rez photograph. The Lotr films had a very cinematic feel to them and from all of the reviews of the hobbit footage that cinematic feel has been replaced by an HD home video realism.

A big sci-fi film or war film would have been great for a 48p introduction not a fantasy.

[Marvolo]

I would love to see a war film shot on ultra real looking digital at 48fps, but I want my fantasy to look like fantasy. I want beautiful cinematography, fantastical color grading, and emotional lighting. If I want realism ill watch something realistic. Its like how Westerns are being shot on digital. To me shooting a western on anything but film is blasphemous. Certain genres and films should be on a certain "canvas".

[Armored Avenger]

If there's one film I want to be completely immersed in, it's Middle-Earth. The Hobbit is that one film I'd want to spearhead the 48 FPS. I love the fact that it's going to be done on a huge film.

I'd rather the technology be perfected before being used on my most anticipated film in years. I don't want to look back on The Hobbit in a few years time and think "wow, 48fps really sucked at first". 48fps just doesn't look that great at the moment as it cheapens the visuals and the cinematography and emphasises how artificial everything is. There is a reason people have been averse to using it.
I'm left wondering if Jackson is determined to pioneer a new way of shooting movies just to add to his creative résumé, rather than because this is a change that needs to happen in the movie industry. This isn't changing the essential fabric of a film, like adding sound or colour or even (in some cases) 3D. Its essentially digital IMAX. Is he trying to solve a non-existent problem?
I was also completely immersed in the LOTR trilogy, without the aid of 3D and 48fps and predict I will have no problems being immersed once again at a 24fps 2D screening of The Hobbit. I will still see The Hobbit in 48fps 3D as well, as thats the way Jackson intends for it to be seen, but I am very apprehensive. Hopefully he proves me wrong.

[dark_b]

I'd rather the technology be perfected before being used on my most anticipated film in years. I don't want to look back on The Hobbit in a few years time and think "wow, 48fps really sucked at first". 48fps just doesn't look that great at the moment as it cheapens the visuals and the cinematography and emphasises how artificial everything is. There is a reason people have been averse to using it.
I'm left wondering if Jackson is determined to pioneer a new way of shooting movies just to add to his creative résumé, rather than because this is a change that needs to happen in the movie industry. This isn't changing the essential fabric of a film, like adding sound or colour or even (in some cases) 3D. Its essentially digital IMAX. Is he trying to solve a non-existent problem?
I was also completely immersed in the LOTR trilogy, without the aid of 3D and 48fps and predict I will have no problems being immersed once again at a 24fps 2D screening of The Hobbit. I will still see The Hobbit in 48fps 3D as well, as thats the way Jackson intends for it to be seen, but I am very apprehensive. Hopefully he proves me wrong.a technology like this can not be perfected if its not realesed in a blockbuster.a blockbuster movie is an expensive production with problems everyday. and this is how you test it out. do i agree with it ? of course not.

[Armored Avenger]

a technology like this can not be perfected if its not realesed in a blockbuster.a blockbuster movie is an expensive production with problems everyday. and this is how you test it out. do i agree with it ? of course not.

I just wish The Hobbit had been the culmination of the tests, rather than the first experiment.

[dark_b]

http://badassdigest.com/2012/04/28/48fps-the-ultimate-battle-of-art-vs-tech/

[DoomsdayApex]

Whoa, talk about 'split down the middle'.

Great article, by the way.

As a person who loves both technology and art, it's a complex issue. As the article references, Tech seems to be spearheading the cinema experience more than Art nowadays, and while I appreciate the advances of Tech, I can't help but feel that Tech is taking the Art aspect of the movie away.

In my honest opinion, there are certain films that are a better match for the 48fps and 3-D, but The Hobbit is not one of them. Utilize the technology in Avatar or The Avengers, but not in flicks like TDKR or The Hobbit.

[dark_b]

Utilize the technology in Avatar or The Avengers, but not in flicks like TDKR or The Hobbit.Avatar and Battleship is not art?

[DoomsdayApex]

Avatar and Battleship is not art?

Not my point. I feel that if a film relies heavily on visuals/CGI/SFX like Avatar or Battleship, then go nuts. Go as wild as you want with the Tech, however, films like Casino Royale or The Dark Knight shouldn't feature 48 fps.

[Fenrir]

3d is a gimmick with two 2d projections , and ours brains do the rest. There’s no depth input in the photography.

Precisely what I have been saying since the very beginning and why I so despise this whole 3D fad. Even with all the fancy new technology, it's just basically two or (at most three layers) of photography with no real depth. What's worse is that it often makes the characters and objects on screen appear even more flat than they would otherwise on standard 2D. I think 3D works best when it is no longer distracting to the point that I don't even notice it is there, but that sort of defeats the purpose, doesn't it? Why am I paying a 25% premium for something I wouldn't feel is there at all? Two days ago I watched The Avengers in IMAX 3D and after the initial jarring effect, it didn't feel any different from any other film I watch in 2D. Another thing I really hate with 3D is how the image gets distorted if you tilt your head while watching (something I often do). And I don't like wearing glasses because they give me a headache.

Real feeling of depth comes from higher sharpness, clarity and resolution. That is why to me, The Dark Knight's IMAX sequences felt far more immersive than anything in Avatar. When the camera looks down at the bank robbers ziplining across two buildings, I genuinely felt as if I was going to fall into the screen.

I find stereoscopic imaging too small scale and intimate in its effect. 3-D is a misnomer. Films are 3-D. The whole point of photography is that it’s three-dimensional.

http://www.dga.org/Craft/DGAQ/All-Articles/1202-Spring-2012/DGA-Interview-Christopher-Nolan.aspx

Damn straight.

[Kane52630]

I don't see why you shouldn't go for 48 fps for The Hobbit. I say go for it and for those that dont want to see it, the tech isn't standard yet so you have the option of seeing this without the 3D fps. Also, I don't see theater owners being prepared for every 3D showing in 48 fps.

[Sawyer]

This conversation bores me.

Footage, Warner Bros. NOW! :o

[Kane52630]

Exactly lol

Me want footage nao! :o (I expect we will get something when TDKR comes out)

[Sawyer]

But..... that's months from now.... :csad:

[ZombieBatman]

Yuck. Too much frames per second and other cinema mumbo jumbo discussion for my liking here. I can't believe this is what everyone has decided to discuss instead of the actual scenes in the footage shown.

[Bruce Malone]

That's apparently how distracting the 48fps was. Practically every critic shown the footage has only gone on about how the footage looks and not the content.

[craigdbfan]

This conversation bores me.

Footage, Warner Bros. NOW! :o

Exactly lol

Me want footage nao! :o (I expect we will get something when TDKR comes out)I was kind of hoping for them to release 48fps footage but Peter Jackson apparently doesn't want to.
”I personally wouldn’t advocate a 48-frame trailer because the 48 frames is something you should experience with the entire film. A 2 1/2 minute trailer isn’t enough time to adjust to the immersive quality.” - PJI mean really? I'm not exactly happy about this 48fps thing but I'd at least like a taste of what I'm eventually going to spend money on.

I'm hoping this is one of those situations where WB does its own thing and does end up releasing a 48fps trailer so we can see the difference for ourselves.

[terry78]

Ironically, we nerds are scared of technology and change when it comes to certain things.

[Spider-Who?]

Filming at 48fps for a 3d movie is an entirely different thing than the trumotoin crap tvs have nowadays. People should NOT be looking at the trumotion effect and thinking 48fps will look the same. People need to get that out of their heads.

[craigdbfan]

Then they should release a 48fps trailer if that's the case. I'm actually curious to see it in the format it was intended.

[Spider-Who?]

It's only a simple animation, but here's a nice example of how different frame rates look.

http://boallen.com/fps-compare.html

[craigdbfan]

I'm aware of the difference between 24fps and 60fps as a good deal of FPS run on 60fps. Most popularly the COD games but that doesn't mean it gives me any better of an idea to how The Hobbit is going to look like in 48fps. I get the fluidity of movement part but attributes like the lighting and it being a bit of a heavy fantasy period piece with extensive costumes, prosthetic's and CGI creatures definitely change all of that. The movement isn't exactly my problem as I welcome smoother dynamism but I want to look at how the palette of the overall movie is affected by these added frames.

Again it'd be nice to see footage for this movie in 48fps so I can decide for myself whether or not I feel it looks good or not.

[Spider-Who?]

Then they should release a 48fps trailer if that's the case. I'm actually curious to see it in the format it was intended.

As we all are, but I think I agree with PJ on holding off. It'll take more than a trailer to get used to it, and that fact will surely put people off. Peter is a great filmmaker and I trust his judgement.

[dark_b]

we will not know how 48 fps looks if they realese the 48fps trailer online.

[Tequilla]

we will not know how 48 fps looks if they realese the 48fps trailer online.

Why not ?

Some movie theatres projections probably wouldn’t be able to show it (although its probable that a lot of it would already be able to) , and some old monitors with small refreshing rates.

Everyone else would be able to see it , outside of some youtube-esque players.

[dark_b]

modern monitors support the technology that Cameron and Jackson are promoting in theaters?

[Tequilla]

modern monitors support the technology that Cameron and Jackson are promoting in theaters?

Yes , outside of 3d (even that there's already some 3d tvs which actually are better than most theatres projections). Anyone with the right equipment can record something in 48 (or higher) and upload it to the net. There's probably videos out there (not on some youtube players that doesn’t support it)

Higher Framerates was talked almost 30 years ago. Cameron isn’t inventing the wheel. There's a lot of formats like showscan and maxivision 48 that were planned considering that. The industry simply took a dump on them.

Now with 3d , higher framerates come in handy.

[dark_b]

i know that Cameron didnt invent the wheel. Cameron talked at comiccon 2009 that some projectors can support higher frame rates. i thought this is not possible on the itnernet and monitors.

[Kane52630]

I hear it's more of a firmware update on the 3D projectors than anything else according to Cameron.

[BobbyCorwin88]

Jackson speaks up about the reactions to 48fps.

http://geektyrant.com/news/2012/4/29/peter-jackson-responds-to-hobbit-footage-48fps-complaints.html?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=twitter

[Armored Avenger]

Yuck. Too much frames per second and other cinema mumbo jumbo discussion for my liking here. I can't believe this is what everyone has decided to discuss instead of the actual scenes in the footage shown.

The footage shown hasn't exactly filled everyone with excitement either. Radagast the Brown has birds living in his hair and rides a sled pulled by rabbits (or hares) and some subplot involving the 'tombs of the Ringwraiths' has been added, which seems to contradict the entire latter history of the Third Age. As I posted earlier:

Entombing the Witch-king after his defeat in the Battle of Fornost completely changes the history of Middle-Earth.
After the battle the Witch-king fled south and later (with the other Nazgul) attacked Minas Ithil, taking the city and leading to it becoming known as Minas Morgul. He is also directly responsible for the end of the royal line in Gondor, due to his challenge of single combat to the childless Eärnur. When Eärnur accepted, he rode to Minas Morgul and was never seen again, leading to the Stewards assuming control of Gondor.
This talk of "the Men of the North" imprisoning the Witch-king after the fall of Angmar completely contradicts everything Tolkien wrote about the character after his defeat and creates massive plot holes (if the Witch-king was imprisoned for all this time, how did Minas Ithil fall? How did Gondor lose its Kings? Who has been preparing Mordor for Sauron's return and leading his forces while he regains power?).

While the inclusion of the Nazgul in the Dol Guldur/Necromancer subplot may seem like a minor and reasonable change, the way they have handled it pretty much butchers the later half of the Third Age.


In addition to this, what was left of the Arnorians of Arthedain (or 'the Men of the North' as the film calls them) would have no where near the number, strength or capability to imprison any of the Nine. The entire North Kingdom had been decimated and what was left of its people became a wandering group of Rangers. How would they have managed to entomb the disembodied spirit of the Lord of the Nazgul?

What was shown of the Trollshaw scene (complete with talking Trolls) and the Riddles in the Dark got a much better reception though (apart from reports of Gollum referring to himself as Smeagol, which seems to contradict events Jackson himself made a big deal over in The Two Towers). It has all just been overshadowed by the 48fps debate, the bizarreness of Radagast and the fan fiction sounding Ringwraith additions.

[I'm Old Greg]

I'm all for this new Format. I like more Frame rates, i got an LED Samsung because I didn't like the motion blur in the old TV.

People always **** on the New and Unfamiliar before giving it more of a chance.
I saw a TV years ago with more frame rates and i couldn't stop starring at it, it was soo expensive, i still haven't seen a TV like that but it felt soo real like they were in a window and not on a television.

I like New and innovative things, I like different, I like progress, i like experimenting. Give me a break people don't like it, sounds like a bunch of old stuck in what there used to cause they can't adjust. I don't want things to stay the same i want it to change.

I can't wait to see the Hobbit shot like this. I want it 'more real'. I need more out of a film experience than just seeing peoples faces stretched out 20feet on a screen.

[Armored Avenger]

I want it 'more real'.

This is a fantasy film in a completely constructed world, so there is no "real" to begin with. Everything is artificial, from the sets, to the wigs, to the make up, the costumes, the props, etc. And it seems the 48fps exposes all of that and takes people out of the illusion of excepting this imaginary world. People are complaining that the sets look like sets, not actual locations. It's apparent that the actors are wearing make up. I fail to see how noticing all of this improves the viewing experience.
As others have said, 48fps seems far more suited for some types of films as opposed to others. A gritty war film with an emphasis on real locations and practical effects, for example, could benefit greatly from the immersion of seeing everything 'as it is'. A fantasy film in which everything is an illusion that must be maintained throughout, not so much.

[dark_b]

the brain is making a connection to the behind the scenes videos. higher fram rates reminds the brain on behind the scenes footage. in the behind the scenes footage you see sets and props and wigs. thats why some reported that the sets looked like sets.

and i didnt know that fantasy movies didnt have to be 100% real. since fanboys like to complain about CGI in every fantasy movie. so is it with CGI different? since movies are not meant to be real why is it wrong if the CGI shadow is 4 % darker then on the live action plate? :oldrazz::woot:

[Marvolo]

Heard it put best "The 48fps are going to make this look a bunch of people are dressed as hobbits and dwarves LARPing through the woods."

I hope not, but that's what it sounds like based on some of the initial reactions.

[Thebumwhowalks]

So, first we have Nolan possibly spoiling people's enjoyment of TDKR by having Bane talk indecipherably , and now there is the possibility that, just when Jackson makes a hobbit film using more fake sets than outdoor location shooting(than he did on lotr anyway), he is using some new filming method that could possibly make the shots look like the kind of cheaper film they use for behind the scenes footage, so it will be more apparent they are using fake sets. great.

[Armored Avenger]

and i didnt know that fantasy movies didnt have to be 100% real. since fanboys like to complain about CGI in every fantasy movie. so is it with CGI different? since movies are not meant to be real why is it wrong if the CGI shadow is 4 % darker then on the live action plate?

The Lord of the Rings trilogy didn't look 100% real, it looked like a film, yet visual effects like Gollum have to maintain a sense of consistency within the created world and appear to interact with the characters. Gollum had to look like he was there with the characters in the location or it would have destroyed the illusion of the artificial world. By exposing all of the seams of filmmaking, the 48fps destroys that illusion (judging from most of the reactions to the footage).

[Midnyte_Sun]

I have friends who hate anyting above 24fps, I on the other hand, like it. Avatar 2 and 3 are supposed to get this treatment as well.

[Caekzor]

I'm all for this new Format. I like more Frame rates, i got an LED Samsung because I didn't like the motion blur in the old TV.

People always **** on the New and Unfamiliar before giving it more of a chance.
I saw a TV years ago with more frame rates and i couldn't stop starring at it, it was soo expensive, i still haven't seen a TV like that but it felt soo real like they were in a window and not on a television.

I like New and innovative things, I like different, I like progress, i like experimenting. Give me a break people don't like it, sounds like a bunch of old stuck in what there used to cause they can't adjust. I don't want things to stay the same i want it to change.

I can't wait to see the Hobbit shot like this. I want it 'more real'. I need more out of a film experience than just seeing peoples faces stretched out 20feet on a screen.

Reading stuff like this makes me sad. I ****ing hate the motion smoothing setting on new TVs. Messes with my eyes and completely ruins the look and feel of films for me.

I love the "film look". To me that also feels like viewing through a window. But a window into another world.

I don't want to feel like I'm chilling on my couch, looking out my front window and watching things take place on my front lawn like a stage play.

That may seem more "real" because it looks like it's "right there" but at the same time it's going to feel less genuine.

[Spider-Who?]

Reading stuff like this makes me sad. I ****ing hate the motion smoothing setting on new TVs. Messes with my eyes and completely ruins the look and feel of films for me.

I love the "film look". To me that also feels like viewing through a window. But a window into another world.

I don't want to feel like I'm chilling on my couch, looking out my front window and watching things take place on my front lawn like a stage play.

That may seem more "real" because it looks like it's "right there" but at the same time it's going to feel less genuine.
Once again, people need to stop thinking that The Hobbit will look like the motion smoothing on the TVs at Best Buy. The two are completely different.

Motion smoothing is an attempt for TVs to overcome the issues that 24fps have when being watched on a TV with a 120hz refresh rate. The TV analyzes each frame and interpolates entirely new frames in between. In other words, every other frame you see is artificial. THAT'S why it looks bad. Because it's a FAKE image created by the TV.

Filming at 48fps is entirely different, and the result will be entirely different because every frame will be actual, honest to god real footage; not a bunch of artificial pixels a TV magically came up with to try and compensate for a higher refresh rate.

[Kane52630]

Alright lets put this into perspective since several people in here are losing their sh** for no reason, forget the 3d and the 48 fps.

Look at this trailer again and tell me how is this something you see on your front lawn like a stage play.


G0k3kHtyoqc


Yeah, I rest my case.

[Whiskey Tango]

Nobody is 'losing their ****'.

[Caekzor]

Look at this trailer again and tell me how is this something you see on your front lawn like a stage play.

Yeah, I rest my case.

That trailer is not 48fps. :cwink:

From Peter Jackson:”I personally wouldn’t advocate a 48-frame trailer because the 48 frames is something you should experience with the entire film. A 2 1/2 minute trailer isn’t enough time to adjust to the immersive quality.”

Once again, people need to stop thinking that The Hobbit will look like the motion smoothing on the TVs at Best Buy. The two are completely different.

Motion smoothing is an attempt for TVs to overcome the issues that 24fps have when being watched on a TV with a 120hz refresh rate. The TV analyzes each frame and interpolates entirely new frames in between. In other words, every other frame you see is artificial. THAT'S why it looks bad. Because it's a FAKE image created by the TV.

Filming at 48fps is entirely different, and the result will be entirely different because every frame will be actual, honest to god real footage; not a bunch of artificial pixels a TV magically came up with to try and compensate for a higher refresh rate.

I know that. But there are complaints that the footage had a similar look.

I am not completely writing it off. I can't. I need to see it first. I really do want to see the final movie the way it was shot at 48fps and in 3D.

Until then I am going to be very unsure about this...

[Marvolo]

Alright lets put this into perspective since several people in here are losing their sh** for no reason, forget the 3d and the 48 fps.

Look at this trailer again and tell me how is this something you see on your front lawn like a stage play.


G0k3kHtyoqc


Yeah, I rest my case.

Trailer is in 24fps so your case isn't rested.

[Kane52630]

And you are expecting every theater to have a only 48 fps showings? Like I said before, this is not a big deal if your preconceived notions aren't comfortable watching it in 48 fps, there's going to be an option at most theaters for the regular 2D.

[Marvolo]

And you are expecting every theater to have a only 48 fps showings? Like I said before, this is not a big deal if your preconceived notions aren't comfortable watching it in 48 fps, there's going to be an option at most theaters for the regular 2D.

Most of us know there is an option. I will be watching it in 24fps 2D myself. What happens when our theaters "upgrade" and we no longer have an option? It is a year and a half til part 2. That is plenty of time for most theaters to "upgrade". Most may not even have an option by the time part 2 comes out. Option or not fantasy films do not need 48fps. Keep the super realism look to dramas, war films etc. I like my fantasy to look like film with an otherworldly look. If I want realistic lighting and grading Il go watch people LARPing. That's ust me tho. If it looks good then its all good, but if it looks ****** in any way I'm not going to cut its slack just because it is the Hobbit. Jackson made this decision and I just hope it was the right one. The canvas should serve the film not a directors desire to be first in a new frontier. There is a time and place for everything.

[redhawk23]

Also though there might be a choice, does that mean the film cannot be criticized for looking poorly in the other format if that is indeed the case?

[dark_b]

i talked to 2 animators yesterday. in school they teach animators to use motion blur to get a feeling of fast movement. in CGI they can control how much motion blur an object has. for example on Transformers they needed to remove some motion blur because the models were so complicated and when they moved it was only a blur.so they added and remove the blur shot by shot.

so i think the solutions is very simple. go scene by scene and look at the footage and make an ARTISTIC CHOICE how much motion blur to use. with 48fps you have such a clean image that you have the option to add motion blur or not. 100% control. isnt this what an artis wants? to have full control over the image?
why am i writting this ? because when directing movies you change almost everything form shot to shot. depth of field,exposure. so why not use 48 fps as a new tool where you can control how much blur the shot has? why should every shot have the same amount?

[:eek:]

Six different versions of the movie will be available. Must be a record. Wonder if anyone is crazy enough to see them all. :)

More amusing is that there will be six different options for people to see the film when it opens - 24 FPS 2D, 24 FPS 3D, 24 FPS IMAX 3D, 48 FPS 2D, 48 FPS 3D, 48 FPS IMAX 3D

[Kane52630]

THE HOBBIT, Production Video #7

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10151028043926807

Download:
Right Click > Save
http://video.ak.fbcdn.net/cfs-ak-ash4/v/449907/942/10151028043926807_9116.mp4?oh=0769ff692dcb7f81b51f adbbd863741e&oe=4FCF0B20&__gda__=1338968864_6834052d9ebccc01926176fdca2bc46 e

[Angel_Faerie]

The set seems like such a fun, friendly atmosphere.

[Octoberist]

omg, I almost forgot about the production videos!

[Kane52630]

It's nice seeing Alan Lee and John Howe working on The Hobbit. :up:

[Octoberist]

I noticed something: Perhaps they're not doing BIGatures this time around. Nice surprise by the end, btw.

[The Squirrel]

I want to ride the barrel rapids!

[Marvolo]

I want to ride the barrel rapids!

So do I!:woot:

[ravn0s]

great video blog

[Spider-Who?]

I am a proffessional animator, and yes, while what thy told you is true, it's an entirely different animal when you're talking about adding motion blur to a live shot. The motion blur for transformers, for instance, is a set a parameters that looks at the various aspects of a 3d model, the distance from the digital camera, what type of digital camera, etc. you don't have that amount of control to create good motion blur for a live action scene.

[Jackasscoley15]

I noticed something: Perhaps they're not doing BIGatures this time around. Nice surprise by the end, btw.

I think we will still see bigatures in the film. As stated in the video, the miniatures we saw were basically just templates for real sets that they planned to build.

[Boom]

Great video blog. The ending is ****ing incredible :lmao:.

[superkong 500]

Great video blog. The ending is ****ing incredible :lmao:.

I hope legolas has a real scene like that in the movie flipping his knives and stabbing/slashing orcs cause there wasn't enough of him using the knives in LOTR. Hell I wanna see legolas doing a scissors head chop a la gladiator, stab and orc with the knives crossed then remove them in an outward slashing motion. Cant wait to see the next trailer I hope its released with TDKR it would make sense.

Also We haven't yet seen Thranduil.

[Siby]

ROFL, the ending was awesome!

[CGHulk]

edit.

[Kane52630]

Strange, I tested the link before I posted it. Oh well.

Edit: I know the problem, for some reason facebook isn't working properly with videos.

[Angel_Faerie]

It's incredible how little Orlando has aged in 10 years.

He's still gorgeous... :atp:

*Ahem!* ...sorry. Fangirl moment over.

[Octoberist]

Orlando looks about the same!

[Hunter Rider]

THE HOBBIT, Production Video #7

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10151028043926807

Download:
Right Click > Save
http://video.ak.fbcdn.net/cfs-ak-ash4/v/449907/942/10151028043926807_9116.mp4?oh=0769ff692dcb7f81b51f adbbd863741e&oe=4FCF0B20&__gda__=1338968864_6834052d9ebccc01926176fdca2bc46 e

The save option is not working Kane. :(

[Kane52630]

THE HOBBIT, Production Video #7

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10151028043926807

Download:
Right Click > Save
http://video.ak.fbcdn.net/cfs-ak-ash4/v/449907/942/10151028043926807_9116.mp4?oh=0769ff692dcb7f81b51f adbbd863741e&oe=4FCF0B20&__gda__=1338968864_6834052d9ebccc01926176fdca2bc46 e

The save option is not working Kane. :(

Yeah It's facebook's problem for some reason. I have it on my computer at home so I guess ill upload it tonight.

[Boom]

God, I look older than Bloom, and I'm 24.

Damn cigarettes :csad:.

[Octoberist]

Vitamin E for the skin!

[regwec]

God, I look older than Bloom, and I'm 24.

Damn cigarettes :csad:.
It doesn't matter if you're male. Nature is sexist.

[Sgt.Pepper]

Fantastic video-blog, very informative. Can't wait for the next one.

[Spider-Who?]

Yeah that was prolly the best vblog so far, and the end had me rolling.

[Boom]

It doesn't matter if you're male. Nature is sexist.
:lmao:


So what do we think? Redesigned warg at 11:51? And John Howe is totally sitting in Beorn's chair :awesome::up:.

[Hunter Rider]

Yeah It's facebook's problem for some reason. I have it on my computer at home so I guess ill upload it tonight.
:bow:

[Kane52630]

:bow:

Here ya go. :up:
http://www.mediafire.com/?po61yz42qklqttj

[Kane52630]

http://i.minus.com/i9FxzZAuDxIOa.gif

http://i.minus.com/iVktgGCXw0rDH.gif

http://i.minus.com/izt6yXMROPlrn.gif

[Hunter Rider]

Here ya go. :up:
http://www.mediafire.com/?po61yz42qklqttj

Thank you. :up:

[craigdbfan]

That was awesome. These guys seem to be having so much fun.

[Boom]

I'd kill to be on this crew :csad:.

[Asteroid-Man]

As would I.

[Boom]

First look at Beorn (sort of)?

http://imageshack.us/f/534/screenshot20120609at105.png/
http://imageshack.us/f/534/screenshot20120609at105.png/

[Abudefduf]

Whatever it is, it looks bland. I hope it's not Beorn.

[Boom]

All Beorn wears in the book is a wool tunic :huh:.

[Abudefduf]

I just see some bearded dude wearing pants... and I think it looks bland. Of course we're talking about a crappy set picture so it doesn't really mean anything.

[Boom]

Yeah. It's a basic, untextured, and uncolored model. Hell, it could've just been whipped up on the spot and not be indicative of the actual design.

Still, I like the general look of it. Beorn is, for all intents and purposes, a hermit, so simple wool garments is about what I expected.

[Doctor Jones]

Jackson has literally white washed him.

This takes everything to a whole new level.

[regwec]

Whatever it is, it looks bland. I hope it's not Beorn.
It must be Beorn. There is no other character in the story who can be associated with that heroic stature, bushy beard and proud stance.

Not sure what you would expect Beorn to look like, if not that.

[Abudefduf]

^ I don't know, really. I'm liking the look of some of the characters, but on the other hand, there are others that look downright awful. That's why I'm being... cautious.

http://www-images.theonering.org/torwp/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/TotalFilm-Summer2012.jpg
Here's some interviews with the actors... and lolwut? at what Turner says about Kili. I hope it's not true.

[Boom]

Turner better be joking. That's just... Ugh.

[Marvolo]

I'd be more worried about Thorin thinking he isnt good enough. Sounds like the Aragorn **** again with him thinking he wasnt worthy of the crown. I get tired of this.

[Abudefduf]

For some reason I missed that part. Yeah, another thing that doesn't sound too good.

[Armored Avenger]

http://www-images.theonering.org/torwp/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/TotalFilm-Summer2012.jpg
Here's some interviews with the actors... and lolwut? at what Turner says about Kili. I hope it's not true.

Kili trying to romance Tauriel?

http://i46.tinypic.com/10ie96u.jpg

[regwec]

Clint speaks for us all.

[Whiskey Tango]

It's probably similar to Gimli's infatuation with Galdriel. I won't panic until I see Kili going through her underwear drawer.

[regwec]

That's worrying in itself, though. It seems that PJ wants to draw a lot of parallels between LOTR and The Hobbit, and force a lot of additional and unjustified references to the former into the latter. I like PJ, but some of his movies have a tendency to get cluttered and overburdened, and this hints at the problem recurring with The Hobbit.

[Yodaman]

Clint speaks for us all.

As a really short dude with an Evangeline Lily crush, I don't really mind. :o

[Boom]

Just confirming what Peter Jackson said a year ago: The Hobbit will be at Comic Con 2012.

Warner Bros. also has reserved a three-hour block Saturday and is likely to anchor its presentation with THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY, and plans include first-look footage from next summer’s MAN OF STEEL (studio has never taken one of Christopher Nolan’s Batman pics to the show, and there are no indications that this year will be any exception). Sources also tell Variety that Legendary Pictures plans to join distrib partner Warners with a preview of Guillermo Del Toro’s tentpole PACIFIC RIM, though the studio would not confirm those plans.
http://www.showblitz.com/2012/06/comic-con-2012-whos-in-whos-out.html

And this article on Bill Connolly may provide us with a wrap date for principal photography:

Connolly is back in the country to do more work on The Hobbit as dwarf warrior Dain Ironfoot.

“I have a war to fight. Elves to kill. Orcs to maim,” he says.

Connolly says he’s enjoying his time working on The Hobbit immensely and that Peter Jackson is not hard task master but a perfectionist.

“He knows what he wants and he stays on the case until he gets it. It’s highly technical and we do a lot of takes. It’s not like normal movies where you just have to get your words right and avoid the furniture.”

He says New Zealand is a lovely place but he had not done much sightseeing, apart from a spot of fishing in Rotorua.

The Fido actor is not sure how long he will be in New Zealand this time round.

“I have an invitation to the wrap party on July the 7th so I think they have ideas of me staying that long.”
http://entertainment.msn.co.nz/article.aspx?id=8482708

[Armored Avenger]

It's probably similar to Gimli's infatuation with Galdriel. I won't panic until I see Kili going through her underwear drawer.

Galadriel was one of the most powerful and beautiful Elves in the history of Middle-Earth. When Gimli becomes enamoured with Galadriel it is unexpected and the fact the a Dwarf should become so infatuated with an Elf is played as rare, slightly comic and touching. It's a great character moment for Gimli (and Galadriel as well, as her gift to him helps to show a different side to her character when compared to her lofty scenes with Frodo).
Tauriel is apparently just a guard or soldier in the armies of Mirkwood. It just seems lazy and uninspired to have another Dwarf develop a crush on the only other prominent female Elf in the film series (especially when said crush is held by the only member of the company whose un-dwarven design still fuels my nerd rage).

I have yet to see or hear anything that makes me comfortable with the inclusion of Tauriel. I fear that she may weaken the development of Bilbo as an independent hero, due to her presence in the Mirkwood scenes and a fear I have that she may help Bilbo and the Dwarves escape (we already have Thranduil and Legolas playing antagonistic Mirkwood Elves, which makes me think Tauriel may be used to show a more heroic side to them). Mirkwood is the location where Bilbo really steps up to the plate and becomes a truly valuable asset to the company, fighting a horde of Spiders, evading capture by the Elves and rescuing the Dwarves with a plan he himself conceived, all without the help of Gandalf. If Tauriel is holding his hand, so to speak, during all of this then it will considerably diminish his character's achievements. I know this fear is unfounded at the moment, but Tauriel is clearly a substantial role (otherwise they wouldn't have bothered creating a new character) and apart from the Battle of Five Armies, the scenes in the Elvenking's Halls are the only place where she can get any real exposure and development.

[FVD]

If they're indeed going with this Kili Tauriel romance I suppose there could some emotional weight involved given the fact that he along with brother Fili dies while helping defend his Uncle Thorin also having been mortally wounded.

[Whiskey Tango]

Galadriel was one of the most powerful and beautiful Elves in the history of Middle-Earth. When Gimli becomes enamoured with Galadriel it is unexpected and the fact the a Dwarf should become so infatuated with an Elf is played as rare, slightly comic and touching. It's a great character moment for Gimli (and Galadriel as well, as her gift to him helps to show a different side to her character when compared to her lofty scenes with Frodo).
Tauriel is apparently just a guard or soldier in the armies of Mirkwood. It just seems lazy and uninspired to have another Dwarf develop a crush on the only other prominent female Elf in the film series (especially when said crush is held by the only member of the company whose un-dwarven design still fuels my nerd rage).

I have yet to see or hear anything that makes me comfortable with the inclusion of Tauriel. I fear that she may weaken the development of Bilbo as an independent hero, due to her presence in the Mirkwood scenes and a fear I have that she may help Bilbo and the Dwarves escape (we already have Thranduil and Legolas playing antagonistic Mirkwood Elves, which makes me think Tauriel may be used to show a more heroic side to them). Mirkwood is the location where Bilbo really steps up to the plate and becomes a truly valuable asset to the company, fighting a horde of Spiders, evading capture by the Elves and rescuing the Dwarves with a plan he himself conceived, all without the help of Gandalf. If Tauriel is holding his hand, so to speak, during all of this then it will considerably diminish his character's achievements. I know this fear is unfounded at the moment, but Tauriel is clearly a substantial role (otherwise they wouldn't have bothered creating a new character) and apart from the Battle of Five Armies, the scenes in the Elvenking's Halls are the only place where she can get any real exposure and development.

*shrug* I don't know what to tell you. Brace for impact!

[Boom]

Hay guyz :awesome::

http://www.albertafilmratings.ca/recentclasstrailers.aspx

[Kane52630]

Hay guyz :awesome::

http://www.albertafilmratings.ca/recentclasstrailers.aspx

http://i50.tinypic.com/9un955.jpg

2:24 mins long? nice!

[Doctor Jones]

Oh... yeeeaaaaaahhhh!

[Boom]

I'm assuming it'll be with Brave next week.

Now please, for the love of God, give me a shot of Beorn.

[JP]

http://i50.tinypic.com/9un955.jpg

2:24 mins long? nice!
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v232/korn0818/075ee6d1.gifhttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v232/korn0818/075ee6d1.gifhttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v232/korn0818/075ee6d1.gif

[Marvolo]

I'm assuming it'll be with Brave next week.

Now please, for the love of God, give me a shot of Beorn.

Wouldn't this more likely to be attached to TDKR next month?

[Boom]

Trailers usually come out a week after they've been classified.

The trailer could still end up attached to TDKR (hell, I've seen the Frankenweenie trailer attached to four different films), but it'll probably debut with Brave next week. That's my guess, anyway.

[Marvolo]

I hope you're right because id rather have the trailer next week as opposed to next month.

[Boom]

We all would. We all would :up:.

[superkong 500]

Yes! I'm hoping we get shots of Beorn, Thranduil, Thorin in action and some orcs. Maybe a glimpse at Thranduil's halls

[Armored Avenger]

Hay guyz :awesome::

http://www.albertafilmratings.ca/recentclasstrailers.aspx

http://i49.tinypic.com/70jk75.gif

[matrix_ghost]

Wouldn't this more likely to be attached to TDKR next month?

COuld be. Though i'm thinking that they might show this with Spider-man ..in 3-d.

[CGHulk]

I was just thinking today when are we going to see a new Hobbit trailer.

[Abudefduf]

http://i49.tinypic.com/70jk75.giflol That woman from The Lost World. What a weird reaction.

Anyway, can't wait for the trailer... is it too much to hope for a glimpse of Smaug?

[ThePowerCosmic]

lol That woman from The Lost World. What a weird reaction.

Anyway, can't wait for the trailer... is it too much to hope for a glimpse of Smaug?

I'm not sure about the Smaug glimpse. Won't we only be getting a glimpse of Smaug in the first movie anyway? I think I remember hearing that Smaug plays a larger part in The Hobbit part 2.

[Kane52630]

Yeah Smaug is going to be in part II so I doubt they will show him in the trailer but you never know.

[Whiskey Tango]

Just Confirmed! We are opening the show as the very first panel at San Diego Comic Con! Get there early Thursday for some crazy cool announc.... I've said too much!

https://www.facebook.com/TheOneRingnet

[craigdbfan]

Sounds good. :up:

[Doctor Jones]

Maybe we'll get a small glimpse of Smaug at the most. Perhaps they might do a showing of footage from both films, mainly from the first. But with shots from the second. At least the ones that are finished.

[jonnywhc]

Does anyone here know if realIMAX will be playing it at 48fps? Saw the trailer attached to 3D IMAX Prometheus and it looked awesome, but obv wasn't at 48fps cos it was attached to a normal reel.

[matrix_ghost]

Does anyone here know if realIMAX will be playing it at 48fps? Saw the trailer attached to 3D IMAX Prometheus and it looked awesome, but obv wasn't at 48fps cos it was attached to a normal reel.

I guess it depends on the theaters . THey basically need to upgrade their projectors .
Also i think WB will look closely at what kind of reception the footage will get at COMIC-CON. No doubt that they will again try to show the footage at 48 fps.

[Boom]

Photo of the Lake-town set:
http://i.imgur.com/ARaMd.jpg

[CGHulk]

Boromir was wrong.
http://i.imgur.com/ufmHE.jpg

[Whiskey Tango]

Photo of the Lake-town set:
http://i.imgur.com/ARaMd.jpg

lol look at that door. somebody get these *******s a framing square

[regwec]

If you live next to a dragon, don't build your houses out of wood.

Elvish proverb.

[Boom]

Has anyone been able to confirm whether or not we're getting a trailer this week? I thought a theater employee would've mentioned something by now.

[Pink Ranger]

If you live next to a dragon, don't build your houses out of wood.

Elvish proverb.

If you live next to Charlie Sheen, don't build your house out of whores and cocaine.

[Boom]

What the hell is going on?

http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2012/06/20/57564-hobbit-trailer-to-show-in-us-theatres-with-brave-but-which-trailer/#more-57564

[Marvolo]

Not a clue but it better get worked out cause I expect a new trailer next week.

[Whiskey Tango]

What’s different in Hobbit trailer #2?

It’s not much different from #1. We already knew that. But what has changed from the first trailer that was released in December 2011?

The first reports are starting to trickle through from our readers, so we thought we’d give you the details so you can decide whether there’s enough for you want to go see it for yourself (we know some of you are thinking of going to see Brave just for Hobbit trailer #2!).

Of course, this is going to involve spoilers. So if you’re spoiler averse, or would prefer to just go to the theatre and find out for yourself, don’t read any further!

Barliman’s chat regular Pontmercy tells us:

The Hobbit trailer in front of Brave is tweaked just a bit. The smoking is still in there. In fact the bit at the beginning where Martin!Bilbo smokes is extended just a hair so you can see him do a bit of a double take. Perhaps reacting to Gandalf?

Also the troll fighting bit is gone and replaced with a close up of Bilbo’s face peering through a crack and then pans down to him peering through a lower crack. I couldn’t tell where it was because it was so zoomed in. Also I think the bit with Gandalf fighting the dwarf Thrain was removed as well.

TORn Messageboarder The Grey Pilgrim expands a little more:

I just saw a midnight showing of Brave and can confirm the differences.

Bilbo is still shown with a pipe, but it looks like an alternate take so he is just holding it but there is no smoke. The heading “next December” is changed to “this December,” and there are indeed two or so new shots, one of Bilbo falling down and then his face peering through something as someone else has stated and another of what looked like Gandalf and Company running quickly through the woods.

These shots were played so quick it was hard to get a really good look at them in the cinema. I think the only replaced shots were the shot of the Dwarves fighting at Trollshaw and/or Gandalf/Thrain’s confrontation.

Quick analysis:

Not much to mull over, but I wonder why and where Gandalf is running through the woods with the company?

Consider: Gandalf is not with the company at the start of the Troll encounter. He’s actually gone away to scout, and only returns later after the company has been caught and trussed up by Bill, Bert and Tom. Later he leaves the company before they enter Mirkwood proper to head south on White Council business.

That perhaps leaves the fir trees incident with the Wargs. Could they be fleeing the goblins here?

Anyway, we’re hopeful of an online release, but we haven’t had word one way or the other from WB yet! Cross fingers.

http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2012/06/22/57670-whats-different-in-hobbit-trailer-2/

[ThePowerCosmic]

That's lame, I was expecting more from the trailer.

[Whiskey Tango]

seriously

[Boom]

Oh well. Here's hoping we get a new trailer with TDKR.

[Drizzle]

I just saw Brave and there was no trailer.

[Boom]

What the **** is WB doing :funny:?

[Kane52630]

Yeah, I'm guessing the real new trailer shows up with the TDKR.

[ThePowerCosmic]

I truly hope so.

[CGHulk]

Yeah there was no Hobbit trailer at my Brave showing too.

[jonnywhc]

Asked my cinema and they radio'd up to the projectionist...Hobbit will be playing at 48fps in trueIMAX :awesome: hopefully this doesn't change!

[Boom]

Luke Evans is about to begin his last four days of shooting.

https://mobile.twitter.com/#!/lukeevansactor/status/217912823253172225

[warhorse78]

While I love, absolutely love the Avengers, this is the film I am most excited to see! I saw the trailer tonight, and I got goosebumps all over again. Really felt like a kid again!

[Zanham]

While I love, absolutely love the Avengers, this is the film I am most excited to see! I saw the trailer tonight, and I got goosebumps all over again. Really felt like a kid again!

Yep. The first A.M. showing on a Friday when there shouldn't be many children.

[Project862006]

http://oi46.tinypic.com/2hxazrn.jpg

[Kane52630]

About time. :up:

[Boom]

Ian McKellen couldn't look more badass if he tried. ****ing epic :up:.

[Boom]

Ten new photos:

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20483133_20608420,00.html

[craigdbfan]

http://i.imgur.com/jiH6q.png


Why does Gollum look more cutsey looking? :funny:

I guess he would be younger but still...

[Boom]

Curiosity about Bilbo, maybe?

[craigdbfan]

Riddles in the dark will probably be my favorite scene if done right. I loved that portion of the book.

[Sawyer]

lol Gollum looks adorable/creepy. Love the new pics. :up:

[Sawyer]

A little surprised this got the SDCC cover instead of Man of Steel. I guess I shouldn't be, since this is the closer release date.

[Boom]

And Beorn is still nowhere to be found. Maybe in the next trailer? Please :csad:?

That aside, McKellen continues to look epic, new Gollum looks fantastic, and dwarf hoods FTW :awesome::up:.

[Kane52630]

http://i.imgur.com/jiH6q.png


Why does Gollum look more cutsey looking? :funny:

I guess he would be younger but still...

That looks really great, it's just enough to where it looks like they added more details in the rendering but without it looking different from LOTR.

[jacobed]

I'm quite the opposite on Gollum. I don't think he looks too impressive there at all. He looks like he does from the other movies. Now I know this is unfinished and when the movie comes out he will look incredible but that picture there eh does nothing for. Thorin on the other hand looks ridiculously bad ass.

[Schlosser85]

I think Gollum looks exactly the same as he did in LOTR (as he should).

[Octoberist]

Gollum looks about the same. I think his amination might be better obviously.

[Abudefduf]

Gandalf and Gollum look great, and Freeman is gonna be a perfect Bilbo, no doubt about that.

But Thorin... oh God, I hate how he looks. I hope the characterization is spot on, because look-wise, he plainly sucks.

[Silvermoth]

Gandalf looks like a boss. Imagine turning up to work and seeing him peer at you over the top of a cup of coffee!

[redhawk23]

I'm not particularly impressed with Gollumn here. While the eyes are of course larger than normal human size, I am disappointed that they look about the same here as they did in the other films. It might seem like a nitpick but the eyes were one of the few things about Gollumn that I've always felt looked a bit off. In comparison to the eyes they've done since with Avatar and Rise of the Planet of the Apes I'm somewhat disappointed.

[redhawk23]

More pics
http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17ro505f2s3q2jpg/original.jpg
http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17rovcze3y6qqjpg/original.jpg
http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17rovcvg9tm3kjpg/original.jpg
http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17rovcvga6ihpjpg/original.jpg
http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17ro50bccqe4ejpg/original.jpg
http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17rohe8bpwywbjpg/original.jpg
http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17rovmmnmwzwbjpg/original.jpg



The beardless younger dwarf is still nonsensical.

[Boom]

It truly boggles the mind :csad:.

Anyone get a copy of EW yet? We need scans of the article :awesome:.

[Boom]

Scans here:

http://www.richardarmitagenet.com/

Does anyone have the tablet edition? Apparently there are exclusive photos on there.

[CGHulk]

http://i.imgur.com/jiH6q.png


Why does Gollum look more cutsey looking? :funny:

I guess he would be younger but still...

I didn't know Steve Buscemi was in this film? :D

[Boom]

http://www.richardarmitagenet.com/images/gallery/Hobbit/HobbitStills/album/29-Thorin-EWiPad-July2012.jpg
http://www.richardarmitagenet.com/images/gallery/Hobbit/HobbitStills/album/28-DwalinBalinBilbo-EWiPad-July2012.jpg

[Abudefduf]

Lol. I love Bilbo's nightgown there. Balin and Dwalin look pretty cool too, can't wait to see them in action.

http://www.richardarmitagenet.com/images/gallery/Hobbit/HobbitStills/album/29-Thorin-EWiPad-July2012.jpgOh look... it's Aragorn's scruffier cousin.

[superkong 500]

EW page scan possible small spoiler ahead

http://www.richardarmitagenet.com/images/articlescans/Hobbit/EW-3Jul12-2.jpg

[Boom]

That picture of Gandalf in the Shire is perfect.

[Boom]

Principal photography has officially wrapped:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151062342726558&set=a.10150238899061558.364437.141884481557&type=1

[Marx]

The new pictures look great! :yay:

[warhorse78]

The number one movie on my list for the year. So close, but yet so far away. I just have this feeling that this movie is going to be fantastic.

[CGHulk]

We made it! Shoot day 266 and the end of principal photography on The Hobbit. Thanks to our fantastic cast and crew for getting us this far, and to all of you for your support! Next stop, the cutting room. Oh, and Comic Con!
Cheers, Peter J


http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/5431/29164610151062342726558.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/819/29164610151062342726558.jpg/)

[Rowsdower!]

Someone fill me in here... I heard that a new trailer was released but when I searched for it, I only found a few articles that said they released a new trailer that was exactly the same as the old one. What the hell?

[Angel_Faerie]

There were only a few minute differences.

[John Locke]

It was reported edited to be more kid friendly so it could appear before Brave. Which is strange because my theater showed the old one.

[ravn0s]

a new trailer for comic con would be awesome.

[lime]

Are the EW pictures expected to be released in HD soon?

[rashad]

https://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/554081_10151066186896558_361331377_n.jpg

[CGHulk]

Awesome!

[Drizzle]

*waits for Strutting Leo to be added to the picture*

[Abudefduf]

Looks like a John Howe painting... love it.

[regwec]

Yes, it looks just like an illustration. Very fitting indeed for this film, and it looks so different from every other movie poster around at the moment.

[jacobed]

Very cool poster

[Marx]

Yes, it looks just like an illustration. Very fitting indeed for this film, and it looks so different from every other movie poster around at the moment.

It looks like someone actually put some thought into the poster and didn't mindlessly photoshop everything together. :up:

[ThePowerCosmic]

WB's really coming through so far with these fantastic Comic-Con posters.

[craigdbfan]

That's really great. I wish WB would have put half as much effort into their TDKR posters.

[ThePowerCosmic]

That's really great. I wish WB would have put half as much effort into their TDKR posters.

Perhaps if TDKR were at Comic-Con last year it would've had an awesome poster. I just hope they give a great MoS Comic-Con poster too.

Edit: And TDKR will probably be so good that you won't care about the crappy posters anyway.

[Sawyer]

*waits for Strutting Leo to be added to the picture*

He's on his way, I'm sure.

[matrix_ghost]

*waits for Strutting Leo to be added to the picture*

Strutting Leo and Happy for the Win :oldrazz:

[CGHulk]

http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/2197/33635510151066186896558.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/23/33635510151066186896558.jpg/)

[Hunter Rider]

I can hear the shire theme just looking at that poster. :)

[Boom]

That's my favorite poster of all Peter Jackson's Middle-Earth movies. I need it on my wall.

[craigdbfan]

Made me think back to the paperback book cover for The Hobbit I have:

http://i.imgur.com/1A8yz.jpg

[Doctor Jones]

Looks very John Howe-ish.

[ThePowerCosmic]

EW Exclusive: 10 Hobbit Scenes
http://www.cinepremiere.com.mx/assets/images/noticias/2012/07-julio/noticia-hobbit-imagen-panoramica-principal00.jpg

[Kane52630]

http://i50.tinypic.com/9un955.jpg

[ThePowerCosmic]

They're beautiful. Loving the vivid colors.

[obin_gam]

yay! first pic of Beorn! (which I assume the bear has to be?)

[marcvader]

Beorn!!!

[rashad]

That Scroll is beautiful!

[redhawk23]

Looks like they very well may have kept Del Toro's warg design, which thank gods.

[ThePowerCosmic]

I bet they're gearing up for that new trailer that will most likely be in front of TDKR.

[CGHulk]

Here's the direct link to the image from the Entertainment Weekly site.
http://img2-2.timeinc.net/ew/i/2012/07/09/the-hobbit-scroll/HOBBIT-SCROLL_6000.jpg

[regwec]

Looks like they very well may have kept Del Toro's warg design, which thank gods.
Yes! :up: The troll in the background of the cauldron scene looks a little less bestial, too, which is appropriate since it needs to talk to its mates.

[Marvolo]

Looks like they very well may have kept Del Toro's warg design, which thank gods.

They look so much better than those hyiena rejects Jackson used.

[Boom]

Beorn...


http://i.imgur.com/8QmIp.gif

[Tanin]

I got a broken link :(

[Doctor Jones]

God... just beautiful. Just ****ing beautiful.

[Darkness Falls]

the new banner is absolutely AMAZING :D

[Drizzle]

http://i50.tinypic.com/9un955.jpg

Seconded.

[Marx]

:funny:

[Boom]

A lot of fans over at TheOneRing.Net think Beorn looks blonde in that picture. He looks black to me :huh:.

[Hunter Rider]

Couple of nice Collectibles revealed for The Hobbit.

http://s8.postimage.org/x7143kkc5/Thorin_MB2.jpg (http://postimage.org/)

http://s8.postimage.org/8f63a2sj9/hobthorinexclusive1500.jpg (http://postimage.org/)

[ThePowerCosmic]

... What?

[CGHulk]

Here's a bigger version!
http://cinescopia.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/noticia-hobbit-imagen-panoramica-principal00.jpg

[ravn0s]

love the banner

[Sgt.Pepper]

Holy S***cakes! That banner is simply amazing.