Official 'The Hobbit' Thread - Part 4

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is 371813

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is 356765

[LOBO3315a]

The Necromancer is Sauron in disguise. He doesn't have his full power because Gollum still has the Ring. Bilbo finds the Ring, and should have it at the Battle of 5 Armies. Will be interesting to see how that dynamic plays out, as the Ring's influence only becomes stronger as it draws closer to Mt Doom.

[Asteroid-Man]

That's some pretty awesome news!

[RoboAmish]

Disliking this idea of Sauron being at the Battle of the Five Armies.

If he could lead the assault in person as the Necromancer, why didn't he bother leading the final battle at the Morannon in LOTR, because it makes about as much sense as this? :huh:

[Mr. Wooden Alligator]

So in terms of the books, after the Necromancer aka Sauron was ousted, he was left in a weakened state hence his seclusion in the Tower during LOTR?

[Figs]

So in terms of the books, after the Necromancer aka Sauron was ousted, he was left in a weakened state hence his seclusion in the Tower during LOTR?

That's what has me confused. In the beginning of LotR he basically exploded when he lost the ring. I thought after that all that was left of him was basically energy of some kind in the form of the great eye in Mordor.

Going by what appears to happen in the Hobbit movie, he explodes ages ago when losing the ring, then comes back somehow in disguise as the Necromancer. At least that's what I'm making out of it all.

[Destructus86]

So, i'm reading The Hobbit on my new kindle for the very first time. Really enjoying it!
I can see a few things i'm sure they will change in the film. Like the happy prancy elves singing. And possibly the lame Goblin song. And some of the dialogue.

[obin_gam]

That's what has me confused. In the beginning of LotR he basically exploded when he lost the ring. I thought after that all that was left of him was basically energy of some kind in the form of the great eye in Mordor.

Going by what appears to happen in the Hobbit movie, he explodes ages ago when losing the ring, then comes back somehow in disguise as the Necromancer. At least that's what I'm making out of it all.
So basically, Saurons carrier:
1. Have the ring and is supergod
2. Loses the ring and becomes mist
3. Manages to hide and rebild himself as The Necromancer
4. Gets driven by forces led by Gandalf to Mordor
5. Starting schemes to take revenge on Middlearth.
6. Gets destroyed by the ring getting destroyed.

?

[RoboAmish]

That's what has me confused. In the beginning of LotR he basically exploded when he lost the ring. I thought after that all that was left of him was basically energy of some kind in the form of the great eye in Mordor.

Going by what appears to happen in the Hobbit movie, he explodes ages ago when losing the ring, then comes back somehow in disguise as the Necromancer. At least that's what I'm making out of it all.

I wouldn't take the "Eye" too seriously, it's a VERY literal reading of the text by Jackson.

Sauron was merely a "spirit" for years but he was able to take a physical form in time as some sembelance of his power returned. The Necromancer was the first hint of Sauron taking physical form again and this somewhat carried over when he fled to Mordor. He did have a physical body in LOTR.

[Figs]

Oh ok, thanks for the explanation.

[regwec]

On the fence about the Sauron at the Five Armies thing.

The bad:

- Why must Sauron be at the center of all evil in Middle Earth? Orcs/goblins, wargs, trolls, barrow wights, mewlips etc all exist in the remote and gloomy corners of Middle Earth, waiting to do evil. I don't see why it has to be Sauron and not The Great Goblin who decides to take them to war.

- It cheapens Sauron, a bit. He should be the ultimate menace, so why is he showing his hand in this little squabble over a blingy rock?

- How does he get there? That takes a bit of working-in.

- Who does he face in the battlefield? Unless it's Gandalf, then there is no-one at 5 Armies who is comparable to Elendil, Isildur or Gil Galad. Okay, Sauron is weaker, but it diminishes his threat and again raises the question of why he has put himself at risk.

- The only reason I can deduce for his presence is that he knows Bilbo has the ring, and he has stalked the Hobbit from Mirkwood. This renders the passage of time between 5 Armies and LOTR inexplicable. Sauron knew the ring had been found, knew Bilbo had it, and would soon know where to find him. No one else knew what the ring was. Sauron would have the ring and be the ruler of the world in a few weeks. The whole business of the Nazgul's intelligence-gathering and the torture of Gollum need never have happened.

The good-

- The Hobbit was written before J.R.R Tolkien knew what the ring was. It's probably a good thing to introduce some foreshadowing/context.

- We don't know how The Necromancer will appear at 5 Armies. The best way of handling it, I think, would be to have him be in disguise. He could be a crooked, sickly and hooded traveller, passing through each army's camp in order to get closer to his prize. That could work.

- Really excited to hear BC as the voice of ultimate evil.

[LOBO3315a]

I wouldn't take the "Eye" too seriously, it's a VERY literal reading of the text by Jackson.

Sauron was merely a "spirit" for years but he was able to take a physical form in time as some sembelance of his power returned. The Necromancer was the first hint of Sauron taking physical form again and this somewhat carried over when he fled to Mordor. He did have a physical body in LOTR.

Yeah, the Eye wasn't Him in the book, it was just a tool he used to search for the Ring. Made more sense rather than having Him physically running around all over the place, looking for it.

[The Morningstar]

Yea, Benedict Cumberbatch is awesome. Have you heard his Alan Rickman impression?

[Drz]

I must have missed it, where does it say Sauron is at the Battle of the Five Armies?

[RoboAmish]

I must have missed it, where does it say Sauron is at the Battle of the Five Armies?

New possible spoilers (from CBM)
Holy Smokes! Benedict Cumberbatch Reveals A Major Change to the Finale of THE HOBBIT

During a Sherlock Homes set visit with the actor, Empire Magazine was able to pry a piece of juicy info from Benedict about The Hobbit If you're familiar with The Lord of the Rings than read the quote below carefully and try to figure out what the spoiler is.

I’m playing Smaug through motion-capture and voicing the Necromancer, which is a character in the Five Legions War or something which I’m meant to understand. He’s not actually in the original Hobbit.


When he says, "Five Legion War" he is referring to The Battle of Five Armies which is the final conflict in The Hobbit.

Readers will know that the Necromancer is Sauron, and that Gandalf disappears halfway through (the book of) The Hobbit to lead a coalition force and drive the Necromancer out of his Mirkwood stronghold. But in the book they dispatch the Necromancer back to (as it turns out) Mordor well before the Battle of Five Armies. Here, however, it looks like he's going to turn up to the finale in person, presumably at the head of the goblin and Warg army, and face Gandalf's team there.



On the fence about the Sauron at the Five Armies thing.

The bad:
- It cheapens Sauron, a bit. He should be the ultimate menace, so why is he showing his hand in this little squabble over a blingy rock?



This is essentially my main problem with it. I know there was the deeper meaning of the Quest of Erebor dispatching Smaug so he wouldn't be an issue and all, but really, the Battle of the Five Armies is a footnote in the history of Middle Earth. Why would Sauron play his cards at such a point?

[Mr. Wooden Alligator]

Are sure the Five Legions references the Battle of FIve Armies? It could refer to a gathering of the races Gandalf and the White Council bring into the Necromancer's stronghold.

Also, I understand that the Eye was a literal reading; I meant to ask: Is Sauron's defeat--while he is under the alias of the Necromancer--the reason that he didn't physically appear in LOTR?

[RoboAmish]

Are sure the Five Legions references the Battle of FIve Armies? It could refer to a gathering of the races Gandalf and the White Council bring into the Necromancer's stronghold.

Certainly conceivable but unlikely I think. But Cumberbatch seems unfamiliar with the text so he could just be getting mixed up.

Also, I understand that the Eye was a literal reading; I meant to ask: Is Sauron's defeat--while he is under the alias of the Necromancer--the reason that he didn't physically appear in LOTR?

No, in fact, he's probably even more powerful in LOTR. But he probably feels that he isn't strong enough to face the combined forces of Men yet and won't venture out until he's reclaimed his Ring. He's cautious and leaves the dirty work to his minions.

[Drz]

Man i dearly hope Sauron aint gonna be at the 5 Army battle, i was actually cool with the idea Sauron vs. Aragorn was gonna happen, because i disliked the whole literal-Eye thing hehe, but yeah if Sauron was at the battle and would know about who has the ring, it creates a massive plothole.

[Whiskey Tango]

but yeah if Sauron was at the battle and would know about who has the ring, it creates a massive plothole.

You don't think, among the hundreds of people who've read the script, that someone would have noticed something like that? Relax.

[regwec]

He isn't been unreasonable in thinking it a possibility that a plot hole might be permitted in order to deliver more "pay off" by having Sauron turn up at the end.

I think that Peter Jackson may, while treating these movies as parts 1/5 and 2/5 chronologically, also treat them as his final Middle Earth movies in general. It is possible that he might want to show the "big bad" of the entire franchise in the last Middle Earthian movie he releases.

[Whiskey Tango]

Maybe he'll permit a few boom mikes in critical shots too, or maybe Bilbo will trip over a set of dolly tracks. I don't see it happening.

You're talking about, what 60-70 years of Sauron knowing exactly who has the Ring and where it is? That's not the sort of casual oopsie one just permits, that's a massive error. There's no way.

[craigdbfan]

I think in all likelihood BC got a bit confused and was referring to the White Council evicting the Necromancer (Sauron) from Dol Goldur. Which takes place a little after/during (varies from The Silmarillion and the LOTR appendices) the Battle of the 5 armies.

Seeing as BC is voicing both Smaug and the Necromancer it's easy to see how he kind of mixed the entire event into one.

[Whiskey Tango]

That would be my guess.

[DarthSkywalker]

The info is actually pretty old I believe.

However, I think it is possible that the connection between Smaug and Sauron will be mentioned and that the army of goblins and wargs could belong to Sauron.

[Spider-Who?]

I wonder if it would be possible that Jackson is combining the necromancer fight with the battle of 5 armies in some fashion. The problem with the latter from the book (that I recall) is that there really isn't a justifiable reason for them to fight; it's all about the gold. Combining the necromancer stuff would possibly make it more about stopping evil then something as petty as securing treasure for yourself.

[Lucien]

Not liking Sauron joining the Five Armies one bit, it stinks of Jackson's poor idea of having him join the Black Gate battle as Annatar at the end of RotK. The Battle of the Five Armies is one big squabble essentially that escalates due to old grudges, Sauron has no place being a part of it. I really hope this is just Cumberbatch misunderstanding or something.

[Lucien]

Are sure the Five Legions references the Battle of FIve Armies? It could refer to a gathering of the races Gandalf and the White Council bring into the Necromancer's stronghold.

Also, I understand that the Eye was a literal reading; I meant to ask: Is Sauron's defeat--while he is under the alias of the Necromancer--the reason that he didn't physically appear in LOTR?

From what I can recall off the top of my head there's no reference of any large forces of Orcs at Dol Guldor, it's just known to be the stronghold of "The Necromancer" and was used as an outpost by the Nazgul before going back to Mordor. There's also no reference to him being physically confronted by the White Council, it's just said that they lead their forces there and drove Sauron out. In all likelihood, Sauron would have seen himself at a huge disadvantage before a huge host of Elves lead by Galadriel, Elrond and the Istari, and just fled before he himself could be engaged in battle.

Edit: To correct myself there, the Nazgul used Dol Guldor as an outpost AFTER Sauron had been outed as the Necromancer. Their presence would have been the biggest give-away that it was actually him. If the Nazgul weren't present when the White Council attacked, which I think was the case, then that'd give Sauron even less incentive to stay and engage anyone.

He didn't appear during LotR because he still wasn't at full strength without the Ring, and he has lesser creature to do his fighting for him, which were all still under his thrall by his will even without physical possession of the Ring. But more importantly, Aragorn's army at the Black Gate was pitiful compared to his own forces and he 100% couldn't conceive of the Ring being destroyed in that moment or any other. Frodo and the plan to throw the Ring back into Mt Doom was completely unforseeable to him. He thought they were throwing themselves to the slaughter and it would be a sure victory, so there was no need for him to leave Barad-Dur. It took several years of fighting for the Last Alliance to make their way to his door step when he finally had no choice but to personally join in himself.

[Boom]

Cumberbatch doesn't sound like he has a clear idea of what's going on. I'm thinking/hoping that he simply mistook the Seige of Dol Guldur for the Battle of Five Armies. He has absolutely no business being there, and it is a terrible idea.

[craigdbfan]

My feelings exactly.

I wouldn't mind if they show both of those events happening simultaneously though. I think that's how it'll probably be shown if I had to place a bet.

[Boom]

It can't happen simultaneously. Gandalf takes part in the Siege of Dol Guldur and the Battle of Five Armies. He can't be in both places at one :cwink:.

There's a reason why Sauron goes under the guise of The Necromancer during his time in Mirkwood. He doesn't want his enemies to know it's him. He's living in secret - biding his time while his fortress of Barad-Dur is being rebuilt. Gandalf ultimately learns his true identity, but when the White Council confronts him at Dol Guldur, he simply retreats to Mordor. It is only after he re-establishes himself there that he declares himself openly to the peoples of Middle-earth.

With Smaug taken out of the picture, attacking Erebor (whether in person or via the goblin army) would be an act of open war. He would reveal himself to the world, which he is simply not ready to do at this point.

[craigdbfan]

You're right the eviction at Dol Goldur happens a little before the Battle of the Five Armies.

Although don't expect that siege of Dol Goldur to go exactly like it did in the book with Necromancer fleeing before the council even gets there (again it varies from The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales and appendices; in one of them he has his army defeated and flees and in another he actually takes part in the battle but isn't seriously injured and then flees). I expect a full on confrontation with the council and the Necromancer and soon thereafter Sauron declaring his return.

He won't be in Erebor though. That's what people are taking out of context in BC comment I think.

If it works out like that then I don't see any problems.

[obin_gam]

So when do people guess they are doing the cut in the story?

[Mr. Wooden Alligator]

Okay, I got it on the Sauron/Ring/Tower deal. Thanks to everyone that answered. :)

Maybe after the elves capture the company or just after they escape the elves?

[superkong 500]

Another reason(besides the obvious ones) why I think Sauron shoudn't be i nthe BOFA is because I think since these are two films and they should both have big finales(like the trilogy had) the battle of dol guldur should be the final battle of part 1 with the dwarves escaping from mirkwood(or whatever they're doing) while gandalf and the white council fight sauron's forces in dol guldur.

[rogue_agent]

ePxNdJZw8oE

[Yodaman]

So when do people guess they are doing the cut in the story?

My guess is that the barrel riding episode will be the climax, but it really could be anywhere.

[Whiskey Tango]

fixed

ePxNdJZw8oE

[rogue_agent]

Thanks, so THAT'S how you embed it. :up:

[Whiskey Tango]

it's a little unintuitive. You'd think it would work just like posting images but alas.

[rogue_agent]

Yeah, that's what I thought too. Doesn't matter, though - you showed me and everything is fine with Middle-Earth again.

[Whiskey Tango]

It's a great find btw. Shore is going to impress yet again.

[rogue_agent]

Stumbled on to it while I was on IMDB. I agree, the music is gonna be fantastic in this.

[regwec]

My guess is that the barrel riding episode will be the climax, but it really could be anywhere.
That doesn't seem very climatic, to me. I would prefer the film to end after the Dwarves have been captured by the Elves, and Bilbo is separated from them. The last scene could be Bilbo deciding to put on the ring and disappear, with several weeks having passed before he is able to take it off again, having freed the Dwarves at the start of the next film.

[Yodaman]

^That would also work. I just read the Hobbit again a couple of weeks ago, and the whole barrel incident seemed very physically and mentally trying on Bilbo. I could see that being made to be the equivalent of the Frodo/Sam boat scene at the end of the Fellowship of the Ring.

It's also hard to guess because we don't know exactly how much of the book Jackson wants in the two halves, with his inclusion of "LOTR prequel" material. He could have close to a half of The Hobbit in each movie, or have it be more like 3/4s in movie 1 and the last bit in the second. Who knows.

[Lord]

Are the other wizards besides Saruman and Gandalf going to appear

[John Locke]

Radagast the Brown will be appearing and is theorized that he is fighting Gandalf in the teaser.

[CGHulk]

Radagast the Brown will be appearing and is theorized that he is fighting Gandalf in the teaser.

It looks like it's Thrain, Thorin's father. Gandalf is in Gol Dulgur. He's released Thrain from his cell, and Thrain in his madness attacks Gandalf.

[Boom]

MTV interviews Richard Armitage:

MTV: Congratulations on being named to MTV's Ones to Watch!

Richard Armitage: Thank you very much!

MTV: Where are you currently in the filming schedule?

Armitage: We just finished up our second block, so we start again at the end of January, and then we go — we think it's the end of July. Then there's a bit more in 2013, we reckon.

MTV: What's it like being on a single project for so long?

Armitage: It's really weird because when we started it was just this enormous mountain to climb, but actually, it's going so fast. I think we've gotten to the halfway point now. It's been really intense but so exciting. We literally just finished our location shoot that we've been out on the road seeing most of New Zealand. It's been the best thing I've ever worked on in my life, by far.

MTV: Is it easy to forget you're acting? Do you get lost in the world the production creates?

Armitage: The soundstages they made in Wellington, [New Zealand], most of the time it doesn't feel like we've been working on a set. Even when there's a green screen there, Peter's vision of it is so clear and his description of it is so clear. The pre-production CGI that they've already created really fires up your imagination. That was the shoot we started with. On location, it's just theirs to program these amazing images into your head, so we can now take them back into the studio.

MTV: Will it be hard to leave behind once you've wrapped?

Armitage: It don't think it will be possible to leave it behind me. I think this is one of those characters that always stay with you because you spend so much time with him and it's such a transformation. I'm in the character every day, and I've become so familiar with him. I sort of know how he thinks. I feel really close to the character, and he will continue beyond this job , [spoiler ahead] even though, he dies at the end of the movie. I think he is a fascinating character. I will probably wake up in six years' time and be inspired to think about him again. It's really exciting.

MTV: How did your previous knowledge of the story change how you approached Thorin?

Armitage: I read it quite a few times when I was young. I think going back to it as an adult is really interesting because it is a book that was, I think, was written for Tolkien's children, but when you're creating a piece on this scale, you have to really visualize it for a much broader audience. I think that's the beauty of Tolkien. He does create very well-rounded, quite dangerous characters to play his protagonists. He risks scaring kids. He's the original fantasy creator, and I think you have to invest those characters with the same gravity as if you were making a piece for adults. It was interesting coming back to it as an adult, re-reading it again, because it did have a simplicity to it, which I really like. I felt we could take those characters and really develop them beyond the book.

MTV: You ended up with middle ground in terms of the amount of makeup. Did you feel lucky?

Armitage: It did evolve. We all started with quite an extreme version of ourselves. I think because my character does spend a lot of time onscreen and you really have to understand what he's going through emotionally, it became clear that if we started make the prosthetic as close to my features as possible but still make him a dwarf, it would be much easier to read the character. He has to go on such a journey, it was really important to do that. I grew my own beard after the first block because I felt that it was restricting my face. The jaw is so connected to emotion that I wanted to have that free. It made such a huge difference.

It's really weird now because I can't play the character when I haven't gotten everything on. It's very hard to rehearse when you're not in costume, when you haven't gotten the prosthetics on, but I look in the mirror when it's all finished and I don't see it. I can't see where it starts and where it ends. I just see the character. I've never had that before. It's such a unique experience. It's a face that doesn't belong to me. It belongs to WETA workshop and the people that created it.

MTV: How was it on set with so many actors playing the dwarves?

Armitage: I love it. I absolutely love working as an ensemble member, and we really are an ensemble. There's great camaraderie among all the guys. There is such a diversity of culture and background. We're working with a lot of Kiwis, and there's real mixture of British actors who come from television and theater and film. It's exactly as the dwarves are. When Thorin assembles the quest, he pulls dwarves from all different places to go on this quest. That's mirrored in who we are as actors.
http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1677131/richard-armitage-hobbit.jhtml

And Mikael Persbrandt talks Beorn (translation):

Are you done with "The Hobbit" now?
MP: No, definitely not. I'm going back in February. I'll start shooting "Hypnotisören" with Lasse Hallström on Wednesday, then I'm off.

Are you in both "The Hobbit"-movies?
MP: Yes, I am. My character is pretty much as big as in the book. I'm not going to say so much more about it, because it's a big film company and they get so upset if I talk to much... But if you read the book you'll get a pretty good picture... and then maybe there's a little bit more.

How did they create your character Beorn? Prosthetics, or some kind of motion capture?
MP: Like I said earlier, I would like to survive the night. Otherwise, they'll send a missile after me I think. It's exciting to be in it. You'll see later. The premiere is a little less than a year away, in December.
http://www.moviezine.se/artikel/9218-persbrandt-vi-behover-fler-kvinnor-i-ultravaringldsfacket

[JakeSully]

http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/853/thehobbit8.jpg

http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/853/thehobbit8.jpg

[Whiskey Tango]

‘The Hobbit’: An unexpected journey on- and off-screen

No major release of 2012 arrives at theaters with more baggage or battle scars than “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey,” a title that became a sort of epic inside joke for the cast and his crew, many of whom worked on “The Lord of the Rings” trilogy that made movie history a decade ago.

“I think fate has actually been kind to us,” director Peter Jackson said last summer, although he didn’t sound convinced by his own words. “Yes, I think fate was kind but I don’t know that we knew that along the way.”

That’s how most quests go, of course, but the journey to adapt J.R.R. Tolkien’s Middle-earth saga into a lavish two-part movie adventure was especially stormy right from the beginning. Roadblocks included an ugly legal battle with the author’s heirs, a two-year delay that came with financial meltdown of MGM, the jolting defection of director Guillermo del Toro, a nasty union dispute and a hospital stay to treat a stomach ulcer for Jackson, who shifted from co-writer and executive producer to director after del Toro’s departure in May of 2010.

There’s also been the vague but very real anxiety that comes with competing with history — can this encore effort actually escape the considerable shadow of the “Rings” trilogy, which racked up $2.9 billion in worldwide box office and saw its finale installment in 2004 become the first fantasy film to win the Oscar for best picture?

This time around, Martin Freeman (best known for costarring in BBC’s “The Office” and his work in films such as “Love Actually” and “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy”) portrays Bilbo Baggins, a young Hobbit who joins a band of dwarfs on their journeys to Lonely Mountain where they hope to reclaim their treasure from Smaug, the fire-breathing dragon who has squatted for so long on his hoarded riches that his pale underbelly is encrusted with jewels and gold pieces.

Not only is Ian McKellen back in the peaked hat of Gandalf, but there are also plenty of other familiar faces from the “Rings” cast (although some make only fleeting appearances); among them are Orlando Bloom, Cate Blanchett, Hugo Weaving, Elijah Wood, Andy Serkis, Christopher Lee and even Ian Holm, who portrayed the older version of Freeman’s character when last we visited the Shire, the land of the Hobbits.

For the uninitiated, “The Hobbit” was published in 1937 and is considered by many Tolkien scholars to be a Misty Mountain warm-up act for the darker, richer 1950s “Rings” epic, which aimed for older readers and found them by the millions across the decades. The softer tones of “The Hobbit” were an early concern for Jackson and the returning members of the “Rings” creative team, among them Philippa Boyens, a screenwriter on all three “Rings” films (and an Oscar winner for “The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King,” which closed out the trilogy in 2004).

“The story is very much a children’s story so deciding how to tell this was one of the first things we had to do,” Boyens said in a phone interview right before Christmas. “Who is the audience? It is very distinctly different, tonally, to ‘Lord of the Rings’ until the very end and then you begin to see the world of Middle-earth opening up… but, having said that, we felt that it is the same audience [who will come to see the films] and then you start to worry because it is easy to repeat yourself. It is quite a similar journey, you’re going from the Shire to a large, dangerous mountain.”

By most reports, Warner Bros.’ two “Hobbit” films — the second of which, “The Hobbit: There and Back Again,” will be released in 2013 — have a combined budget in the $500-million range, so the stakes are high. The appetite of fans is certainly intense (the first trailer for the film, released Dec. 20, quickly became an Internet sensation) and when Jackson made a surprise appearance last summer at Comic-Con International in San Diego he was cheered like a returning war hero.

Backstage, he said that, after the first three Tolkien films, he never expected to be back for another tour of duty but that — like Bilbo Baggins — it’s the journey that chooses the traveler, not the other way around.

“This is the most enjoyable filmmaking experience of my career, by far, which is interesting since I came into it slightly reluctantly,” the director said in San Diego. “It’s all unexpected.”

http://herocomplex.latimes.com/2012/01/14/the-hobbit-an-unexpected-journey-new-photo-peter-jackson-martin-freeman/

http://i44.tinypic.com/2586qg1.jpg
There was the usual dim grey light of the forest-day about him when he came to his senses. The spider lay dead beside him, and his sword-blade was stained black. Somehow the killing of the giant spider, all alone by himself in the dark without the help of the wizard or the dwarves or of anyone else, made a great difference to Mr. Baggins. He felt a different person, and much fiercer and bolder in spite of an empty stomach, as he wiped his sword on the grass and put it back into its sheath.

“I will give you a name,” he said to it, “and I shall call you Sting.”

[Blue Sugar]

As a Swede it's so cool that Mikael Persbrandt is in this.

[Godsfireworks]

That picture is glorious, I just can't wait to see it on the big screen!!!

[Armored Avenger]

Even though I absolutely loved the trailer, I did think that Thorin looked too young in the scenes at Bag End. I hope the lighting in the other locations of the film show him looking more like this:

http://i41.tinypic.com/ofdgsn.jpg

[superkong 500]

Thorin looks rather aragonish in that pic. I just watched fellowship of the ring on blu-ray and its glorious! The picture looks great and the green tint issue is noticeable in only two or three scenes at the most.

[Vartha]

Yeah well until I can afford a Flat SCREEN over my Flat tube I'll hold off on the Bluray set since I have the original Extended.

[superkong 500]

I wonder if like with legolas peter jackson will make thranduil a badass action hero elf. It would be cool to see Legolas and thranduil fighting side by side. Hell I want to see the dinamic between father and son legolas arguing and disagreeing with the way his father handles things specially with Thranduil being kind of a greedy and ambitious bastard.

[Boom]

Even though I absolutely loved the trailer, I did think that Thorin looked too young in the scenes at Bag End. I hope the lighting in the other locations of the film show him looking more like this:

http://i41.tinypic.com/ofdgsn.jpg
That's actually my favorite picture of Thorin. He looks great there.

[corby]

Looks like they're casting extras from Wellington to play elves, dwarves, and also humans:http://www.trademe.co.nz/441281338?utm_source=Weta+News&utm_campaign=b461e994d2-WetaNews_24Jan_2012&utm_medium=email.

[Bim]

Evangeline talks about Tauriel: http://insidemovies.ew.com/2012/01/25/evangeline-lilly-real-steel-hobbit/

Speaking of small and little, I’d be remiss not to bring up The Hobbit. You’re playing a new character named Tauriel, who’s a Mirkwood elf, and that would lead me to believe that she is a warrior of some kind. Did you have to learn archery and swordplay?
Yes, she is a warrior. She’s actually the head of the Elven guard. She’s the big shot in the army. So she knows how to wield any weapon, but the primary weapons that she uses are a bow and arrow and two daggers. And she’s lethal and deadly. You definitely wouldn’t want to be caught in a dark alley next to Tauriel.

So then Tauriel must be involved with the dwarves being captured…
I think basically what you’re asking is if she’s in the film very much. She’s not in the first film very much. She comes into the first film near the end, and has a very small part to play. Her role in the second film is much more involved. Although, I have to say, when I first read the scripts and took the job, she had a lot less going on in the second film. I think the role is becoming a bit more demanding that I had expected it to be. There’s a lot more for me to do now, which is a lot of fun, but it’s a little more pressure.

Does she play a large part in the Battle of Five Armies?
Oh, I don’t know. We haven’t shot that yet. I still have to go back for five more months of filming.

How many months have you been there already?
On and off for the past six months. It’s a two-year shoot in total for both films, and my contract had me blocked off for about a year. I come in and out of New Zealand throughout that year.

How has the experience of shooting in New Zealand compared to the multiple years you spent in Hawaii on Lost?
In some ways, it feels really familiar. I’m from Canada, and New Zealand feels like you took all the best bits of Canada and squished them onto a tiny island like Hawaii. I was absolutely blown away by the beauty of the South Island. I seem to be landing really great locations on a lot of my work. I hope that continues, knock on wood.

[superkong 500]

So she's the commanding officer in Thranduil 's royal guard. I hope she's not another legolas I hope they make her very different from him when it comes to fighting. Speaking of which I hope legolas has a significant role and fights in the battle of five armies. I wanna see him use those badass elven knives, he barely used them in the trilogy. on a side note: lily's gorgeous and she kinda looks like liv.

[marvelrobbins]

based on what she says I think we get the first hint how film 1 will end.With the captures of the dwarves by the wood elves.And Bilbo seeing them being taken away.
Thranduil and Legolas may not be seen till begining of film 2.

I am sure Legolas will have a significant role In the battle of five armies.

[matrix_ghost]

Any word on whether Hobbit will have a presence at this year's COMIC CON ?

[Boom]

Any word on whether Hobbit will have a presence at this year's COMIC CON ?
Jackson posted this back in July:

Good news and bad news today. Bad news is that we won't be doing any Hobbit presentation at Comic Con in San Diego this year. New Line and Warner Bros were very happy to support a presentation, but I declined, simply because I felt it was too early. There's so much more of the films still to shoot. I just wanted to get that out there, because I've seen various references to the possibility of something Hobbity at Comic Con. Hate to disappoint anyone. But something tells me we will be there in force next year.
http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10150716474789027&id=616994026&ref=notif&notif_t=feed_comment_reply#!/notes/peter-jackson/some-news/10150322456841558

[matrix_ghost]

Jackson posted this back in July:


http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10150716474789027&id=616994026&ref=notif&notif_t=feed_comment_reply#!/notes/peter-jackson/some-news/10150322456841558

Dang.
Aren't they finished shooting ?
I guess with them being in full post. prod mode , a presence at the Con wouldn't be worthwhile. I mean you'd want to see some some footage and not "just the stars".

[Kane52630]

They are still doing principal photography for both films if I remember correctly. At the same time they have the WETA Digital team doing the special effects.

[Destructus86]

Yeah well until I can afford a Flat SCREEN over my Flat tube I'll hold off on the Bluray set since I have the original Extended.

You can get a flat screen (HD) for like $200 or less.

[Boom]

Dang.
Aren't they finished shooting ?
I guess with them being in full post. prod mode , a presence at the Con wouldn't be worthwhile. I mean you'd want to see some some footage and not "just the stars".
Well, he said they'd be there this year, so I'm sure they have something.

Because they're shooting in digital, the shots can be handed over to Weta Digital almost immediately. I'd wager they've been doing post-production work throughout most of the shoot - not to mention the fact that PJ has been cutting/editing during the breaks. Otherwise there would have been no way to get the first film out by December.

According to Jackson, they finish shooting in July (not including pick-ups in 2013).

[Kane52630]

Interesting, will there not be any pick-ups for the first Hobbit film?

[matrix_ghost]

Well, he said they'd be there this year, so I'm sure they have something.

Because they're shooting in digital, the shots can be handed over to Weta Digital almost immediately. I'd wager they've been doing post-production work throughout most of the shoot - not to mention the fact that PJ has been cutting/editing during the breaks. Otherwise there would have been no way to get the first film out by December.

According to Jackson, they finish shooting in July (not including pick-ups in 2013).

You are right in saying that the WETA will have gotten the shots immediatly once PJ approves.
The thing that suprises me though is that the fact that WETA also has some other big movies .
When they were doing the VFX for the LOTR movies , they were just doing one movie at the time. Obviously handling all the shots definately meant that they had a huge workload. THe company is also growing with each year. By comparison , AVatar was the last time they were doing the VFX just one movie in an entire year.
For 2012 these are the movies :

The Avengers

Director: Joss Whedon
Studio: Marvel
Estimated Opening Date: 4 May 2012 (USA)



Prometheus

Director: Ridley Scott
Studio: Twentieth Century Fox
Estimated Opening Date: 8 June 2012 (USA)



Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter

Director: Timur Bekmambetov
Studio: Twentieth Century Fox
Estimated Opening Date: 22 June 2012 (USA)



The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

Director: Peter Jackson
Studio: Warner Bros. Pictures
Estimated Opening Date: 14 December 2012 (USA)



Either the first movie doesn't have quite extensive VFX work to be done or WETA has seriously grown as a company compared to the time they were doing Avatar. I'm actually going with the former.

[Kane52630]

I didn't know WETA Digital is working on Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter and the Avengers, awesome!

[matrix_ghost]

I didn't know WETA Digital is working on Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter and the Avengers, awesome!

Both WETA and ILM are working on Avengers

[Kane52630]

I knew ILM was working on the Avengers but that's nice to hear that WETA is helping them.

[matrix_ghost]

I knew ILM was working on the Avengers but that's nice to hear that WETA is helping them.

Well considering that Marvel was hell bent on releasing the movie in May 2012 and shooting began quite late ( i know some Marvel fan is gonna flame me for this) they do need the big guys to handle all the VFX.
WETA has proven again and again that they are capable of handling large sequences in "short" timeframe.

[Hunter Rider]

I'm liking everyting the lovely Miss Lilly had to say.

[Pink Ranger]

Tauriel's first line:

"Ahhhh! Thank the elf lords it was all a dream, I was never in that plane crash."

[Sawyer]

Tauriel's first line:

"Ahhhh! Thank the elf lords it was all a dream, I was never in that plane crash."

Then she looks around and sees that all the men around her look like Orlando Bloom in elf drag, and begins to yearn for the island again.

[Boom]

Interesting, will there not be any pick-ups for the first Hobbit film?
I guess not. It's strange, but I have yet to hear confirmation of any pick-ups taking place in 2012. So I can only assume that all the pick-ups will be for the second film.

[rogue_agent]

Article on The Hobbit from TotalFilm Magazine's February Issue

(To download the full magazine, click here: http://rapidshare.com/files/2934738675/total-film-2012-02-feb.pdf )

http://bit.ly/A3r2YT

http://bit.ly/AcdAvb

http://bit.ly/xp9GqQ

http://bit.ly/zJZhw0

http://bit.ly/wZsNZr

[Thundarr]

So is The Hobbit hitting theatres this May? God, I hope so. I am very eager to see these movies.

[Hunter Rider]

^^ No, The Hobbit is released in December.

[AndThePickles]

Then she looks around and sees that all the men around her look like Orlando Bloom in elf drag, and begins to yearn for the island again.

Pssh, Orlando Bloom as an elf is sexy as hell.

[chamber-music]

Martin Freeman is the master of facial expressions :woot:

p_3eizxJq5o

[spidey-dude]

he is perfect for Bilbo - so glad he got cast - really wish more hitchhiker films got made

[Boom]

Bask in the glory that is Cumberbatch's voice:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdWMTMjzaik

[Kane52630]

Peter Jackson Explains 'Hobbit'/'Lord Of The Rings'

http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1677640/sundance-peter-jackson-hobbit-lord-rings.jhtml

PARK CITY, Utah — The first trailer for "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" made it quite clear that Middle-earth hasn't changed much in the years since Peter Jackson concluded his "Lord of the Rings" trilogy. That's not a complaint, mind you — fans have come to know and love Jackson's interpretation of the J. R. R. Tolkien fantasy epic with the same passion they have for the source material. When it comes to "The Hobbit," in other words, change is not necessarily welcome.

Speaking with MTV News at the Sundance Film Festival, Jackson explained that it was always his intention to keep "The Hobbit" tonally and visually consistent with the "Lord of the Rings" films.

"We wanted it to be a part of the five-film series," he explained. "Fortunately, Tolkien wrote a lot of extra material in the appendices of 'The Lord of the Rings,' where he himself kind of tied the two stories together, 20 or 30 years after the publication of 'The Hobbit.' So we've been able to use some of that material."

But even though Jackson's "Hobbit" isn't "as much of a children's story as the original book was," he's worked hard to make sure the films still "have some humor" to them. For example, Jackson promised that "some of the songs [from the novel] have made their way in there." Fans can get their first taste of those tunes in the "Hobbit" trailer, when the dwarves gather in Bilbo Baggins' humble abode to sing a somber song.

Finding that balance between staying true to the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy while allowing the "Hobbit" films to stand on their own has been an enjoyable challenge for Jackson, who is more than thrilled to once again be dabbling in dwarves and dragons.

"I'm enjoying the movie [as much as the fans], which is the thing that I'm really excited about," he said. "I love going to work every day. I love shooting it. In February, we start another 100 days of shooting, so by about July, we're done. We will have shot both movies by that stage."

"The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" storms into theaters December 14.

The 2012 Sundance Film Festival is officially under way, and the MTV Movies team is on the ground reporting on the hottest stars and the movies everyone will be talking about in the year to come. Keep it locked with MTV Movies for everything there is to know about Sundance.

That sounds great to me. :woot:

[Kane52630]

http://i.imgur.com/e79UJ.jpg

[Boom]

Scottish comedian Billy Connolly cast as Dain Ironfoot

http://static.stuff.co.nz/1328744279/721/6390721.jpg

Scottish comedian Billy Connolly is joining the cast of Sir Peter Jackson's The Hobbit.

Connolly will play Dain Ironfoot, a great dwarf warrior and cousin of Thorin Oakenshield.

"We could not think of a more fitting actor to play Dain Ironfoot, the staunchest and toughest of dwarves, than Billy Connolly, the Big Yin himself," said Sir Peter.

"With Billy stepping into this role, the cast of The Hobbit is now complete. We can't wait to see him on the battlefield."

SOURCE: http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/film/6390709/Connolly-to-play-Hobbit-great-dwarf


Finally :up:.

[Whiskey Tango]

Billy Connolly makes everything better.

[Boom]

Complete Hobbit cast:

Hobbits
Martin Freeman ... Bilbo Baggins
Ian Holm ... Old Bilbo Baggins
Elijah Wood ... Frodo Baggins
Eric Vespe ... Fredegar Chubb

Dwarves
Richard Armitage ... Thorin Oakenshield
Graham McTavish ... Dwalin
Ken Stott ... Balin
Dean O'Gorman ... Fili
Aidan Turner ... Kili
Mark Hadlow ... Dori
Jed Brophy ... Nori
Adam Brown ... Ori
John Callen ... Oin
Peter Hambleton ... Gloin
William Kircher ... Bifur
James Nesbitt ... Bofur
Stephen Hunter ... Bombur
Jeffrey Thomas ... Thror
Mike Mizrahi ... Thrain II
Billy Connolly ... Dain Ironfoot

Wizards
Ian McKellen ... Gandalf the Grey
Christopher Lee ... Saruman the White
Sylvester McCoy ... Radagast the Brown

Elves
Hugo Weaving ... Elrond
Cate Blanchett ... Galadriel
Lee Pace ... Thranduil
Orlando Bloom ... Legolas
Evangeline Lilly ... Tauriel
Bret McKenzie ... Lindir
Robin Kerr ... Elros (?)

Men
Mikael Persbrandt ... Beorn
Luke Evans ... Bard
John Bell ... Bain
Stephen Fry ... Master of Lake-town
Ryan Gage ... Alfrid
Ray Henwood ... Net Mender (?)

Goblins
Barry Humphries ... The Great Goblin
Conan Stevens ... Azog

Other
Andy Serkis ... Gollum
Benedict Cumberbatch ... Smaug the Golden
Benedict Cumberbatch ... The Necromancer

[Pink Ranger]

I want some of those Dwarf Empanadas.

[craigdbfan]

I was just looking at those. :funny:

They look damn delicious.

[Pink Ranger]

I was just looking at those. :funny:

They look damn delicious.

Upon closer inspection, those might just be hot pockets the actors were eating from the catering table between scenes.

[craigdbfan]

They're Hobbiton empanadas, ok!? :argh::p

[Boom]

LOL wut?

[obin_gam]

Yet another perfect casting choice :D

[darkseid26]

can't wait

[Silvermoth]

All of these great casting announcements is giving me a Billy Coronary!

[Thedudehimself]

I know exactly what role Frodo and Old Bilbo will play in the film. Present day bookends. That s fine for me. But I am really really curious about how SARUMAN and LEGOLAS will play into the story? I just hope they don t extend too much on the book.

Has PJ given any word on rather he will extend the story?

[Boom]

You guys need to listen to this now:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=iv&src_vid=rzYXZPF3kdE&v=ME5urFBf0kk&annotation_id=annotation_619432

:bow:

[Thedudehimself]

This is awful. Why would you post that?

[DarkSovereignty]

maybe because he...enjoyed it perhaps? I think it's alright.

[vinsanity]

From Peter Jackson's facebook:

Hi everybody. We will have a new on-set video from THE HOBBIT coming here soon!



can't wait :)

[ThePowerCosmic]

tfslY_AvhLw

[obin_gam]

tfslY_AvhLw
That was evil :csad:

:oldrazz:

[Kane52630]

Man it's taking forever!

[Boom]

While we wait for the video blog:

'The Hobbit' Is Going To Be 'Amazing,' Star Says
Benedict Cumberbatch tells MTV News working with Peter Jackson was 'extraordinary.'

For those who have been keeping tabs on the comings and goings surrounding Peter Jackson's return to Middle-earth in "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey," there is a unique level of excitement building around the film. The die-hard Jackson fans and "Lord of the Rings" loyalists are eager to see anything helmed by the Oscar-winner, particularly when it involves a faithful adaptation of J. R. R. Tolkien's beloved book, which has a different tone and fanbase from "LOTR."

This excitement level is not just for fans like us, but everyone involved with the production as well. When MTV News caught up with rising star Benedict Cumberbatch recently, who is playing not one but two roles in the film, he was full of praise for Jackson as well as his friend/co-star Martin Freeman.

"I was very lucky [to work] with Pete," Cumberbatch told us at Elton John's Oscar-viewing party. "As far as the experience, what an extraordinary one it was because at the time I was in my work; I was in isolation with him and this incredible tag team. And at the very cool place with that technology doing mo-cap for two characters, Smaug the dragon and another character, which will remain nameless, and it was an awful lot of fun."

Cumberbatch went on to say that he hasn't seen any finished shots from the film since he worked mainly by himself doing voice-over work and movements for the characters.

"It's a sort of wonderful ongoing process," he said. "I spent a lot of time recording voice as well as doing movements. So, it was sort of freeing; it was fun. It was like playing a game. It's going to be an amazing film; it's going to be a real treat. I watched 'The Lord of the Rings' again before I started working, and the way those films grow in depth of craft on every level are extraordinary. Their mark is for that."

The "War Horse" actor admitted that the only trouble he had while on set was keeping a straight face when he saw his friend and "Sherlock" co-star Martin Freeman in costume as lovable Hobbit Bilbo Baggins.

"It was great. I got to hang out with him, and I kept a straight face for a bit and then I started giggling because I know Martin, I don't know Bilbo," Cumberbatch said with a grin. "For Martin to be sitting there playing Bilbo is amazing. He's going to be amazing, he's going to be fantastic in this film."
http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1680152/the-hobbit-movie-stars.jhtml

[Doctor Jones]

Cumberbatch is the ****ing man.

[Kane52630]

THE HOBBIT, Production Video #6

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10150720773691807

[obin_gam]

no easter egg :(

[CGHulk]

Direct link right click Save As
http://video.l3.fbcdn.net/cfs-l3-ash4/444311/178/10150720773691807_36677.mp4?oh=76a54374742822ee001 52681629f2a79&oe=4F528300&l3s=20120301123552&l3e=20120303124552&lh=0f5580619a6d735afdcb3

[ThePowerCosmic]

That was nice.

[Boom]

One of my favorite blogs so far.

Anyone up for screen caps?

[Boom]

Epic dwarf is epic:

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7065/6798990928_d51e995f63_b.jpg

[Octoberist]

I love it!

[Doctor Jones]

Just pan the camera a bit over the right in the Lake Town set Peter, and you --

****.

[Hunter Rider]

Three things stood out for me in the blog.

- Snowy mountain sequence?

- Dwarfs in barrels!

- Andy Serkis' amazing mullet.

[superkong 500]

I've been wondering how many changes will jackson an co make to the characters. In LOTR they changed aspects of aragorn from the books(although many complained about it) I wonder if they'll do the same for say, thorin. How will theyportray and approach his death scene cos in the book he's killed by bolg's bodyguards or something like that, but I'm hoping he goes out heroically maybe killing bolg before he falls and then Beorn saves him from the rest of the horde I wonder also if they will make him a better leader than he's in the book

[Octoberist]

Since they're doing more set than location shoot this time around, I hope sets like Laketown don't feel..clausiphobic.

[Boom]

Pictures of the Dale set:

http://www.herr-der-ringe-film.de/v3/de/news/tolkienfilme/news_85056.php

Wasn't expecting the Mediterranean influence.

[Pink Ranger]

Wasn't expecting the Mediterranean influence.

No wonder they want the gold so bad, they must be in debt up to their eyeballs!

[regwec]

Hah! Very droll.

The Mediterranean influence is a surprise, since the Daleans are northerners. Nevertheless, clay for bricks and tiles must be abundant for them, since they live on the river banks, and perhaps the Elves of Mirkwood are reluctant to supply timber for housebuilding. Or maybe PJ just wanted Dale to look different to Bree.

[Boom]

And here are some photos of the Lake-town set:

http://www.herr-der-ringe-film.de/v3/de/hobbit/galerie_1/allebilder_1/allebilder_2.php

[Octoberist]

Lake town and Dale are two separate cities right?

[Boom]

Correct.

Dale was further north - between the southwest and southeast arms of The Lonely Mountain.

[DarknessOfDeath]

Im excited.....knowing Evangline Lilly is gonna be in this :)

[Octoberist]

Correct.

Dale was further north - between the southwest and southeast arms of The Lonely Mountain.

Yeah, Dale looks like...a Greek or Italian city or something.

[Whiskey Tango]

Im excited.....knowing Evangline Lilly is gonna be in this :)

:hrt:

[Whiskey Tango]

onering.net just posted a bunch of new pics in their album - https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10150658470464821.403449.6425769820&type=3&l=653130938b

[Jackasscoley15]

Those were posted three months ago.

[DarknessOfDeath]

:hrt:

I have a tight thing for brunettes. :hrt:

[Whiskey Tango]

Those were posted three months ago.

That's nice. Take it up with whoever posted their facebook update 9 hours ago.

'We weren't allowed to share all our Hobbiton Movie Set photos but the non-disclosure was lifted so here are a bunch more.'

[Boom]

Smaug the Golden?

Remember The Hobbit production vlog #2*that came out back in July 2011?

Well, we've watched it again (and recommend you do too), especially the bit between 2:05 and 2:25, where it isn't hard to spot Peter Jackson and his crew wearing a "200 Days To Go"*sweatshirt. What is hard to spot though is the logo on the front of that sweatshirt... until now.

Our Dwarves at TORn who spend their time mining the interwebs for gems of information came across an image of the hoodie that reveals the logo is none other than*Smaug the Golden.

Our staffers then got down to discussing it, and some said Yes, and some said No. Some said it couldn't be the real design for Smaug, and some said it only offered clues to what the real Smaug will look like.Â*One staffer called Greendragon was (aptly!) drawn to this image more than the others and said it looked very much like "a John Howe Smaug". Finally, the end of it was to put the image out for your consideration and see what you thought of it.

So, what do you think? Real or not? Mildly interesting or surprisingly faithful?*Sound off on our message boards.

http://www-images.theonering.org/torwp/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Smaug-detail.jpg

It's very evocative of John Howe's design. What do you guys think? Is it just an illustration designed specifically for the hoodie, or is it a taste of what Smaug is going to look like on screen?

[Whiskey Tango]

No idea. If he *does* look like that it's alright by me. :up:

[DarthSkywalker]

Im excited.....knowing Evangline Lilly is gonna be in this :)

Ronan would of been so much better. Too bad she past on the role.

[ThePowerCosmic]

I saw the trailer again when it played in front of Wrath of the Titans. My friend thinks it looks lame but I keep telling him we haven't seen anything yet. I can't wait until a new trailer releases and shows more footage... This movie is going to be epic and he has no idea yet.

[DarthSkywalker]

The Hobbit is my favorite book. I wouldn;t really call it epic, outside of the Smaug bit. It is a far smaller, more intimate adventure.

[ThePowerCosmic]

When I say epic I mean the characters and the situations they find themselves in. Not an actual Epic. But the feeling of adventure is going to be fantastic.

[regwec]

'The Hobbit' is just the sort of adventure you want to happen to you when you are ten years old. It has a really clever blend of threat (Bilbo is torn from his ordered, domestic little world and thrust into genuine danger), license (the quest allows Bilbo to behave in a manner most unbecoming to a Baggins; stealing, sneaking, slaying and double-dealing), and security (Bilbo survives under the protection of the sturdy Dwarves, the enigmatic Gandalf and a ring of invisibility).

The harmony of threat, license and security is, I think, a perfect formula for the ideal childhood adventure. Stir in a bit of sex and you have the adults, as well.

[Kane52630]

Yeah I saw the trailer for Wrath of the Titans in 3D and holy s*** it was beautiful in 3D. :hrt::wow:

[DarthSkywalker]

When I say epic I mean the characters and the situations they find themselves in. Not an actual Epic. But the feeling of adventure is going to be fantastic.

Yeah, I wouldn't really call the situations or characters all that epic. There is Gandalf, Beorn and Smaug, but the rest, even Mr. Oakenshield, don't really qualify. That is kind of the whole point of Bilbo. The story doesn't read like the epic tales the in story characters talk about.

It is a wonderful, fantastic adventure. I wouldn't call it epic, not in the same manner of the LOTR.

[ThePowerCosmic]

Yeah, I wouldn't really call the situations or characters all that epic. There is Gandalf, Beorn and Smaug, but the rest, even Mr. Oakenshield, don't really qualify. That is kind of the whole point of Bilbo. The story doesn't read like the epic tales the in story characters talk about.

It is a wonderful, fantastic adventure. I wouldn't call it epic, not in the same manner of the LOTR.

Guess it fits my definition of epic then. I agree about LOTR being more epic however.

[Whiskey Tango]

http://i40.tinypic.com/2uhv2tj.jpg

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/6711200/Sneak-peek-at-Hobbit-set

[Kane52630]

Is there any word on a new trailer? I like to think we will get a new one when TDKR comes out.

[Moridin]

The Hobbit is my favorite book. I wouldn;t really call it epic, outside of the Smaug bit. It is a far smaller, more intimate adventure.

The book alone sure, but (and I'm no expert) shouldn't the additions give it a firm bump into epic territory?

[Boom]

Is there any word on a new trailer? I like to think we will get a new one when TDKR comes out.
I think TDKR is a safe bet for a new trailer.

[Octoberist]

http://i40.tinypic.com/2uhv2tj.jpg

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/6711200/Sneak-peek-at-Hobbit-set

Is that a bigature or an actual set?

[Doctor Jones]

I would say look at the truck...

[Llama_Shepherd]

Is that a bigature or an actual set?

It looks like an actual set, given the size of the doors in relation to the set and it's surroundings.


The book alone sure, but (and I'm no expert) shouldn't the additions give it a firm bump into epic territory?

Have we seen a list of additions, I haven't been following this too carefully, but I hear that parts of The Silmarillion will be implemented, is there are credence to this?

[Spider-Who?]

it's not exactly The Hobbit related, but I made a poster for the lord of the rings drinking game and thought this might be a good place to share :)

http://fuzzydrawings.deviantart.com/art/LotR-Drinking-Game-Poster-295945861

[Sawyer]

Downside of watching Game of Thrones: Everyone in this franchise seems like an absolute ****ing pansy by comparison. :csad:

[Pink Ranger]

The lack of incest means less aggression, I guess.

[Bruce Malone]

Downside of watching Game of Thrones: Everyone in this franchise seems like an absolute ****ing pansy by comparison. :csad:

I recently re-watched the LOTR trillogy and to be honest while the battles were still amazing the characters sort of seemed to 2-d to me now. Everyone was so obviously good and obviously evil, which incidentally made gollum seem even more enjoyable to me (he was already my fav character).

He was the only character imo to be really flawed and have to deal with inner moral struggle. He would fit in quite well in westeros.

[Sawyer]

Sauron has nothing on the Lannisters.

Those bastards....

[Thebumwhowalks]

Downside of watching Game of Thrones: Everyone in this franchise seems like an absolute ****ing pansy by comparison. :csad:

I have not seen GoT yet, but that's what it's like after watching HBO's 'Oz', every prison movie/tv show seems lightweight in comparison.

[Pink Ranger]

Sauron has nothing on the Lannisters.

Those bastards....

Forget about the stupid ring, the Lannisters would have just bought all the land surrounding Gondor and economically starved them into surrender.

[Spider-Who?]

I recently re-watched the LOTR trillogy and to be honest while the battles were still amazing the characters sort of seemed to 2-d to me now. Everyone was so obviously good and obviously evil, which incidentally made gollum seem even more enjoyable to me (he was already my fav character).

He was the only character imo to be really flawed and have to deal with inner moral struggle. He would fit in quite well in westeros.

That's because lotr is ABOUT good and evil and the archetypes therein. Game of Thrones is about the revenge and deceit and stradegy that comes with fighting for power. I don't knock lotr for having decidedly good and decidedly evil characters (though they definitely have their own character flaws) because its an entirely different type of story with extremely different themes. Both works are amazing in their own right.

[regwec]

Yes- good and evil are big subjects and it is both brave and unusual to write about them directly without mollifying the themes with broader reference to human emotion. Allegory might well be the best method of doing it, though Tolkien always insisted that he never wrote allegorically.

[Asteroid-Man]

If I may, the Ring represents "temptation" and it wears off on Frodo and Boromir pretty harshly. LOTR as a whole is filled with symbolism and archetypes and every character follows a different character outline.
Aragorn for example follows the path of a "heroic quest", and Boromir follows the path of a "Tragic Hero" as per Aristotle. Gandalf is a great example of Deus Ex Machina. Sam, the unlikely hero. Marry and Pippin the jesting duo, very Shakespearean. Saruman is acts as a representation of Greed, with Wormtongue being Deceit, all working under Sauron - Evil.
Fascinating stuff there. Real fascinating.

[regwec]

I don't think you can claim that any character is precisely analogous to any particular theme. Saruman is interesting because, though you are right to say that he is greedy, he is as much about the dangers of compromise and pragmatism at the expense of principles.

[Asteroid-Man]

I'm not claiming that they are confined to a specific analogy, but merely that the ways in which their characters develop represent something more than just the next "Joe Blow" character in other films/books.

[regwec]

Yes, that's certainly true.

Who do you think are LOTR's most interesting characters? My thoughts are:

- Denethor
- Saruman
- Boromir
- Sam

[Asteroid-Man]

Isildur, Gollum, Boromir, Aragorn and Faramir.

[Boom]

TheOneRing.Net recently sat down with Conan Stevens. Apparently, there was a bit of a mix-up. Instead of playing Azog (who doesn't make an appearance in The Hobbit), Stevens is playing Bolg, the son of Azog and the goblin chieftain at the Battle of Five Armies.

http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2012/04/22/55228-exclusive-hobbits-conan-stevens-chats-with-torn/#more-55228

TheOneRing's moderator explained on the forum:

It wasn't supposed to be a big fanfare announcement by request.

The character *was* Azog when his role in the movie was announced. But, perhaps along the way they realized that Azog wasn't even *in* "The Hobbit," and that the orc who led the orc army on the BoFA was actually Bolg. That's only my theory - nothing official - but Larry did recently find out that the character is now Bolg.

As I speculated above, perhaps they got the character name wrong, thinking it was Azog, not Bolg that led the orcs in the BoFA. If they didn't (i.e., they knew Azog was not a Hobbit character name), then perhaps they were going to combine both characters into "Azog" so they could do some Moria back-story without the confusion of two similar orc characters, then later realized they could do the same thing with the proper character name, Bolg.

[kvz5]

:awesome: :awesome: :awesome:

Warner Bros. to Preview 'The Hobbit' at CinemaCon

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/the-hobbit-preview-cinemacon-314880

[Kane52630]

Hopefully we get to see a brand new poster.

[Boom]

Please let their be descriptions.

Please. For the love of God.

[Sawyer]

Probably thinking far too far ahead, but do we know if there will be anything at SDCC?

[Boom]

I think Peter Jackson said they'd be there in force this year.

[Doc Ock]

I think Peter Jackson said they'd be there in force this year.

Excellent! :awesome:

[Thedudehimself]

Man, my anticipation for "The Hobbit" makes even "The Dark Knight Rises" look irrelevant.

Too bad we get only the FIRST PART this december.

I really wanna know where they going to place the CUT in the book for the two movies. Hmmm.

Also, I m curious to see how they will work Saruman and Legolas into the story. Hopefully they don t change the book too much arround, for it is pretty much perfect how it is.

[Kane52630]

colliderfrosty (https://twitter.com/#%21/colliderfrosty):
heard nolan is def here for the wb presentation. Also they've provided special 48fps 3d glasses to everyone when u walk in. #THEHOBBIT!


Those guys must be lucky as hell. :wow:

[Kane52630]

Alex Billington ‏ @firstshowing

Saw the 10 minutes of raw The Hobbit footage in 48FPS 3D. Intriguing, the footage looks amazing, but the 48FPS experience is an odd change.

There are going to be endless debates about 48FPS and how good/bad it looks. I just think we need to get used to change after 80yr of 24FPS.

[craigdbfan]

48/60fps always looks a bit peculiar. The eyes can never quite get used to them when it comes to movies at least.

For gaming it's preferred but for movies, eh.

[Armored Avenger]

I have been reading a lot of the tweets from people who saw the footage and the response to the 48fps seems to be mixed to negative. The common criticism I am seeing is that the film does not look cinematic and feels more like television. I guess we will have to wait until December to see for ourselves.
I am also less than enthused that the 10 minutes of footage featured a "Legolas and Tauriel action sequence". At least some of the riddle game was screened, as well as White Council and Dol Guldur footage.

[dark_b]

trust me if it look sbad i will complain for 12 months. but until i dont watch footage that is screened with 48fps in a theater that supports 48 i will not complain.

again Cameron and Jackson are screening footage in updated theaters that are able to project footage at 48fps. my theater can not because its not updated.

[Tim_Riggins]

Yep, seeing reports that it looks amazing, and others like Devin Faraci that it looks terrible. Knew it would happen anyway, 24 fps is the cinematic standard we've always had, it's the very definition of "cinematic", even though 24 fps footage can not look cinematic.

48 fps and I'm eager to see it will make it look so real that some can"t handle the change like Faraci. He does say however that the CGI creatures, etc look so much more real, some will love it, others hate it.

[Boom]

Devin's reactions:

http://badassdigest.com/2012/04/24/cinemacon-2012-the-hobbit-underwhelms-at-48-frames-per-secon/

[dark_b]

Devin hates digital and he hates Cameron because of Avatar. i belive that a lot didnt like the hobbit footage.

[redfirebird2008]

Devin hates digital and he hates Cameron because of Avatar.

That might be part of it but I don't think it's some grand conspiracy against Cameron or Jackson. I happen to love their movies. I cannot for the life of me understand why you would want to get rid of gorgeous cinematography and make everything look as if you're watching a live performance. That's just not what I expect of movies. They should look different from a live performance, they should look "cinematic" as so many people like to say.

[ThePowerCosmic]

This sounds bad... To be honest, I had forgotten all about this movie having 48 fps until about a week ago. I just want to watch The Hobbit, plain and simple.

[Boom]

It will be available in 24 fps.

[Boom]

EDIT: **** this lag.

[Octoberist]

Devin hates digital and he hates Cameron because of Avatar. i belive that a lot didnt like the hobbit footage.

To be honest, I've grown to like Devin. I don't agree with him all the time but when I do, it's all the way.

[dark_b]

It will be available in 24 fps.the trailer that is online is proof that they can transform a 48 movie to 24 .
so if it will get bad reviews i will watch it in a 24 fps theater.

[Octoberist]

It will be available in 24 fps.

I'm all for advanced tech but I'm betting the reason why we've stuck with 24 is because it just looks good to the eyes. If The Hobbit looks like video, good lighting and all, that sucks.

[dark_b]

To be honest, I've grown to like Devin. I don't agree with him all the time but when I do, it's all the way.he is very honest. and doesnt play the hollywood game where they try to invite all those critics and give them gifs. abd he also has a lot connections. he has a good track record with spoilers,leaked info and scoops.

but if he hates something he will do everything to bash. the same if he likes something. for example he liked the story and footage from Rise of the Apes from the first week. and he promoted the movie the whole year.

the problem with his opinion about digital and 48 is that he hates with a passion Cameron . i am not just trying to writte over the top. he literally hates James Cameron. hates.

[Armored Avenger]

Hearing more of what was in the footage doesn't exactly fill me with excitement. Radagast has birds under his hat, a sled pulled by bunnies and is described as being silly. I was fearful they would reduce him down to comic relief. Also, Gandalf investigating the Ringwraith's tombs better have some decent explanation behind it because if the film is saying they have been entombed since Sauron's fall in the Last Alliance then the entire fall of Arnor to the Witch King blows this addition apart. I know I should wait until I see the final product but this along with the disappointing reaction to the 48fps does bring me down a bit (for now anyway. I'm sure the next video blog will boost me right back up again).

[redfirebird2008]

I'm all for advanced tech but I'm betting the reason why we've stuck with 24 is because it just looks good to the eyes. If The Hobbit looks like video, good lighting and all, that sucks.

Exactly man, exactly. Why would anyone assume that we don't LIKE the way movies have looked for 100 years? It would be one thing if there was some obvious problem that people were complaining about, but there isn't. I don't like the "motion flow" effect on HDTV's when you try to watch movies, and I am definitely not wanting my experience at a movie theater to be the same as watching a live performance.

[Boom]

I'm getting the sinking feeling that Radagast will be awful.

[Octoberist]

It would be hell if everything looked like true motion years from now.

[redfirebird2008]

It would be hell if everything looked like true motion years from now.

No kidding man. I couldn't believe it when I saw Pirates of the Caribbean playing in "motion flow" at Best Buy years ago. It was the climactic fight scene between Jack and Barbossa. I honestly thought it was a behind-the-scenes featurette. Had to stand there for a good 30 seconds before realizing it was the actual movie. It just doesn't look right. I saw an article praising Hobbit's 48 fps footage because "it looks so realistic, like you're standing on the set watching the actors." That sounds EXACTLY like what I saw with motion flow for Pirates. I don't want movies to look like I'm standing there on the set. If I want to watch a live performance, I'll go watch someone perform a play.

[redfirebird2008]

All that being said, the good news is the trailer looked good in 24 fps. Let's hope the full conversion of the movie to 24 fps turns out to have a similarly nice appearance. I'm more afraid of what the future holds though (10-20 years from now). If they don't even give us a choice to watch in 24 fps, that will be depressing.

[dark_b]

we will know if it looks bad or good in december.i think it will not work because we are not used.

but again.TV motion flow is not the same as projected 48 fps. the new theaters that are able to project footage at 48-60 fps. this is different.

[redfirebird2008]

we will know if it looks bad or good in december.

BUT AGAIN.TV motion flow is not the same as the new theaters that are able to project footage at 48-60 fps. this is different.

It sure doesn't sound like it. "So realistic it feels like you're standing on set." When I watch a movie, I don't WANT to feel like I'm standing on set.

[Doc Ock]

It would be hell if everything looked like true motion years from now.

Oh God. That would be a nightmare! I'd have to stick to video games forever or cartoons...or something for onscreen entertainment.

I sure hope The Hobbit doesn't look like true motion. :(

[Kane52630]

Some of you are overreacting...

[Doctor Jones]

Some of you are overreacting...

May I remind you that this is the internet.

[BobbyCorwin88]

I'm eager to see what 48fps looks like consistently throughout a film. I really just want to see how action scenes look without all the blur. I love seeing more detail out of my frame. I'm still completely hesitant about the 3D aspect of this film. As much as I admire and trust Jackson as a film maker, I can't help but wonder if he simply got caught up in all the 3D hype and wanted to make his mark on it. When I saw Tin Tin, the 3D did absolutely nothing for me. It detracted from the overall experience and I hate what 3D did to the image. It was smaller and the colors were dimmed down substantially. I really don't want to see that happen to the Hobbit.

I like what Chris Nolan has been saying lately about IMAX film. He's pretty much been voicing what I've been trying to articulate for a while now. I truly do believe that IMAX is the proper step forward for film making, not 3D. But I do think Jackson has something going with 48fps and I can only imagine what that would be like combined with IMAX. Here's hoping.

[dark_b]

http://www.slashfilm.com/cinemacon-ten-minutes-the-hobbit-underwhelms-higher-frame-rates-cinematic-future-james-cameron-promised/

[Kane52630]

May I remind you that this is the internet.

lol true. I actually dig the 48 fps on the tvs, It doesn't look any less of a film just because it's smoothed out nor it looks like "soap opera tv" as some people said before.

[Octoberist]

lol true. I actually dig the 48 fps on the tvs, It doesn't look any less of a film just because it's smoothed out nor it looks like "soap opera tv" as some people said before.

n-n-n-nasty!

[Kane52630]

Also we don't know for sure how many theater chains are prepared for 48 pfs, so most likely the majority of people will see it in the 24 fps 3D. And I saw the trailer in 3D and it looks magnificent.

[Octoberist]

And I haven't met one person who like to watch movies in Tru-Motion. It's not about being a traditionalist or whatever because I think Tru Motion is like adding too much pepper to your steak thus ruining it.

[Kane52630]

Tru-Motion looks really odd at first but every time I see one, I'm captivated on seeing more of it.

[Octoberist]

Also we don't know for sure how many theater chains are prepared for 48 pfs, so most likely the majority of people will see it in the 24 fps 3D. And I saw the trailer in 3D and it looks magnificent.

I think that's 24.

Read this fair article about the footage. It's written by someone who wants to embrace 48 but just couldnt. Or not yet.
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/55212

[dark_b]

tru motion is fake even in theory. tru mtion is trying to create more frames out of nothing. youcan not create something form nothing. at least this filmed with 48 fps. i hate with a passion tru motion. with a passion.

we are used to 24 fps. we all knew that someoen who will bring 48fps to the movies as a standard will be the bad guy. someone always has to be the bad guy.

[redfirebird2008]

someone always has to be the bad guy.

Hello Tony. :oldrazz:

[Kane52630]

I think that's 24.

Read this fair article about the footage. It's written by someone who wants to embrace 48 but just couldnt. Or not yet.
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/55212

Fair enough, I always love when directors push for something new that enhances the movie going experience. I love James Cameron's push for 3D and I love Nolan's push for IMAX.

[Cheshire Cat]

The Hobbit will be an interesting movie to watch. I'm glad it finally got the okay to film in New Zealand. :)

[Doctor Jones]

Fair enough, I always love when directors push for something new that enhances the movie going experience. I love James Cameron's push for 3D and I love Nolan's push for IMAX.

Same. Anyone can have a preference. My favorite format is IMAX, but I'm all for the progression of 3D and digital.

[redfirebird2008]

Same. Anyone can have a preference. My favorite format is IMAX, but I'm all for the progression of 3D and digital.

Preferences are fine as long as a choice is offered. As Nolan has said, the choice to use film isn't as open as it used to be. The industry is quickly moving towards digital without even realizing some of the consequences of it. Film is a far better way of archiving movies than crappy hard drives that won't even last a decade, never mind the 1,000 years that celluloid can last. But they don't even care about this part of it.

I remember when the Avatar 3D craze happened, the industry started moving towards forcing us to accept 3D even if we didn't want it. Toy Story 3 wasn't even offered at my theater in 2D, which was frustrating. I simply refused to see it in the theater and waited to rent it on home video. I didn't dislike the 3D in Avatar, but I didn't find it mindblowing. However, I was absolutely distracted by the stupid glasses. If they can develop a 3D technology that doesn't require us to wear glasses, I will be on board with it. Then and ONLY then can anyone argue it's an evolution similar to sound or color, and even then I would argue it's nowhere near as important as those two things (especially sound). I'll be pretty pissed if they pull the rug out from under our feet and start shooting everything in 48 fps even while audiences complain about the fact that it looks like a soap opera/video game/TV show instead of a movie.

[Octoberist]

the problem isn't so much tech, but I think..the studio mishandling it.

[Octoberist]

http://collider.com/the-hobbit-48fps-cinemacon-recap-dark-knight-rises/161642/

The camera man/Variety writer Joshy Dickey at 15:06 makes a good point: He thinks there's a huge future for this but there will also be a learning curve. Meaning that in a few years, 48 will be perfected. Josh also mentions how lighting plays a huge role in how to make 48 look good. He mentions that the lighting was off in certain scenes in The Hobbit reel.

That being said, Devin Faraci said that it's great that they're testing out new tech, but do they have to do it with a big movie like The Hobbit? Because obviously it's not perfected, and it'll be dated by the time 48 becomes better in the future.

[Whiskey Tango]

well now I'm curious what it looks like

[Kane52630]

Watching the Collider video, it's exactly what I was expecting. It's an even more drastic change from 2D/3D which I like.

[Boom]

- Radagast is described as "very weird," and apparently he drives a sled pulled by rabbits. He also has birds living under his hat, and they poop all over him him. ":dry:" does not do justice to how I'm feeling about that.

- Gollum refers to himself as Smeagol in the Riddles in the Dark scene, which poses a continuity issue with Two Towers.

- The Witch-King and the other Nazgul have crypts, so I guess the War in the North didn't happen in PJ's movie-verse.

- The person Gandalf is fighting in Dol Guldur (in the teaser trailer) is Thrain.

- Gandalf tells Galadriel that Bilbo makes him "brave," or something along those lines.

[Doctor Jones]

I can't wait to see 48 fps. I want to be taken into the film. Middle Earth is the place it would be. Frosty is correct in that it's new and it's the beginnings of it and we need to get used to it.

[Boom]

More details from TheOneRing.Net:

PJ's intro was mostly about the technical aspects, saying that this change in frame rate is analogous to moving from silent to sound.

Opening shots were helicopter shots, similar to opening of TTT. Gorgeous. Sunrise over Misty Mountains to the fluting strains of Howard Shore music. Followed by a few shots that were seen in the trailer, intros of characters, etc.

Dol Guldur/Thrain - Gandalf is seen wandering through sub-dungeon of Dol Guldur, searching through corridors as if being chased. Thrain crazed, out his mind from torture, jumps out of the dark in a "Boo!" moment and attacks Gandalf. Yes, this is the scene from the trailer. Thrain's face is not closely seen. No other creatures are seen there.

Scenes of Bilbo in the Shire, mostly stuff we've seen in the trailer or vlogs. Martin Freeman as Bilbo is very different from other hobbits. He has a lightness and elan, with a very light comedic touch. Not like slapstick humor of Merry & Pippin. Fresh, funny, approachable, comedic but not too much. Quickbeam was very enthusiastic about his performance.

Saruman/White Council - this was still green screen, no grading or background effects added yet. Elrond, Galadriel, Gandalf are shown sitting with Saruman. Radagast was not present. Galadriel looking at a sword, identifies as a Morgul blade. Everyone is aghast as she tells the history of the blade as she says it is the sword of the Witch-King and he was destroyed long before in battles with the North Kingdom. He was held in a dungeon in the North from which he should not have been able to escape but Galadriel is afraid that this means he has. Saruman is studying it carefully, with maybe a glint in his eye.

Galadriel touching Gandalf's face. The context is Galadriel asking Gandalf why he chose this particular hobbit. Gandalf says, almost to himself, that it is because he sometimes feels a little afraid and Bilbo gives him courage. Galadriel touches his face and tells him not to be afraid, that he always has friends.

Radagast - Gandalf is shown alone in the dark with his staff lit, searching through catacombs where the ringwraith's tombs are...then Radagast appears suddenly. Both put their staffs down the tunnel to see the tombs broken open. Radagast seems rather childlike, like he is more in tune wth animals than people. Radagast's staff is similar to Gandalf's; a knobbly wooden staff. Radagast is "weird and wonderful" looks nothing like the Decipher card. This is a new Radagast is an "unbelievable, crazy, cool, mess", with a bird's nest on his head. Quickbeam loved his appearance and style. Radagast was only shown in the dark, "Moria-style" dungeon which was only lit by Gandalf's staff. It was hard to see costume details but they appeared to be a mixture of black and brown, with a "weird shaped" hat with flaps on it. He has a bird nest on his head under his hat. Was conversing with Gandalf about the crypts/tombs that had once belonged to the Ringwraiths. Radagast also has a staff. The only other shot of Radagast was him flying by in his sled. Radagast has a sled that runs on the forest floor, drawn by larger-than-life (but not giant) grey jackrabbits. Q really liked the sled, thought it was cool.

Mirkwood, the dwarves are shown after their spider sequence, they are covered in spider webs. Don't see much of Mirkwood, what is seen has spider webs everywhere. Tauriel slides into the scene with bow and arrow at the ready. Brown outfit with braided hairdo. Medium brown hair (not blond). Legolas appeared at the end of the scene with Tauriel. AS the dwarves are running covered in webs, they are suddenly confronted by Elves, and Legolas has an arrow pointed at Thorin's nose, saying "I will not hesitate to kill you, dwarf!" setting up for his attitude in LOTR. His costume is the same as LOTR. Tauriel's is similar, but in brown rather than green.

Not shown in the footage - No shot of Thranduil. No Laketown, no Elven halls. No shots of spiders or eagles. No Beorn. No Rhosgobel or Necromancer. No shots of Dale, Lonely Mountain or any hint of Smaug. No shots of goblins. No Bard or Master of Laketown. No hint of Aragorn/Rangers, etc. No shots of the Ring. Not much of the music, it's still be worked on. No dwarf singing, no Elves on horseback, no wargs, no goblins. No dwarf women.

Dwarves - Dwarves look great, with a lot of detail. Some are presented in a comedic way, some serious, all very different and distinct characters. No more dwarf singing. Sounds like mostly what we've already seen in trailer and vlogs except for one brief shot of dwarves in barrels on the river, with some effects tape visible - not a finished scene.

Trolls - They showed about a minute and a half of troll scene. Features some camera shots from above, creating a good sense of perspective with the live actors. Scene begins with a scene of Bilbo suddenly caught by "ginormous" hill trolls. In the troll scene, all the dwarves come runnign to rescue Bilbo. One of the younger ones takes an axe stroke at the legs of one troll, others stab at their feet. The trolls are articulate in speech with heavy Cockney accents. The scene goes similar to the book but not exactly. Wallet is not shown (or heard). "burrahobbit" is in, though we hear a "g" sound in there so it comes out like "burgahobbit". One of the trolls reminded Q a little of "Sloth" from The Goonies, with a slightly misshapen face

Riddle scene - Gollum is a "new vision" because he is now in 48fps. Scene is established with Bilbo begging for a way out of the cave but Gollum wants to play riddles. He identifies himself as Smeagol. Gollum regrets giving his name as Bilbo later regrets giving his. The Riddle scene was shown intercut with action scene with trolls, running with spiderwebs, Bilbo in the Shire. Gollum is mostly being Smeagol because he's trying to interact with another being that isn't a goblin. Bilbo still feels threatened and has Sting out in a defensive way. Sting is not glowing yet (there are no orcs present). Bilbo is wearing the same color jacket in the cave scene as in LOTR - he apparently leaves Rivendell wearing that jacket. - the scene ends with Gollum proposing the "stakes" - Bilbo saying if he wins, Gollum has to show him the way out. Gollum agrees and says that if he wins, "we gets to eats it raw". Bilbo hesitates and then agrees. Gollum comes off as attracted by the idea of talking with a fellow being, but also hungry, so we get a sense of the schizophrenic Seamgol/Gollum divide.

Returning characters - Christopher Lee might look slightly older, but Gandalf and Galadriel look the same. The returning characters look just the same as in LOTR. Legolas appears briefly.

Frame rate/3D - 48fps was crystal-clear and vivid, not like watching film. The images are "very sharp", the depth of field is "amazing". Quickbeam says he doesn't know if it's "too clear", it is very different and it you'll have to acclimate to it. The prosthetics did not look fake. The digital work of the CGI creatures looks even better at the higher frame rate. He says the trolls look fantastic. It will take some getting used to, whether people will like it immediately or not is hard to tell. It looks brighter and more vivid than LOTR footage. If there are complaints about the new framerate "I'm not surprised, welcome to the new frontier." It's a major change that will take adjustment. Fans will have the choice to see it in 2D or 3D -yes, 3D glasses will be needed. Quickbeam wore his comfortably over his usual glasses at this event. There were no scenes of "gimmick" 3D with things coming straight out of the screen, more a sense of depth in the image.

[jacobed]

Could careless about the pointless 3d, I am happy to hear the actual footage looks good.

[Boom]

Hey, Peter Jackson.

You know what will get people to stop focusing on the negative feedback from CinemaCon?

A new video blog :awesome:.

[DarthSkywalker]

Why play this game with this movie of all movies?

[Marvolo]

I'll most likely see this in 24fps, because my theater is not capable of 48fps that I know of, and I will be seeing the 2D version.

That being said, on blu-ray it may be in 48fps, and I hate to think this film could be bothersome in that regard. Of all films, and after it being trapped in development hell I wish they had done this experiment with another film. I've been anticipating this film since 2003, and if this film looks "weird" in the slightest it will hamper my enjoyment.

I'm waiting until I see the film to pass judgment, but I am cautiously anxious at the moment.

[Bruce Malone]

How are people going to react to the fact that the hobbit will now look quite different than the previous LOTR films due to the 48fps?

Most of the reaction to the 48fps has been mixed which is not a great sign.

[Marvolo]

How are people going to react to the fact that the hobbit will now look quite different than the previous LOTR films due to the 48fps?

Most of the reaction to the 48fps has been mixed which is not a great sign.

It will probably be the thing that is picked over the most, and may overshadow the film itself. I mean look. Ten minutes of footage was shown, and people barely reported what was shown. Talk of the 48 fps is everywhere though. Ten whole minutes of new footage, and the frame rate is all anyone can talk about. Its already dominating discussions on the film.

[Rac]

I'm glad that the footage at least looks good in 24fps (or whatever speed they are playing the trailer in theaters). I might see this in 48fps, for the second time, but first time is definitely 24fps. I want to enjoy the film.

I haven't even been able to watch Public Enemies yet...

[matrix_ghost]

It will probably be the thing that is picked over the most, and may overshadow the film itself. I mean look. Ten minutes of footage was shown, and people barely reported what was shown. Talk of the 48 fps is everywhere though. Ten whole minutes of new footage, and the frame rate is all anyone can talk about. Its already dominating discussions on the film.

To be honest when the first footage of Avatar was screened , the reports was also about the 3-d effects , the quality of the CGI images etc. Not so much about the footage itself.
I think the difference here is unlike AVatar which showed full sequences , Hobbit was more about seeing different scenes meaning that the audience couldn't properly adjust to the change .

[Marvolo]

To be honest when the first footage of Avatar was screened , the reports was also about the 3-d effects , the quality of the CGI images etc. Not so much about the footage itself.
I think the difference here is unlike AVatar which showed full sequences , Hobbit was more about seeing different scenes meaning that the audience couldn't properly adjust to the change .

And that's what worries me about this whole thing. The fans and viewers in general have been wanting this film for years and years. Here it is but they throw us in the deep end with this new frame rate. We just want great film after all the BS it went through to get greenlit. I don't want to have to adjust to something new when I see this film for the first time or any time I pop this in my blu-ray player. I just want to be able to enjoy this film without having to adjust to something no one really asked for in the first place. If 48fps had already been done a few times and proven itself I'd be ok with it but to take the gamble on this film of all films is a bit more than aggravating for me.

[matrix_ghost]

And that's what worries me about this whole thing. The fans and viewers in general have been wanting this film for years and years. Here it is but they throw us in the deep end with this new frame rate. We just want great film after all the BS it went through to get greenlit. I don't want to have to adjust to something new when I see this film for the first time or any time I pop this in my blu-ray player. I just want to be able to enjoy this film without having to adjust to something no one really asked for in the first place. If 48fps had already been done a few times and proven itself I'd be ok with it but to take the gamble on this film of all films is a bit more than aggravating for me.

In hindsight they should've just shown entire sequences instead of snippets.
And while i can understand your point on them taking a huge risk by shooting this in 48 fps , fact that sooner or later a big production would have to do it.
With every movies tech is always being developed and refined.
Plus lets not forget that TTT also had a huge risk that paid off in the end :

Gollum.

TTT basically relied on making Gollum believable. If WETA had screwed that up , TTT would've failed miserably.

[BobbyCorwin88]

One of the latest reviews I've read compared the 48fps look to an old Doctor Who episode or a live television event. To be honest, I really had no clue what to expect from a constant moving image at 48. I was just going by Jackson's description of it, being that it would give you a clearer definition picture and motion blur would be reduced, making action sequences clearer easier to keep up with.

That all excited me, but now I'm not sure how to take it. I was already worried about it being in 3D, but now that 48 is an issue I can't see why I wouldn't see this in normal 24fps. The irony is that this will more than likely be a great film from every angle you think of it. I hate to think that great films like this are going to have a black spot on them for all of time because of poor frame rate decisions and the inclusion of 3D.

I mean, really think about it. What does 3D contribute to a movie like the Hobbit? I can't think of a single thing.

[dark_b]

what if they go clip by clip and only use 48 fps footage for acting scenes and fast camera movement? fo all dialoge shots and slow camera movement they use 24? they would have to go clip by clip so that we dont notice when it switches.

[Kane52630]

3D for me makes you feel that you are there.

[BobbyCorwin88]

3D for me makes you feel that you are there.
I felt like I was already there in the early 2000's when I was watching LOTR on a film projector. A skilled cinematographer (which the Hobbit has) has the ability to make you feel in the moment and physically transported through showing you something spectacular, which is exactly what Peter Jackson's team excels at doing.

3D isn't so much a "wow I'm actually there" effect as it is a stereoscopic effect. Chris Nolan says it best here:
"3-D is a misnomer. Films are 3-D. The whole point of photography is that it’s three-dimensional. The thing with stereoscopic imaging is it gives each audience member an individual perspective. It’s well suited to video games and other immersive technologies, but if you’re looking for an audience experience, stereoscopic is hard to embrace. I prefer the big canvas, looking up at an enormous screen and at an image that feels larger than life. When you treat that stereoscopically, and we’ve tried a lot of tests, you shrink the size so the image becomes a much smaller window in front of you.”

Basically, both of us can be sitting in a 3D movie and both of us can have a completely different experience than the other. When my experience can sometimes come down to where I'm actually seated in the theater, I'm going to have to pass on that option. I haven't seen one film in 3D that impressed me or did something better than what a normal film has done.

[Sun_Down]

I remember when HD TV came out and things looked terrible. You could really see the pancake make up on actors and the fakeness of the sets. It seems these things have been resolved as the industry adapted to the technology.

That said, when I watch certain TVs (that I assume use some sort of newish technology), they look terrible. And they still look terrible. That too-fast-moving, soap opera style filming can truly ruin a good show/movie. There is such a thing as too much resolution, at least when the filmmakers don't know how to smooth it out.

All the talk of "it's early footage, it's not done", etc. is pretty unconvincing though. Anyone remember X3? The Sentinel clip looked crappy and had terrible music. The effects of Jean destroying that door in the infirmary looked cheap. And when the movie came out? Yeah, they were unchanged (mostly). So the work-in-progress rationale doesn't comfort me particularly.

[Boom]

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.

[Bruce Malone]

The problem as described by those who've seen the 48fps is that it takes away the cinematic feel of the film. The LOTR films were very cinematic and it's a shame that it seems the hobbit will be the odd man out.

For a vast fantasy i don't think this was the right film to showcase 48fps, if 48ps is all about super clarity and realism a fantasy may not be the best bet. I think a war film would actually have worked better. Fantasy needs that somewhat gloss over it.

[terry78]

Same gripes when Public Enemies came out. People *****ed about Mann using the digital.

[Bruce Malone]

^^^

With good reason. I think public enemies would have looked a lot better without the hd home video in the 1930's look it had.

[Marvolo]

I felt like I was already there in the early 2000's when I was watching LOTR on a film projector. A skilled cinematographer (which the Hobbit has) has the ability to make you feel in the moment and physically transported through showing you something spectacular, which is exactly what Peter Jackson's team excels at doing.

3D isn't so much a "wow I'm actually there" effect as it is a stereoscopic effect. Chris Nolan says it best here:


Basically, both of us can be sitting in a 3D movie and both of us can have a completely different experience than the other. When my experience can sometimes come down to where I'm actually seated in the theater, I'm going to have to pass on that option. I haven't seen one film in 3D that impressed me or did something better than what a normal film has done.

This is my issue with 3D. For me there are so many more distractions with 3D: the glasses, the flicker, the dark visuals, ghosting (cross talk), things coming out of the screen etc. When I go watch a 2D movie I sit down and I get lost in what's going on. I don't eat, I don't drink, or any of that stuff I just soak it all in.

The problem as described by those who've seen the 48fps is that it takes away the cinematic feel of the film. The LOTR films were very cinematic and it's a shame that it seems the hobbit will be the odd man out.

For a vast fantasy i don't think this was the right film to showcase 48fps, if 48ps is all about super clarity and realism a fantasy may not be the best bet. I think a war film would actually have worked better. Fantasy needs that somewhat gloss over it.

You hit the nail on the head for me. To me film is like art and your film or camera is your canvas. Different canvas and brushes serve different purposes depending on the art you are making. Fantasy benefits heavily from cinematography and the way it is graded. A super realistic clearity and motion may clash with what this film is. An in your face gritty war film from say Spielberg would have been good, but not this film.

I like my fantasy to look like fantasy not realism. Some of my favorite cinematographers, especially someone like Bruno Delbonnel, make their films look like paintings, and I'm not sure it is possible with this 48fps.

[BobbyCorwin88]

This is my issue with 3D. For me there are so many more distractions with 3D: the glasses, the flicker, the dark visuals, ghosting (cross talk), things coming out of the screen etc. When I go watch a 2D movie I sit down and I get lost in what's going on. I don't eat, I don't drink, or any of that stuff I just soak it all in.
Probably the biggest issue I've ever had with 3D is that color is seriously dimmed down, which many people don't understand is a huge issue. I don't care how expertly you think these guys are shooting something in 3D, nothing can save the color through those glasses.

I seriously wish Jackson would have just scrapped the digital 3D, 48 idea altogether and just shot on IMAX. Can you imagine those famous sweeping landscape shots of New Zealand on an IMAX screen? It pains me when great film makers like Jackson miss the bigger picture (no pun intended) and go with digital 3D over IMAX. Thank goodness Chris Nolan is championing this stuff so heavily, otherwise no one would pay attention.
You hit the nail on the head for me. To me film is like art and your film or camera is your canvas. Different canvas and brushes serve different purposes depending on the art you are making. Fantasy benefits heavily from cinematography and the way it is graded. A super realistic clearity and motion may clash with what this film is. An in your face gritty war film from say Spielberg would have been good, but not this film.

I like my fantasy to look like fantasy not realism. Some of my favorite cinematographers, especially someone like Bruno Delbonnel, make their films look like paintings, and I'm not sure it is possible with this 48fps.
Agreed.

I'm still interested to see if 48 goes anywhere someday, but I hate that this is the reaction we're getting, and I don't think something as loved as the Hobbit should have been the film to test it on.

[Kane52630]

The 48 fps 3D clears any ghosting and blur and the last few 3D films I've seen are much brighter than before.

[Marvolo]

Probably the biggest issue I've ever had with 3D is that color is seriously dimmed down, which many people don't understand is a huge issue. I don't care how expertly you think these guys are shooting something in 3D, nothing can save the color through those glasses.

I seriously wish Jackson would have just scrapped the digital 3D, 48 idea altogether and just shot on IMAX. Can you imagine those famous sweeping landscape shots of New Zealand on an IMAX screen? It pains me when great film makers like Jackson miss the bigger picture (no pun intended) and go with digital 3D over IMAX. Thank goodness Chris Nolan is championing this stuff so heavily, otherwise no one would pay attention.

Agreed.

I'm still interested to see if 48 goes anywhere someday, but I hate that this is the reaction we're getting, and I don't think something as loved as the Hobbit should have been the film to test it on.

As with any new technology demo sometimes the product they test it on can suffer. The new technology takes center stage rather than letting the material shine. One example, to use a game, Assassins Creed was a big tech demo more than anything and the story and game mechanics were ho hum. Later sequel's addressed those issues, but the first one has never been a great game. This film is a 48fps demo that will, based on initial reaction, leave a black mark on the film itself. It happens in any evolving industry, but its sad it had to happen to this film.

I know me, and I've never liked tru-motion or 120hz conversion on films or tv. It looks unnatural to me, and I've never been able to get used to it. Unless this film looks completely different from that there is a snowballs chance in hell I will like it. Final judgment is reserved, but I'm looking for something specific with this, and unless its that I don't see it being my cup of tea.

[Octoberist]

I'm in the mind where I want to see the 48 for myself. I think the write up at Aint It Cool was very fair and constructive: It looked like Tru Motion but not. So obviously, it looked better than that HD TV crap but at the same time, it's also radically different that the result could divide people.

I'm thinking that The Hobbit will be playing in 24 FPS in 2D, while the 3D versions will have 48.

[dark_b]

if you go back to the avatar threads you will see that i was one one of the rare people complainign about the strobing. you could see it very good when the camera was moving very slow. 3D is closer to reality. and in reality 24fps is not enough.

i have an idea what they could have done. ok this is talking without any proof. they should use the 48 fps and add motion blur where it needs it. you can add 3D and 2D motion blur. a software called Nuke has this option. even After Effects has a cheap 2D motion blur. you go clip by clip and add motion blur where it needs. you still have 48 fps resolution so you dont get the strobing and ghosting effect.

[dark_b]

This is my issue with 3D. For me there are so many more distractions with 3D: the glasses, the flicker, the dark visuals, ghosting (cross talk), things coming out of the screen etc. When I go watch a 2D movie I sit down and I get lost in what's going on. I don't eat, I don't drink, or any of that stuff I just soak it all in.

this is not fair. a lot of theaters are saving on energy and bulbs. they on purpose showing you a darker 3D image. the ghosting effect is sometimes also a problem bcause the theater doesnt have the projectors calibrated.in the last 5 years i watched at least 5 movies where the image was very dark .i am talking about a normal 2D movie. and in one movie the edged were blurry. yes you read it right. the f... theater showed a blurry movie. this has to become illegal. someone needs to go to prison. i am not sayin that the image is not darker with 3D movies. it is. but a lot of times the theaters are even more making it darker. if youare listening to slashfilm podcasts you can see how Adam and David a lot of times complain about the bad 3D. not from the movie but from the theater.

[dark_b]

Probably the biggest issue I've ever had with 3D is that color is seriously dimmed down, which many people don't understand is a huge issue. I don't care how expertly you think these guys are shooting something in 3D, nothing can save the color through those glasses.

I seriously wish Jackson would have just scrapped the digital 3D, 48 idea altogether and just shot on IMAX. Can you imagine those famous sweeping landscape shots of New Zealand on an IMAX screen? It pains me when great film makers like Jackson miss the bigger picture (no pun intended) and go with digital 3D over IMAX. Thank goodness Chris Nolan is championing this stuff so heavily, otherwise no one would pay attention.
.i am not writting this because you are wrong. you just dont have enough info. let me explain it to you.

every second of Hobbit will go on the computer. Jackson is editing,color timing on computers. so everything is digital. which means everything needs to be scanned on the disc. plus almost every shot from Hobbit will have an CGI effect.
now lets go to Nolan. he is not using in every shot CGI. he edits oldschool like Spielberg( War Horse was his fist digital cut movie). so we have a situation where Nolan doesnt have to get the footage on the computer. from what i understand he even uses some oldschool techniques for color correction. you see where i am going? Bird with M:I4 also didnt have in every shot a CGI effect.
IMAX is for movies that are very practical and filmed on location. you can not use IMAX for a fantasy movie like Hobbit. first there is not enough harddrives to have the whole movie in IMAX resoltions. second WETA couldnt render everything in imax resolution. on TDK DoubleNegative had insane big problems. they had problems even previewing the footage. everything needed to be in bigger resoltuion for CGI models. ILM had comuter crashing when rendering the robots. some computers burned. yes burned.

IMAX is not an option for Hobbit. and it never was an option. TDKR can be 50% in imax resolution.

[dark_b]

http://www.firstshowing.net/2012/laser-projection-at-55000-lumens-hfr-48fps-the-future-of-cinema/

laser projection. now this is interesting. everything that is closer to IMAx and at the same time easier and cheaper is interesting.

[Whiskey Tango]

i have an idea what they could have done. ok this is talking without any proof. they should use the 48 fps and add motion blur where it needs it. you can add 3D and 2D motion blur. a software called Nuke has this option. even After Effects has a cheap 2D motion blur. you go clip by clip and add motion blur where it needs. you still have 48 fps resolution so you dont get the strobing and ghosting effect.

"The good news is modern cameras can eliminate lens flare. The bad news is we'll have to cgi in some lens flare to compensate."

[dark_b]

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.

[BobbyCorwin88]

i am not writting this because you are wrong. you just dont have enough info. let me explain it to you.

every second of Hobbit will go on the computer. Jackson is editing,color timing on computers. so everything is digital. which means everything needs to be scanned on the disc. plus almost every shot from Hobbit will have an CGI effect.
now lets go to Nolan. he is not using in every shot CGI. he edits oldschool like Spielberg( War Horse was his fist digital cut movie). so we have a situation where Nolan doesnt have to get the footage on the computer. from what i understand he even uses some oldschool techniques for color correction. you see where i am going? Bird with M:I4 also didnt have in every shot a CGI effect.
IMAX is for movies that are very practical and filmed on location. you can not use IMAX for a fantasy movie like Hobbit. first there is not enough harddrives to have the whole movie in IMAX resoltions. second WETA couldnt render everything in imax resolution. on TDK DoubleNegative had insane big problems. they had problems even previewing the footage. everything needed to be in bigger resoltuion for CGI models. ILM had comuter crashing when rendering the robots. some computers burned. yes burned.

IMAX is not an option for Hobbit. and it never was an option. TDKR can be 50% in imax resolution.
The very basis of how Jackson shot LOTR was that a heavy percentage of it was practical. There's a ton of CGI, to be sure, everything you described that IMAX is good for, i.e. shooting on location and shooting practically, is what Jackson excels at doing. If CGI on IMAX film is that much of a problem then obviously the entire film couldn't be shot on the format, so I would preferably want most of those shots to be the giant landscape shots of all the different locations around New Zealand.

As far as actually adding CGI elements to an IMAX negative; my understanding of film is that the more latitude you have to work with, the more special effects you are able to add, so in theory I would guess that it would be an animators dream come true. I don't know much about the conversion process of IMAX film, but I don't see how editing it could be too terrible different from normal 35. You mention that Nolan is an old school editor, how do you mean? Does he physically cut film on a flat bed? Because as far as I know, the industry has been editing on computer for a good long while now and I haven't seen anyone say differently. It's almost dumb not to edit on a computer, unless you're really efficient using traditional means.

But going back to my original argument, I don't see how IMAX is a bad format to use for a film like this since, as you stated, it's perfect for practical and location shooting. The Hobbit is all of that and then some.