Official 'The Hobbit' Thread - - - - - Part 14

[Vartha]

I officially hate 48fps. HATE IT.

Why do you get sick with it?
I haven't had any issues with either 3D or 48fps

 

[Warhammer]

60fps? My goodness.

 

[Warhammer]

Why do you get sick with it?
I haven't had any issues with either 3D or 48fps

The problem with 48fps for me is that it loses the illusion or suspension of disbelief. It looks so real that it looks fake. During a scene, it's like I am standing on set or holding the camera.

I reminds me of when I watch blu-ray on some types of televisions. It's like I'm watching the movie at 1.5x speed. Initially, it's jarring.

 

[Greyknight1]

I was honestly disappointed in the move. Melted gold was so fake. Too much running and lot of scenes useless. Felt like a 4 hour movie. The cliffhanger sucks. Felt like an hour watching dwarfs trying to kill the dragon.

 

[Warhammer]

The scenes with Smaug after the initial introduction with Bilbo dragged. It felt like an episode of Scooby-Doo. I dozed in and out and barely woke up a second or two before the cliffhanger.

 

[terry78]

Haha, those tunnels did remind me of the classic hallway door gag. This should have been playing during.

[YT]bPyt5HoIRvc[/YT]

 

[Vartha]

The problem with 48fps for me is that it loses the illusion or suspension of disbelief. It looks so real that it looks fake. During a scene, it's like I am standing on set or holding the camera.

I reminds me of when I watch blu-ray on some types of televisions. It's like I'm watching the movie at 1.5x speed. Initially, it's jarring.

I noticed that with one other film, don't recall what it was now, but, yeah on films like these you almost WANT a fuzziness to it.

 

[Victarion]

Did Jackson do any sort of father/son relationship stuff in here?

 

[Pink Ranger]

Did Jackson do any sort of father/son relationship stuff in here?

Kind of, at the beginning. And some interactions with Bard and Bain. Legolas and Thranduil too, but they're about as standoffish to each other as you'd expect if your dad is Lady Gaga.

 

[Vartha]

Noticed Jackson right off in Bree. If anyone missed him. lol

 

[Infinity9999x]

The biggest criticism I had of this movie, above even the random added side-plots, was far and away the CGI.

I honestly do not understand why Jackson has characters CGI WHEN THERE IS NO NEED FOR THEM TO BE CGI. Even with how good the tech is today, they still look fake, and they don't look as good as well-done makeup on a real actor does. Azog does not need to be CGI, he could easily be a real man and Jackson could use the same camera tricks to make him look bigger that he does with Gandalf. Bolg didn't need to be CGI. All the other orcs that were randomly CGI DIDN'T NEED TO BE FRIGGIN CGI.

It's just annoying, because the orcs he used in the films he made over a decade ago look better than the ones he has in his film now, and that's just inexcusable. But even further, it separates the look and feel of the Hobbit films on a design aspect.

It just really bugs me, and I honestly have no idea why he made that choice.

 

[Warhammer]

Convenience, dog. Convenience.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Convenience, dog. Convenience.

Is it really though? I'm not a producer or director so I don't know, but I can't imagine it's actually cheaper to CGI all that stuff in? All the green screen work and render time it takes etc. It's got to be cheaper to go practical. Especially with characters like the Orcs. I mean, it's not like I'm saying make a practical Smaug.

 

[redhawk23]

See the 3d, cgi elements of the first film actually did benefit from the 48 frames I thought but it was the live action parts of the first hobbit film that suffered. Considering how much an Avatar sequel would likely be an entirely CGI creation it might actually not be bad.

 

[Infinity9999x]

See the 3d, cgi elements of the first film actually did benefit from the 48 frames I thought but it was the live action parts of the first hobbit film that suffered. Considering how much an Avatar sequel would likely be an entirely CGI creation it might actually not be bad.

I'm not sure what you're saying here. Are you saying because Avatar did well they should keep using CGI? Sorry, the wording of your post just has me confused.

But even in the 3D, whenever the CGI characters were interacting with real people it always looked a bit fake to me. And in some cases, Azog looked particularly bad. He was a bit better in this film, but even when he's good, he still doesn't look as real as if they had just used a real actor. Which would have

 

[Warhammer]

Is it really though? I'm not a producer or director so I don't know, but I can't imagine it's actually cheaper to CGI all that stuff in? All the green screen work and render time it takes etc. It's got to be cheaper to go practical. Especially with characters like the Orcs. I mean, it's not like I'm saying make a practical Smaug.

This trilogy was going to be a cash cow going in. The extra amount it cost to create the CGI characters is nothing when that kind of money is being made.

And by the way, I completely agree with you. I felt that those two characters specifically should have been practical. It just looks much better and definitely could have been cheaper. Besides, old ol' practical effects and make-up is scarce these days. This is why I wish Guillermo Del Toro was still directing these films. He would have done as much practical effects/make-up as he could have before he introduced CGI. That is cinema magic.

 

[Infinity9999x]

This trilogy was going to be a cash cow going in. The extra amount it cost to create the CGI characters is nothing when that kind of money is being made.

And by the way, I completely agree with you. I felt that those two characters specifically should have been practical. It just looks much better and definitely could have been cheaper. Besides, old ol' practical effects and make-up is scarce these days. This is why I wish Guillermo Del Toro was still directing these films. He would have done as much practical effects/make-up as he could have before he introduced CGI. That is cinema magic.

Yeah, I know they make bank, but still.

And I agree. If we were going to have the Hobbit films look a bit different design wise, I wish we had Del Toro doing it, because he definitely would have done as much practical as possible. That's why I love him and Nolan. Honestly, a mix of CGI and practical is the way to go. Just look at films like Jurassic Park. The parts of the movie that look very dated are the parts where there are all-CGI dinos. But the parts where they used a combo of practical and CGI effects (like the T-Rex breaking out of the cage) still look great.

 

[jacobed]

You can tell most of their cg bill went towards Smaug. Saw this for a third time and I was shocked to find myself really loving it. Still have problems like the really terrible cg, like really terrible but I was still loving it

 

[terry78]

I think having the two lead orcs be guys in makeup and their minions be CG would've worked better as it shows that they're kind of a different stock than the rest of the grunts.

 

[ares834]

Noticed Jackson right off in Bree. If anyone missed him. lol

The funny thing is he plays the "same" character in FotR. He looks the exact same and is also eating a carrot.

The biggest criticism I had of this movie, above even the random added side-plots, was far and away the CGI.

I honestly do not understand why Jackson has characters CGI WHEN THERE IS NO NEED FOR THEM TO BE CGI. Even with how good the tech is today, they still look fake, and they don't look as good as well-done makeup on a real actor does. Azog does not need to be CGI, he could easily be a real man and Jackson could use the same camera tricks to make him look bigger that he does with Gandalf. Bolg didn't need to be CGI. All the other orcs that were randomly CGI DIDN'T NEED TO BE FRIGGIN CGI.

It's just annoying, because the orcs he used in the films he made over a decade ago look better than the ones he has in his film now, and that's just inexcusable. But even further, it separates the look and feel of the Hobbit films on a design aspect.

It just really bugs me, and I honestly have no idea why he made that choice.

Jackson has said it is because it offers him more freedom. I can't find the interview right now but he says no matter the amount of prosthetics applied the "orcs" will have eyes and a mouth where humans have theirs. By using CGI he can widen or shorten the width between eyes, move around the mouth and allow the orc to open his mouth in such a way that humans can't possibly do.

 

[matrix_ghost]

isn't cameron doing 60fps?

Not set in stone.
He was still testing but the overall consensus was that 60 fps made everything looked as real as real word .
There was still the matter of the cost being considered when filming an entire movie in 60 fps.

60fps? My goodness.

Douglas Trumbull has already made a short movie filmed at 120 fps and near IMAX resolution

 

[matrix_ghost]

Convenience, dog. Convenience.

It does free the director of alot of limitations however the overall feeling i get is that the directors really go all out and to some audience members it does feel like overkill.
I definately can see an upside to using CGI compared to practical FX AND i also see where practical effects look better then CG.
Combine both and you have a winning formula.

 

[BlackFox]

You thought Thranduil was wasted? Honestly, despite only being in the film for a few minutes they did a great job with him. He is ancient and regal yet wild and fey just as he should be. Beyond that they alluded to a very interesting back-story that he had.

Sorry perhaps my meaning I did not explain well.

He was a great character but I wish there had been MORE of him and we got to see that instead we seemed to get more of Tauriel who was less so.

I also wanted a lot more Bard and a lot less Legolas, I really hope we get to see Bard kick some Orc a** in the next film.

 

[ThePhantasm]

EDIT: from this Twitter account

 

[BlackFox]

You can tell most of their cg bill went towards Smaug. Saw this for a third time and I was shocked to find myself really loving it. Still have problems like the really terrible cg, like really terrible but I was still loving it

Yeah the CG other than Smaug was ropey, even the barrel scene, which was still great, but looked very dodgy at some points.

And yeah as someone said the Orcs in LOTR looked better non CGI than they did full CGI in this, I guess its easier to do because it cant be cheaper can it?!?

That gold statue looked like a cartoon.

Its damn frustrating because I really wanted to love this film like LOTR but it had all the right elements but just fell down in several areas the original trilogy never did to the same degree.