Official 'The Hobbit' Thread - Part 17

[Iceman]

After some delay I'm finally getting a chance to see this today. BTW, what the hell happened with all the Higher Frame Rate thing for this film? I've heard absolutely zero about this film being in 48fps, I'm guessing PJ's experiment has been a bit of a dud.

I'm sure someone was saying in this thread about watching it with HFR and that they liked it like that quite recently, maybe a couple of pages back. I don't know myself, had completely forgotten about it.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

I haven't got a bluray player yet

At this point, don't bother getting into it. Wait for a 4K format to become mainstream.

 

[jmc]

I saw some samples of the HFR and it really made the film look like a TV production, I'm guessing it was always going to be a hard sell with those type of results. Kudos to Jackson for trying though, but it seems clear 48fps has a while to go before becoming any sort of standard.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Kudos to Jackson for using the Hobbit films as a glorified prototype. James Cameron will realize the potential, as he always does.

 

[Iceman]

I saw some samples of the HFR and it really made the film look like a TV production, I'm guessing it was always going to be a hard sell with those type of results. Kudos to Jackson for trying though, but it seems clear 48fps has a while to go before becoming any sort of standard.

Like 3D. I'm all for these technological developments but both of these were introduced too early before they were at a level for mass market consumption. Avatar's box office shows the potential when you actually do get tech advances right.

 

[Iceman]

Kudos to Jackson for using the Hobbit films as a glorified prototype. James Cameron will realize the potential, as he always does.

Exactly. I'll pay to watch Cameron films in 3D HFR and whatever else he wants to add on as I know he'll get them to a work as intended.

 

[jmc]

I question whether or not HFR will ever become a norm. The thing is at a higher frame rate you lose the barrier between real life and film, at 24fps your mind tells you what you're looking at isn't real, at 48fps it's closer to what your eyes see in real life and therefore it's easy for your mind to detect when things are fake. It's why people have complained about things looking like a set because their minds can detect that it is! lol

In order to compensate you'd have to make your sets and make up look far more realistic which is going to cost more time and therefore more money.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Cinema is already headed that way. Cameron described the 3D experience the same way you describe HFR. That what was once a screen to another world is now a window. But it was still imperfect. You observed as a ghost who is not quite in that dimension. Hence the slowness of their movement (and ghosting). With HFR, the transition is that much closer. The window has no veils.

In order to compensate you'd have to make your sets and make up look far more realistic which is going to cost more time and therefore more money.

Perhaps a purely CG environment will be more optimum for this format.

 

[Iceman]

Perhaps a purely CG environment will be more optimum for this format.

That would be great news for George Lucas! If only he still owned LucasFilm. t:

 

[jmc]

Perhaps a purely CG environment will be more optimum for this format.

It might be the only way for the format to be honest. As long as you have live action elements and CGI elements in HFR there's always the risk of it taking people out of the movie, which is ironic given it's meant to be a immersive experience.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Which is why it just might work with Avatar 2,3, and 4. And the fact that you don't underestimate Cameron.

 

[jmc]

Which is why it just might work with Avatar 2,3, and 4. And the fact that you don't underestimate Cameron.

It's going to depend what the Real life to CGI ratio is. Cameron does seem to be thinking along side Jackson about HFR, and if anyone can perfect it it will probably be him. That said, I think there are still limits to the human eye that will always be difficult to overcome without spending considerable more time and money.

 

[The Guard]

Not understanding some of the complaints.

Why wouldn't the Nazgul be assembled to protect Sauron? They're essentially the servants of Sauron, yes?

 

[jmc]

So I finally saw it. Look, it was entertaining for the most part, but at the same time this film is missing the character journey and story of the LOTR films. The battles sequences just went on and on and Bilbo was more or less invisible (no pun intended) throughout. In all this trilogy to me has just been a complete misjudgement on part of the film makers. It didn't need 3 films, it barely even needed 2, it's just come across as trying to be LOTR instead of just being a story about Bilbo Baggins' adventures, and that's the saddest thing I've taken away from this series. It could easily have been one really good movie, instead it's 3 movies that have shining moments but lack the narrative depth to justify their existence. If they just made it actually be The Hobbit I think it would have been a good companion piece to LOTR. But what's done is done. Overall, the series amounts to being nothing more than just OK. I'm hoping one day to see someone do a reedit of this film as a single 3 hour piece because I think a really good single movie exists within this series.

 

[TheVileOne]

Alfred was a terrible character and should not have had such a large role in the third movie.

 

[Iceman]

It's spelt 'Alfrid', in case that helps make him a bit less annoying.

 

[Brother Jack]

It's spelt 'Alfrid', in case that helps make him a bit less annoying.

I would say it makes him more annoying.

It might have been worth it if he had a satisfyingly brutal death at the end but instead he just kind of walks away.

 

[Iceman]

Haha, agreed on both.

They killed off the Master of Laketown. I thought they were bound to do something to this guy, even if it was a comedic death. All that ****** build up for nothing.

 

[Herolee10]

10 years ago, hell even 4 years ago, I never would have found myself saying that i thought a James Gunn film (GOTG) would LOOK MUCH MORE visually impressive than one of Jackson's fantasy epics.

 

[jmc]

I don't disagree with that statement, as overrated as I thought Guardians was I think it looked far better visually than The Hobbit.

 

[Zatanna]

Saw it.... my one complaint right now is CGI Dain. He looked ridiculous. Overall, I am happy with it.

 

[Herolee10]

Also, as others have said, the beginning of this film featuring Smaug's attack on Laketown and his eventual defeat should have taken place at the end of the second Hobbit film.

Just cut out the slapstick Tom & Jerry-like chase sequence and insert the sequence above and end when Thorin starts walking towards the mountain after hearing that Smaug was defeated.

Also, did anyone else think that something looked wrong with Legolas's (Orlando's) face when he appeared behind Tauriel as she was saying goodbye to Kili? It looked very CGI-ish.

 

[jonathancrane]

I find Orlando Bloom's face always looks like that, but, that's just me, haha...

 

[sueb1863]

They probably had to CGI Orlando's face a bit so he looked younger.

 

[vinsanity]

Weekend estimates: $41,420,000 total domestic until now: $168,522,000 almost $500 Million Worldwide

It's already doing better than DOS and the same as AUJ did in the first 12 days