Official 'The Hobbit' Thread - Part 7

[HowardStark]

That has nothing to do with what you wrote. Changing the goal post does not make your original point any more right.

The quality of films are irrelevant here. FOTR and TTT has some great work for their time. ROTK would have matched them if they had actually finished it. But lets be fair, ILM and the annoying Star Wars series blows the LOTR trilogy away in the special effects area.

TPM came out two years before any LOTR film, and it holds up better.

Are you seriously telling me The Prequels are better the LOTR Trilogy. Yes The Prequels are not bad but nor are they too me as good as Rings. Besides LOTR is not the same thing as SW. LOTR has to look lived in and real. Star Wars had great effects but its different movie where Lucas again had 20 years to make them. Too me the Goblins in LOTR were lots better then the Clone Troopers who look weightless and empty.

 

[Vartha]

Do it. Please do it!

I'll do it today but won't be able to post it til monday as I work a rare DAYTIME 12 hour shift lol

 

[HowardStark]

Why are you bringing up the story? We all know it, I hate it. That is irrelevant. Stop propping up LOTR here. It is unnecessary. We are talking special effects.

Avatar took so long because Cameron is a freak and perfectionist. Davy Jones is amazing, but him and his undead pirates don't even come close to the work done on Avatar in terms of size and scoop. It isn't even close to a comparsion.

Cameron believes in a pre-production and post-production on par with film. With as much time and care needed to fit his vision.

Pirates I am talking about COTHBP and they to me was some of the best cgi work other then The Planet Of The Apes Apes.And I guess Episode 3 Yoda. Avatar is for another topic another day. LOTR should be discussed in a Hobbit thread.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Are you seriously telling me The Prequels are better the LOTR Trilogy. Yes The Prequels are not bad but nor are they too me as good as Rings. Besides LOTR is not the same thing as SW. LOTR has to look lived in and real. Star Wars had great effects but its different movie where Lucas again had 20 years to make them. Too me the Goblins in LOTR were lots better then the Clone Troopers who look weightless and empty.

I am no longer sure if you are being serious.

Your obsession with how long films took to get made (Lucas clearly didn't start work on the prequels until he was reading to actually shoot them) or the quality of film when we are talking about effects is bizarre.

In terms of special effects, the prequels were superior.

With LOTR the FOTR got a bit of a pass, mainly because it was a bit of a test run and they really nailed the big moments. The prologue and Balrog were genius.

In terms of effects, I think TTT was easily the most consistent of the films. Yes it had the CGI sheen in the big battles (ent attack and Helm's Deep) and the warg attack set special effects back a few years, but it has some amazing work.

ROTK has some solid work, but it really does look unfinished.

With AUJ I get the ROTK vibe, we didn't quite have the time to finish vibe, which I think is ridiculous on a film this large.

I'll do it today but won't be able to post it til monday as I work a rare DAYTIME 12 hour shift lol

That is cool, thank you.

 

[moviedoors]

Rings does not get enough credit for being amazing with all the effects

 

[Vartha]

I remember when I was a kid going to see the Kong on the Universal Studio lot ride. When we got in the building (My mother didn't really believe Kong was going to be in the building) and we saw Kong my little brother jumped my entire family to get to the other side of the tram. I don't like the film all that much, but that Kong was a piece of art. One of the funniest and most terrifying experiences of my life.

hahaha Yeah the movie wasn't GREAT but Kong himself was VERY cool.
I got turned onto Baker when he did the make up for the original Dark Shadows Werewolf and had an article about it in Famous Monsters lol MAN that mag was awesome too .

 

[DarthSkywalker]

hahaha Yeah the movie wasn't GREAT but Kong himself was VERY cool.
I got turned onto Baker when he did the make up for the original Dark Shadows Werewolf and had an article about it in Famous Monsters lol MAN that mag was awesome too .

It is so different now because when it comes to special effects, creature design and other such things it feels like there are becoming less and less "main men". Prominent figures who you can associate the work with and tell simply from their work who was in charge of the design.

LOTR is one of the few films that emphasizes these craftsman.

 

[Vartha]

It is so different now because when it comes to special effects, creature design and other such things it feels like there are becoming less and less "main men". Prominent figures who you can associate the work with and tell simply from their work who was in charge of the design.

LOTR is one of the few films that emphasizes these craftsman.

I wouldn't say it's THAT different. They DO scan Scupltures of characters and creatures into computers to get the right look, but even THEN you can see who the artist was if you know their style well enough.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I wouldn't say it's THAT different. They DO scan Scupltures of characters and creatures into computers to get the right look, but even THEN you can see who the artist was if you know their style well enough.

Perhaps it is my own lack of attention then. Stupid growing up.

 

[Vartha]

Perhaps it is my own lack of attention then. Stupid growing up.

na more like not looking in the right spots at the right time lol sort of like that 1st 13 minute Hobbit vid on you tube lol

 

[ThePhantasm]

With LOTR the FOTR got a bit of a pass, mainly because it was a bit of a test run and they really nailed the big moments. The prologue and Balrog were genius.

Yes. I still don't understand how they managed to make the Balrog's fire so realistic looking. Its stunning special effects.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

na more like not looking in the right spots at the right time lol sort of like that 1st 13 minute Hobbit vid on you tube lol

Ouch. I think I actually felt that.

 

[747]

On this german fansite http://www.herr-der-ringe-film.de/v3/de/news/tolkienfilme/news_99968.php you can download a converted 48 frames trailer of The Hobbit which gives you an idea how it'll look like.

High
http://www.lukeletellier.com/wp-con...The+Hobbit+Trailer+@+48fps+-+High+Quality.flv

Medium
http://www.lukeletellier.com/wp-con...e+Hobbit+Trailer+@+48fps+-+Medium+Quality.mov

Low
http://www.lukeletellier.com/wp-con...=The+Hobbit+Trailer+@+48fps+-+Low+Quality.mov

If this is kinda how it's gonna look then bring it on I say! Cause that looks great, I love the realness of if and it doesn't distract at all. Looks better than the original version of the trailer imo.

 

[Visceral]

To me it seems that what is really hurting this film is the spreading of the story out over 3 films, its just the cash grab we all knew it would be.

 

[747]

Just saw a tweet, after the Swedish premiere, saying the story is too drawn out and that the 48fps looks awful.

 

[ThePhantasm]

To me it seems that what is really hurting this film is the spreading of the story out over 3 films, its just the cash grab we all knew it would be.

I'm not convinced it is a cash grab. So I suppose you mean "we all (minus ThePhantasm)."

Maybe once I see the movie I'll be convinced, but until then much of the dismal outlook on this new trilogy seems to me to stem not from an appreciation of the stories' many beats and the addition of the appendices material, but from a general cynicism.

 

[Visceral]

I'm not convinced it is a cash grab. So I suppose you mean "we all (minus ThePhantasm)."

Maybe once I see the movie I'll be convinced, but until then much of the dismal outlook on this new trilogy seems to me to stem not from an appreciation of the stories' many beats and the addition of the appendices material, but from a general cynicism.

No one's crap talking the hobbit or tolkien here.

They did the LOTR trilogy with one film per book, so I can understand expanding to two films in order to capture everything, but three seems like they are taking the fanbase for a ride.

Then you have a great majority of the reviewers stating that the story is drug out. The facts look pretty convincing here.

 

[ThePhantasm]

I wasn't using "appreciation" to mean "enjoyment" there. I wasn't suggesting that people were crap talking the Hobbit book.

I was saying that an appreciation (full understanding or analysis) of the Hobbit's story beats, which are more numerous and concise than any one book in the LOTR trilogy, warrants the consideration that (coupled with extensive appendices material) the Hobbit can make a decent trilogy for story purposes rather than to be a cash grab.

For what its worth, a great number of reviews for the LOTR movies charged them with being "drug out" as well.

 

[Visceral]

Iam quite sure they could have done it in one great film and still kept the great majority of the fanbase happy.

 

[ThePhantasm]

Iam quite sure they could have done it in one great film and still kept the great majority of the fanbase happy.

I disagree. I've analyzed this in the past in this thread. There are way too many story beats. It is a short book because it is much more condensed than LOTR. But once you make each event into a scene, you need at least two films. Add the appendices in to tie it to the LOTR trilogy, and that gives you three.

You can read my summary here if you like.

Remember, even back in the early days, Del Toro mentioned that the book had too many story beats for one film. And that was before they decided to integrate the appendices material along with it.

 

[moviedoors]

Maybe we can all stop claiming it's too long or just long enough or the critics are "wrong" or the critics are "right" or this or that until we've actually seen it.

Just a thought.

 

[ThePhantasm]

Maybe we can all stop claiming it's too long or just long enough or the critics are "wrong" or the critics are "right" or this or that until we've actually seen it.

Just a thought.

That was exactly my point.

 

[jmc]

Wasnt the original plan for the second Hobbit film to be a film that bridges the gap between the Hobbit and LOTR?

 

[moviedoors]

That was exactly my point.

Could've fooled me.

 

[Bruce Malone]

Wasnt the original plan for the second Hobbit film to be a film that bridges the gap between the Hobbit and LOTR?

To my knowledge yes.

I think it's still a head scratcher to look back and see how the much much bigger Lord of the Rings books were only given 1 film each to tell their story yet the tiny by comparison hobbit gets 3 films to its name, even including the appendices that's still over-kill.

From some of the early reviews it sort of shows. At least with reference to the pace of the film and how it really takes a while to get going. It may pay off with the last film but we'll see if 3 films is pushing the material.