Official 'The Hobbit' Thread

[Drizzle]

Who else is getting antsy about the lack of Hugo Weaving news?

I'm not worried. He'll be in it. He shows up in everything these days. He's like a white Samuel L. Jackson.

 

[redhawk23]

I'm not worried. He'll be in it. He shows up in everything these days. He's like a white Samuel L. Jackson.

 

[Pink Ranger]

I'm not worried. He'll be in it. He shows up in everything these days. He's like a white Samuel L. Jackson.

"Enough is enough! I've had it with these mother####in' hobbits on my mother####in' plane!"

 

[Boom]

Some of the fans over at TheOneRing are just flat-out ridiculous.

First they speculate that Legolas will be the one killing Smaug (because Bard hasn't been announced yet). And now they're speculating that Legolas will be replacing Thranduil (because he hasn't been announced yet).

Come on, folks .

 

[Whiskey Tango]

Some of the fans over at TheOneRing are just flat-out ridiculous.

First they speculate that Legolas will be the one killing Smaug (because Bard hasn't been announced yet). And now they're speculating that Legolas will be replacing Thranduil (because he hasn't been announced yet).

Come on, folks .

That's the internet for you.

 

[Octoberist]

You kinda need Bard since he's the only big Human character in the story.

 

[Boom]

And you kinda need Thranduil since he's the ****ing Elf-King of Mirkwood.

 

[Boom]

Keep your eyes on Peter Jackson's Facebook page, folks.

Hi everyone. Watch this space... My first video post from the set of THE HOBBIT will be landing here soon!

 

[Sgt.Pepper]

Yeah! Can't wait.

 

[Doc Ock]

Keep your eyes on Peter Jackson's Facebook page, folks.

Suhweet!

 

[Doctor Jones]

****, I don't have facebook. It can be uploaded to youtube right?

 

[CGHulk]

****, I don't have facebook. It can be uploaded to youtube right?

Someone will.

 

[Boom]

So I found this on the Hobbit Facebook page. I really hope this is the official logo for the films. A perfect blend of quirkiness and personality.

Spoiler

 

[Sgt.Pepper]

I hope that is the official logo too.

Are they going to use the subtitles An/The Unexpected Journey and There and Back Again because I prefer if they just use Part I and Part II instead.

 

[Boom]

There's been no official confirmation of the supposed subtitles. And it surprised me when I ended up loving them. At first I was in the "Part I/Part II" Camp, but then we would have this:

The Hobbit: Part I
The Hobbit: Part II
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King

Three films with subtitles, two without. And when you look at these two projects as one collective series, it looks odd for the Hobbit films to not have subtitles.

Now, in comparison:

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
The Hobbit: There and Back Again
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King

 

[Kane52630]

edit: whoops

 

[Sgt.Pepper]

Now with your comparison, Part I and Part II does seem a bit weird placed.

It's not that hard to convince me because you totally convinced me now that the subtitles are better than Part I and Part II .

 

[Octoberist]

I think the subtitles are a nice touch.

 

[Marx]

So I found this on the Hobbit Facebook page. I really hope this is the official logo for the films. A perfect blend of quirkiness and personality.

Spoiler

I hope so too. It matches the original trilogy almost exactly.

 

[Octoberist]

I'm still itching for Bard's casting....

And yes, the logo looks rad.

 

[TX85]

Great logo and just added/liked the Facebook page!

 

[Boom]

Need... this video... now... .

 

[Octoberist]

48 Frames Per Second


by Peter Jackson on Monday, April 11, 2011 at 5:12pm

Time for an update. Actually, we've been intending to kick off with a video, which is almost done, so look out for that in the next day or two. In the meantime, I thought I'd address the news that has been reported about us shooting THE HOBBIT at 48 frames per second, and explain to you what my thoughts are about this.

We are indeed shooting at the higher frame rate. The key thing to understand is that this process requires both shooting and projecting at 48 fps, rather than the usual 24 fps (films have been shot at 24 frames per second since the late 1920's). So the result looks like normal speed, but the image has hugely enhanced clarity and smoothness. Looking at 24 frames every second may seem ok--and we've all seen thousands of films like this over the last 90 years--but there is often quite a lot of blur in each frame, during fast movements, and if the camera is moving around quickly, the image can judder or "strobe."

Shooting and projecting at 48 fps does a lot to get rid of these issues. It looks much more lifelike, and it is much easier to watch, especially in 3-D. We've been watching HOBBIT tests and dailies at 48 fps now for several months, and we often sit through two hours worth of footage without getting any eye strain from the 3-D. It looks great, and we've actually become used to it now, to the point that other film experiences look a little primitive. I saw a new movie in the cinema on Sunday and I kept getting distracted by the juddery panning and blurring. We're getting spoilt!

Originally, 24 fps was chosen based on the technical requirements of the early sound era. I suspect it was the minimum speed required to get some audio fidelity out of the first optical sound tracks. They would have settled on the minimum speed because of the cost of the film stock. 35mm film is expensive, and the cost per foot (to buy the negative stock, develop it and print it), has been a fairly significant part of any film budget.

So we have lived with 24 fps for 9 decades--not because it's the best film speed (it's not by any stretch), but because it was the cheapest speed to achieve basic acceptable results back in 1927 or whenever it was adopted.

None of this thinking is new. Doug Trumball developed and promoted a 60 frames per second process called ShowScan about 30 years ago and that looked great. Unfortunately it was never adopted past theme park use. I imagine the sheer expense of burning through expensive film stock at the higher speed (you are charged per foot of film, which is about 18 frames), and the projection difficulties in cinemas, made it tough to use for "normal" films, despite looking amazing. Actually, if anybody has been on the Star Tours ride at Disneyland, you've experienced the life like quality of 60 frames per second. Our new King Kong attraction at Universal Studios also uses 60 fps.

Now that the world's cinemas are moving towards digital projection, and many films are being shot with digital cameras, increasing the frame rate becomes much easier. Most of the new digital projectors are capable of projecting at 48 fps, with only the digital servers needing some firmware upgrades. We tested both 48 fps and 60 fps. The difference between those speeds is almost impossible to detect, but the increase in quality over 24 fps is significant.

Film purists will criticize the lack of blur and strobing artifacts, but all of our crew--many of whom are film purists--are now converts. You get used to this new look very quickly and it becomes a much more lifelike and comfortable viewing experience. It's similar to the moment when vinyl records were supplanted by digital CDs. There's no doubt in my mind that we're heading towards movies being shot and projected at higher frame rates.

Warner Bros. have been very supportive, and allowed us to start shooting THE HOBBIT at 48 fps, despite there never having been a wide release feature film filmed at this higher frame rate. We are hopeful that there will be enough theaters capable of projecting 48 fps by the time The Hobbit comes out where we can seriously explore that possibility with Warner Bros. However, while it's predicted that there may be over 10,000 screens capable of projecting THE HOBBIT at 48 fps by our release date in Dec, 2012, we don’t yet know what the reality will be. It is a situation we will all be monitoring carefully. I see it as a way of future-proofing THE HOBBIT. Take it from me--if we do release in 48 fps, those are the cinemas you should watch the movie in. It will look terrific!

Time to jump in the car and drive to Bag End for the day. Video coming soon!

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Peter-Jackson/141884481557#!/notes/peter-jackson/48-frames-per-second/10150222861171558

 

[Octoberist]

 

[Boom]

^ Looks like that logo is official, after all. I love it .

Anyway, that was a great article, and I'm glad we have a more specific time frame for the video's release. I can stop refreshing his Facebook page now .

Warner Bros. have been very supportive, and allowed us to start shooting THE HOBBIT at 48 fps, despite there never having been a wide release feature film filmed at this higher frame rate.

I didn't know that. That's awesome .