The Hobbit movie(s) anticipation thread

[Roderick Femm]

Originally Posted by Coriolanus

SPOILER:

So what happened to Sauron between the off-stage events in The Hobbit and LOTR such that he became the great eye thingie?

SPOILER:

Sauron rebuilds the Barad-dûr! : http://www.henneth-annun.net/resourc...w.cfm?EVID=830

So he regarded the change as an improvement?


Roddy

[Coriolanus]

Originally Posted by Roderick Femm

So he regarded the change as an improvement?
Roddy

Absolutely. Sauron was spanked out of his Necromancer digs and went right to Mordor. Possibly the re-emergence of the One Ring had something to do with his ability. As long as it still existed - Sauron was good to go.

[Elendil's Heir]

In The Really Unfinished Tales, Tolkien revealed that Sauron won a drawing at Home Depot and was able to finish the Barad-Dur rebuild even sooner than he'd hoped.

[jayjay]

Originally Posted by Elendil's Heir

In The Really Unfinished Tales, Tolkien revealed that Sauron won a drawing at Home Depot and was able to finish the Barad-Dur rebuild even sooner than he'd hoped.

Ty Pennington called that episode his hardest yet...

[RTFirefly]

Originally Posted by Elendil's Heir

In The Really Unfinished Tales, Tolkien revealed that Sauron won a drawing at Home Depot and was able to finish the Barad-Dur rebuild even sooner than he'd hoped.

You're just saying that because Tolkien wrote those words for your character.

[carnivorousplant]

Originally Posted by RTFirefly

You're just saying that because Tolkien wrote those words for your character.

You're a brave man. Go and break through the lines. And remember, while you're out there risking your life and limb through shot and shell, we'll be in be in here thinking what a sucker you are.

[Baal Houtham]

Originally Posted by standingwave

Honestly, who would you rather have working on the films, the Hildebrandts or Howe and Lee?

Honestly, the Hildebrandts, and based on the preview footage compiled upthread it looks like Jackson may have moved in that direction. A lot of the scenes are drenched in color, which looks more like the Brothers than Howe or Lee.

I only know Howe and Lee from the links you provided, but neither seems to have a consistent vision of Middle Earth. The art in the links was largely monochrome and was generally moody details rather than scenes. Really I don't see the art in those links as being closely related to the LOTR films.

I won't defend the Hildebrandts' accuracy as Tolkien translators, but they built a visually striking Middle Earth.

[gaffa]

Originally Posted by Baal Houtham

Honestly, the Hildebrandts, and based on the preview footage compiled upthread it looks like Jackson may have moved in that direction. A lot of the scenes are drenched in color, which looks more like the Brothers than Howe or Lee.

You can't take the previews as the final word. The digital Red cameras, for some reason, do not produce usable color directly. Every single shot has to be color corrected. One of the Production Diaries linked in this thread has a lot of information about the Red Digital cameras, the correction process and how shockingly garish the actual sets were. Any regular video or stills shot on one of those sets would have to have the same correction applied to look the same as the finished production.

[Bridget Burke]

I found The Brothers' visions of Tolkien garish & saccharine; never liked any of their work. Very glad that Lee & Howe were chosen as the lead artists for the films.

Yes, their book illustrations sometimes did just "suggest"--but their continuing involvement with Jackson, et al., has been a great benefit. (I recently watched the LOTR "extras" again; both artists produced conceptual work but also did hands-on work. And I get a bit of an "odd couple" vibe--gentle, hippie Alan Lee sharing space with John Howe, who does military enactment in his "spare" time.)

Now--surely The Hobbit will have lots of "special" stuff, too!

[Quartz]

I'm seeing the film later this week.

[squeegee]

Originally Posted by gaffa

You can't take the previews as the final word. The digital Red cameras, for some reason, do not produce usable color directly. Every single shot has to be color corrected. One of the Production Diaries linked in this thread has a lot of information about the Red Digital cameras, the correction process and how shockingly garish the actual sets were. Any regular video or stills shot on one of those sets would have to have the same correction applied to look the same as the finished production.

IIRC from those clips, it's the 3D process that robs the color saturation, not specifically the cameras. But I don't recall them going into further detail then that, so perhaps I didn't see the right clip.

[simster]

Originally Posted by Quartz

I'm seeing the film later this week.

You and about a gazillion other folks - we have our tickets in hand for Saturday night - it's going to be hell avoiding the threads here until then.

[gaffa]

Originally Posted by squeegee

IIRC from those clips, it's the 3D process that robs the color saturation, not specifically the cameras. But I don't recall them going into further detail then that, so perhaps I didn't see the right clip.

Maybe the cameras have some filter or have to bounce off half-silvered mirrors. But I thought they were physically small enough that they could get a pair human eye distance apart with no special tricks. Doubtless this first film will be the subject of a cover article of American Cinematographer magazine.

[squeegee]

Originally Posted by gaffa

Maybe the cameras have some filter or have to bounce off half-silvered mirrors. But I thought they were physically small enough that they could get a pair human eye distance apart with no special tricks. Doubtless this first film will be the subject of a cover article of American Cinematographer magazine.

Actually I recall the camera rig they showed in the clips, which showed that they couldn't get two cameras looking straight-on in a stereoscopic pair and they had to bounce the image through a mirror to at least one of the REDs to get the proper separation. It was quite clever. But I don't think that has anything to do with the saturation problem; mirrors shouldn't be a big deal. My recollection is that the 3D "compositing" (is there a more correct term?) of the two cameras robbed color saturation, but I should go back and view the clips; it's been a bit and I don't recall what detail they went into about that specific issue.

[Skammer]

I just checked Friday's schedule at our local 21-screen cinema. Twenty one screens, you have your choice of four different movies playing:
- The Hobbit (IMAX 3D)
- The Hobbit (HFR 3D)
- The Hobbit (3D)
- The Hobbit


They should give the guy who sets up the marquee the night off.

[Quartz]

The film is very long. Is there a natural bladder break?

[Skammer]

Originally Posted by Quartz

The film is very long. Is there a natural bladder break?

I'll not drink during the movie, a bladder break sounds painful.

[jayjay]

Originally Posted by Quartz

The film is very long. Is there a natural bladder break?

Obviously, I don't know what Jackson put into the Rivendell scene, but if he follows the book, that's a good place. It should be roughly halfway through the first film, and absolutely nothing happens there except a bunch of silly elves singing and dancing and piling provisions on the party. Once they leave Rivendell, it's pretty much all action or important plot (I think the first film ends with just after the Riddle contest. I don't know if the Eagles are in this one, though. So I'm going to guesstimate it'll end anywhere from Bilbo's escape from the mountain to Beorn's provisioning of the party and them entering Mirkwood. I'd guess Eagles, because the whole rescue comes pretty close after the escape and the trek from the Carrock to Beorn's is a natural bridge for the first and second movie.

[squeegee]

Originally Posted by jayjay

Obviously, I don't know what Jackson put into the Rivendell scene, but if he follows the book, that's a good place. It should be roughly halfway through the first film, and absolutely nothing happens there except a bunch of silly elves singing and dancing and piling provisions on the party. Once they leave Rivendell, it's pretty much all action or important plot (I think the first film ends with just after the Riddle contest. I don't know if the Eagles are in this one, though. So I'm going to guesstimate it'll end anywhere from Bilbo's escape from the mountain to Beorn's provisioning of the party and them entering Mirkwood. I'd guess Eagles, because the whole rescue comes pretty close after the escape and the trek from the Carrock to Beorn's is a natural bridge for the first and second movie.

I think you're forgetting

SPOILER:

the secret message on the map

which is quite important later.

[jayjay]

Originally Posted by squeegee

I think you're forgetting

SPOILER:

the secret message on the map

which is quite important later.

Yes, I am. I thought that came much earlier (as in, the dwarves knew about it from the beginning).

[Mahaloth]

I'm going Sunday, but has anyone seen it yet?

The reviews look mainly positive, but the 48 FPS reviews are looking quite bad. The effects look worse, the lighting looks worse, and the props/sets look faker.

I'm seeing it in 2D 24FPS. I've read a few reviews that say the movie is a lot better that way and at that frame rate.

[Lasciel]

I'm seeing it in 24, because I'm more interested in the film than in the technology.

I would LIKE to see it in 48, but I can't do 3D, so I don't know if that will end up working out. I'd hate to pay those kinds of prices for the ~ 30 minutes that I can handle 3D without my eyeballs falling out of my head.

What I'll be interested to see is if this new framerate catches on, if it will lead to improvements in set building and light matching to make those "substitutions" less obvious, or if movies will move more towards being entirely shot in "real" locations to avoid the issue entirely.

It's an interesting puzzle for the props and set making people, and I am really interested in how it's all going to work out!

[Tarwater]

Originally Posted by Mahaloth

The reviews look mainly positive...

Technically true, I guess. It's at 74% on RT and Metacritic has an average score of 60, so critics don't seem overly enthusiastic about it.

[Peremensoe]

Originally Posted by Mahaloth

The reviews look mainly positive, but the 48 FPS reviews are looking quite bad. The effects look worse, the lighting looks worse, and the props/sets look faker.

I haven't seen a 48FPS review where I've been able to really understand the objection, except that it violates the reviewer's expectation about what movies are supposed to look like (as compared to, in some cases, TV or "video"). Some of them really seem to boil down to "It looks so real! It's awful!"

However, it hasn't been clear that any of the reviews have been for 2D 48FPS, which is what I'd be interested in.

[randwill]

Is there a 2D 48FPS version?

[Mahaloth]

Originally Posted by randwill

Is there a 2D 48FPS version?

At one point, it was looking like that was.....maybe happening? As far as I know, it hasn't happened and 24 FPS is 2D only.

I could be wrong; let me know.

[Mahaloth]

I did just check all the local theaters around here. We have some showing the 48 FPS(marked HFR) and all those screenings are 3D.

[Peremensoe]

Originally Posted by randwill

Is there a 2D 48FPS version?

I think not, alas. There has been plenty of talk about all the possible combinations of technologies. This, which I just found, says,

...the aptly named new site 48 fps Movies, which is putting together a list of the places that are equipped for both 48 fps and 3D. That's important, since Warner Bros. won't be releasing the 48 fps version of The Hobbit in 2D-- if you're in for one new technology, you're in for the other one as well.

So that would be, not--but the last bit there isn't right, because there will be 3D 24FPS.

So... while the version I'm seeing Sunday is 2D 24FPS, I hold out hope that I can check out the 48 at some point--which maybe no reviewers have even seen, as yet.

[jayjay]

I just want to update that 48fps list I posted earlier...that was apparently an IMAX-only 48fps list. There are additional standard screen 48fps showings at other theaters.

http://www.48fpsmovies.com/48-fps-theater-list/

[Mahaloth]

And the site does confirm that the 2D 48FPS is not screening. I'd love to see an extended trailer that way, but I really do prefer both 2D and 24FPS seems like the way to go.

Still, I'm curious about higher frame rates.

[Skammer]

I bought my ticket last night for a 48fps showing tomorrow night; I hope I don't regret my choice. I could have gone with standard 3D or 2D.

[squeegee]

Wow, it opens tomorrow and it's currently at 49% (top critics) on the Tomato Meter based on 37 reviews. On the one hand: JP, you better not have Kong'd these films! On the other: Skyfall, a thoroughly bad movie with maybe a few cool things in it, is clocking at 91% (top critics) on that same meter, so there is a bit of a tomato credibility-gap to think about.

The major criticisms seem to be about pacing, so maybe I'll go to a matinee next week and nip out to Starbucks and read the paper during any slow spots.

[C K Dexter Haven]

Since this is the "anticipation" thread, and we're no long anticipating, I'd like to suggest that this thread ((11 pages long) be closed and we start a new thread commenting on the actual movie rather than on the trailers, sneak peaks, speculation, and so forth.

[carnivorousplant]

For G-d's sake, er, please be so kind as to post a link.

[twickster]

Originally Posted by C K Dexter Haven

Since this is the "anticipation" thread, and we're no long anticipating, I'd like to suggest that this thread ((11 pages long) be closed and we start a new thread commenting on the actual movie rather than on the trailers, sneak peaks, speculation, and so forth.

Done. I moved over three posts from this thread that seem to belong in the new thread.

twickster, Cafe Society moderator

[C K Dexter Haven]

Originally Posted by carnivorousplant

For G-d's sake, er, please be so kind as to post a link.

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=675509

[twickster]

Unlocked at OP's request, for anticipation about the next two movies. Discussion about the first film should continue to go in the other thread.

[Quartz]

Is it definitely two more movies?

[squeegee]

Originally Posted by Quartz

Is it definitely two more movies?

It is definitely two more bloated movies.

[Lasciel]

Originally Posted by squeegee

It is definitely two more bloated movies.

I'm hoping the soundtracks for the next two are... a little more varied than the first was?

Course, it didn't help much that one of the limited new motifs was the Radagast theme music, which makes me think of demented 1940s typewriting clerks more than anything remotely Middle Earthian.

[squeegee]

On a lark, I bought the first movie on Blu-ray and watched it last week. I originally saw it in the theater in 3D and hated that, and hoped the visualizes would be awesome at home. They were. Sadly it didn't really make up for this horrid mess of a movie. Sigh. Maybe PJ will take the negative reviews to heart and do the next one better, but a "middle" movie is challenging to make well.

[Mahaloth]

Originally Posted by twickster

Unlocked at OP's request, for anticipation about the next two movies. Discussion about the first film should continue to go in the other thread.

Thanks a ton.

So, are we 100% sure we are getting an extended 1st movie in the Fall?

I have been hearing some very loose rumors that the studio backed down from committing to a full extended version of the movie. I kind of wonder if going to 3 movies meant that the extended was what we saw.

[Mahaloth]

Well, I am hearing that we will have an extended cut on DVD by the end of the year.

[Mahaloth]

Oh, and filming began again today. They are scheduled to do 10 more weeks of filming in order to get the final footage for the last two movies.

All principal cast there, I believe, though only a one unit production instead of multiple filming units.

[Elendil's Heir]

I was disappointed in the first movie, I must admit. Great to look at, but never quite... clicked for me. And the Dwarves were obviously regular guys with funny hair - not at all proportioned the way Gimli had been in LOTR, for instance. I actually preferred the Dwarves in the cartoon Hobbit to these guys.

[Mahaloth]

Originally Posted by Elendil's Heir

I was disappointed in the first movie, I must admit. Great to look at, but never quite... clicked for me. And the Dwarves were obviously regular guys with funny hair - not at all proportioned the way Gimli had been in LOTR, for instance. I actually preferred the Dwarves in the cartoon Hobbit to these guys.

Hopefully, it's the weakest of the three sections, though I still rather enjoyed it. Less good than LOTR, but no Phantom Menace or Matrix 3 in terms of poor continuation of series. (uh, so to speak).