A perfectly good reason to be unreasonable! 
Some 3D movies have been excellent, and the 3D is a visual enhancement. Yeah, it’s probably a fad designed to give the movie an edge over people just waiting for the video, but it has been used very well (TOY STORY 3, for instance) to increase the dramatic and visual impact. It’s very different from the 1950s bits with 3D throwing spears at the audience. Well-done 3D is more subtle.
Bah! Humbug, I say! I watched Toy Story 3 on demand and found it to be charming and very well done. The absence of 3D effects (which I didn’t know had been used in the film) took nothing away from it that I could see. There’s no substitute for good story, good editing and good cinematography, IMO.
Actually the only recent 3D movie that really worked for me was Journey to the Center of the Earth. But this was a crappy movie that we went to see just for the 3D effects. We saw Toy Story 3 in 3D at the movies and 2D since and it was no real difference and still the weakest of the Toy Story movies. A far cry from Up! or Wall-E
So, did they ever cast the Voice of Smaug?
Sean Connery available?
Too type-casty?
Gilbert Gottfried!
Too soon?
Rumored to be Leonard Nimoy
So is there a* full confirmed *cast list for this film yet anywhere? I’m a bit surprised Hugo Weaving still hasn’t been announced since Elrond has a significant part, and I’m also curious if David Tennant is actually playing Thranduil or not.
I’m sorry if this has been covered in one of the many previous Hobbit threads but,
FRODO??? WTF?!?!?!
I was really looking forward to this new movie adaptation of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, but then I heard they were going to film it in colour. I’m so tired of these filmmakers just throwing the latest gimmick into their movies whether it fits or not. They’re really just trying to make more money, and so they just shoehorn this new fad in whether it fits or not. I bet they go out of their way to add colour into the film while sacrificing important plot or character development details. I’m just going to boycott this film.
</1939>
Presumably he only appears in a small segment of the second film, to help tie back to the other movies. I’ll be disappointed if they invent too much for him.
Galadriel wasn’t actually in The Hobbit either, but she would be a big part of any White Council story. I’m fine with the movies getting into that, or other parts that weren’t directly depicted in the book, so long as it’s pretty consistent with what we know from Tolkien’s ancillary writings.
Also, notice that Thrór and Thráin are to appear, so either the narrative begins well before “An Unexpected Party,” or there will be an extended flashback sequence as Thorin tells the story.
I can fully understand certain elves being included. After all, Galadriel and Legolas were alive at the time of The Hobbit and if they’re going through Mirkwood it’s reasonable to expect Legolas to be there.
I was talking to my boyfriend about Frodo this morning and we determined that they must be planning on having him reading There and Back Again to Sam’s kids or something (like the grandfather and the sick kid in the Princess Bride). If he’s in it for any more than that, I’m gonna be annoyed. Elijah Wood did a decent job and I don’t mind the character. But, he wasn’t alive, he wasn’t there, and he doesn’t fit in the story.
I’m sure it’ll be Bilbo recounting his adventure instead of having his adventure - which kind of kills the dramatic tension. I mean yes we know he makes it, but this is a children’s story and they likely aren’t fully versed in a “chance meeting in Bree”.
Frodo most certainly wasn’t alive at the time of The Hobbit. Frodo was 33 when Bilbo was 111. That was 60 years after The Hobbit.
I think everybody knows that.
Color never made people sick, and I’ve never seen a color film that used color as a gimmick. I can say neither for 3D.
Technically the Wizard of Oz used color as a gimmick as did the 1940s Magic Garden and a few others but otherwise I know what you mean and you’re correct.
3D is not color. 3D is Smell-O-Vision.
But there are a significant number of people who can’t get the full impact of color due to colorblindness, and yes, color was absolutely viewed as a gimmick when it first appeared. Same with sound in films (which, unlike 3D, actually locks out an entire group of people from the experience - the deaf).
In both cases, level-headed people eventually realized that the emergence of new technology enables rather than takes away, and that the fumbling first generation of its practitioners will eventually give way to new filmmakers who discover how to use it with subtlety and artistry. I would argue, just comparing films like Coraline and Up to the “SWORD FLYING AT THE AUDIENCE” stuff of 3D yore, that we’re in exactly that transition period now for 3D.
(Note that I’m not arguing that 3D will become ubiquitous the way sound did, but rather that the new gen of directors will be those that understand its proper use - more like the color revolution than the “talkies.”)