|
keep punching joe posted:My eyes can't focus on 3D and trying to watch it always leaves me with a headache so I really hope that this is shot in such a way that the 3D is just there as an added effect and not lots of things getting thrown towards the camera to justify the fact that it is in 3D. Theatres in my country don't know anything about proper projection and sound levels, so 3D movies have been an unequivocally bad experience for me. 2D movies for me from now on, be it regular 2D or 3D with those glasses.
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2011 23:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 04:40 |
|
|
keep punching joe posted:My eyes can't focus on 3D and trying to watch it always leaves me with a headache so I really hope that this is shot in such a way that the 3D is just there as an added effect and not lots of things getting thrown towards the camera to justify the fact that it is in 3D. I have this problem. I haven't seen very many 3D Films because of this but I think a lot of it has to do with how the 3D is used. When I saw Hugo a week ago, I was worried for a few minutes because the trailers were very jarring but then the film itself was really easy on my eyes. I had no problems watching it all the way through and found the effect very enjoyable. I'm sure its easy to screw up but hopefully they take note of how to do it right.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2011 23:24
|
|
|
Scans of a new article and photos from Total Film magazine: http://heirsofdurin.wordpress.com/2011/12/17/new-hobbit-article-in-total-film/
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2011 23:56
|
|
|
Mr. Gibbycrumbles posted:Scans of a new article and photos from Total Film magazine: That shot of Thorin is REALLY giving me a Gowron vibe. drat.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 00:06
|
|
|
Effingham posted:That shot of Thorin is REALLY giving me a Gowron vibe. drat. I refuse to see this as a bad thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 03:44
|
|
|
Effingham posted:That shot of Thorin is REALLY giving me a Gowron vibe. drat. Wait, is that the same actor?!
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 04:45
|
|
|
I hope people aren't down on 3d because of all of the crappy post production 3d movies that have been out. Avatar, Tron Legacy, and this are the only movies truly shot with 3d cameras (that I can think of). Not to mention the frame rate will make it look even smoother and more spectacular.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 05:49
|
|
|
Don't forget DRIVE ANGRY!
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 05:56
|
|
|
Gimmedaroot posted:I hope people aren't down on 3d because of all of the crappy post production 3d movies that have been out. Avatar, Tron Legacy, and this are the only movies truly shot with 3d cameras (that I can think of). Not to mention the frame rate will make it look even smoother and more spectacular. This is completely incorrect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_3-D_films Any movie in the first bracket not listed as "filmed in 2-D" is a 3D movie, not a post-conversion job.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 05:57
|
|
|
Ok, I was talking about the post-Avatar James Cameron cameras. The rush job of Alice in Wonderland and Clash of the Titans after Avatar produced a slew of post production crap that soured people on the idea of 3d, and I wish they would give The Hobbit a chance.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 06:00
|
|
|
Is 48 fps going to look all hosed up when I buy the Blu-ray and play it on my TV? Can my PS3 accurately send the 48 fps signal and can my TV, which I believe flickers at 60hz, display it properly? Sorry if this is a dumb question, I sometimes don't remember exactly how these things work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 06:01
|
|
|
It's going to look like any other movie you have on blu-ray.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 06:54
|
|
|
According to "The Hobbit" Facebook Page, the trailer will premier on Tuesday at 7pm PST.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 07:59
|
|
|
Gimmedaroot posted:Ok, I was talking about the post-Avatar James Cameron cameras. The rush job of Alice in Wonderland and Clash of the Titans after Avatar produced a slew of post production crap that soured people on the idea of 3d, and I wish they would give The Hobbit a chance. PJ is not using the Avatar cameras. They developed their own system using RED Epic cameras. It will look great, most likely, but it's a different kind of 3D to Avatar.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 08:00
|
|
|
keep punching joe posted:Plus that section was inserted by Tolkien after he had written LOTR as a way to link the books, along with rewriting the Riddles in the Dark chapter. So loving what?  It's an adaptation of The Hobbit as it exists today, not the first edition of the Hobbit. Why should anything JRR added himself in later editions not be considered good enough to be included in the movie?CerealCrunch posted:I'm reading through appendix A of Lord of the Rings right now, and Gandalf and Thorin get together in Bree before the Hobbit. Is all this in the appendices? I'm super stoked to read those for the first time, because I skipped over them the first time I read LOTR. Now I'm on my second complete readthrough, near the end of ROTK.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 14:23
|
|
|
I thought 3D would give actual depth, like on somebody's face their nose is in front of their cheeks, their chin in front of their neck and so forth. But every 3D thing I've seen has looked like a diarama with cardboard cut-outs. Does my initial impression of what 3D is actually exist or do they all have that effect?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 14:25
|
|
|
Szmitten posted:I thought 3D would give actual depth, like on somebody's face their nose is in front of their cheeks, their chin in front of their neck and so forth. But every 3D thing I've seen has looked like a diarama with cardboard cut-outs. Does my initial impression of what 3D is actually exist or do they all have that effect? Did you see Avatar in 3D? It was actually stereoscopic (IE: worked the same way human eyes do)
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 14:27
|
|
|
Hedrigall posted:Is all this in the appendices? I'm super stoked to read those for the first time, because I skipped over them the first time I read LOTR. Now I'm on my second complete readthrough, near the end of ROTK. There's a short note in the dwarf section of Appendix A. Tolkien actually wrote out a longer account of the meeting between Gandalf and Thorin (titled "The Quest of Erebor") which was meant for the appendices but ended up being left out; it was eventually published in Unfinished Tales, as CerealCrunch mentioned. The appendices do have some interesting material, though. There's also enough additional stuff in Unfinished Tales to make it worth getting, especially if you've also read and liked the published Silmarillion. (Which I personally love, but that's not entirely universal even among people who really like Tolkien's more accessible stuff.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 14:37
|
|
|
Hedrigall posted:(IE: worked the same way human eyes do) I know what you're saying about Avatar and similar movies using 2 cameras to produce stereopsis instead of inducing 3D with postprocessing, but I just thought I'd sum up the reasons that people are uncomfortable with 3D. Dolphin fucked around with this message at 14:56 on Dec 19, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 14:53
|
|
|
Hedrigall posted:Did you see Avatar in 3D? It was actually stereoscopic (IE: worked the same way human eyes do) Nope. The only 3D I've seen are in stores with 3DS and 3D TV demos and if they're showing it off at its worse then that's pretty dumb. If the selection of actual 3D is that slim then it's kinda pointless.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 14:59
|
|
|
Sorry I know this has probably been brought up a lot in the previous thread but I didn't take a good look at the cast list on IMDB until now. While I never would have figured Aidan Turner for a dwarf I'm sure he'll kick rear end, and James Nesbitt was born for this role. Sylvester McCoy as Radagast, loving awesome. And yay Bret McKenzie is going to be in it again  Probably a tiny cameo but still.Sorry if I'm gushing, can't help myself it seems. I do know I was incredibly psyched for the original LOTR movies before they came out, I guess that never went away. My only disappointment in the lineup so far is having Brian Blessed in this but not having him play Beorn. I'll live with it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 15:31
|
|
|
DS at Night posted:My only disappointment in the lineup so far is having Brian Blessed in this but not having him play Beorn. I'll live with it. Brian Blessed is not in this as far as I am aware. Guillermo was considering him at some point, but that went nowhere when PJ took over the casting. In fact I'm gonna update the OP with some more detailed casting info.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 15:43
|
|
|
Mr. Gibbycrumbles posted:Brian Blessed is not in this as far as I am aware. Guillermo was considering him at some point, but that went nowhere when PJ took over the casting. I have a problem with taking IMDB very literally even though it says "rumored" right after the name. They better not be kidding about Lee Pace as king Thranduil though 
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 15:51
|
|
|
If this movie looks anything like Public Enemies I will not be happy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 17:21
|
|
|
By the way, if you want your Hobbit trailer spoiled, I have updated the OP with a leaked breakdown of the trailer content.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 19:31
|
|
|
ComposerGuy posted:I refuse to see this as a bad thing. I don't, either. I know that Thorin is going to make those Misty Mountain goblins experience Bij!
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 20:01
|
|
|
Mr. Gibbycrumbles posted:By the way, if you want your Hobbit trailer spoiled, I have updated the OP with a leaked breakdown of the trailer content. Oh god the temptation...
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2011 20:33
|
|
|
Short thread and there's already some of the same old misinformation and misconceptions about 3-D and framerates being tossed around. I've worked on two theatrical 3-D features, and am working on another at the moment - I won't say which, but it's pretty high profile. I'd be more than happy to clear up some of the confusion and am tempted to start an A/T thread. What do you guys think, should I go ahead and do it formally in the A/T forum or should I do it in CineD? I'd love to be something of a resource to you guys but can't promise a ton of time and energy - my current gig has me pretty busy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2011 00:28
|
|
|
Trump posted:It's going to look like any other movie you have on blu-ray. ...except that it's 48fps instead of 24? My understanding is that there's already motion judder with 24fps sources on displays that don't natively flicker at a multiple of 24hz, so I was wondering if anybody knows whether that effect will be more or less pronounced with a 48fps source. Apologies if that was not clear initially.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2011 01:11
|
|
|
Colonel Whitey posted:...except that it's 48fps instead of 24? My understanding is that there's already motion judder with 24fps sources on displays that don't natively flicker at a multiple of 24hz, so I was wondering if anybody knows whether that effect will be more or less pronounced with a 48fps source. Apologies if that was not clear initially. I'm pretty sure Jackson said that there will be a 24fps version of the film back when it was first announced that he was shooting 48fps and everyone was worried, which is probably what the home releases are going to use?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2011 01:13
|
|
|
If anyone wants a cheap Hobbit fix you should pick this up http://www.amazon.com/Hobbit-Illustrated-Fantasy-Classic/dp/0345445600/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1324340537&sr=8-3 It's a neat adaptation with some nice artwork. I got it years ago and still crack through it once in a while.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2011 01:21
|
|
|
Colonel Whitey posted:...except that it's 48fps instead of 24? My understanding is that there's already motion judder with 24fps sources on displays that don't natively flicker at a multiple of 24hz, so I was wondering if anybody knows whether that effect will be more or less pronounced with a 48fps source. Apologies if that was not clear initially. From here. Peter Jackson posted:We will be completing a "normal" 24 frames per second version—in both digital and 35mm film prints. If we are able to get the Hobbit projected at 48 fps in selected cinemas, there will still be normal-looking 24 fps versions available in cinemas everywhere. So there you have it. It will look loving good either way. The end. Mr. Gibbycrumbles fucked around with this message at 02:04 on Dec 20, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2011 02:01
|
|
|
Szmitten posted:I thought 3D would give actual depth, like on somebody's face their nose is in front of their cheeks, their chin in front of their neck and so forth. But every 3D thing I've seen has looked like a diarama with cardboard cut-outs. Does my initial impression of what 3D is actually exist or do they all have that effect? The cheapest way one can do post-production 3D is basically to create layer masks and make a flat movie into a cardboad cutout. This was very visible in clash of the titans, only the CGI sequences had proper 3D (since it's probably easier to load a plugin, flick a switch and wait a few weeks to get a real 3d render vs manual 3D conversion)
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2011 03:19
|
|
|
ufarn posted:Sounds like you might want to check out these glasses: http://www.2d-glasses.com/. Why wouldn't people just pay for the 2d showing instead of buying those glasses. It's cheaper anyways. To stay on topic I wish I would have known a trailer was coming after it was released, short waits for things are worse than long waits for things in a weird way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2011 11:14
|
|
|
Medical posted:Why wouldn't people just pay for the 2d showing instead of buying those glasses. It's cheaper anyways. Some theaters don't offer 2D showings of 3D films or very limited. Most theaters playing Hugo, for example, either didn't get 2D versions, or would only show it once, at like...11am-Noon.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2011 11:17
|
|
|
TheBigBudgetSequel posted:Some theaters don't offer 2D showings of 3D films or very limited. Most theaters playing Hugo, for example, either didn't get 2D versions, or would only show it once, at like...11am-Noon. Where I live there's usually a 2d version at like 7:00 then a 3d version in another theater at 7:15. Lucky me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2011 11:24
|
|
|
And there's the part of going in with other people. The majority doesn't always agree with you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2011 11:25
|
|
|
Wishful thinking, but I'd love it if they released the trailer at 48 fps in S3D. A decent 3d-vision equipped PC could play it in that format, yes?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2011 13:15
|
|
|
ufarn posted:And there's the part of going in with other people. We're talking about people who would post in the Something Awful thread for The Hobbit. I don't think this will be an issue for any of us.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2011 15:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 04:40 |
|
|
So when these make a billion dollars, what fantasy properties will Hollywood greenlight to try and cash in?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2011 22:25
|
|