I loved the movie! I have never seen a movie that is so crisp, like everything looks so detailed (could be the fact I wore my contacts to the movie). I also fealt everybody had alot more character than compared to previous Lord of the Rings Movies. For example radagast or the trolls where such interesting characters. This is not like Lord of the Rings in which you have seen the equivalent of there characters in so many other movies. But in other movies I have never seen any characters like the Goblin King. Also use of 3d was great and it was never obnoxious. Loved the movie, need to see like the 24 hour extended marathon of everything Lord of the Rings.
Fantastic movie. Everything looked so great, I was worried from the trailers that the sets looked to empty and fake but this movie looked terrific! CG, sets and costumes were brilliant. Pacing was a bit jarring, a lot of stopping and starting, but was very happy with the finished product.
One thing I will say is the lead is very disappointing; his acting was fairly bad in the first 2/3rds of the film, then he got better.
Have they finished all principal photography on this?
So after seeing the movie in regular 2D 24fps we decided to try out the 48 fps to see if we might like it. I truly believe this is another case of technology being ahead of what we can handle. Maybe several years from now as we play more with higher frame rates we will figure out how to do it right. But applying age old methods to the new format didn't really work out so well imo.
The best way I can describe it is the uncanny valley applied to frame rates... it's too close to realism but lacks just enough to make you feel very uncomfortable when watching. I also noticed that it puts even more pressure on the actors. When watching in 24 fps I found almost every character believable. However when watching the HFR version I really felt like Gandalf was an actual wizard in real life... but bilbo I felt was just an actor on the set.
I feel like if they can overcome the feeling of the viewers being on a "set" and truly bring the cinematic experience over to a higher framerate then it could be amazing. But as of now it falls very flat. I think it will require a complete reconstruction of all film making framework to truly move into the HFR realm.
Have they finished all principal photography on this?
I'm pretty sure they did, because they filmed them during the same time, with different buildings for different sets. In one of the vlogs Jackson did, he mentioned things that would be in another movie and they blurred out some of the production shots for things I'm assuming will also be in the other movies. IMDB says the other two are in post-production too.
I thought the 2d showing was in 48fps when I first started watching it because the panning landscapes made me a bit uneasy. Something weird was going on with the foliage. It seemed to get better with the later shots though.
I just came back from viewing it a second time, this time not in HFR, so I think now I'm entitled to make a proper comparison:
3D @ 24 fps:
-very good visuals
-noticed some weird schocking video when the camera was panning very rapidly.
3D @ 48 fps:
-soooo beautiful!
-the panning issue didn't occur here
-some of the lens flares were quite annoying (just like the specular in the white orc's eye
-some things appeared a bit 'too sharp', like the foliage when the camera flies over the running company. I didn't notice this in the normal 3D version.
Overall I preferred the 3d HFR (48 fps) version over the normal 3d version!
Why weren't the 2D versions in 48fps? I get sick at 3d movies so I was bummed to find out I have to watch the standard version like some sort of low class street urchin.
Surprised Radaghast is in so much of the movie, doesn't he just fill out a few lines in the appendices of one of the books? Most of the pacing problems were due to his involvement. And his nemesis, the
Radagast was important for the convincing of the elves and gives Gandalf a real motive. Also it is explaining Saruman's role. I feel he's just in there to flush out the story of the 6 films.
This was released today in AUS, i went to IMAX to see it in 3D was so fucking beautiful and epic! i thought the previous 3 movies where as good as it was going to get art wise, but my god so fucking epic.
Alas the projector broke down towards the end of the movie and everything went black we got a full refund and a free ticket to go see it again, so shattered. This is why we always get movies later than everyone else, cause we can't have nice things.
Oh? Thought he was an elf before not a necromancer.
He's sort of an equivalent of angel in Tolkien's mythology, but of higher power than the wizards.
Sauron originally had the ability to appear in any form and that's how he charmed the various races to accept his rings of power, which he then tried to use to enslave them. He lost this ability when he lost the Ring and never really managed to fully materialize again.
He's called the Necromancer because everyone thought Sauron to be dead after Isildur defeated him, and all they know at that time is that he's a wizard capable of bringing back the Nazgul, who are undead.
Part of the greater story in the Hobbit, that's only hinted at, is how Gandalf realizes the real danger, that Sauron is preparing to return, and how he begins the fight against him. Smaug, the dragon, would have been a terrible weapon against the men and elves and dwarves if he survived, and of course there's the One Ring which he certainly would've found - had Bilbo not taken it from Gollum.
It's also why the movie adaptation is about far more than what's in the book, I fully expect the two remaining movies to reinforce these ties to LOTR.
There's also a lot more backstory on how the Necromancer appeared and what he did for like 2000 years - what's actually shown in the Hobbit is just the final months or so.
Sauron is a Maia, just like the wizards. the reason Sauron is far greater in power is due to Morgoth pouring so much energy into him.
Morgoth being a Vala.
to put this into biblical context, i guess you would have Illuvitar (Eru) as God.
the Valar as a pantheon of Archangels
the Maiar as Angels created by the Vala
collectively, the Valar and Maiar are the Ainur
cutting ALL of the lore into a single paragraph:
Melkor was created first, and was the most powerful of the Valar. but he introduced "discord" into the great music of creation (creation in the lore of middle earth is thought of as a piece of music, with the Valar singing things into existence). by creating discord in the music, he sought to corrupt and rule all. this eventually led to him stealing the Silmarils (jewels containing the light of the two trees of valinor, essentially the source of all "light" in the world), and eventually destroying the two trees.
Melkor was then branded "Morgoth", which means "black foe of the world".
Morgoth used the discord he had sown to corrupt some elves and turn them into orcs through his dark powers. he also created dragons, balrogs (of which he had an army!!!!) and other such creatures. the Maia, Annatar was also corrupted, and became Sauron. he adored and worshiped Morgoth.
He initially appeared to the elves, dwarves, and men, as a friend, a golden figure (Annatar). and taught the elf Celembrimbor to create rings of great power. Celembrimbor made three rings for the elves, without the input of Annatar... they were hidden from him, the reason is unknown, but it's speculated that if Annatar had been involved in their creation directly, the War of the Ring would have never happened, as the elves would have been under Saurons complete control.
Anyway, the full verse Sauron spoke as he crafted the One Ring was:
''Three Rings for the Elven-kings under the sky,
Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone, Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throneIn the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.
One Ring to rule them all,
One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie."
the One Ring itself only contains the inscription: "One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them, One Ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
The elves removed their rings as soon as Sauron wore his, because they recognised his evil. when he realised that he could not corrupt the elves, he demanded the return of their rings, this time in his "true" appearance as Sauron, and all out war ensued.
if you're wondering how king Thror managed to gain such wealth as he did before Smaug came and took Erebor... it's because he had one of the seven rings of the dwarves.
the lesser rings of power (the seven and the nine) gave their wearers power, and gathered wealth to them (which had a corrupting effect of its own). the dwarves were immune to the controlling powers of the one ring, and did not turn to wraiths like men. but they still became corrupted by greed, and as you see from the hobbit, great wealth attracts great creatures such as dragons.
Thanks for the write up... was too lazy to go over all of it
Most of this stuff is from the appendices of LOTR. There were a few convenient oversights in Hobbit that Tolkien was able to use to extend the backstory.
Like Gandalf disappears from time to time which made him look like a coward and an idiot if you only read that book, even though he usually manages to save the band whenever he reappears. But later on these events were explained with him going after the Necromancer, finding out that he's Sauron - making his actions far more important than aiding Thorin in his quest for gold and revenge.
If someone wanted to adapt the Hobbit without any hope for LOTR movies to be made, it would of course be just about that one book. But now that we already have those three movies, a lot if this extra material can be incorporated and it will make sense to the audience, either because they've already seen the rest of the story, or because they'll be able to do so.
yeah, i think we will see a lot of things that come from the appendices or are "flashback" type sequences from the silmarillion... unless PJ is going to make that book into a movie too... OH MAH GOD!!!!!!!
Anyway, the full verse Sauron spoke as he crafted the One Ring was:
''Three Rings for the Elven-kings under the sky,
Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone, Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throneIn the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.
One Ring to rule them all,
One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie."
Thought it was amazing! Some people I went with thought it wasn't as good as LOTR, but I think its more a case that you have to try to not expect it to be just as good or better than the LOTR movies or you'll just end up thinking its pretty average XO
I suppose if the dwarf prince gets a hold of it he will be the irrefutable king? I forget, did the king go mad with greed before or after finding the heart of mountain? That could be important.
DO NOT READ UNLESS YOU WANT TO KNOW HOW THE HOBBIT ENDS
on the Arkenstone (heart of the mountain):
The stone itself is just seen by the dwarves to be their most precious of possessions. there is a theory behind this, which i'll go into at the bottom of this spoiler.
The stone was found during Thror's reign and he used it as a way of crowning himself king under the mountain. Bilbo later finds it on top of Smaugs horde of gold, and keeps it, and when the dwarves refuse to share any of the gold with either king Thranduil of the elves, or Bard the archer (who killed Smaug), he gives it to Thranduil.
Thranduil, and Gandalf then try to trade the jewel for some of the gold, but this is interrupted by a huge horde of goblins, and the battle of five armies breaks out. Thorin Oakenshield is killed in this battle, and the Arkenstone, along with the elven blade "Orcrist" being mounted on his tomb... being an elven blade, it glows blue whenever orcs/goblins are nearby, so because of this Erebor could never again be subject to a sneak attack.
side note: kinda pissed that they didn't show Orcrist or Foehammer (gandalfs sword) glowing in the hobbit.
anyway. the reason many fans of middle earth believe that the Dwarves (and even Thranduil) find this stone to be so precious, is that it could be one of the Silmarils. it's possible that Thranduil and even Gandalf don't recognise it for what it is, since it's been lost for many thousands of years. one of the Silmarils was said to have fallen into a fiery chasm, so it could well have been born in a lava stream and eventually settled in the rock below Erebor.
because the Silmarils contain the light of the two trees, which is basically a metaphor for "the essence of good". looking upon it would create a sense of wonder and contentment in the dwarves the likes of which they had never experienced before. indeed elves in middle earth are split into two catagories, elves and dark elves. dark elves are simply elves who have never seen/experienced the light of the two trees, they are no more or less good or evil than other elves, BUT the elves believe that experiencing the light is a huge part of their existance.
i remember peter jackson said that not having gandalfs sword glow in LOTR was an oversight, and they just kept it that way in The Hobbit for continuity. but Orcrist should glow for definite.
i remember peter jackson said that not having gandalfs sword glow in LOTR was an oversight, and they just kept it that way in The Hobbit for continuity. but Orcrist should glow for definite.
The thing is, even Sting wasn't glowing at the end of the Hobbit. That REALLY irked me. (When they're fighting the wargs at the end).
Love that buildup of rivendell! A lot of play pause to see all the steps xD I wonder if those actors you see in front of rivendell when the shot is finished are real actors or 3d models of the actors, because the frame before you see 3d models moving around or are those just placeholders?
is it just me or does it look like the eye of sauron is in smaug's eye. I don't particularly pay attention to dragon eyes if they're all red and glowing with black pupils though. Maybe it's just an evil thing :P
Does the compositing all look a bit off to other folks? Makes everything look very dinstinctly CG. I guess it's quite likely that we're looking at unfinished shots and it'll improve a bit before release.
Does the compositing all look a bit off to other folks? Makes everything look very dinstinctly CG. I guess it's quite likely that we're looking at unfinished shots and it'll improve a bit before release.
Yes.... some really low quality stuff there... dunno if this was ready to be shown. The locations look spectacular, but at the end you see smaug and it looks like cheap cg that is overlayed badly.
I just saw the movie last night. Its one of the best CG movie i ever seen, its the scenario/script that bugs me. It probably has something to do with the length of dialogue at the beginning.
The first movie I enjoyed. But the CG wasnt nearly as up to par as lord of the rings. Some of it was very CG looking. And the new one looks like its even worse for that. The dragon looks terrible, and that whole shot at the end looks like green screen
The first movie I enjoyed. But the CG wasnt nearly as up to par as lord of the rings. Some of it was very CG looking. And the new one looks like its even worse for that. The dragon looks terrible, and that whole shot at the end looks like green screen
As much as i can relate to your comment, i find the hobbit CG to be above LOTR. I was instantly impressed by the opening scene in the inner castle and mines.
I don't think its a case of the cg being better or worse, its the fact that there is just so much more of it, combined with the more cartoony vibe aimed at kids rather than the darker tones of LOTR. thought the hobbit was ok, but nowhere near as awesome as lotr.
Could be the true, but i could easily point to a cgclip here and there in lotr that made me chuckle in the theater. You could be right but i watched it without bias. And was marvelously amazed. Those are Dwarfs after all, so a cartoony kiddy approach is what they aimed for, instead of the heavy lotr atmosphere.
Does the compositing all look a bit off to other folks? Makes everything look very dinstinctly CG. I guess it's quite likely that we're looking at unfinished shots and it'll improve a bit before release.
yup, i don`t get why they wanted to show this so early
The cg characters in the first one where really nicely done so i know it`s going to look great in the end but especially that last smaug shot looked really off
Those are Dwarfs after all, so a cartoony kiddy approach is what they aimed for, instead of the heavy lotr atmosphere.
they aimed for both which turned me off - like expanding a brief quip about Azog in the book into a big dramatic back story. It could just be me, I can't stand melodrama + slapstick anymore, I watched too much Anime in College.
Replies
One thing I will say is the lead is very disappointing; his acting was fairly bad in the first 2/3rds of the film, then he got better.
Have they finished all principal photography on this?
The best way I can describe it is the uncanny valley applied to frame rates... it's too close to realism but lacks just enough to make you feel very uncomfortable when watching. I also noticed that it puts even more pressure on the actors. When watching in 24 fps I found almost every character believable. However when watching the HFR version I really felt like Gandalf was an actual wizard in real life... but bilbo I felt was just an actor on the set.
I feel like if they can overcome the feeling of the viewers being on a "set" and truly bring the cinematic experience over to a higher framerate then it could be amazing. But as of now it falls very flat. I think it will require a complete reconstruction of all film making framework to truly move into the HFR realm.
I'm pretty sure they did, because they filmed them during the same time, with different buildings for different sets. In one of the vlogs Jackson did, he mentioned things that would be in another movie and they blurred out some of the production shots for things I'm assuming will also be in the other movies. IMDB says the other two are in post-production too.
I thought the 2d showing was in 48fps when I first started watching it because the panning landscapes made me a bit uneasy. Something weird was going on with the foliage. It seemed to get better with the later shots though.
3D @ 24 fps:
-very good visuals
-noticed some weird schocking video when the camera was panning very rapidly.
3D @ 48 fps:
-soooo beautiful!
-the panning issue didn't occur here
-some of the lens flares were quite annoying (just like the specular in the white orc's eye
-some things appeared a bit 'too sharp', like the foliage when the camera flies over the running company. I didn't notice this in the normal 3D version.
Overall I preferred the 3d HFR (48 fps) version over the normal 3d version!
You should be more worried about Christopher Lee, he's 90!
Alas the projector broke down towards the end of the movie and everything went black
Don't you know who that is?
Oh? Thought he was an elf before not a necromancer.
He's sort of an equivalent of angel in Tolkien's mythology, but of higher power than the wizards.
He's called the Necromancer because everyone thought Sauron to be dead after Isildur defeated him, and all they know at that time is that he's a wizard capable of bringing back the Nazgul, who are undead.
Part of the greater story in the Hobbit, that's only hinted at, is how Gandalf realizes the real danger, that Sauron is preparing to return, and how he begins the fight against him. Smaug, the dragon, would have been a terrible weapon against the men and elves and dwarves if he survived, and of course there's the One Ring which he certainly would've found - had Bilbo not taken it from Gollum.
It's also why the movie adaptation is about far more than what's in the book, I fully expect the two remaining movies to reinforce these ties to LOTR.
There's also a lot more backstory on how the Necromancer appeared and what he did for like 2000 years - what's actually shown in the Hobbit is just the final months or so.
Morgoth being a Vala.
to put this into biblical context, i guess you would have Illuvitar (Eru) as God.
the Valar as a pantheon of Archangels
the Maiar as Angels created by the Vala
collectively, the Valar and Maiar are the Ainur
cutting ALL of the lore into a single paragraph:
Melkor was created first, and was the most powerful of the Valar. but he introduced "discord" into the great music of creation (creation in the lore of middle earth is thought of as a piece of music, with the Valar singing things into existence). by creating discord in the music, he sought to corrupt and rule all. this eventually led to him stealing the Silmarils (jewels containing the light of the two trees of valinor, essentially the source of all "light" in the world), and eventually destroying the two trees.
Melkor was then branded "Morgoth", which means "black foe of the world".
Morgoth used the discord he had sown to corrupt some elves and turn them into orcs through his dark powers. he also created dragons, balrogs (of which he had an army!!!!) and other such creatures. the Maia, Annatar was also corrupted, and became Sauron. he adored and worshiped Morgoth.
He initially appeared to the elves, dwarves, and men, as a friend, a golden figure (Annatar). and taught the elf Celembrimbor to create rings of great power. Celembrimbor made three rings for the elves, without the input of Annatar... they were hidden from him, the reason is unknown, but it's speculated that if Annatar had been involved in their creation directly, the War of the Ring would have never happened, as the elves would have been under Saurons complete control.
Anyway, the full verse Sauron spoke as he crafted the One Ring was:
''Three Rings for the Elven-kings under the sky,
Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.
One Ring to rule them all,
One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie."
the One Ring itself only contains the inscription:
"One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them, One Ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
The elves removed their rings as soon as Sauron wore his, because they recognised his evil. when he realised that he could not corrupt the elves, he demanded the return of their rings, this time in his "true" appearance as Sauron, and all out war ensued.
if you're wondering how king Thror managed to gain such wealth as he did before Smaug came and took Erebor... it's because he had one of the seven rings of the dwarves.
the lesser rings of power (the seven and the nine) gave their wearers power, and gathered wealth to them (which had a corrupting effect of its own). the dwarves were immune to the controlling powers of the one ring, and did not turn to wraiths like men. but they still became corrupted by greed, and as you see from the hobbit, great wealth attracts great creatures such as dragons.
/end lorebomb.
Most of this stuff is from the appendices of LOTR. There were a few convenient oversights in Hobbit that Tolkien was able to use to extend the backstory.
If someone wanted to adapt the Hobbit without any hope for LOTR movies to be made, it would of course be just about that one book. But now that we already have those three movies, a lot if this extra material can be incorporated and it will make sense to the audience, either because they've already seen the rest of the story, or because they'll be able to do so.
i so want to see Gothmog
[ame="
on the Arkenstone (heart of the mountain):
The stone was found during Thror's reign and he used it as a way of crowning himself king under the mountain. Bilbo later finds it on top of Smaugs horde of gold, and keeps it, and when the dwarves refuse to share any of the gold with either king Thranduil of the elves, or Bard the archer (who killed Smaug), he gives it to Thranduil.
Thranduil, and Gandalf then try to trade the jewel for some of the gold, but this is interrupted by a huge horde of goblins, and the battle of five armies breaks out. Thorin Oakenshield is killed in this battle, and the Arkenstone, along with the elven blade "Orcrist" being mounted on his tomb... being an elven blade, it glows blue whenever orcs/goblins are nearby, so because of this Erebor could never again be subject to a sneak attack.
side note: kinda pissed that they didn't show Orcrist or Foehammer (gandalfs sword) glowing in the hobbit.
anyway. the reason many fans of middle earth believe that the Dwarves (and even Thranduil) find this stone to be so precious, is that it could be one of the Silmarils. it's possible that Thranduil and even Gandalf don't recognise it for what it is, since it's been lost for many thousands of years. one of the Silmarils was said to have fallen into a fiery chasm, so it could well have been born in a lava stream and eventually settled in the rock below Erebor.
because the Silmarils contain the light of the two trees, which is basically a metaphor for "the essence of good". looking upon it would create a sense of wonder and contentment in the dwarves the likes of which they had never experienced before. indeed elves in middle earth are split into two catagories, elves and dark elves. dark elves are simply elves who have never seen/experienced the light of the two trees, they are no more or less good or evil than other elves, BUT the elves believe that experiencing the light is a huge part of their existance.
Hehh, according to my pal at Weta who's been the Goblin town sequence lighting lead, it's because of a simple reason:
i remember peter jackson said that not having gandalfs sword glow in LOTR was an oversight, and they just kept it that way in The Hobbit for continuity. but Orcrist should glow for definite.
[ame="
the best ones are the ones you dont even realise are CG.
The thing is, even Sting wasn't glowing at the end of the Hobbit. That REALLY irked me. (When they're fighting the wargs at the end).
The rest looks great though, maybe a bit too colourful. Should probably be a bit more gritty imo.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idp6wjqG674
EDIT: why isnt embedding working any more... What do I need to do to the link to get it to embed here now?
I like dragons from D&D (Neverwinter Nights) and Final Fantasy games.
get rid of the https and make it http
Yes.... some really low quality stuff there... dunno if this was ready to be shown. The locations look spectacular, but at the end you see smaug and it looks like cheap cg that is overlayed badly.
As much as i can relate to your comment, i find the hobbit CG to be above LOTR. I was instantly impressed by the opening scene in the inner castle and mines.
yup, i don`t get why they wanted to show this so early
The cg characters in the first one where really nicely done so i know it`s going to look great in the end but especially that last smaug shot looked really off
they aimed for both which turned me off - like expanding a brief quip about Azog in the book into a big dramatic back story. It could just be me, I can't stand melodrama + slapstick anymore, I watched too much Anime in College.