DELETED_74993

ps3ud0 said:
the actual 3D experience itself still isnt really worth paying for 9 times out of 10.
Click to expand...

I agree, normally I try to avoid 3D films with the main exception being if the IMAX version is 3D only. Generally IMAX makes anything better and way more absorbing, so I tolerate the eye strain for a few hours for it.

Only other exception I had was the Life of Pi, but that also fits your mold of the 3D being more subtle and part of the film. It works well for Life of Pi when most of it is one person on a boat.
 
Finally saw it. Just the basic 'ol 2D version. I thought it was "OK"....probably get a 7/10 from me. Far too long, IMO.....needed to be 2 hours at the absolute max. I was totally bored by the end. On the plus side, the casting was all spot-on and Golum was utterly brilliant again. On the whole though.....a bit "meh".
 
The only thing that really bothered me, is that the bulk of the dwarves, just don't look like dwarves, in fact, if you are missing a frame of reference, you cannot tell that they're not human. Unlike in the LotR trilogy, where Gimli was very definitely a dwarf, no matter what.
 
Ceryndrion said:
The only thing that really bothered me, is that the bulk of the dwarves, just don't look like dwarves, in fact, if you are missing a frame of reference, you cannot tell that they're not human. Unlike in the LotR trilogy, where Gimli was very definitely a dwarf, no matter what.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm not sure why that is. Obviously they would have had no problem in getting them all to look like dwarves. PJ obviously had a reason for making some of them extremely human-like. Is there anything in the Middle Earth lore than says some dwarves look different to others? I assumed that with PJ's attention to detail, there must have been a reason for the decision.
 
Well I think with the sheer number they really needed visual identity. Also there's nothing in the lore to suggest they all have to look like Gimli (what has become known in other fantasy as the classic dwarf look)
 
Why did peter jackson feel the need to have that massive prologue at the start of the film. It could have been half the length, if anything at all! Felt like you were getting the whole backstory in one big helping, instead of being fed small pieces of information to keep you hooked.
 
Curio said:
Finally saw it. Just the basic 'ol 2D version. I thought it was "OK"....probably get a 7/10 from me. Far too long, IMO.....needed to be 2 hours at the absolute max. I was totally bored by the end. On the plus side, the casting was all spot-on and Golum was utterly brilliant again. On the whole though.....a bit "meh".
Click to expand...

yeah thats pretty much what i thought.
 
Enjoyed the film, but the pace felt really slow.

The 'pale orc' character seems really forced and over the top.

It's not a patch on LotR so far.
 
So when will The Hobbit 2 and The Hobbit 3 be out? Have they already been filmed/completed or are they starting to film them now and they won't be out for a good few years?
 
I saw it at the main IMAX in 3d 24FPS which I loved, but wanted to check it out again in the HFR version.

Again I was impressed, but it did feel like Bilbo was on speed for the first 10 minutes until my eyes adjusted, kinda like the motion judder that TV's have on by default, you get that feeling that the characters are moving quicker than the scene itself.

As for the CGI it definitely helped this and the dynamics of the panaramic helicoptor fly overs were break taking.

Never known why people moan that 3d hurts their eyes or this felt even worse to some, as I prefered it without the such blurred ghosting effect you sometimes see.
 
Went to see in again, in HFR this time, and I was staggered by the difference it makes (way more than I thought it would) and I can't make up my mind if I prefer it or not. I did notice a few sections that seemed over-fast, but these were confined to very tight close-ups of characters performing quick actions; no wide shots gave me that feeling. Overall the HFR seemed to cheapen the look of the film, giving it a TV/home video quality, as many have pointed out... many scenes also felt like video game cut scenes, even having a bloomy/HDR glow, in fact the whole aesthetic felt rather like a video game, with parts looking like something from Witcher2, Gears Of War and a few other games from recent years.

The clarity overall is amazing however, and the big effects and open landscape shots are quite awesome in HFR; this is where the tech really comes into it own and makes it quite mind blowing.

Maybe in the future things can be done to lessen the cheapening effect, and put back the cinematic feel; after all, this is a new technique, which film makers need to adapt too... I'm glad PJ has tried to push the boundaries, and I'm hopeful both 3D and HFR techniques will get better, and make going to the the cinema, rather than watching at home, the event it once was... it has felt stagnant in recent years.

As for the film I really enjoyed it again, but did feel the section in Bag End was a little too long this time; with repeated viewings, it could really drag.... still a 9/10 for me though, and wish parts two and three were closer to release.
 
Last edited:
Saw it last night in 2D (not sure if it was HFR or not) and loved it.....apart from one way over the top scene with a wizard in the woods......

What is HFR? And what ares the benefits/downsides?

The film looked stunning
 
I watched this new years eve, HFR3D on the IMAX screen here in Sheffield.

I noticed the shift to HFR instantly compared to the 3d trailers of Man of steel and Star Trek shown before the film. It's like night and day difference. That was the real star of the film, and I want more of it. The panning shots over the landscapes were so good you could almost have been in the helicopter that shot them.

As for the film, I didn't rate it too highly. 3 out of 5 territory. The beginning with the dwarves in Bilbo's house seemed to go on forever. I almost self harmed when they started singing. Once that was over it wasn't too bad.
 
Ceryndrion said:
The only thing that really bothered me, is that the bulk of the dwarves, just don't look like dwarves, in fact, if you are missing a frame of reference, you cannot tell that they're not human. Unlike in the LotR trilogy, where Gimli was very definitely a dwarf, no matter what.
Click to expand...

Why don't they look like dwarves to you? If its because of the height I think that you have to remember for a lot of the book and certainly the first film, there is little interaction with the dwarf company and humans/elves. I think when you see them with the Elves in Mirkwood and the Men of Dale the height difference will become obvious.
 
Bigpops said:
I watched this new years eve, HFR3D on the IMAX screen here in Sheffield.

I noticed the shift to HFR instantly compared to the 3d trailers of Man of steel and Star Trek shown before the film. It's like night and day difference. That was the real star of the film, and I want more of it. The panning shots over the landscapes were so good you could almost have been in the helicopter that shot them.

As for the film, I didn't rate it too highly. 3 out of 5 territory. The beginning with the dwarves in Bilbo's house seemed to go on forever. I almost self harmed when they started singing. Once that was over it wasn't too bad.
Click to expand...

The dwarves singing is a significant feature of the book. Would you rather they change the book because you don't like it?
 
Hencore said:
Why don't they look like dwarves to you? If its because of the height I think that you have to remember for a lot of the book and certainly the first film, there is little interaction with the dwarf company and humans/elves. I think when you see them with the Elves in Mirkwood and the Men of Dale the height difference will become obvious.
Click to expand...

For me the not looking like Dwarves thing also came from their clothes/armour. In the battle flashbacks to outside Moria and Erebor the armoured up Dwarves looked exactly how I'd picture them but Thorin's company just looked too Human and Thorin himself reminded me too much of Aragorn.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom