Here we go again
It's the proper aspect of the film (I believe). The alternative would be to cut off the left/right part of the image to fit it to 16:9 format so you'd miss parts of the image.
DELETED_74993
- Thread starter DELETED_74993
- Start date
Here we go again
It's the proper aspect of the film (I believe). The alternative would be to cut off the left/right part of the image to fit it to 16:9 format so you'd miss parts of the image.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 13 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 5,798
Cinema is wider than TV broadcasts. You should shop for a 2.35:1 TV then you wouldn't have black bars
Cinema is wider than TV broadcasts. You should shop for a 2.35:1 TV then you wouldn't have black bars
Except you'd have big black bars left and right for all terrestrial broadcasts etc
Huh? If followed the book fairly accurately?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 53,766
- Location
- Welling, London
So for those who have seen this in both 2D and 3D, which version did you prefer?
I haven't read the book, but what I'm saying is that there was several mini adventures that really didn't contribute to there main mission kinda felt like space fillers
eg?
Are you going to relentlessly argue that 2 hours 50 minutes was an adequate time for just over 100 pages of a book? It's got to be one of the slowest page per minute translations of all time.
Stretched scenes:
- green wizard. Most of that should have been cut out
- the trolls
- every seen with the dwarves bumbling about
- the mountain giants
- the undramatic and extended fight out of the mountain
I watched LOTRTTT yesterday and it was so epic, really creepy in places too.
*sigh* Here we go with fan/anti-fan nonsense again...
"Relentlessly argue"? - No, but I'll put my view over though, and then you can go and rant about it I suspect?
"Green wizard?" - Are you referring to Radagast? Yep, by far the biggest addition to the film of material not in the book. I didn't really have much of a problem though. I actually had more of a problem with Radagasts diversion tactic to draw the Orcs away, where he kept bring them back to the Dwarves... Why not lead them away?
"The Trolls" - I was more annoyed it didn't follow the original book rather than invent new unnecessary/less effective material. But hardly should have been cut?
"Every seen with the dwarves bumbling about" - (Every scene) Comes across as somewhat of an anti-fan statement.
"The mountain giants" - Didn't find it a problem. Only lasted a couple of mins.
" undramatic and extended fight out of the mountain" - Well, infact Bilbo's escape was cut from the book version, which is a shame really.
Not sure what your point is. Is it as complex and deep as LOTR? No. But then it's not really trying to be. It's based in a kids book and IMHO did a fairly good job and bringing it to the screen. My biggest issues I've listed before, and none of these involved running time and formula to do with screen time to book pages.
Some people like to wollow in films and aren't fussed with slower scripts. Some are. Personally I enjoyed the film's speed. But then I love the extended LOTR versions too, where some people don't.
Last edited:
What do you mean anti-fan? How butt-hurt do you sound that I have a differing opinion!
I just didn't like the film and thought it was too long.
If we are speaking objectively, it was a long film and it stretched the source material out for longer than most other book to film adaptations.
Sorry, anti-fan? lol
I just didn't like the film and thought it was too long.
If we are speaking objectively, it was a long film and it stretched the source material out for longer than most other book to film adaptations.
Sorry, anti-fan? lol
What do you mean anti-fan? How butt-hurt do you sound that I have a differing opinion!
I just didn't like the film and thought it was too long.
If we are speaking objectively, it was a long film and it stretched the source material out for longer than most other book to film adaptations.
Sorry, anti-fan? lol
"Anti-fan" is someone who (seemingly like yourself) jumps up and down having over-the-top problems with a film, typically bringing lists of reasons why a film has problems with no real rational reason or compromise. Your list came across like that.
"How butt-hurt do you sound that I have a differing opinion!" - I don't sound butt hurt at all. I simply answered your points. You're the one resorting to silly childing antics. But we're on the internet, so not much of a surprise. Why is me simply questioning your list of issues causing you such a problem? Can't you just rationally discuss it?
"I just didn't like the film and thought it was too long." - Fine... I can understant that. As I said, some people prefer faster moving scripts, some don't...
"If we are speaking objectively, it was a long film and it stretched the source material out for longer than most other book to film adaptations." - Probably.
Interesting you took the opportunity to throw childish rhetoric, rather than actually discuss the list of issues you had? Not a surprise really though.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 7,774
- Location
- Under the Hill
Loved the book and enjoyed the film. Yes there are differences but I don't think it felt long and is building up nicely. Very similar in feel to The Fellowship imo.
I'm interested why the film was so long though when I would have thought a typical "studio" move would have been to chop 10-20 mins from it, and to have that as an extended DVD/Bluray. Eg: Radagast's scene(s).
Going to be interesting if Jackson has yet more material for an extended cut? Doesn't feel like there could be?
Don't get me wrong I enjoyed it, it is a good film but a lot of space fillers still enjoyable still worth a watch!!!
"Going to be interesting if Jackson has yet more material for an extended cut? Doesn't feel like there could be?"
I agree
"Going to be interesting if Jackson has yet more material for an extended cut? Doesn't feel like there could be?"
I agree
Finally got around to watching this in the cinema as we were off on Public holiday today. We watched the high frame-rate version in IMAX 3D and I thought it looked too much like a tv movie tbh, not sure if it was the IMAX feel, the 3D, the HFR, or a combination of all three together.
Over all the film was good, deviated a fair bit from what I remember of the book, the correct feel though - it is a children's story after all.
The missus who hasn't read the hobbit loved it from start to finish.
Over all the film was good, deviated a fair bit from what I remember of the book, the correct feel though - it is a children's story after all.
The missus who hasn't read the hobbit loved it from start to finish.
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Feb 2008
- Posts
- 2,377
- Location
- Surrey
My wife and I watched this at the Waterloo Imax on Sunday. It was enjoyable, but:
1. I don't like 3d, as it doesn't add anything to the film. It keeps taking me out of the film as I look around the screen and notice which things are 3d and which aren't. There is also the problem that some things close to the camera are out of focus, so I look at them and they are still blurry. Also, fast moving objects and chase scenes look terrible since they just become a blurry mess, like the frame rate can't keep up.
2. WTF was with all that bird poo on Radagast's face? It was really disgusting, I don't know how someone could think of that. On imax you could just see this massive load of stuff on his face, especially in close-ups. Gross and unnecessary!
3. It was a terrible decision to make Azog CGI. He looked really fake, and there were many close-ups where you could see how low res his textures were. He reminded me of a character from Batman:AA - looks good from afar, but up close his skin looks 2d, like the scars aren't recessed or don't stand out. When they were stuck in the tree they had too many close ups on his face. Every time something happened it would go to him like "What do you think Azog?" and he would go "Grrrr!".
4. The chase scene from the goblins was way too long! And they killed so many goblins so easily they just lost any threat whatsoever. My wife described it aptly as being like a computer game - run, run, jump, cut the rope, run, hit the rock...I saw someone on IMDB compare it to the dinosaur stampede in King Kong which went on for ages and was just ridiculous.
I still liked it and look forward to watching it again on blu ray.
1. I don't like 3d, as it doesn't add anything to the film. It keeps taking me out of the film as I look around the screen and notice which things are 3d and which aren't. There is also the problem that some things close to the camera are out of focus, so I look at them and they are still blurry. Also, fast moving objects and chase scenes look terrible since they just become a blurry mess, like the frame rate can't keep up.
2. WTF was with all that bird poo on Radagast's face? It was really disgusting, I don't know how someone could think of that. On imax you could just see this massive load of stuff on his face, especially in close-ups. Gross and unnecessary!
3. It was a terrible decision to make Azog CGI. He looked really fake, and there were many close-ups where you could see how low res his textures were. He reminded me of a character from Batman:AA - looks good from afar, but up close his skin looks 2d, like the scars aren't recessed or don't stand out. When they were stuck in the tree they had too many close ups on his face. Every time something happened it would go to him like "What do you think Azog?" and he would go "Grrrr!".
4. The chase scene from the goblins was way too long! And they killed so many goblins so easily they just lost any threat whatsoever. My wife described it aptly as being like a computer game - run, run, jump, cut the rope, run, hit the rock...I saw someone on IMDB compare it to the dinosaur stampede in King Kong which went on for ages and was just ridiculous.
I still liked it and look forward to watching it again on blu ray.
That's because BFI IMAX aren't showing the HFR version, this is precisely what the HFR version fixes.
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Feb 2008
- Posts
- 2,377
- Location
- Surrey
Yeah I know, but if it wasn't 3D we wouldn't have this issue.