The Hobbit / HFR 3D (1 Viewer)

[washingcattle]

Right so, lets shelve this 48fps until Terence Malik gets the itch again.

 

[Richie]

I saw this today on the I-Max screen in Cineworld.. Was already dubious about the decision to make a 330 page book into nearly 9 hours worth of films and having seen it the stuff they've added in really feels unnecessary. You get an albino orc chasing them around for most of the movie plus Radagast the goofy tramp wizard resuscitating hedgehogs, and more tedious talky exposition scenes in Rivendell.. Two normal length movies would have been more than enough. Martin Freeman is very good in it, particularly because he talks normally and not in that portentous modern fantasy movie way (like the head dwarf who seemed to be doing an impression of Russell Crowe in Gladiator the whole way through).

The 48fps framerate paradoxically had an effect on me similar to watching old sped-up 1920s footage, dunno whether it was just messing with my brain's expectations but people seemed to twitch around at crazy speed, particularly in close up. There's a hyper-real sheen to the image quality that clashes with the idea of a murky dirty medieval landscape. It did seem to make the 3D effect more convincingly 'solid' though. A problem that it shares with the Rings films is that the battle scenes are pretty much all shot the same big budget action movie way, roaring close-ups of axes smashing down and cameras careening and swooping all over the place, to the point where it's a bit numbing after the 2nd or 3rd time. The Gollum scene feels like a real standout, partly because it breaks the walky talky / fighting / walky talky / fighting rhythm that the rest of the movie follows. Not terrible, but I wish they'd followed through with giving it to somebody other than Jackson to direct, del Toro certainly might have been interesting.

 

[shower another shower]

Just got back from the 2D versioon and it was fucking amazing. Can't wait till Dec13th, 2013.
Gonna sit and watch the trilogy tonight now.

 

[shower another shower]

Gandalf and The Lady of the Woods, WHA!

 

[jonah]

I'm going tomorrow with my dad, but I think its pretty definite that we're going for 2D. Excited!!

 

[D0njo]

I thought it was grand. Except the bit where (not really a spoiler) Gandalf and Galadriel are talking and he turns to face the audience for a bit of a 'message'. That was really annoying.

 

[Denny Oubidoux]

Saw this earlier. The 3d gave me a headache, there was no real need for it when the film is already on a big screen but other than that I really liked it. The battle scenes were much more convincing than they were in the LOTR films, the elves seemed a bit less poncey and the dwarves sang nicely. It reminded me of watching Jason and the argonauts as kid, one enchanting scene after another. The special effects seemed to deliberately have a more old fashioned, vintage look about them. A very promising start.

 

[Stan Bowles]

My feelings on the film are as follows:

IF GANDALF CAN SUMMON GIANT FUCKING BIRDS JUST FLY STRAIGHT TO THE FUCKING MOUNTAIN.

 

[ann post]

how is this 'adults review childrens movie' thread going anyways?

 

[D0njo]

You vain arrogant man.

 

[jonah]

^pfft.

Anyway, I thought this was great. To be repetative, the first hour wanes in pace, but beyond that I have very few problems other than my own personal inability to sit through three hours of anything, even if it is Citizen Kane. I thought Richard Armitage was fecking great.

 

[snakybus]

I thought this was good fun. Sure why not go for the silly trilogy. I'll still buy the popcorn and watch the whole lot.

 

[Jerry Twig]

My feelings on the film are as follows:

IF GANDALF CAN SUMMON GIANT FUCKING BIRDS JUST FLY STRAIGHT TO THE FUCKING MOUNTAIN.

I thought the exact same, and one fucking dwarf even thought to mention it after

 

[pissypants]

Slightly off topic, but I saw Life of Pi today and it really made me wonder why anyone would release in 3D. It looks like muck. Horrible blurry outlines on everything because the polarization doesn't entirely occlude the image meant for the opposite eye, and a strobing effect when something moves quickly across the frame. Really ugly.

I'm no purest, but until it seriously ups it's game 3D is an absolute bust. I look forward to the next generation of 3D getting it right, and to a time when we guffaw at today's 3D like we do the images of people at red and blue goggled monster movies.

 

[David Kronenbourg]

Hugo was the best use of 3D I've seen. Probably the only time I've felt it actually brought something to a movie

 

[jonah]

Slightly off topic, but I saw Life of Pi today and it really made me wonder why anyone would release in 3D. It looks like muck. Horrible blurry outlines on everything because the polarization doesn't entirely occlude the image meant for the opposite eye, and a strobing effect when something moves quickly across the frame. Really ugly.

I'm no purest, but until it seriously ups it's game 3D is an absolute bust. I look forward to the next generation of 3D getting it right, and to a time when we guffaw at today's 3D like we do the images of people at red and blue goggled monster movies.

The idea is that 48fps is supposed to eliminate a lot of those problems as well as some of the light loss... that said, I have yet to see anything in 48fps and refuse to go to anything in 3d, so I have no idea as to whether this is at all true.

 

[Denny Oubidoux]

Life of Pi looks like an awful pile of shite

 

[ann post]

it might be for adults or something.

 

[hermie]

I've actually only ever seen one movie in 3D, |Prometheus. Thought it was great. But am always still fearful, it's a terrible waste if you pay the extra money and it doesn't work at all.

 

[hermie]

Life of Pi looks like an awful pile of shite

Really? Haven't seen it but good source material, Ang Lee's usually pretty good...