Not one, Not Two, but THREE yes THREE Hobbit Films

Mr. Analog · July 30, 2012, 04:20:14 PM

Peter Jackson announced that there will be a third Hobbit film:
https://www.facebook.com/notes/peter-jackson/an-unexpected-journey/10151114596546558

That's a remarkable amount of footage for a ~300 page book, compared to say Lord of the Rings (which is maybe 1500 pages?)

I have this feeling there's going to be a lot of walking haha

Lazybones · July 30, 2012, 04:30:05 PM

Ya, over all I LOVE the extended edition of LOTR accept for the first movie... Just seems very SLOW.

Mr. Analog · July 30, 2012, 04:32:48 PM

Agreed, there was a certain pacing to the book where everything just kept getting bigger and bigger, that didn't translate too well in the first extended edition film.

Darren Dirt · July 30, 2012, 07:14:34 PM

They're taking the hobbits to Megaprofitsgard!

Mr. Analog · July 30, 2012, 07:25:57 PM

Quote from: Darren Dirt on July 30, 2012, 07:14:34 PM
They're taking the hobbits to Megaprofitsgard!

An army of Jar-Jar Binks' fighting forever IN THREE DEE

Lazybones · July 30, 2012, 08:30:03 PM

Two = likely great and true to the book without fluff.

Three I am gravely concerned.

Darren Dirt · July 31, 2012, 10:08:30 AM

Quote from: Lazybones on July 30, 2012, 08:30:03 PM
Three I am gravely concerned.

http://www.google.ca/search?q=gravely+concerned&tbm=isch
Perhaps a bit extreme choice of words? #fwp #humblingperspective

Darren Dirt · August 27, 2012, 12:42:18 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2k_EiYh4IU

new trailer (at least one I haven't seen before)

Darren Dirt · December 06, 2012, 10:17:13 AM

spoiler-filled [p]review sums it up as "a lot of fun, however long and uneven"

http://www.slashfilm.com/the-hobbit-an-unexpected-journey-hfr-3d-review-peter-jacksons-latest-is-rousing-yet-repetitive/

(but lots of camera sweeps over/through epic battles -- yay!)

Mr. Analog · December 06, 2012, 10:19:52 AM

I like the book, it's an easy read you can get through in a couple nights more or less, I'm not surprised in the least that they are going to pad it out (see thread title).

What could have been a nice tight film has been stretched out into a trilogy for reasons I suspect are less artistic and more profit motivated.

Darren Dirt · December 06, 2012, 11:27:58 AM

Quote from: Mr. Analog on December 06, 2012, 10:19:52 AM
stretched out into a trilogy for reasons I suspect are less artistic and more profit motivated.

or maybe half half?

It seems Mr. Jackson himself, personally, loves the NZ landscape, and therefore loves the epic panning and slow, lengthy walks and whatnot that were clearly his signature of the LOTR 10+ hour experience. Why not do the same for the "prequel" trilogy? #cheekmeettongue

Mr. Analog · December 06, 2012, 11:31:38 AM

Yeah, one of the biggest complaints most moviegoers had with LOTR is going to be amplified.

He should just make a big HD documentary about New Zealand and get it out of his system.

Darren Dirt · December 06, 2012, 12:23:34 PM

Quote from: Mr. Analog on December 06, 2012, 11:31:38 AM
He should just make a big HD documentary about New Zealand and get it out of his system.

but NOT in 48fps 3D (imho)

"Some audience members have reported nausea while others have reported migraines."
http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/191750/the-hobbit-apparently-not-only-looks-crazy-but-may-make-you-barf

Mr. Analog · December 06, 2012, 01:19:50 PM

Yeah, not a feature I'm looking forward to.

Also it makes it look cheap, like old video.

Tom · December 06, 2012, 01:41:25 PM

Quote from: Mr. Analog on December 06, 2012, 01:19:50 PM
Yeah, not a feature I'm looking forward to.

Also it makes it look cheap, like old video.

I think it makes it look more like a soap opera. They tend to use 30-60 fps cameras. Everything looks more fluid or something. something to get used to I think. It's amazing how a higher framerate is seen as worse than a much lower frame rate with some motion blur added in. Just what we're used to I think.