The Hobbit Trilogy Discussion Thread

[Ernest Rister]

Did anyone else think that the Arkenstone was going to be bigger?

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by SkillzthatKillz

Just got home from seeing it in HFR 3D not too long ago. All I can say is...

[Show spoiler]WOW!!! HFR 3D is the way to go for blockbusters from now on. It took me about 5ish minutes to adjust to the new look but after that it was hyper-clear, hyper-realistic cinema at its finest. I feel that the extra FPS really helped the action scenes, the cgi heavy scenes (aka most of the action scenes), and the landscape scenes. I also didn't find the extra FPS distracting during the dialouge heavy scenes (the dwarf gathering in the hobbit hole, the white council, etc.). I really can't imagine having to watch it in 24 FPS now.

One minor complaint though...

[Show spoiler]While I thought the goblin king looked fantastic as a cgi creation/character, I felt his execution was really cheesy. In particular, when he pops up in front of Gandalf and the Dwarves and says "What are you going to do now, Wizard?" Then Gandalf cuts his stomach open and the goblin king says, "That'll do it," and falls to his death. Just a really cheesy line that felt out of place (at least to me).

Overall, I'd say 4.0 out of 5 stars though. Good storytelling and mind blowing cinematic moments make this a journey worth taking, especially in HFR 3D Can't wait for part 2 next December

Agreed!

I felt the same way about that G King scene. However I quickly accepted it realizing the movie's much more lighthearted tone.

.

[cinemaphile]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

have you heard of heresay?

are you implying I have not heard or read any reviews? That I can't do math and figure out the percentage of those reviews that felt postive or negative about the 48fps? Did I claim to know how everyone in the world feels? NO. I said, from all the reviews I personally have read/seen/heard, that was the split.

anyway, I'm done debating. Hard to argue with a defensive fanboy who won't acknowledge differing opinions.

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by Walter E Kurtz

The first scenes at the start were so weird....think benny hill

Originally Posted by tilallr1

I know what you mean. The 48fps was definitely not helping during the slow sequences in the film. I really don't know what Peter Jackson was thinking by using the frame-rate. It looked for the most part awful, really detracted from my overall enjoyment. I do regret watching it this way.

But the 3D itself and action sequences were better because of it.

OK. I am now really starting to believe that some theaters are not showing this correctly.

I noticed none of that.

.

[pagemaster]

Originally Posted by cinemaphile

are you implying I have not heard or read any reviews? That I can't do math and figure out the percentage of those reviews that felt postive or negative about the 48fps? Did I claim to know how everyone in the world feels? NO. I said, from all the reviews I personally have read/seen/heard, that was the split.

anyway, I'm done debating. Hard to argue with a defensive fanboy who won't acknowledge differing opinions.

Sorry if I offended you.

[cinemaphile]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

OK. I am now really starting to believe that some theaters are not showing this correctly.

I noticed none of that.

.

I haven't heard "Benny Hill", but I've heard plenty talking about the TV look of it, and this is people who were at premieres, critic screenings, etc, that are set up and supervised by studios if not the filmmakers themselves, so I'm sure they were shown correctly.

Even the very first footage shown, with Peter Jackson in attendance, many of those present talked about the look of it like that.


I must note that * I have NOT seen it in 48fps yet. So I am making no personal judgment on it yet *

[Blu-Benny]

this this last night @ the midnight showing.....absolutely loved it!!

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by cinemaphile

I haven't heard "Benny Hill", but I've heard plenty talking about the TV look of it, and this is people who were at premieres, critic screenings, etc, that are set up and supervised by studios if not the filmmakers themselves, so I'm sure they were shown correctly.

Even the very first footage shown, with Peter Jackson in attendance, many of those present talked about the look of it like that.


I must note that * I have NOT seen it in 48fps yet. So I am making no personal judgment on it yet *

Yep. I have read all that too.

But its really crazy so see such differing of opinions on this subject. Some people are blown away by it while others utterly hate it.

.

[pagemaster]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

Yep. I have read all that too.

But its really crazy so see such differing of opinions on this subject. Some people are blown away by it while others utterly hate it.

.

I am curious to know where are the people who absolutely hate it?

[Rudeboy2025]

Loved it! So great to be back in Middle Earth again. Can't wait for the sequels.

9.5/10

[cinemaphile]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

I am curious to know where are the people who absolutely hate it?

off the top of my head, 3 different critics who were on Attack of the Show were pretty anti-48 (one said he had seen it twice so far - once in 48fps, and one "the right way" lol), and some reviews at aintitcool, among others. Lots more but those are the ones that jump to mind.

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by cinemaphile

off the top of my head, 3 different critics who were on Attack of the Show were pretty anti-48 (one said he had seen it twice so far - once in 48fps, and one "the right way" lol), and some reviews at aintitcool, among others. Lots more but those are the ones that jump to mind.

However one critic that hated it said that a second showing at 48-FPS was much much better.


BTW, I did get a mild headache from it. But that's what aspirin is for, right?

.

[The Apocalypse]

I'm gonna watch it again over Christmas

[radagast]

Originally Posted by L-Rouge

most certainly it is not ;-).

[Show spoiler]Radagast is no Jar Jar either

Thank you.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by radagast

Thank you.

Goblin King worse than Jar Jar.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

Yep. I have read all that too.

But its really crazy so see such differing of opinions on this subject. Some people are blown away by it while others utterly hate it.

.

Doesnt that happen with any large scale, popular thing though? Its like the Yankees or hoppy beer or mayo - you either love 'em or hate 'em. No middle ground.

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Goblin King worse than Jar Jar.

Really? Hmmmm.... thats interesting.

[Will21st]

Originally Posted by cinemaphile

DEFENSIVE FANBOYS ALERT!!!!

"reliable data"?? There's no official "reliable data". I clearly stated that was the approximate split just from what I've read and heard - As in, all the reviews I've read online or in print (lots), reviews I've heard from friends, coworkers, or on radio (plenty of those too), and also reviews I've seen on TV (quite a few).

you wanna call it a "game changer", go ahead, but you cannot add "no doubt" because there certainly is doubt. Look outside your circle of friends and you'll hear PLENTY of negative takes on it.

DEFENSIVE TROLL ALERT!!!! see,I can do that,too!

1. Your supposed 80/20 split is nonsense and means nothing.I'm reading,hearing and seeing a lot more praise for 48 than dislike.

2. This is without the shadow of a doubt a game changer,wether you see it or not.

[Snicket]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Goblin King worse than Jar Jar.

I wouldn't go that far myself, but it was clear he did not belong. His voice was terrible.

Originally Posted by Duffy12

Agreed!

I felt the same way about that G King scene. However I quickly accepted it realizing the movie's much more lighthearted tone.

.

What was lighthearted? The brutal decapitations?

That was one of my main issues, it was mature and filled with shlock at the same time, it has a bit of an identity crisis.

[Snicket]

Originally Posted by will21st

defensive troll alert!!!! see,i can do that,too!

1. Your supposed 80/20 split is nonsense and means nothing.i'm reading,hearing and seeing a lot more praise for 48 than dislike.

2. This is without the shadow of a doubt a game changer,wether you see it or not. :d

hyperbole alert!!!!!!!


It's a shame this has ceased to be "Peter Jackson's The Hobbit" and is now "Peter Jackson's 48 Frames Per Second"

I won't get into a HFR showing until next week, but I do plan on checking it out.

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Goblin King worse than Jar Jar.

LOL

Not by a long shot.

.