The Hobbit Page 22

  • Page

    of 52 First / Last

  • Deleted user 26 April 2012 00:10:52
    Brave_Dave wrote:local dimming
  • Ged42 5 Jul 2012 19:00:15 7,721 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Some new stills

    Looks like the elves are playing a bigger part, probably in the second movie. I'm not sure of the lore, but when Gandalf battles the Necromancer, is it just him or him and army of elves?
    Maybe the three elven rings are going to be a key plot point.

    Also i'm trying to figure, if the CGI work on Gollum's skin has just improved or if they've purposely made him look healthier. Due to either having the ring or a steady diet of raw and wriggling fishes.
  • Bremenacht 5 Jul 2012 19:07:46 17,843 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    I think there was something about it in The Silmarillion. He went there himself first, but then returned with Agent Smith (aussie actor) and the elves from Rivendell?

    I suppose Gollum would be younger and fresh with the ring's power, so could be deliberate.

    I'd very much like to see stuff from the Silmarillion put on-screen. The Witch King stuff would be cool, wot wiv the Dragons etc. Fall of Gondolin.
  • Triggerhappytel 5 Jul 2012 19:14:05 2,695 posts
    Seen 14 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    I thought Gandalf went there with some other wizards to kick the necromancer's arse. May be mistaken though; haven't read the books since about 1998.
  • Bremenacht 5 Jul 2012 19:46:47 17,843 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    I could be equally wrong - it's been a long while since I last read any of them.
  • Deleted user 5 July 2012 19:49:41
    Didn't get very far with Salmarillion, glad they're including more of the lore in this.
  • RobAnybody 5 Jul 2012 21:06:03 890 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    Triggerhappytel wrote:
    I thought Gandalf went there with some other wizards to kick the necromancer's arse. May be mistaken though; haven't read the books since about 1998.
    It's not very clear really - a bit more info here:

    http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Attack_on_Dol_Guldur
  • Feanor 9 Jul 2012 23:04:31 14,145 posts
    Seen 15 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Rather large banner.

    http://static.stuff.co.nz/files/Hobbit_Banner_big.jpg
  • disusedgenius 10 Jul 2012 00:00:28 5,284 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Jesus, that IS a big banner!

    Good to see Beorn in there as well, I was expecting them to cut him out of it.
  • Feanor 10 Jul 2012 01:45:23 14,145 posts
    Seen 15 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    I'm sure he would have been if they just did one movie.
  • Deleted user 10 July 2012 08:46:27
    hiddenranbir wrote:
    Deffo booking myself for IMAX 3D. Don't care if I end up alone, this is a must.
    Not sure about the IMAX thing. The higher framerate should make it more watchable (24fps on a screen that size is fucking painful to try and track) but ultimately it's not been filmed for the IMAX format. IMAX is a broken old format and until they start embracing the advantages of digital (specifically the much higher framerate they can utilise) then feature films are a no-go for it. I wish nobbers like Cameron and Nolan would stop pretending it's some kind of holy grail.

    Deffo thinking about givng 3D a go though, if I can find a Dolby3D screen (RealD is utter shite, way too much brightness drop-off). Dolby Atmos would be nice too, but I don't know if any local screens will be set up in time for that
  • ronuds 10 Jul 2012 17:24:02 21,788 posts
    Seen 1 year ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    I feel like I'll be getting the shaft seeing this in 2D on a regular-size screen!
  • Feanor 24 Jul 2012 00:39:13 14,145 posts
    Seen 15 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    The Hobbit - Production Blog #8

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NS3ameZfPdw&feature=youtu.be
  • beastmaster 25 Jul 2012 09:28:39 11,336 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    They are going to stretch it out to become a trilogy!

    Warner Bros = Bunch o' cunts!

    The Resident Evil films. I'm one of the reasons they keep making them.

  • Deleted user 25 July 2012 09:37:34
    Fucking trilogies, do one.
  • kalel 25 Jul 2012 09:38:51 87,063 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Post deleted
  • mrpon 25 Jul 2012 09:40:03 28,772 posts
    Seen 6 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    CrispyXUK wrote:
    Fucking trilogies, do one.
    Don't think I could sit for that long.

    Give yourself 5 or gig, you're worth it.

  • kalel 25 Jul 2012 09:43:09 87,063 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    The success of LotR as a trilogy is largely based on it being filmed all in one go.

    This has ill-judged-money-spinning-fuck-up written all over it.
  • Ignatius_Cheese Moderator 25 Jul 2012 09:57:12 10,854 posts
    Seen 16 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Supposedly, it was Peter Jackson who wanted to stretch it out to a trilogy, as opposed to just Warner Bros/New Line...
  • kalel 25 Jul 2012 09:59:00 87,063 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    He presumably has no interest in money and lives off the dreams of children.
  • evild_edd 25 Jul 2012 10:05:25 3,079 posts
    Seen 36 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    kalel wrote:
    He presumably has no interest in money and lives off the dreams of children.
    Thought you were talking about Ronnie Barker's son there for a minute....

    Why look, it's a blog:
    http://www.edwardlaven.blogspot.co.uk

  • Pac-man-ate-my-wife 25 Jul 2012 10:21:36 7,008 posts
    Seen 4 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    ...the plan isn't simply to spread the original text more thinly across the three films, but instead to explore the book's various appendices, which include a number of characters and stories not included in the primary story.
    I don't have a massive problem with that. If he was trying to extend the already slight book across a third film then I'd be more concerned, but there's bags of stuff in Tolkein's world that could be made into interesting film.
  • disusedgenius 25 Jul 2012 10:25:05 5,284 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    I'm still of the opinion that there's probably enough stuff in The Hobbit for more than 2 films, even without the extra fluff around it, so this doesn't surprise me.
  • Deleted user 25 July 2012 10:26:28
    Well reading it it sounds like the current plan is still for two films for the books story so there'll be an additional film on the end, not sure how that's gonna work really.
  • disusedgenius 25 Jul 2012 10:28:48 5,284 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Well they've got something like 50 years of Middle Earth time to play with - all of Aragorn's dealings with Gandalf, Gollum etc. Would probably end up like a series of shorts though. Either that or they change the edit so they extend out what they've already shot, then fill the gaps over the next year/year and a half.
  • Feanor 25 Jul 2012 13:46:00 14,145 posts
    Seen 15 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    So long as the story of the Hobbit wraps up at the end of the second movie, and this third movie is all stuff that happens between that and FotR then I'm fine with it.

    It would be cool to see Aragorn hunting Gollum all the way to the edge of Mordor, and maybe Boromir and Faramir doing stuff together.
  • kalel 25 Jul 2012 13:53:35 87,063 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    The issue as I see it is this. One book, whether it's 100 pages or 1000 will have a narrative arc. If you break that arc into two or three parts, you're going to end up with weirdly paced sections that don't have a proper structure or narrative.

    This was the exact problem with the last two Harry Potter films.

    Given that each book of LotR is about twice the size of The Hobbit, it's really hard to justify turning this into three or even two films, from a story-telling point of view at least.
  • Page

    of 52 First / Last

Log in or register to reply