Discussion in 'Community' started by -Courtney-, Nov 25, 2006.
Right. Until then, be positive. There really is no concrete reason not to.
Oh and I will be traveling 2 hours at one point of the theatrical run to see the 48 fps. As much as I'm skeptical of the form, I would like to see the film as it was intended. I'm just like that.
As always, I'll have to see it for myself.
I'll be traveling 1900 km to see the 48 fps.
re: that Daily Mail article. DAILY MAIL. Ignore it.
12 more days! Hey the 12 days of LOTR. I have absolutely no idea how one could make a song out of that.
Shouldn't it be the "Twelve Days of Hobbit"? - or something?
"On the first day of Hobbit my true love sent to me, Nori, Dori and Ori!
On the second day of Hobbit my true love sent to me, Bifur, Bofur, Bombur, Nori, Dori and Ori!
On the third day of Hobbit my true love sent to me, Oin, Gloin, Bifur, Bofur, Bombur, Nori, Dori and Ori!
On the fourth day of Hobbit my true love sent to me, Fili, Kili, Oin, Gloin, Bifur, Bofur, Bombur, Nori, Dori and Ori!
On the fifth day of Hobbit my true love sent to me, Dwalin, Balin, Fili, Kili, Oin, Gloin, Bifur, Bofur, Bombur, Nori, Dori and Ori!
On the sixth day of Hobbit my true love sent to me, Thorin Oakensheild... Dwalin, Balin, Fili, Kili, Oin, Gloin, Bifur, Bofur, Bombur, Nori, Dori and Ori!"
It's erm... a start.
Well, the last time Jackson didn't want to cut down his movie, we got King Kong. So there's plenty of concrete reasons to be dubious.
I'd agree if it were something outlandish, but considering that a good number of people really do get dizziness and migraines from "normal" 3D films (and a higher number from 3D televisions), it's not so easy to dismiss.
In 3 years of my theater being completely digital I have not had one complaint from a single customer saying they got dizzy from 3D. Headaches I could believe but dizziness is not all that common.
I've known a few people who've been affected in that way by 3D films. It wasn't severe or anything, but MY ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE TRUMPS YOURS.
Plus reports on the subject from more legit news sources.
Lord of the Rings is three 3+-hour films (about 10 hours in total for the theatrical releases), adapted from a single novel of about 1000 pages in length. That's about an hour per 100 pages (or an hour per 80 pages for the Extended Editions). That novel, The Lord of the Rings, is further subdivided into six books plus appendices. That's a lot of material to cover in three films, and despite the length of those films, not all of the material was covered, nor was the material that did make it to the screen given the full screen time it deserved. A lot of stuff was excised and/or truncated to be able to fit it into the finished films, and even the extended versions cannot and do not tackle everything Tolkien wrote.
The Hobbit is three 2+-hour films adapted from a single novel of about 300 pages in length, plus material from the aforementioned appendices which were never fully realized on film. That's about seven-and-a-half total hours of film, or about an hour per 45 pages, not counting the LOTR appendices. To cover everything, by my reckoning, seven+ hours is the amount of time that's required.
The major failing of most book-to-film adaptations is that reams of material have to be deleted or summarized.The Rankin/Bass Hobbit from 1977, which is only about an hour long, tosses out all kinds of essential matter, and is a lesser work for it.
We're finally, at long last, being given a full treatment of the entire contents of a seminal fantasy work, and people -- even fans of the book! -- are complaining. To me it's very simple: If you love the book, you'll want to see the whole thing realized on screen. If you don't love the book, you're probably not keen on seeing the films anyway. So don't see them! Stay home instead. Watch something else. Why complain that we're being given a gift of this magnitude? No one is forcing you to pay to see frame one of these movies.
A fully satisfying film version of The Hobbit needs room to breathe, and it needs time to establish its themes, its world, its fifteen or so major characters. Three movies of roughly Star Wars length each seems just the thing to my mind -- especially if the LOTR appendices are being mined, and events only hinted at in the text are being shown to the audience.
Sure, but that was based on an ill-advised expansion of the source material, namely the 1933 film, which worked just fine as a sharp, punchy, 100-minute adventure film. The difference here is that the source material is far more dense and lengthy.
This is more an evocation of Middle-Earth than anything else, as there are references to the Sil, the Hobbit and LOTR, and there are some liberties taken with the numerals, but here is my wee contribution until I have more time to think about it:
On the (first, etc...) twelfth day of Yuletide
my true love sent to me:
Twelve Valar watching,
Eleven Elders discoursing,
Ten great ships sinking,
Nine Nazgul flying,
Eight Walkers remaining,
Seven Dwarf-lords digging,
Six great swords swinging,
Five armies clashing,
Four brave Hobbits,
Two film trilogies,
and the One Ring precious to me.
Has anyone else seen what the Noble Collection is making for the Hobbit this year? I so wish I had the money...
Will there be non-3D IMAX showings or is it IMAX 3D only?
Hmmm I'm not sure. They haven't been very clear about all the options. My guess is the IMAX ones will all be 3D. Blech I just want to see the first part of Star Trek Into Darkness. But I guess I should go see the 48fps IMAX anyway so I don't have to hear people say 'but you've not even seen it!' when I complain about how bad it is
Make that "Ten flagships sinking". What with the great swords coming after, there was one repetition too many in the poem...
The "Eleven" and "Five" lines have one syllable each too many. Remember that the five gifts are in the declarative, "Five golden rings!" May I suggest:
Eleven Elders talking,
Five armies clash!
Other than that, your lyrics are a delight.
I don't have a IMAX at my theater but it looks like everyone I've looked up in the area has all IMAX HFR 3D or IMAX 3D shows so far. At least for the first week's run.
I happened to have a frigging blast at Jackson's King Kong.
I almost fell asleep.
I thought it was mostly okay, but what completely destroyed my suspension of disbelief was when Kong fell from the Empire State Building... and there wasn't even a crack on the pavement.
I thought it was fun too. The visuals were amazing. Yeah it did drag in parts especially the first 45 minutes or so, but no epic is perfect.