• Announcements

    • Jay

      PLEASE DONATE to JWFAN if you can!   08/16/16

      Hello JWFan members,   The team behind JWFan needs your help!   We need annual donations to keep our community running   This is for the domain name, IPBoard license, and server space.   We hope you can help use with a donation of any size.   Use this link or the link on the mainpage. Thank you!   The Administration team

17867 posts in this topic

Radagast should just ride a horse like he did in LotR. Like normal wizards do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Radagast should just ride a horse like he did in LotR. Like normal wizards do.

Normal wizards? There are no such things!

Wizards are weird! Deal with it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Radagast should just ride a horse like he did in LotR. Like normal wizards do.

Normal wizards? There are no such things!

Wizards are weird! Deal with it!

Well one of them was trying to take of the world with genetically mutated super men (or Orcs) and the other one sleeps in ditches and hangs out with Hobbits. So the third will naturally be a certified lunatic hermit with bird nests growing from his hair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, descriptions of sled being pulled by bunnies generally tend to have that effect on people...

But to be honest, after thinking a bit about it, I'm more or less willing to accept it... if you take into consideration that apparently, in the film, the story will be told by Bilbo to Frodo. So giant bunnies and other nonsensical thing are just an addition by Bilbo to "spice things up" a bit (much like in the book, which is supposed to have been written by Bilbo, and has walking dogs, and giant bees). But even thinking that way, I'm sure I'll still have hard time accepting those bunnies... Bunnies are evil, man!

They're pure evil regardless of whose perspective the story is in.besides, Bilbo never meets Radagast, he never about Gandalf's meetings. That's all behind the scene stuff.

Well, if you had read Quint's reports (not our Quint, the other Quint, from Ain't It Cool News), you would have known that Bilbo and the Dwarves are actually present during a scene where Gandalf and Radagast are speaking.

Normal wizards? There are no such things!

Wizards are weird! Deal with it!

Well one of them was trying to take of the world with genetically mutated super men (or Orcs) and the other one sleeps in ditches and hangs out with Hobbits. So the third will naturally be a certified lunatic hermit with bird nests growing from his hair.

And don't even get met started on Alatar and Pallando! These two are the worst of the gang!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, descriptions of sled being pulled by bunnies generally tend to have that effect on people...

But to be honest, after thinking a bit about it, I'm more or less willing to accept it... if you take into consideration that apparently, in the film, the story will be told by Bilbo to Frodo. So giant bunnies and other nonsensical thing are just an addition by Bilbo to "spice things up" a bit (much like in the book, which is supposed to have been written by Bilbo, and has walking dogs, and giant bees). But even thinking that way, I'm sure I'll still have hard time accepting those bunnies... Bunnies are evil, man!

They're pure evil regardless of whose perspective the story is in.besides, Bilbo never meets Radagast, he never about Gandalf's meetings. That's all behind the scene stuff.

Well, if you had read Quint's reports (not our Quint, the other Quint, from Ain't It Cool News), you would have known that Bilbo and the Dwarves are actually present during a scene where Gandalf and Radagast are speaking.

Normal wizards? There are no such things!

Wizards are weird! Deal with it!

Well one of them was trying to take of the world with genetically mutated super men (or Orcs) and the other one sleeps in ditches and hangs out with Hobbits. So the third will naturally be a certified lunatic hermit with bird nests growing from his hair.

And don't even get met started on Alatar and Pallando! These two are the worst of the gang!

They just have the blues, that's all. Blues wizards they are called.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Normal wizards? There are no such things!

Wizards are weird! Deal with it!

Well one of them was trying to take of the world with genetically mutated super men (or Orcs) and the other one sleeps in ditches and hangs out with Hobbits. So the third will naturally be a certified lunatic hermit with bird nests growing from his hair.

And don't even get met started on Alatar and Pallando! These two are the worst of the gang!

They just have the blues, that's all. Blues wizards they are called.

Alatar And Pallando's Lament - Music By Jazzy J. Jones

A- I'v got the bluuuuuuueeeeeessssssss.

Can you feel the bluuuuueeeeessssss deep inside meeeeeeee??

P- I've got the bluuuuuuueeeeeeeeesssssss.

I don't feel like going to barbecuuuuueeeeeessssss.

A- I've got the bluuuuuuueeeeeessssssss

Let's have some fonduuuuuuuueeeeeeesssssss

P- I've got the bluuuuuueeeeeeeeesssssss

I've got so many issuuuuuuueeeeeeessssssss

A- I've got the bluuuuueeeeeeesssss

Would you lend me some tissuuuuuueeeeessssss??

A&P-We've got the bluuuuuuuuueeeeeeeeeeessssssss

That's why people call us The Bluuuuueeeeeeeeesssssss

And this is our song, a song that came out of the bluuuuuuueeeeeesssssssss!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Blues Wizard Brothers?

We should not even jest of such things. Internet is a dangerous tool Faleel. We don't know who else might be watching.

*throws a cloth over JWFan forums in fear of Peter Jackson's eye*

o-howard-shore-returning-to-score-the-hobbit-for-peter-jackson.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

o-howard-shore-returning-to-score-the-hobbit-for-peter-jackson.jpg

Wow. Never saw that pic before. That's my next sig for sure.

Was it during King Kong recording sessions? Because that would explain a LOT of things...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No that's from the time of RotK sessions if I remember correctly. Shore looks quite pained and PJ is his usual manic self.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, yes. And I forgot that PJ started melting and lost his glasses during King Kong.

Ah, these were the good ol' days. No bunnies or starfish hairdos to moan about... These were simpler times. Happier times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

gollum.jpg

There's only one good way to film a brace of coneys.

800px-Golden_Eagle_flying.jpg

STUPID FAT JACKSON! HE RUINS IT!

165457-bigthumbnail.jpg

Oh much better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe we all misinterpret things, and Jackson really wants to push PG 13 by having Radagast's sled pulled by a pair of these rabbits:

ADMIN NOTE: IMAGE REMOVED

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh most reviewers do not care about the inaccuracies of the story telling but consistently moan about the 48fps and how cheap it makes the film look. Ouch PJ! Ouch film reports and critics!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are some of these reviewers not taking in to account (or for the sake of being able to criticise, ignoring) the fact that the footage was largely unfinished and ungraded? The scene was Saruman was apparently still just actors against green screen.

We've seen how great it will look in the trailer. It doesn't look like HDTV or, as that last review mentioned, an old Doctor Who episode. The 48fps probably will take some getting used to when we first see it, but I don't think anyone can judge the look of a film based on footage that hasn't even been colour graded yet. Look at raw footage from LOTR - looks pretty rough too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure under normal circumstances the journos would absolutely take an unfinished state into consideration. No, this seems alarming. Maybe the final colour grading and various other tinkerings will drastically improve the finished aesthetic, but I still can't help but wonder why Jackson would allow such an apparently substandard work-in-progress to be seen... and dissected by the rabid internets. It makes no sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd probably chalk that up to a bad judgement call. There's no doubt that this wasn't the right way to show off the new filming technique. Would have been better just showing the trailer, maybe slightly extended, in 48fps 3D. There has been positive feedback as well though.

It's going to look different, but for now I'll trust that PJ and Co will not have gone ahead with this if it was going to make the end result look like it was made for TV. It's not supposed to look like 24fps celluloid but there will be a "normal" version released as well. I'm not a huge fan of 3D anyway so I dare say I'll be watching the 2D 24fps version first and then I'll give it a go in super smooth-o-vision :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a fan of Lord of the Rings. I haven't read any of the books and personally don't like the three films. I personally think they're far too long and the story doesn't compel me enough to invest over nine hours of my life to ever watch them again. That being said, I have no problems acknowledging that they are extremely well crafted films and obviously had a lot of care and attention put into them all headed by a director who never achieved greater before or probably since.

With all that being said, I don't see why he would do the 48fps with these films. If they're supposed to be viewed in unison with the trilogy, wouldn't you want them to visually be similar to the others? While they might be using the same locations and similar set designs, the fps will clearly stand out and detract from the ability to connect the films together. This is the same problem Lucas got into when he decided that the Star Wars films apparently didn't need to build sets any more. Phantom Menace at least visually fits into the series, yet the other two just feel completely out of place and have very few visual connections to the original films. For being such a fan of Star Wars, it seems that Jackson failed to heed the mistakes that Lucas made.

Again, I have no investment in these films so I could care less, but its unfortunate that fans of these films will now have to deal with the same problems that Star Wars fans have to. Personally I'm not too surprised, as other than LOTR, I haven't found any Jackson film particularly amazing or worthy of high praise. Perhaps just like Lucas, Jackson just had a brief period of supreme creativity and achievement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the films are also released in 24 fps, and Jackson didn't go the Lucas way, in any sense, of filming in a complete digital environment, I don't see a problem with visual continuity.

The wonderful places in New Zealand play a major major part, and sets and miniatures are being built just like with LOTR.

There isn't even the faintest reason to worry about visual continuity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. And the source material is awesome, so the films would be at the very least tolerable, moreso than the prequels.

And the casting is still top notch, while the same can't be said about the prequels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a fan of Lord of the Rings. I haven't read any of the books and personally don't like the three films. I personally think they're far too long and the story doesn't compel me enough to invest over nine hours of my life to ever watch them again. That being said, I have no problems acknowledging that they are extremely well crafted films and obviously had a lot of care and attention put into them all headed by a director who never achieved greater before or probably since.

With all that being said, I don't see why he would do the 48fps with these films. If they're supposed to be viewed in unison with the trilogy, wouldn't you want them to visually be similar to the others? While they might be using the same locations and similar set designs, the fps will clearly stand out and detract from the ability to connect the films together. This is the same problem Lucas got into when he decided that the Star Wars films apparently didn't need to build sets any more. Phantom Menace at least visually fits into the series, yet the other two just feel completely out of place and have very few visual connections to the original films. For being such a fan of Star Wars, it seems that Jackson failed to heed the mistakes that Lucas made.

Again, I have no investment in these films so I could care less, but its unfortunate that fans of these films will now have to deal with the same problems that Star Wars fans have to. Personally I'm not too surprised, as other than LOTR, I haven't found any Jackson film particularly amazing or worthy of high praise. Perhaps just like Lucas, Jackson just had a brief period of supreme creativity and achievement.

Some valid points here. Some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure under normal circumstances the journos would absolutely take an unfinished state into consideration. No, this seems alarming. Maybe the final colour grading and various other tinkerings will drastically improve the finished aesthetic, but I still can't help but wonder why Jackson would allow such an apparently substandard work-in-progress to be seen... and dissected by the rabid internets. It makes no sense.

Agreed. Even if this was the right way to show off the new film-technique, I am extremely surprised that a high-profile perfectionist like Jackson and his brilliant team would allow anything sub-standard to be shown. But one thing I'm pretty sure about is that after all this negative criticism, Jackson isn't going to let this slide. I'm sure he'll do whatever needs to be done to fix the 48 fps.

And by the way. The trailer looks great, yes, but its in 24 fps right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But can you let the bunnies/jackrabbits/floppy eared bushy tailed creatures slide? Even on skates or skiis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe they created these CGI rabbits just for this particular screening, and they'll be replaced by giants dragons in the final film, to create the biggest "WOW" surprise EVAH, MAN!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe they created these CGI rabbits just for this particular screening, and they'll be replaced by giants dragons in the final film, to create the biggest "WOW" surprise EVAH, MAN!

No wonder the other scenes looked so rough and unfinished. All the time and effort went to the fake CGI bunnies to mask the real beasties pulling the sled/carriage. It makes sense my friend. It all makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it funny what they mention about fake stuff on set looking more fake and CGI stuff looking more real.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14mz0r7.jpg

That image is frankly quite disturbing...maybe BloodBoal's idea is valid, maybe they'll be replaced by epic Dragons!!

But in all seriousness, why can't Radagast ride a horse again?!

Horse = animal

Radagast loves animals

Therefore: Radagast loves horses!!!

If that was not apparent to Jackson...then I don't what to say.

The main point is, how do we know they're really bunnies. Because some guy who was displeased with the film said so? I don't buy it. I don't buy the fact that with such a brilliant crew with some of the world's best Tolkien fanatics (namely Phillipa Boyens) would let something as atrocious as bunnies bear the honour of carrying Radagast...seriously thats just messed up. I refuse to believe any crew (with the exception of one that is led by Lucas) is that stupid.

No other review mentioned bunnies, so I'm just going to go with the theory that that guy was kind of pissed with the preview that he dismissed a bunch of animals as anything cute and fluffy...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But in all seriousness, why can't Radagast ride a horse again?!

Horse = animal

Radagast loves animals

Therefore: Radagast loves horses!!!

If that was not apparent to Jackson...then I don't what to say.

:lol:

Even if they wanted him to use a slide or a chariot, they could take inspiration of the Celts. With horses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. And the source material is awesome, so the films would be at the very least tolerable, moreso than the prequels.

And the casting is still top notch, while the same can't be said about the prequels.

I beg to differ.

The Star Wars prequels had great potential as far as the story is concerned, and the casting with Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman, Samuel L. Jackson, Liam Neeson and others are top-notch as well.

The iceberg that sank the Titanic is still Lucas' incompetence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. And the source material is awesome, so the films would be at the very least tolerable, moreso than the prequels.

And the casting is still top notch, while the same can't be said about the prequels.

I beg to differ.

The Star Wars prequels had great potential as far as the story is concerned, and the casting with Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman, Samuel L. Jackson, Liam Neeson and others are top-notch as well.

The iceberg that sank the Titanic is still Lucas' incompetence.

I beg to differ.

Apart from McGregor and Neeson, none of the actors were really good in their role or were playing interesting characters. Portman, Jackson and some others might be good actors, but in these films, they never shine, while I'm sure Freeman, Armitage & Co will.

I agree that the story had potential, thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course you're right.

But the reason they don't show their skills in these "films" is in my view Lucas' direction and abysmal screenplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, this thread is frankly pretty depressing with all this negative Hobbit news...after a bit digging myself, the reactions to the 48 fps haven't been all that negative!

Look at these:

http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/2012/04/48_frames_chang.php

The state of cinema as most of us know it changed radically today when 10 minutes of footage from Peter Jackson's 48 frames-per-second 3D The Hobbit were shown on the huge Collisseum screen inside Caeser's Palace today. 48 fps 3D is such a startling and game-changing thing that it's like the introduction of sound in 1927, CinemaScope in 1953, and high-end 3D with Avatar. I was knocked back in my seat...open-mouthed. This is the most startlingly "real" form of cinema I've ever seen, so much so that it isn't "cinema." And there's the rub.

That's coming from Jeff Wells, a man who hated the Lord of the Rings trilogy. If he really fell in love with The Hobbit, then it must be something.

Here's another one:

http://movies.about.com/b/2012/04/24/hobbit-footage-screened.htm

Once audiences get to see The Hobbit screened at the 48 frames per second rate when it's released in theaters on December 14, 2012, I can guarantee moviegoers are going to demand all films be presented at 48 fps.

- RE: the 48 frames. I think it will take a bit of adjusting our expectations, but I've never a movie that jumps off the screen and immerses you in the film the way this 10 minute piece did.

- RE: the performances. On par with Lord of the Rings, with Martin Freeman appearing to be the perfect Bilbo.

From AICN:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/55212

I have major reservations, but at the same time am beyond awed at many elements of what hit my visual cortex. Recalling the sweeping landscape shots they opened with now, I almost feel tears welling, and I can’t explain why. It was overwhelming in the most literal sense. It directly assaults your synapses with twice as much information through your retinas as you have become conditioned to expect from traditional cinema. I did not see the digital seams around creatures like Gollum and the trolls, a major benefit over 24fps. The creatures had a sense of mass in the environment, which was disconcerting in a good way.

I started getting acclimated, and then it cut away again, and again, and again. The scene that really allowed me to relax and get used to it was the scene with Bilbo and Gollum in the cave, the longest segment they showed us. If there had been more contiguous sequences like that, cut together like a full scene (albeit with unfinished color grading and effects), I think the response might have been very different in that room today. The enemy of a radically new presentation like 48fps is the sizzle reel format of cutting. People needed to be given the benefit of their patience not being tried by rapid cutting back and forth from non-contiguous scenes.

That last point is probably what what was the root of these negative reactions. Perhaps there were too many cuts for anyone to really adjust to the 48fps.

This one was the most assuring in my eyes:

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/peter-jacksons-48fps-presentation-of-the-hobbit-at-cinemacon-gets-a-mixed-response-20120424

It's too early to determine the success or failure of this new "format" (for lack of a better term), but calling it a "mistake" (as some people are) based on 10 minutes of footage is premature at best. In fact, much of the reaction today is reminiscent of the same concerns that James Cameron's "Avatar" was met with in the months leading up to its release, that 3D wouldn't be the game changer that Fox was hoping for, and audiences wouldn't be impressed enough to make it a hit. And then it went on to make over 2 billion dollars. But at the current moment, while everyone at CinemaCon is talking about 48fps, to the average regular moviegoer out in the real world? They have no idea what that means.

This is what I'm getting from all these articles. I used to think that 48 fps would just be more hi-def and more realistic, but it seems like it makes it seem you feel like you're literally there. This is probably what is disturbing so many folks used to the cinematic illusion of 24 fps. And I have to say, those articles are quite encouraging because it means the 48 fps is definitely not as bad as Badass Digest made it out to be. It looks like he was really exaggerating as most just needed more time to get used to 48fps. And considering how Devin was exaggerating about the 48 fps, whats to say he wasn't exaggerating about all that bunny nonsense.

It seems to me that people will need some time to get used to 48 fps, and once that happens, people will eventually love it. And some of the complaints about the sets will probably be addressed by Jackson and his crew. I think I'm pretty ok with the 48 fps issue now.

Of course, none of these articles really address the content...hopefully Jackson won't fail there...(its quite possible that all the tomb and bunny nonsense was just exaggerated bs).

- KK, The Merciful One

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to see what absurdly high framerates look like. Maybe they're going high, stepping outside the comfort zone of the audience, but not high enough to impress by the sheer difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seven months, only seven months to go!

And we'll get score previews even earlier .... I'm getting nervous in my comfy chair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know what higher fps look like. It's weird at first, but you adjust. Movements are like silk, blurring is eradicated, a long dolly shot sails from left to right like a steadicam mounted on a ghost. It's quite amazing, once you adjust. Which is why I'm baffled as to why Jackson would give a demonstration with unfinished lighting passes and unsatisfactory colour grading. Let's just say I'm not surprised it looked like seventies tv drama. I only hope the 48fps doesn't have some sort of detrimental effect on the digital post production process - causing uncanny byproducts which are difficult to filter out. But really, I remain hopeful the finished article will dazzle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it really helps to make it appear like I'm standing in the set, with 3D, then bring it on!

As long as I have the choice to watch it in the "old" way, I don't get the complaints.

And I'm pretty sure, bunnys and jackrabbits aside, that The Hobbit will be an awesome film on its own, and is just as good without the digital goodies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now