• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

    Read BEFORE posting Trades & Request

The Hobbit

Man, Sean O'Neal of the AV Club is hilarious:

When Peter Jackson said that he was bringing every possible actor he could find from the Lord Of The Rings trilogy into The Hobbit out of some deep-seated fear that without their comforting presence, audiences would somehow dismiss it, thereby sending him into a shame spiral of binge eating that would cause him to regain all the weight he’s lost—actually, wait, Peter Jackson didn’t say this. These were our own cynical conclusions, based entirely on the fact that The Hobbit is increasingly turning into some sort of Middle Earth high school reunion. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, of course; some bleed-over is to be expected, even if some of Jackson’s efforts to ensure the films link up lately feel strangely compulsive.

Anyway, the newest LOTR actor confirmed to return is Ian Holm, who will reprise his role as the elder Bilbo Baggins, despite the fact that The Hobbit already has a Bilbo Baggins—namely Martin Freeman, who seems increasingly lucky to be getting any screen time at all.
Click to expand...
:lol:
 
kitano takeshi
or park chanwook/bak chanuk
or the guy who directed Bad Santa
or sacha baron cohen.

none of these guys would be allowed anywhere near The Hobbit, but the results would be funktacular.

edit: the Bad Santa director has experience working with little people.
 
Evangeline lilly as an Elf.
evangeline-lilly.jpg


That makes sens... :)
 
I demand this timeless classic to be included in the soundtrack. Or at least a cameo by Nimoy.

 
Well, yeah, exept Evangeline lilly as an Elf is not a wishfull thinking of mine, it's official :)
 
Regardless of Evangeline Lilly's current Elfic status or lack thereof, I still demand the above. :cool:
 
And there's me thinking that it didn't get any better than Elfin Liv Tyler, oh how wrong I was.
 
nOmArch said:
And there's me thinking that it didn't get any better than Elfin Liv Tyler, oh how wrong I was.
Click to expand...

I was thinking the exact same thing. It all could be let down by a poor English accent though......unless PJ goes for American elves????

And Dame Edna is in as well.....
 
Miss Lilly is also good at speaking different languages, I think I heard her speaking pretty good french.
Could help speaking elvish.
 
This is a few months old, but it has interesting implications for fanediting. Peter Jackson wrote:

I thought I'd address the news that has been reported about us shooting THE HOBBIT at 48 frames per second, and explain to you what my thoughts are about this.

We are indeed shooting at the higher frame rate. The key thing to understand is that this process requires both shooting and projecting at 48 fps, rather than the usual 24 fps (films have been shot at 24 frames per second since the late 1920's). So the result looks like normal speed, but the image has hugely enhanced clarity and smoothness. Looking at 24 frames every second may seem ok--and we've all seen thousands of films like this over the last 90 years--but there is often quite a lot of blur in each frame, during fast movements, and if the camera is moving around quickly, the image can judder or "strobe."

Shooting and projecting at 48 fps does a lot to get rid of these issues. It looks much more lifelike, and it is much easier to watch, especially in 3-D. We've been watching HOBBIT tests and dailies at 48 fps now for several months, and we often sit through two hours worth of footage without getting any eye strain from the 3-D. It looks great, and we've actually become used to it now, to the point that other film experiences look a little primitive. I saw a new movie in the cinema on Sunday and I kept getting distracted by the juddery panning and blurring. We're getting spoilt!

Now that the world's cinemas are moving towards digital projection, and many films are being shot with digital cameras, increasing the frame rate becomes much easier. Most of the new digital projectors are capable of projecting at 48 fps, with only the digital servers needing some firmware upgrades. We tested both 48 fps and 60 fps. The difference between those speeds is almost impossible to detect, but the increase in quality over 24 fps is significant.

Warner Bros. have been very supportive, and allowed us to start shooting THE HOBBIT at 48 fps, despite there never having been a wide release feature film filmed at this higher frame rate. We are hopeful that there will be enough theaters capable of projecting 48 fps by the time The Hobbit comes out where we can seriously explore that possibility with Warner Bros. However, while it's predicted that there may be over 10,000 screens capable of projecting THE HOBBIT at 48 fps by our release date in Dec, 2012, we don’t yet know what the reality will be. It is a situation we will all be monitoring carefully. I see it as a way of future-proofing THE HOBBIT. Take it from me--if we do release in 48 fps, those are the cinemas you should watch the movie in. It will look terrific!
Click to expand...
From http://www.facebook.com/notes/peter-jackson/48-frames-per-second/10150222861171558

So, I have a lot of questions about this. Is there any reason existing LCD and plasma screens can't display 48 fps video files stored on computer hard disk drives? Could existing connectors (HDMI, DisplayPort, DVI, analog) transmit 48 fps video to a screen?

I think most editing applications can work with any custom frame rate, but rendering, authoring and playback is a different matter. The work flow might be as different as Blu-ray is different from DVD.

A lot of fanedits have benefited from using a Blu-ray source to produce a higher quality DVD image. So I am wondering if using a 48 fps source and "downscaling" (downframing?) to 30 fps DVD or Blu-ray would yield any image improvement.
 
PC's & LCD's will be fine stand alone players would probably need a firmware upgrade but it shouldn't be too much of a problem.
 
nOmArch said:
PC's & LCD's will be fine stand alone players would probably need a firmware upgrade but it shouldn't be too much of a problem.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm not a expert but LCD's already have a lot of options to "smooth" the animation (and so "creating" additionals frames?).
By the way those options are discuted a lot on some forums because a lot of people find that it gives movies an odd look.
I often seen those 100hz, 200hz etc... HDTV with "movement smoothing" options on, and I agree that despite the first "wow" effect, it does feel odd and I would not want to watch an entire movie with those options on.
Maybe seeing a movie directly shot on 48 fps will be awesome though.
 
Oin and Gloin (Gimli's father)
gloinoin.jpg
 
Peter Jackson is always talking about achieving an otherworldly, fantasy look through color grading and these dwarve portraits are no exception. A lot of people have commented these photos look a lot like illustrations even though they are highly detailed live photos. I'd guess the film team is doing a lot of color grading on these portraits similar to the look they're aiming for in the finished movie.

TMBTM said:
Maybe seeing a movie directly shot on 48 fps will be awesome though.
Click to expand...

I hope so too. Jackson uses a lot of swooping, rotating & orbiting camera moves, especially in the big effects shots. 48 fps could give a major boost in quality to those shots. Between the higher frame rate, 3D, and antique storybook look I think this flick promises a unique theater experience. They gotta pile on the features just to keep up with the state of the art.
 
2012 will be a redemption year for blockbusters after all the mediocre BS this year

Dark Knight Rises and Star Trek II
and in december The Hobbit

I mean the fact that they give us so much background vids - and the fact that hundreds of people enjoy watching them (me included) just speaks for the anticipation of this movie
 
Not sure if all these pics have been posted here already:

e76d3146.jpg


00290065-0000-0000-0000-000000000000_00000065-06d3-0000-0000-000000000000_20110712153150_HBT-DWF-001c_550.jpg



00290065-0000-0000-0000-000000000000_00000065-06d3-0000-0000-000000000000_20110712153412_HBT-DWF-002_550.jpg


vlcsnap2011070821h58m04.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom