| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 6:48 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| northway wrote: |
| fermentation wrote: |
It was decent. There are things I would've changed about it, but it was really more of the same. If you liked LOTR, you'll like this. Great performance by Andy Serkis and Martin Freeman. Can't compare it to the book as I haven't read it.
One thing I didn't like about it were the constant "saved by the last minute" type scenes when the characters were in danger. Almost every action or suspense scene ended in that manner. |
I thought it got repetitive after awhile. I liked how in-depth it got, but after the fourth extended battle omg-we're-gonna-die scene I got a bit burnt out on it.
Series and Freeman were great though.
The dwarves are kinda weird. |
^ Agree with all this.
Aren't dwarves shorter/fatter/stronger like in the last series? These suckers look like the bastard children of dwarves + gnomes or something.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Peace Train
Joined: 01 Nov 2012
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 7:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| fosterman wrote: |
I know this is probably a stretch but has anyone watch this film twice?
once in 48HFR and once in 24frame rate?
can someone compare the two? |
Watched it last night and I can only assume I watched the 24 frame version because everything just seemed off. It felt like I was watching some cheap re-enactment on the history channel or something. The panoramic shots all looks like cheesy paintings and the CG was painfully obvious.
After reading that article posted in this thread (wish I had seen it earlier) I can only assume this is the reason. I couldn't even follow the story I was so distracted by the dissonance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
giraffe
Joined: 07 Apr 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Peace Train wrote: |
| fosterman wrote: |
I know this is probably a stretch but has anyone watch this film twice?
once in 48HFR and once in 24frame rate?
can someone compare the two? |
Watched it last night and I can only assume I watched the 24 frame version because everything just seemed off. It felt like I was watching some cheap re-enactment on the history channel or something. The panoramic shots all looks like cheesy paintings and the CG was painfully obvious.
After reading that article posted in this thread (wish I had seen it earlier) I can only assume this is the reason. I couldn't even follow the story I was so distracted by the dissonance. |
You probably watched the 48 frame per second one if you noticed all that... The 24 fps one would be like all other movies that you watch and "softer" looking and not as noticeable as what you watched... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peace Train
Joined: 01 Nov 2012
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 9:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| giraffe wrote: |
| Peace Train wrote: |
| fosterman wrote: |
I know this is probably a stretch but has anyone watch this film twice?
once in 48HFR and once in 24frame rate?
can someone compare the two? |
Watched it last night and I can only assume I watched the 24 frame version because everything just seemed off. It felt like I was watching some cheap re-enactment on the history channel or something. The panoramic shots all looks like cheesy paintings and the CG was painfully obvious.
After reading that article posted in this thread (wish I had seen it earlier) I can only assume this is the reason. I couldn't even follow the story I was so distracted by the dissonance. |
You probably watched the 48 frame per second one if you noticed all that... The 24 fps one would be like all other movies that you watch and "softer" looking and not as noticeable as what you watched... |
Ya makes sense. It was similar to watching a movie on an HD LCD with a 120Hz frame rate. Everything is just too -- polished. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ethan Allen Hawley
Joined: 04 Jun 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 4:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
I hear what you guys are saying about it being "too polished" but I see that as nust being a destinct style seving to highlight the hyper-real nture of the story. And yeah there are plenty of "Whew, that was close!" moments, but, it IS a story, and a fantasy story at that. I think the hyper real nature of the new filming type lends itself perfectly to the subject matter. I mean, blue beings with cat tails jumping around trees lit up with floating disco lights didn't seem to bother too many people in Avatar. Why is it harder to suspend a sense of reality suddenly distorting when delving back into a universe of dwarves and hobbits?
BTW did you see it in 3 or 4D? I've seen a few 3D flicks and this one just leaves all others for dead, there is just so much amazingly artful action jumping out of the screen. I read it decades ago and hardly remember it, but this brings it alive again in an amazingly refreshing way. Yeah yeah, the start was slow. The beautiful woman next to me was asleep in the first 15 minutes. It's called setting the scene and introducing the characters, and thus being faithful to the original book and the even older art of story telling. Within another ten minutes though she was literally jolted awake and the story barely slowed down for the rest of the ride, and she certainly stayed awake and wired for the rest.
Can't wait to see it again...and to go flying with Smaug. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fosterman
Joined: 16 Nov 2011
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 7:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
it's cool how kids today who are going to see this were not even born when LOTR came out.
so for us, we are more judge mental with our movies. we will critic them more than a 13 year old kid watching it for the first time.
because we have seen thousands of amazing movies, a 13 year old kid today going to the movies has not seen that many great movies compared to us.
so I am sure they will be blown away.
I am going to watch it and try to watch it as someone seeing a new style of technology, not compare it to LOTR, and try to accept it as the introduction story to LOTR.
I will be looking at the 48fps to see if I am a fan or not.
and then I will watch it at 24fps, to see which one I prefer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fosterman
Joined: 16 Nov 2011
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 1:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| anyone seen the IMAX 3D 48FPS? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ursus_rex
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Location: Seoul, ROK
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| How kid-friendly is it... I know it says 12 years. Is that realistic, or is it in actuality lower or higher. My son is 7 years old... would that be too young with parental guidance even? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
12ax7
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ursus_rex wrote: |
| How kid-friendly is it... I know it says 12 years. Is that realistic, or is it in actuality lower or higher. My son is 7 years old... would that be too young with parental guidance even? |
You've seen the LOTR movies, right? It's not any worse than that. My guess is your son will love it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Waygeek
Joined: 27 Feb 2013
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 21, 2013 10:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| John Stamos jr. wrote: |
| Not me, hobbits are weird as hell. Surprised they got their own movie spin off. |
Christ please tell me you're joking... have you ever opened a book in your life???
Does anyone know of anywhere showing 'The Desolation of Smaug' in Seoul? Damn WB Korea, CGV and Lotte managed to somehow outgreed each other and nobody ended up with anything... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ursus_rex
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Location: Seoul, ROK
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 21, 2013 10:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Saw it on Sunday at CoEx... 3d. Likely still showing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Smithington
Joined: 14 Dec 2011
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 6:45 pm Post subject: Re: The Hobbit is out tomorrow. |
|
|
| tanklor1 wrote: |
| Who is going to see The Hobbit this weekend? |
How old are you people? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
optik404
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 7:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Seriously. After graduating from Uni, no adult should be going to the movies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cj1976
Joined: 26 Oct 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 7:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| optik404 wrote: |
| Seriously. After graduating from Uni, no adult should be going to the movies. |
Haha, I have to agree. Same as Harry Potter. I am not a fan of this guy, but he is totally on point here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMjrXRgu8IU |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ursus_rex
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Location: Seoul, ROK
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 7:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree. We certainly need a very narrow definition of what should be viewed as entertainment... and anyone who deviates from what we determine to be the norm shall be mercilessly taunted...
I hereby nominate you as grand poobah of cultural relevance... go forth and dictate personal taste! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
