Out of Pod Experience

Yup.

Reminds me of that line from Citizen Kane:

CARTER
There is no news big enough.

KANE
If the headline is big enough, it
makes the news big enough.

AK

The technical film Guilds here in America are indeed expensive. Thus even shows like Battlestar Galactica are made in Canada.

Apparently the ones in England are too restrictive with short days and lots of breaks, including Tea Time. Drove James Cameron nuts when making "Aliens", as they would just stop working in the middle of complex undertakings and leave. Thus LOTR in New Zealand and the Star Wars pre-quels in Australia.

Also, reality series do not have writers to be paid.

Signs of the times. Everything to save an almighty dollar for the stockholders.

Yeah, just saw the time from that bounty, after I posted, but its funny.

Film discussions are usually touchy. Was just making assumptions.

So tell me then, what inspired the bounty? A load of bad ice?

Cleaned the thread of some off topic posts. Please continue on.

Movie looks pretty good by the way.

That happened in his early 'horror' films too.

It's more like this: "Bad Taste" was an accidental "Let's watch this thing. It looks awful!". That was around 1990.

My roommate and I made fun of it. Telling everyone how silly and 'awful' it was. Hilarious.

When I first started reading news about LOTR films being developed by a Peter Jackson in 1995 I did not realize who that was until Harry over at aintitcool.com put Peter's early titles in a little blurb, and I saw "Bad Taste" listed. My mother still remembers me suddenly yelling ."Noooooo. This dude is way too inept to do LOTR. No way...no WAY!"

Because of both length and the entirely separated stories especially Part II, it would be best served as a mini-series.

For once animals were: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/19/hobbit-animal-deaths-wranglers_n_2158198.html

More issues with the 48 FPS rate:

"Finally, let me get to the giant elephant in the room – the 48 fps frame rate – for those who are curious how it plays on the big screen. THE HOBBIT is by no means the definitive statement on whether the shift in frame rate can work in the long run, but it is one fascinating experiment that showcases its benefits while frustrates with its negatives.

First off, THE HOBBIT looks absolutely amazing. You already know what it’s like to see a high-resolution image via your Blu-ray player… now imagine seeing that same image quality projected on the silver screen. It’s that crisp and that clear, enabling you to see individual feathers on an eagle’s wings or the disgusting details of a troll’s face or the spray of Rivendall’s waterfalls. This is something you haven’t seen before projected in such a way, so it sure will take you a bit to get adjusted to what you’re seeing. By the time I walked out of the theatre, I felt as if my eyes had gone through a serious boot camp workout, being used in ways they had never been before. They did feel a bit strained for the extra work they were being called upon to do. But it wasn’t just the extra detail they were being called upon to pick up. That was only the bright side of this equation.

The downside is that that they were also required to move a lot faster to grasp and decipher a lot of the motion and camera movements that Jackson was using throughout the film. Close-ups and medium shots appear to move quickly at rapid speed, which is absolutely jarring when you first see it and then every time after, as if you are watching them move in fast-forward. Simple tasks like the elder Bilbo putting something away in a chest look almost comical, because of how quickly they transpire in relation to things shot from a wider angle. Pans and swishes come across like something you might see in a video game cut scene, and with the added camera movement trying to put you in the action of say a battle, it almost feels as if you’re in the middle of a 3-D motion simulator ride. I think that the new frame rate can be a worthy tool for filmmakers to use periodically, but I don’t see it becoming any sort of new standard until they learn its limitations, which means changing dramatically the way certain things are captured by the camera in order to not disorient the audience when it’s finally projected."


Warning: the full review below is fairly negative until Gollum hits the screen 45 minutes from the end.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/59994

This review is full of ****. Pure utter ****. I just returned from the midnight release and (yes even as a nasty Pirate) I teared up several times. I'm a major lotr fan and Tolkien was my childhood growing up. My grandmother turned me to the Hobbit as a book when I was very young so naturally it's something kind of sacred.

The movie doesn't disappoint in the least. I would however recommend to NOT see it in 3D and rather just traditionally. I personally find 3D to be a gimmick and takes away from the quality and detailing of the film so I saw it in 2D. The sets are gorgeous. I was literally blown away by Eredor and the detailing of the Lonely Mountain. It was about on par with Minas Tirith and that's saying something.

The movie is NOT Lord Of The Rings. Those going in expecting massive battles or a dark determined plot are going to be disappointed. However those whom have read the book will be thoroughly pleased. Jackson does an amazing and I mean AMAZING job of tying in the little details such as Dol Guldur and the "Necromancer."

The reasoning why these critics are giving it such crap is because Jackson is building upon the tensions leading up to the War Of The Ring. he is revealing Saurons growing power, The White Council, Gandalf's concern over a growing darkness where as Sauraman see's nothing.

I'm certain we will see the development of Aragorn as a young man and even Denethor and Gondor's early struggles to set the stage probably at the end film of this trilogy.

This film also gives definition to characters and added depth that enriches them in LOTR such as Sauraman The White or Elrond. You see personality and yes even Gandalf has added depth especially in one particular scene where I don't think there was a dry eye in the theater. I won't spoil it but let's just say it has to do with a simple question as to why Bilbo was chosen to go on the quest.

Thorin Oakenshield and Bilbo as characters are portrayed wonderfully and I was very surprised at the level of depth shown in Thorin.

Don't let these snobby prudes deter you. It was a wonderful film and one everyone who has read the book NEEDS to see. If you go in expecting the Hobbit that is what you will get. A film with emotion and character development that I could only put on par with that of Lincoln for films of 2012.

Please go see it.