SubJeff on 15/12/2012 at 22:46
Saw it in 3D at 48fps.
Briefly - I liked it, a little to much CGI, especially as it the higher fps makes it look odd. Otherwise after a while the higher frame rate starts to really work IMHO.
Be back later for a fuller review.
Renzatic on 15/12/2012 at 22:49
You goddamn tease. :mad:
Vivian on 15/12/2012 at 23:10
Its:
Really good
The bad guy is panthro from thundercats
Far too long
There is an awesome troll or goblin or whatever with bollocks for a chin
In no fucking way a complete film. It has no ending. It just stops.
faetal on 16/12/2012 at 00:13
I'd read elsewhere that the 48 fps makes it look like a telenovela - any insight into this?
SubJeff on 16/12/2012 at 00:55
At first it's definitely got something of a high end fantasy TV show about it, like Dr Who (which I cannot stand BTW) or Downton Abbey. But you get used to it and realise. I think I prefer it.
faetal on 16/12/2012 at 01:32
Previously, on AMC's The Hobbit...
(just realising that all of the decent US shows are shot on film these days)
belfong on 16/12/2012 at 04:36
I didn't realize it was a trilogy until recently and then my interest dropped. I think Jackson is trying to milk this really hard.
Vasquez on 16/12/2012 at 07:44
Quote Posted by belfong
I didn't realize it was a trilogy until recently and then my interest dropped. I think Jackson is trying to milk this really hard.
Same feelings here... Why didn't he go straight for Silmarillion? That would have material for a lifetime of making Tolkien films.
I read in some review about Radagast, and now I'm not sure I want to see it at all :(
faetal on 16/12/2012 at 13:35
Oof.
