CatBus said:
There was a conveyor belt scene in AOTC? Seriously? Wow did that movie make no lasting impression.
CatBus said:
There was a conveyor belt scene in AOTC? Seriously? Wow did that movie make no lasting impression.
Let me help me you: the stuff that happened inside the Droid Factory ... Anakin ... and Padme ... on the conveyor belt.
I'm sorry. I used the nomenclature from the official soundtrack ('On the Conveyor Belt').
Too many ... bad memories ... ... R2 ... ... flying.
Rogue One is redundant. Just play the first mission of DARK FORCES.
The hallmark of a corrupt leader: Being surrounded by yes men.
‘The best visual effects in the world will not compensate for a story told badly.’ - V.E.S.
‘Star Wars is a buffet, enjoy the stuff you want, and leave the rest.’ - SilverWook
It's suffering from many of the same problems, but not all of the problems. Many aspects like the acting and production design are still very solid.
timdiggerm said:
CatBus said:
There was a conveyor belt scene in AOTC? Seriously? Wow did that movie make no lasting impression.
Can't tell if crappy fan edit or crappy real edit.
Seriously, that whole video triggered zero recollection for me. My only memory of the entire damn movie was an obnoxious screeching lizard, which was my cue for a bathroom break. A pretend bathroom break, so that I could just get out of the theatre for a few minutes. Maybe that scene was in the middle of the lizard scene? If not, wow, no impression at all.
@ CO
can you find me a link to that source? I'm really interested in reading it...makes sense since in my opinion ROTS is the only good one out of the PT
CatBus said:
timdiggerm said:
CatBus said:
There was a conveyor belt scene in AOTC? Seriously? Wow did that movie make no lasting impression.
Can't tell if crappy fan edit or crappy real edit.
Seriously, that whole video triggered zero recollection for me. My only memory of the entire damn movie was an obnoxious screeching lizard, which was my cue for a bathroom break. A pretend bathroom break, so that I could just get out of the theatre for a few minutes. Maybe that scene was in the middle of the lizard scene? If not, wow, no impression at all.
I think the problem is that he linked to the wrong video.
CatBus said:
timdiggerm said:
CatBus said:
There was a conveyor belt scene in AOTC? Seriously? Wow did that movie make no lasting impression.
Can't tell if crappy fan edit or crappy real edit.
Seriously, that whole video triggered zero recollection for me. My only memory of the entire damn movie was an obnoxious screeching lizard, which was my cue for a bathroom break. A pretend bathroom break, so that I could just get out of the theatre for a few minutes. Maybe that scene was in the middle of the lizard scene? If not, wow, no impression at all.
The screeching lizard isn't in AOTC it's in ROTS.
Edit: (3:45) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oGf-a1Dqlc
pittrek said:
The main problems of the Hobbit movies
- 48fps
- 3D
- too much CGI
- too much "filler scenes" just to make the story into 3 movies
If the Hobbit was done on 24fps 35mm film with a blend of miniatures, matte paintings, animatronics and CGI and would be one 3 hour long movie, it would be so much better.
The PT had much more problems
- illogical plot filled with plot holes
- too much CGI
- undeveloped characters for which I don't care about
- bad acting
- bad directing
- bad editing etc
Seeing as I didn't watch The Hobbit in the cinema but at home, the frame rate and the 3D didn't touch me so I'm comparing like with like.
in that context The Hobbit films, compared to the PT are immeasurably better and flow quite well into The Lord of the Rings films. You could imagine the whole sequence as a very long modern mini-series along the lines of Game of Thrones.
The PT and the OT hardly connect if at all, they are as similar as two dissimilar things in pod *
stretch009 said:
CatBus said:
timdiggerm said:
CatBus said:
There was a conveyor belt scene in AOTC? Seriously? Wow did that movie make no lasting impression.
Can't tell if crappy fan edit or crappy real edit.
Seriously, that whole video triggered zero recollection for me. My only memory of the entire damn movie was an obnoxious screeching lizard, which was my cue for a bathroom break. A pretend bathroom break, so that I could just get out of the theatre for a few minutes. Maybe that scene was in the middle of the lizard scene? If not, wow, no impression at all.
The screeching lizard isn't in AOTC it's in ROTS.
I think he meant a screeching wizard.
...
Oh wait, that was also ROTS.
I thought that was in the blu-ray version of ANH:SE.
It's a mirrored tone poem!
stretch009 said:
The screeching lizard isn't in AOTC it's in ROTS.
Edit: (3:45) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oGf-a1Dqlc
Wow. So it seems I remember absolutely nothing about AOTC. Which means it's now ahead of TPM as my new favorite prequel! Now if only I could forget the podrace or the lava duel!
I would go so far as to say that The Desolation Of Smaug was far more of a travesty to the LOTR trilogy and Tolkien then the prequels were to the OT. Disgusting. The first I thought was okay.
The frame rate is the best part, and the main reason I went to see it. I'm quite the HFR proponent, and I hope they go further (60fps).
Cameron wants to shoot the Avatar sequels at 60p, which makes me wonder just how the hell they'll make a 24p version since you can't evenly extract 24 from 60. He did say that he might just go with 48, though.
With that first Hobbit movie, I remember the first few minutes being very jarring in the theater at 48p. The opening logos looked like a video game! Bilbo walking around his house looked sped-up! I'll reiterate: even in the 24-frame version, the altered shutter speed makes everything look choppy and unnatural.
The tradeoff, however, was that the first wide shot of the inside of Erebor literally took my breath away in 48p. Like, I gasped and teared up. This is what Doug Trumbull was talking about with his Showscan experiments.
I should also say, and maybe it's just me, but the 48p digital Imax presentations of the first two Hobbit movies have probably been the brightest 3D presentations I've seen so far. I don't know if the increased framerate has something to do with that, but there it is.
Would there be a filter that one could use on the Blu-Ray to make it look more like it was filmed at 24fps instead of 48? Like a subtle motion blur or something?
Well, the Hobbit movies, while I'm not a big fan of them, did not make me want to throw up. The prequels made me physically ill, so I guess I'd say that the hobbit movies are similar to the prequels only in that they are both prequels and don't live up to the originals, although the prequels in my opinion failed much more than the Hobbit films.
Erik Pancakes said:
Would there be a filter that one could use on the Blu-Ray to make it look more like it was filmed at 24fps instead of 48? Like a subtle motion blur or something?
I thought I remembered hearing that they applied a motion blur to the 24p version. Maybe they did and it looked even choppier beforehand, but if that's the case it still looks choppier than it should to me.
At least PJ made more movies than George; and from what I know there was no 20 year gap between directing films either.
Wow, nevermind about 60p, it's sounding now like Cameron is going to shoot Avatar 2/3/4 in the 120p "Showscan Digital" format devised by Trumbull within the last few years. I recall seeing the demo video on youtube. If you take every five frames and blur the first three together while deleting the last two, voila, you've got a 24p version.
Anyway, getting back to The Hobbit, someone once summed up the difference between these movies and the PT pretty well. The Hobbit movies' flaws make you appreciate what worked in LotR even more whereas the PT actively hurts your enjoyment of the OT.
Actually that's good news, to me at least. I was never that impressed by the HFR in the Hobbit--to me, it didn't seem "more real" so much as "a different kind of fake". It was still so far removed from realistic motion that it seemed like a lot of effort for very little payoff--hardly worth retooling the film production chain for, especially when it was going to seem just as old and crusty as 24p once people got over the novelty and started clamoring to fix its shortcomings with an even higher framerate. 120p might just be sufficiently better to be worth it, IMO.
The bad news, of course, is that it involves sequels to Avatar for crying out loud.
BTW Is Cameron ever going to make those Avatar sequels? It's been nearly five years since the the movie came out, and that is not a good sign for a possible franchise.
I'm kind of afraid Battle Of Five Armies is going to ruin the whole Jackson LOTR franchise for good:
http://www.pajiba.com/trade_news/how-peter-jackson-continues-to-miss-the-point-of-tolkien.php
Fortunately I have never seen the last two Hobbit movies, but I think the main problem is that you can't make three movies out of one book. LOTR at least made sense: it was split into three books in 1954, and thus Jackson made three movies. I guess as long as Jackson doesn't alter the actual Tolkein books, we shouldn't get too mad about his film adaptations.
generalfrevious said:
BTW Is Cameron ever going to make those Avatar sequels? It's been nearly five years since the the movie came out, and that is not a good sign for a possible franchise.
Yeah, I've been wondering that for awhile now. He keeps talking about making them, but still isn't actually doing it.
timdiggerm said:
generalfrevious said:
BTW Is Cameron ever going to make those Avatar sequels? It's been nearly five years since the the movie came out, and that is not a good sign for a possible franchise.
Yeah, I've been wondering that for awhile now. He keeps talking about making them, but still isn't actually doing it.
Last I heard, he has several writers working on the scripts for all three films simultaneously. I expect he wants it to be all planned out before shooting begins.
You probably don’t recognize me because of the red arm.
Episode 9 Rewrite, The Starlight Project (Released!) and ANH Technicolor Project (Released!)
NeverarGreat said:
timdiggerm said:
generalfrevious said:
BTW Is Cameron ever going to make those Avatar sequels? It's been nearly five years since the the movie came out, and that is not a good sign for a possible franchise.
Yeah, I've been wondering that for awhile now. He keeps talking about making them, but still isn't actually doing it.
Last I heard, he has several writers working on the scripts for all three films simultaneously. I expect he wants it to be all planned out before shooting begins.
Which could be in 2020, at this rate. I mean Avatar wasn't that good to begin with if you take out the 3D gimmick. But let's go back to the Hobbit.
The Hobbit movies are passable I guess, but they don't have scenes like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOqT5_AAPgo