Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
Please let those 3D 'Hobbit' rumors rest in peace
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All

Magpie
Immortal


Aug 30 2009, 12:52pm

Post #51 of 88 (5930 views)
Shortcut
hehe... [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
And what does your "personal guarantee" mean -- are your readers due some sort of refund now?



I love you N.E. :-)



LOTR soundtrack website
Torn Image Posting Guide
magpie avatar gallery


Tim
Tol Eressea


Aug 30 2009, 3:44pm

Post #52 of 88 (5895 views)
Shortcut
Woot Guillermo to the rescue! [In reply to] Can't Post

Yeah you were clear the first time in my humble opinion - there just will always be some who are going to parse words to look for what they want. Sir, you are awesome, where else can one go to get the info straight? Nowhere. Heh heh nothing against George Lucas, but it would have been nice to have him step in now and then to silence the rumor posters on his forum that I had to deal with as a mod then.

Looking forward to seeing The Hobbit!! Woohooo!!

Good... Bad..... I'm the guy with the gun.


Tim
Tol Eressea


Aug 30 2009, 3:58pm

Post #53 of 88 (5933 views)
Shortcut
Well yeah Jim ain't the Devil [In reply to] Can't Post

We were just trying to reconcile contradictory information and thankfully you stepped in again.

Jim has been right in the past and he may be right in the future. He is dead-on about the imminent conversion of film into an expanding 3-D field - at least in most blockbusters and I know of, at least, 4 or 5 major filmmakers preparing 3D films right now. Some of them seriously artistic and ungimmicky!!

Man I would seriously dig an "ungimmicky" 3D film, every 3D film I've given a chance has been a big disappointment and has been gimmicky. Thanks for confirmation on future 3D conversions and I for one am willing to give conversions a chance.

And no- neither David Tennant nor Tom Cruise are Bilbo and we are not redesigning Gollum.


Bam, bam and BAM. You sir, are an awesome rumor-shooter-downer-guy. I may also mention you're an awesome film maker.

Good... Bad..... I'm the guy with the gun.


Sunflower
Valinor

Aug 30 2009, 4:08pm

Post #54 of 88 (5949 views)
Shortcut
Add me to the "thank you's" [In reply to] Can't Post

I appreciate your replies both to us and to JIm very much. That clears up everything.

I am not against 3D per se, but right now I have serious doubts about it in its current incarnation.

First, I am skeptical of the technology as it stands right now because it seems to be little more than a gimmick being forced on people to wring more dollars out of the filmgoing audience in tough economic times. I am very irrititated that there is not a choice between 2D and 3D for practically ALL the children's films and blockbusters out there this summer (oh, it shows on one "token" 2D screening but that's only 2 or 3 showings a week, in all the theaters in my town) and those 3D shows are a full $4 more than regular ticket price. I have no financial problem with it, being single, but for a family pinching pennies these days it could be a problem. Concessions cost enough!
As I have repeatedly said, 3 or 4 yrs ago I watched Beowulf in 3D for only $1.50 more than regular ticket price and loved it. IMO, a 3D film should not cost any more regular ticket price than that. Anything more is gouging and unfair. The price will have to come down considerably for me to be favorable to it.

Secondly, don't get me wrong, but I don't think the technolgy has evolved yet to a point where I am impressed with it. It's great at first, but after the first half-hour it is a huge distraction. And not all films are suitable for 3D--at least in its current incarnation. Something like Beowulf or action films are great, but as it stands now, films like dramas or romantic comedies are not suitable. I know for a fact that if LOTR were put into 3D right now, the intrusion of 3D in the quieter scenes, such as Bag End, Rivendell, the Golden Hall, and the Arwen scenes it would be huge irritating distraction and would take me completely out of the story. Face it, in the end 3D is going to have to look more like seamless 2D for me to be impressed. And the glasses will have to go. They are completely unecessary.

At the current rate of development, how long do you think it may be before 3D gets to this point? Jim may be able to answer this.

Thirdly, some of us are concerned that fascination with 3D technology is being undertaken at the expense of important things like sotry, character and emotion, still the most important things in a picture. Most 3D blockbusters this summer have been sorely lacking in these things. Buchanicus and I had an extended discussion of "District 9" and Avatar in the "Avatar" thread over in OT, which has now fallen to the 2nd page down there.
Based on what you saw, I sincererely hope that Mr. Cameron has a great story with the kind of unforgettable characters that we will fall in love with, that he has peopled his past films with. I have faith that he can accomplish this..I hope.

Lastly, I am very interested to learn that apparently there are huge vision/eyesight issues for older 3D viewers. The population of the US and many other countries is rapidly aging and reading some comments on here, I am finding out that the technology is not suitable for middle-aged and older viewers. Before the technolgy can become completely acessable to the entire filmgoing population, it will have to be cleaned up to the point where these issues are resolved.
And Hollywood has got to stop concentrating on the younger and "four quandrant" family audiences--people under 50, and face the fact that demographically, they can't continue to make the huge sums of money they want without reaching out to this audience. Such antiquated things as dramas and sophisticated (NOT snarky) romantic comedies will have to come back if Hollywood is to survive. And films for women too. IMO the film industry in the end is NOT going to live and die on the blockbuster. The studio heads have GOT to get past this "huge and instant profit" metality and open themselves up to more "middle-range" films. District 9 has shown a path to how this can be successfully done, and at a fraction of the cost. (Now THERE's a film that would have been great in 3-D!)
How will 3D accomadate this? (This is a 30-something woman speaking.)

And lastly: in a nutshell, someone has to convince me WHY we need this technology so much. SorryTongueSmile
Film preservationsits and historians working in film libraries in Hollywood are finding out, with alarm, that analog film prints from decades ago are in remarkable great shape, whereas the first digital prints from the 80's and early '90's are already fading. I am concerned that digital technolgy may not last as long as traditional film prints..has any thought been given to longevity and preservation issues, or are film-makers been to dazzled by the wonder of the present?


Oh--and I guess I'm very lucky to have an IMAX theater in my town! There are less than 500 worldwide? Albany, NY is VERY fortunate then!


(This post was edited by Sunflower on Aug 30 2009, 4:15pm)


Ceres_the_Dwarf_(planet)
The Shire

Aug 30 2009, 4:11pm

Post #55 of 88 (5835 views)
Shortcut
Doubts About No 3D Weren't Unreasonable [In reply to] Can't Post

The 'as of this moment' phrase from the original quote definitely sounded like a qualifier, and it turns out it was. To me, it sounded like, 'we don't have any 3D plans *right now*, but those plans could change'. Now, we hear that if Avatar makes a big splash this December, we could possibly see a 3D version after all. So the people who didn't take the original comment as a definitive quashing of the 3D idea were, in fact, right.


Tim
Tol Eressea


Aug 30 2009, 4:16pm

Post #56 of 88 (5749 views)
Shortcut
Good questions.... [In reply to] Can't Post

.... Sunflower! Heck I'm almost 40 - though I still have 20/10 vision. You've highlighted some issues I wasn't even aware of.

Good... Bad..... I'm the guy with the gun.


Tim
Tol Eressea


Aug 30 2009, 4:51pm

Post #57 of 88 (5751 views)
Shortcut
That's not what was being claimed [In reply to] Can't Post

What was being said was that GDT was side-stepping or "not answering" the question - implying that 3D was being secretly planned all along - that was what was being claimed by these sources - that the Hobbit WAS going to be in 3D. GDT's first statement (that was being debated earlier) was definitive in that no 3D was being secretly planned. That's how I took it and others took it, and anyone claiming otherwise I felt were looking for a conspiracy. Turns out I and others understood it correctly - there is no conspiracy. So, the people who took the answer as a definitive "the Hobbit is not planned to be in 3D" took it the right way. THAT was what was in question and of COURSE things can always change in the future. Smile

Good... Bad..... I'm the guy with the gun.


farmer maggot
Rivendell

Aug 30 2009, 5:56pm

Post #58 of 88 (5833 views)
Shortcut
Thank you for the comments and added extras! [In reply to] Can't Post

I have not seen any recent 3D material let alone a full length feature but I was involved 2 decades back in producing some polariser based 3D material for viewing at an exhibition. The process was a nightmare but the results were spectacular. If you could get past any of the gimmicks that abuse the eyes and visual cortex then a literally new dimension could hit the artform. If it can truly, naturally and comfortably place me in or at the edge of an apparently real 3D space (imagine The Pellennor Fields or Kazad-Dum with Balrog!) instead of watching a 'moving wallpaper', and can be created to naturally direct my focus of attention (so as not to be overwhelming or confusing), then a new visual world could await. But then I wear glasses already!

I will wait with interest for Avatar. Many thanks indeed. Did you consider an animatronic Bilbo by the way? Evil


Ceres_the_Dwarf_(planet)
The Shire

Aug 30 2009, 6:36pm

Post #59 of 88 (5905 views)
Shortcut
T [In reply to] Can't Post

5X5,

I know you were arguing in particular with Jim Dorey and assertions like 'the movie will be in 3D' but those who chimed in earlier-like Gwynhyffar, for instance-plainly weren't wrong to suspect a bit of sidestepping on Mr. Del Toro's part.

The term 'sidestep' isn't perjorative, it merely implies (to my ears) that one doesn't answer a question definitively, to allow for wriggle-room.

Well, Mr. Del Toro clearly gave himself 'wriggle-room' when he said, 'as of this moment''. Also, when he speaks up here-and how cool is that!-talking about Avatar and 'the market', well, that only bolsters the impression that some people took away from the original quote.
If they aren't having discussions about 3D *now*, they've plainly had discussions about possibly changing the plan depending on how it goes with Avatar.

Earlier, you wrote, "If these guys aren't preparing for 3D, then there's no 3D."

Given what Del Toro just wrote, 3D could very well be still be in the offing, despite the fact they're not 'preparing' for it.

You also wrote, "If it's going to be in 3D, then why wouldn't he just say it's going to be in 3D? If they hadn't decided on that yet - then guess what - they'd be discussing it."

Apparently, it's not that simple, is it? They're obviously leaving the door open, despite the fact they're not, ahem, discussing it.

-Ceres


Radagast_the_Brown
Rivendell


Aug 30 2009, 7:17pm

Post #60 of 88 (5766 views)
Shortcut
Hmm.. [In reply to] Can't Post

I still don't see why people can't just take Del Toro's words at face value. "We have not discussed 3D". Period. Not "we did discuss it, but aren't right now, but things could change depending...". If that's what he meant, then he would have said as much, especially considering he's come here specifically to clarify this situation.

All you have to decide, is what to do with the time that is given to you...


Theodred
Lorien


Aug 30 2009, 7:38pm

Post #61 of 88 (5737 views)
Shortcut
Maybe augmented reality is a part of the answer to future 3D reality, if you don't want to wear those glasses? [In reply to] Can't Post

It certainly does look promising, as you can see for yourself in this video:

Code


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLCUzA6KMEw
http://www.ladyofrohan.com/funeralsong.wav


Guillermo
Rivendell

Aug 30 2009, 7:55pm

Post #62 of 88 (6972 views)
Shortcut
Regardless- [In reply to] Can't Post

We are not discussing 3D at all or "hedging our bets" in regards to a possible future. Haven't been doing it and are not doing it now. We are full-on en route to a 2-D, film (not digital) production. That alone should tell you something. We've been marching to a calendar and preproduction that doesn't consider the 3D possibility.

There is no memos, Faxes, emails or messenger pigeons. No 18 minute gap in teh tape. No blue dress with 3-D samples on it. No WM3-D. No 3D-gate going on at all.

Hope this closes that part of the debate.

All the best

G


farmer maggot
Rivendell

Aug 30 2009, 8:15pm

Post #63 of 88 (5785 views)
Shortcut
WM3-D .......Love it! [In reply to] Can't Post

Weapons of Mass ......delusion..... diversion .......derision.......dissection............ oh discussion Unsure Or maybe Miss Direction!

All delivered by (Tom) Cruise missiles straight from Dr Who's TARDIS!!!!!


Ataahua
Superuser / Moderator


Aug 30 2009, 8:30pm

Post #64 of 88 (5758 views)
Shortcut
Nice one G. [In reply to] Can't Post

And thank you for your patience with us fans.

Celebrimbor: "Pretty rings..."
Dwarves: "Pretty rings..."
Men: "Pretty rings..."
Sauron: "Mine's better."

"Ah, how ironic, the addictive qualities of Sauronís master weapon led to its own destruction. Which just goes to show, kids - if you want two small and noble souls to succeed on a mission of dire importance... send an evil-minded b*****d with them too." - Gandalf's Diaries, final par, by Ufthak.


Ataahua's stories


Magpie
Immortal


Aug 30 2009, 8:39pm

Post #65 of 88 (5772 views)
Shortcut
LOL // [In reply to] Can't Post

 


LOTR soundtrack website
Torn Image Posting Guide
magpie avatar gallery


Ceres_the_Dwarf_(planet)
The Shire

Aug 30 2009, 8:43pm

Post #66 of 88 (5764 views)
Shortcut
Okay, I get the absurdity... [In reply to] Can't Post

...of arguing with the director over what's going to happen with his movie, so no one needs to point that out to me right now. I do assert that post #47 does carry a whiff of 'hedging', but apparently it's all in my head.

p.s. You know who would make an awesome Bilbo? Tony Shaloub. Seriously.


Curious
Half-elven


Aug 30 2009, 9:30pm

Post #67 of 88 (5832 views)
Shortcut
Aha! [In reply to] Can't Post

I notice you didn't deny that Tom Cruise is playing Thorin! Shocked

Just kidding! Wink I hope you don't feel the need to deny every rumor that gets started in the next year. You have better things to do!

But thanks for stopping in. We love hearing from you. Smile


Sunflower
Valinor

Aug 30 2009, 9:37pm

Post #68 of 88 (5726 views)
Shortcut
LOL! [In reply to] Can't Post

Only on TORN could the director himself post an unequivocal reply to a question, and people will STILL argue about it. What was that statement about "Passionate people arguing" etc.

I love this placeSmile

Mr. Del Toro is probably chuckling mightily to himself.
Thank you, sir, for putting up with us...:)


(This post was edited by Sunflower on Aug 30 2009, 9:40pm)


grammaboodawg
Immortal


Aug 31 2009, 1:18am

Post #69 of 88 (6103 views)
Shortcut
Period. Full stop! [In reply to] Can't Post


My grandchildren will be so bummed; but I'm not :)

Cheers!



sample

"There is more in you of good than you know, child of the kindly West."
~Hug like a hobbit!~ "In my heaven..."

I really need these new films to take me back to, and not re-introduce me to, that magical world.



TORn's Observations Lists


Tim
Tol Eressea


Aug 31 2009, 1:19am

Post #70 of 88 (5808 views)
Shortcut
G's Not a Crook! [In reply to] Can't Post

There is no memos, Faxes, emails or messenger pigeons. No 18 minute gap in teh tape. No blue dress with 3-D samples on it. No WM3-D. No 3D-gate going on at all.

Love the Nixon/Watergate references. Cool

Good... Bad..... I'm the guy with the gun.


grammaboodawg
Immortal


Aug 31 2009, 1:40am

Post #71 of 88 (5758 views)
Shortcut
*huge smile* [In reply to] Can't Post

You're right about Jim. His posts have brought us much excitement and anticipation, and he's sharing what he can... thank goodness. This exchange has reminded me of our intense debates about whether the Balrog has wings or not. It's very cool of you to help keep us on the straight road about this... and to share with us the truth of who will NOT be Bilbo. I know you haven't been free to share any of the casting possibilities, so this is very generous. Thank you.

And thank you for checking in with us... and ready to let us know when something's up... or not.

Cheers!



sample

"There is more in you of good than you know, child of the kindly West."
~Hug like a hobbit!~ "In my heaven..."

I really need these new films to take me back to, and not re-introduce me to, that magical world.



TORn's Observations Lists


Tim
Tol Eressea


Aug 31 2009, 1:54am

Post #72 of 88 (5736 views)
Shortcut
1's and 0's [In reply to] Can't Post

I am concerned that digital technolgy may not last as long as traditional film prints..has any thought been given to longevity and preservation issues, or are film-makers been to dazzled by the wonder of the present?

The good news (and I'm no expert) is that digital storage space is plentiful. Slap these puppies on redundant hard drives or DVD ROM's and they'll last forever barring EMP's or world-wide catastrophe's (I've been watching too much History Channel stuff about giant meteors and cosmic radiation blasts from black holes).

Good... Bad..... I'm the guy with the gun.


squire
Valinor


Aug 31 2009, 3:03am

Post #73 of 88 (5685 views)
Shortcut
Read anything from your old 5" floppies lately, or some Wordstar files from college? [In reply to] Can't Post

You're theoretically right that digitization preserves films in a way that film stock can't. On the other hand, the idea that early 2000s films on "DVD ROMs" or "drives" will be watchable outside of a museum 50 to 100 years from now, much less "forever", is quaint.

The problem is not the data, it's the format, which changes radically on a decade-by-decade basis. And since it costs money to transfer media to updated formats (like film-to-DVD, which is happening now but not to thousands of rarer or less-popular films!), it will be the future's commercial tastes, not ours, that will dictate whether New Line's The Lord of the Rings will even be watchable by a mass audience in 2059 or 2109.



squire online:
RR Discussions: The Valaquenta, A Shortcut to Mushrooms, and Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbit
Lights! Action! Discuss on the Movie board!: 'A Journey in the Dark'. and 'Designing The Two Towers'.
Footeramas: The 3rd TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion; and "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
squiretalk introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary


Tim
Tol Eressea


Aug 31 2009, 5:19am

Post #74 of 88 (5935 views)
Shortcut
oh, no man fer sure dvd's ain't going to be around long [In reply to] Can't Post

Yeah I was just tryin to say there's plenty of storage space out there for the 1's and 0's. That's all. I know nothing about any studio's plans or strategies to save or preserve their films. Yep, anyone keeping things stored is going to have to keep track of updating software and/or hardware. I think I've heard of film stock having the same kind of problems - I remember Star Wars got pretty degraded in storage. I think there are internet online storage solutions and that's a universal format of a sort, but yeah even that is going to evolve over the years.

Good... Bad..... I'm the guy with the gun.


Sunflower
Valinor

Aug 31 2009, 6:53am

Post #75 of 88 (5694 views)
Shortcut
Well... [In reply to] Can't Post

I've read a bit on the subject, mostly on Nikki Finke's site, and I've been uncomfortable about what I've read. You're right about the well-known film being preserved (they want to milk that ol' DVD dollar), while allowing other less "accessible" classics to fall by the wayside..

Regarding preservation technology:
All this ignorant JQ public film "consumer" can say is this:

I still own, in the closet, a cassette-playing Walkman and my DVD player is a combo VHS/DVD player.
I can still play my vintage 1983 cassette copy of U2's "War" on my casette player perfectly. (Granted, side 1 doesn't work--it was played to death in the 80's--but side 2 works fine. (Thank God it was one of those "full album on each side" things.)

I can still pop my played-to-death-vintage 1981 VHS copy of "The Empire Strikes Back" into the VHS part of the machine, and it works as good as the day I got =it as a birthday gift when I was a little kid.

However, when I pop in my only 6-yr-old ROTK EE DVD into the DVD part of the machine, I now have to skip a couple of scenes which have been played to death and have begun ,a couple of times, to get that "frozen Picasso painting" look when the screen freezes into a million glaring pixels. It only happens a couple of times, but if I play it too much more it will go that way permanently, and I want to preserve my LOTR DVD's, whatever format becomes available..for nostalgia's sake. Juat as I preserved the former two works of art in the format they were first released in.

We all know what happens to a DVD that's been played too much. Ironically, wasn't that the argument that was hyped to sell DVD's-that they were supposed to last forever? How can we gauantee that the same won't be true of Blu-Ray? You never really know until 10 or 15 yrs passes. But I am finding that today, in so many areas, from cars to stero systems to clothes, things were really made better 20 + yrs ago. They weren't deliberately cheaply made to force you to buy it again and again, just to fill a CEO's pocket with that nice fat Christmas bonus, without which they cannot breathe. An issue that of course was not an issue 20+ yrs ago when the studios were owned by smaller companies run by MOVIE MEN and not dishwasher or whisky salesmen, and who did require such huge huge paychecks--which they knew were impossible anyway b/c being mive men they knew how risky the art form was, yet loved it so much they stayed in it to take those artistic risks.

Speaking of filling CEO's pockets with nice fat Christmas bonuses--check out these coments from Jim Cameron himself, and the company he's teaming up with for the Avatar release:

http://www.aint-it-cool-news.com/node/42123

esp the comments from the Pansonic CEO. "It has to be a blockbuster to get 3D to be watched in the home." ?? Are we hyping a movie here, or just trying to sell more HDTV's and Blu-Ray players, a source of income to take the place of declining real ticket sales? Sorry Mr. Cameron--I admire you but not here. You're pimping Panasonic product, but we have yet to hear a peep about the details of the STORY behind Avatar. Reminds me of recording artists giving their songs away for car commercials.

Excuse me for my skepticim...


(This post was edited by Sunflower on Aug 31 2009, 7:01am)

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.