CINEMACON: Description Of THE HOBBIT Footage; Mixed Response To 48fps Presentation

CINEMACON: Description Of THE HOBBIT Footage; Mixed Response To 48fps Presentation

In addition to TDKR, Warner Bros. also featured some new footage from Peter Jackson's The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, screened at 48 frames per second. Check out some details after the jump..

By MarkCassidy - Apr 24, 2012 01:04 PM EST
Filed Under: Fantasy
Source: Badass Digest

The Badass Digest have posted a description, and reaction to, the 10 minutes of footage from The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey they saw at CinemaCon today. This marked the first time anyone has seen footage filmed at 48fps. This is the new projection standard (previously 24fps) that the likes of Peter Jackson and James Cameron have been touting as "the next big thing". But first reactions to this have been mixed. In fact, I haven't read reports from anyone who thought it came across entirely successful, and the majority seemed to feel it was very disappointing - giving off a very "tv" vibe. Devin Farcai from Badass Digest definitely wasn't a fan (a few positives aside), and you can read why by clicking the link below. But more interesting was his description of the footage that screened..



There was a lot of the helicopter shots you expect in a Lord of the Rings movie. Lots of shots of the dwarves trudging over mountains (again, this stuff looked spectacular). There was some of the business we saw in the trailer, with the introduction of the company of dwarves. There were also some quick shots - the company floating down a river in barrels, Gandalf running through a dungeon, being jumped on by a wild man of some sort, Legolas sliding in front of spider-webbed dwarves and knocking an arrow, warning he would kill them. There were also a handful of longer scenes that we saw.

We saw Bilbo's meeting with the three trolls. One positive aspect of the 48fps is that since everything looks so video, the digital creatures look more like they're on the set. The tone of the scene is very playfully threatening, with the trolls having dim reactions. The scene ends with the dwarves coming to Bilbo's rescue in a big battle against the trolls.

We also saw Gandalf investigating the rising darkness. In one scene he is at a table with Elrond, Galadriel and Saruman, talking about ancient tombs that have been opened - ancient tombs with such strong binding spells no one should have been able to get in. Then there's a scene of Gandalf investigating the open tomb, where he runs into a very silly Radagast the Brown, who has some birds under his hat (we also saw a shot of his sled being pulled by bunnies). It turns out the opened tombs belong the nine Ring Wraiths.

The biggest scene was Bilbo meeting Gollum. Despite being told what we were seeing were unfinished effects, Gollum looked great (and again, the 48fps gave him more of a sense of being actually there). The scene was cut a little slackly; I imagine the final version will be tighter. But it was good.


Seems to be the general consensus that the actual content was great, just not the higher frame rate presentation. Be sure to click the link back to Badass Digest below to check out the entire article.









GLADIATOR II: Epic New Trailer And Poster Tease A New Legacy...Or Another Rebellion!
Related:

GLADIATOR II: Epic New Trailer And Poster Tease A New Legacy...Or Another Rebellion!

GRENDEL First Look Reveals Creature Design For Jeff Bridges' Take On The Legendary Monster
Recommended For You:

GRENDEL First Look Reveals Creature Design For Jeff Bridges' Take On The Legendary Monster

DISCLAIMER: ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]

ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

1 2
Curmudgeon
Curmudgeon - 4/24/2012, 2:03 PM
I... I was actually starting to drool a little bit.
ManofSteel23
ManofSteel23 - 4/24/2012, 2:14 PM
God it will be weird seing saruman with the good guys in this film,so [frick]ing glad jackson came back to do the film,noone knows it better,sounds good to me
Lilvic92
Lilvic92 - 4/24/2012, 2:21 PM
The Avengers
ralfinader
ralfinader - 4/24/2012, 2:23 PM
The Hobbit was the first real book I read that wasn't a comicbook, and a movie I look forward to possibly more than the Avengers. They could film this damn thing on 8mm or cellphones, as long as Jackson is involved I am already sold.
ShinjaTurtle
ShinjaTurtle - 4/24/2012, 2:31 PM
48fps makes me barf.
Literally!
hoodedjester
hoodedjester - 4/24/2012, 2:31 PM
YES!
GingerBird
GingerBird - 4/24/2012, 2:32 PM
TDKR didn't have mixed reviews...
sexfoodcomics
sexfoodcomics - 4/24/2012, 2:32 PM
I hate people, saying higher frame rate projections look "TV" like!!! They know nothing of film and frame rates and don't realize we are used to an archaic standard. That's it, we are just used to seeing something wrong, so when we see something that is technically more real to the way our eyes see , everyone freaks out cause its different. The only reason 24fps was chosen to film and project cause it was the least amount of frames that can be used to synce sound up with picture. That's all. ( also I heard it was the frame rate that was chosen by a photographer early on to prove that a horse has all 4 feet off the ground at a given point in his run). We just stuck with it so long cause basically we got lazy , that's it , laziness. Look at what happens when a camera pans across an open field, what do you see?? A 24fps judder!! There's not enough frames per second to capture a smooth pan. Do your eyes do that?? NO!!! They don't!!! If anyone wants to know what's going on here with the new 48fps filming and projecting ask and I shall tell
OnLeatherWings
OnLeatherWings - 4/24/2012, 2:34 PM
Sounds awesome but i'm curious about this 48fps. I hate that TV look with a passion
marvel72
marvel72 - 4/24/2012, 2:38 PM
this is the movie of the year,no doubt about it.

that poster is f*ckin great.
TimJude72
TimJude72 - 4/24/2012, 2:40 PM
I read the Hobbit a long time ago but I don't remember Legolas in it...is he coming back just for the movie or what?? Any input on that??
ShinjaTurtle
ShinjaTurtle - 4/24/2012, 2:41 PM
But remember, it wasn't the footage/content getting the mixed reviews.
Just the technology.
But, it does kinda yank the rug from under your first impression.
MassExecutions
MassExecutions - 4/24/2012, 2:44 PM
So long as its not as bad as those HD tv's that fill in the space between frames with there best guess of what comes next. Man, I hate those things!
RadicalDuck
RadicalDuck - 4/24/2012, 2:48 PM
@TimJude72 - Yeah he isn't in the book. However, the Elven King in Mirkwood who captures the dwarves is Legolas' dad, so its not really surprising that they are putting him in- in some ways it'll help bridge the gap.
MovieMann
MovieMann - 4/24/2012, 2:49 PM
Basically every one who has seen the footage has commented on how the 48fps looks really bad.

This is really dissapointing news
95
95 - 4/24/2012, 2:50 PM
Stereoscopic 3D + 48fps = Nauseated Audience?
MovieMann
MovieMann - 4/24/2012, 2:51 PM
There have been complaints that because of the 48fps
the Sets look like actual sets
And you can tell that people are wearing prosthetics.

What you have posted here is actually the most positive thing I have heard anout the footage.

headlopper
headlopper - 4/24/2012, 2:53 PM
Hurm...48 frames per second. That means something.



Anyhow, I'm with @marvel72...this movies gonna be AWE.SOME!
Ashes2Phoenix
Ashes2Phoenix - 4/24/2012, 2:56 PM
Considering the footage was not complete, I don't see what the big fuss is about. I mean some scenes still had green screens in them. I know it was for a presentation and you are giving people impressions by showing it to them but by the sounds of it they have not even finished the colour-correction. This news does not concern me.

sexfoodcomics
sexfoodcomics - 4/24/2012, 3:01 PM
The problem isn't the 48fps. It's everything else. It's just like when we went fron SD to HD. U can see little details u didn't see before. Which means sets, lighting, makeup, VFX , everything needs to be able to withstand being seen in super crisp detail. There isn't as much motion blur because we are capturing more frames, which means the image isn't going to be as soft. I'm so glad we are moving forward in film tech, now we just have to wait for everything to catch up.
Ashes2Phoenix
Ashes2Phoenix - 4/24/2012, 3:04 PM
@sexfoodcomics: Surely 48 fps would be a happy medium between 24 and 60, so surely there would be some motion blur ? I personally like the look of 24 fps than 60 but I am curious to see what 48fps would look like. Like you said I am sure it is because people are not used to this new style.
DrRockso
DrRockso - 4/24/2012, 3:12 PM
I read The Hobbit whilst incarcerated
Ashes2Phoenix
Ashes2Phoenix - 4/24/2012, 3:15 PM
@SuspenseSmith: Yeah I have a Canon 60d and I never film in 50 or 60 fps because it looks way to fluid. It makes it look cheap, so I always film in 24 fps because I like the smoothness of it and the soft blur. I definitely prefer the quality of 24 fps but I have faith in Jackson's vision so I will just have to wait and see.
headlopper
headlopper - 4/24/2012, 3:33 PM
@DrRockso- That must have been 'captive'ating reading :)
Ranger14
Ranger14 - 4/24/2012, 3:45 PM
It's Peter Jackson. The least worry I have is the cinematic quality of The Hobbit on the big screen. Still my most anticipated film of the year, just edging out The Avengers.
neonhero
neonhero - 4/24/2012, 3:56 PM
I hope the "new" tech doesn't mess up a movie I am VERY excited about. I'm sure it'll be awesome, though. Studios don't blow the kind of dough that's going into this without some screen tests to ensure the quality of the film.
Darkhaven
Darkhaven - 4/24/2012, 6:46 PM
The only thing that could have made this the "Greatest Geek Year Ever" would have been the release of Ghostbusters 3. The Avengers, The Hobbit, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, Skyfall, The Bourne Legacy, The Raven, Prometheus, Total Recall, Expendables 2, TDKR, TASM...MY WALLET CAN'T HANDLE ALL OF THIS AWESOME!!
brewtownpsych
brewtownpsych - 4/24/2012, 6:47 PM
Hmmmm ... i don't want to be watching Dr. Who in Middle Earth. I, for one, like the softer, more cinematic stock. I dunno, seems to have a warmer, artistic quality to it, yes because it is what i was raised on but so what -- i'm not into seeing where the rubber nose was glued on to Kili's face.
brewtownpsych
brewtownpsych - 4/24/2012, 6:48 PM
@darkhaven ... right, 2012 has to go down in the record books as the biggest nerd movie year of all time. maybe, maybe some year in the early 80's with the star wars stuff, indiana jones, ET, aliens, predator, etc. ...
Darkhaven
Darkhaven - 4/24/2012, 7:06 PM
@brewtownpsych: 1984 will probably remain the biggest for a long time. There were some absolute monsters that year: Terminator, Ghostbusters, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, Dune, A Nightmare on Elm Street, The Neverending Story, Gremlins, Conan the Destroyer, Star Trek Three, The Last Starfighter, and Firestarter.

Edit: forgot Buckaroo Banzai also. Those are just the sci-fi/supernatural/hero stuff. The comedies and such of that year was insane.
ISleepNow
ISleepNow - 4/24/2012, 7:25 PM
Sounds like they should use the 48fps selectively the way they do IMAX, specifically for long shots and such..
GrayFox1025
GrayFox1025 - 4/24/2012, 7:35 PM
I think it is just a matter of something to get used to.
1 2
View Recorder