[QUOTE=LiquidNazgul;40999054]I must have missed it because I didn't see Smaug at all[/QUOTE]
Watch it all the way through next time. You can't miss it.
John Watson will finally be reunited with Sherlock.
I love the Hobbit, but still, all that CGI annoys me sometimes.
You'd think since they were so hush hush about what Smaug looks like that he'd look less generic. That Del Toro design looks a lot better I think, although the horns are too similar to a balrog's. Oh well.
[QUOTE=Diet Kane;40994960]I'm saying remove all the stupid [B]LOTR trilogy[/B] and Simalaron[B] shit that doesn't belong in the Hobbit[/B]
and trim down the action scenes that are just streeeeeeeeeetched on forever[/QUOTE]
you do realize the hobbit IS lotr ...right?
thats like saying lets remove all the shit that connects star wars 4, 5, and 6 to 1, 2, and 3... or connects any star trek series.
the official illustrations of the hobbit are a traditional looking dragon as well so I'm fine with it
[editline]12th June 2013[/editline]
What I'm more surprised about is the presence of legolas, which is a very nice addition
[QUOTE=killerteacup;41000050]the official illustrations of the hobbit are a traditional looking dragon as well so I'm fine with it
[editline]12th June 2013[/editline]
What I'm more surprised about is the presence of legolas, which is a very nice addition[/QUOTE]
Seconded. I think it looks fun. Not accurate to the book, but still, fun.
[QUOTE=The_J_Hat;40997657]I don't think that was going to be Guillermo's final design, since he wanted a classic looking dragon in the film.[/QUOTE]
Where'd you get that from? Del Toro was going all out on a new and different dragon design from everything i can find
[url]http://io9.com/5747879/10-things-you-didnt-know-about-guillermo-del-toros-monsters[/url]
[url]http://screenrant.com/hobbit-guillermo-del-toro-creature-designs-interview-smaug-the-dragon-scottm-33787/[/url] "I came up with a very strong idea that would separate Smaug from every other dragon ever made."
This looks great. Hope it is as good as the first one
[QUOTE=Mr Shadyface;41000238]Seconded. I think it looks fun. Not accurate to the book, but still, fun.[/QUOTE]
Not too inaccurate, he was in Mirkwood at the time of The Hobbit afaik, technically he could have been there in the book, but unnamed.
[QUOTE=postal;41000300]Where'd you get that from? Del Toro was going all out on a new and different dragon design from everything i can find
[url]http://io9.com/5747879/10-things-you-didnt-know-about-guillermo-del-toros-monsters[/url]
[url]http://screenrant.com/hobbit-guillermo-del-toro-creature-designs-interview-smaug-the-dragon-scottm-33787/[/url] "I came up with a very strong idea that would separate Smaug from every other dragon ever made."[/QUOTE]
Well, it appears I am wrong.
[QUOTE=Antimuffin;40995036]What. It's the goddamn prequel and plays in the same universe. It's supposed to have a connection to Lord of the Rings. What the fuck are you talking about.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=J!NX;41000042]you do realize the hobbit IS lotr ...right?
thats like saying lets remove all the shit that connects star wars 4, 5, and 6 to 1, 2, and 3... or connects any star trek series.[/QUOTE]
Have either of you even read the books? I think what he means is that the films aren't following the books well enough. There was so much in the Hobbit that didn't belong in the Hobbit.
[QUOTE=Zatar963;41002066]Have either of you even read the books? I think what he means is that the films aren't following the books well enough. There was so much in the Hobbit that didn't belong in the Hobbit.[/QUOTE]
It's been known for a long time that Jackson is adding stuff that wasn't shown in the books, and it's a proper move because lots of us want a trilogy because this is Middle Earth's last hurrah on the big screen. I like the new stuff. :( What I don't like is the absolute lack of blood.
[QUOTE=Zatar963;41002066]Have either of you even read the books? I think what he means is that the films aren't following the books well enough. There was so much in the Hobbit that didn't belong in the Hobbit.[/QUOTE]
to be fair, sadly, theres shitloads of examples of not following the book
it isn't always bad but hey.
I thought the Hobbit was a let down in contrast to the Lord of the Rings, you can see it's aimed at a younger audience with the jokes and childish humour, i was expecting something more like the other movies.
Hope its better than the first one, wich was in my opinion a dissapointment.
A while ago I watched a few seasons of a show at 30fps. You really do get used to it after a while, although it's very jarring and looks cheap at first.
When I watched a more recent season that switched back to 24fps, I thought something was wrong with the video since it was so choppy. Then I realised that it was normal. It was a weird transition, but I can now go back and forth between high fps and low fps. It's neat sometimes.
I really don't get how the LOTR effects are so much more convincing than the Hobbit effects. I've been watching the trilogy lately and there's only a handful of places in the whole thing where I thought 'Yeah, that's obviously CGI'. For the Hobbit I thought that all the way through. I really wish they had at least done the Pale Orc with makeup, maybe making him look enormous using the same forced perspective tricks they use to make Hobbits look small.
1:10
All I could think of after that is "u know nothin jon snow"
I'm not saying the movie was shit, i'm saying i was expecting it to be more like the lord of the rings. It's all right for a kid's movie. I'll still watch the rest of the movies though, after seeing the effort they went through to make the film.
Looks like the same mediocre cgifest the first was
[QUOTE=CatFodder;41010473]I really don't get how the LOTR effects are so much more convincing than the Hobbit effects. I've been watching the trilogy lately and there's only a handful of places in the whole thing where I thought 'Yeah, that's obviously CGI'. For the Hobbit I thought that all the way through. I really wish they had at least done the Pale Orc with makeup, maybe making him look enormous using the same forced perspective tricks they use to make Hobbits look small.[/QUOTE]
I think the pale orc plot was shoe horned in the movie at the "last minute" so they had to CG him fyi
[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;41028069]Fellowship of the Ring is the greatest film ever made
sorry[/QUOTE]
The first Hobbit
LOTR was great
and The Hobbit book is one of my favorites
I dont see why everyone complains about CGI. I think it makes movies look impressive
Too much CGI IMO. Especially when they could use actors with makeup.
Actors with real costumes and make up look a ton better than cgi enhanced everything like in the hobbit.
They even gave them cgi capes.
[QUOTE=Chrille;40994987]also, smaug looks really bad lol. whatever happened to this?
[img]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/--DF9oAhgmRc/TlDwLOrb3QI/AAAAAAAABmg/7rs0WW0Ailc/s1600/6a00e550a3fc4c883400e551935cf68833-800wi.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
wow how generic and shitty
[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;41031821]wow how generic and shitty[/QUOTE]
are you fucking kidding me
take a look at the smaug from the trailer and say it's not the epitome of generic dragons
and do provide an example of a movie dragon looking similar to that concept art
which probably wasn't final, but i sure as hell like the direction they took with that one much more than just "red lizard with wings"
Yeah, IMO CGI should be limited to effects, landscapes and monsters.
[editline]14th June 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;41031821]wow how generic and shitty[/QUOTE]
lol generic
when was the last time you saw something like that?
in like every single average concept artists portfolio ever?? it looks like your average run-of-the-mill video game enemy
it's an okay design but it wouldn't fit smaug or the rest of the character design in the hobbit at all. old fashioned dragon works better this time around
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
