The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug teaser trailer (Page 1 of 5)

There are definitely some cartoonish effects. I guess you could say it's staying consistent with LOTR in that respect.

Personally, I'm really digging Smaug's look.

Ya I just don't give a fuck about this kind of fantasy movie anymore, it all looks pretty, and expensive, and fake, and I'm just bored

They're cartoony, there's zero practical effects, or any attempt to make them look like anything that could or would actually exsist, and just a general disregard for reality in general.

It reminds me of Oz the great and powerful or Burtons Alice In Wonderland, except instead of it trying to be a magic wonderland, it's supposed to be Middle Earth. Which is the same thing I've been saying since I saw  the first trailer for the Hobbit. It's not Middle Earth, and they're not even trying to pretend like it is... it's some other cartoon universe where gravity doesn't exsist and everyone walks around going mork mork mork.

It's kinda like they saw that shot of Legolas looping around the horse to get back on top from LOTR (The not very great one), and thought that they should do an entire movie (trilogy) in that style.

Even Smaug didn't do anything for me, he looks like a cardboard cut out of a dragon slapped on top of a frame from Fantasia.

And yes, I've officially given up on this series.

Last edited by BigDamnArtist (2013-06-11 21:46:36)

Haha, that is an adequate comparison. I`m sure i will watch it, but I don`t know whether it will be in the theater. As I personally boycot 3d it probably won`t. I liked bits and pieces of the first Hobbit movie, but the action sequences, especially the long action sequence escaping the caves, bored me much like the light saber fights in episode1-3, and it already being so long and sidetracked so often, I don´t know whether I would even call part one a pleasant experience. So what am i expecting?

I do get that in every Tolkien adaptation there will be a female part expanded or inserted, as he is mostly writing about dudes (with a few exeptions here and there), but seriosly, who is that elven chick?

Btw I still dont get why they go for the hobbit and not for the story of Hurin´s Sons or the story of Luthien and Beren, if they want to go all lenghty and epic on it. Those are material for the format they want. And there even would be strong female parts in there, Silmarillion Spoiler

I wonder just how many miniatures they used this time around. The use of prosthetics seems to have taken a big drop this time around, have all the practical effects done so too?

I also suspect that the use of digital cameras isn't helping. Yeah, sorry, I went there.

You're right though, LOTR has a gritty look that helps ground it, and the way it was shot was a definite part of it. The digital look of these Hobbit films really does them no favors

Wow, that's really sad to hear PJ do such an apparent 360 (:P) on the use of miniatures. And ironically, the ability to swoop in and do any camera movement with the CGI sets is that the film becomes much less real. Maybe that's the intention, to make this trilogy a 'ride'?

That is Tauriel, captain of the Woodland Realm's Guard. She is a controversial character, to say the least. Caution, some spoilers ahead: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tauriel

Also, I am a little surprised at the lack of use of miniatures given the success in LOTR. Personally, I at least am glad to see Mirkwood, and Smaug and am still interested in the film.

Wow, Is Peter Jackson becoming the new George Lucas?

I had forgotten about how in the production vlogs they talked about bringing more color into the Mirkwood set because "the Red cameras tend to eat color." They may have gone a little too far...

Here they talk about the colors in Mirkwood starting around 6:15.

PJ: "In the movie they won't look anything like that. They'll be graded down and you'll just get the barest hint of color in the finished film."

Eh... Ish.

What I missed from the Hobbit was the colour grading they did back in LOTR. There was a desaturated, subtle blue-y green tint  to the world and they weren't afraid to get grainy. That made the whole thing feel so much more like an old story. Couple that with models and prosthetics and PJ's never ending mantra of "it has to feel like it's real" and you end up with a world you feel you could walk right into.

Hobbit went the complete opposite direction. The colours are vibrant and tend to ooze from every nook and cranny. The camera dives and swoops, actors are replaced with digital stunt doubles. While that might be impressive on a technical level, I feel a big disconnect between this story and LOTR. You could argue that we're watching the story from Bilbo's perspective and therefore the world is more of a marvel and wonder than if it were read from an old tome.

Y'know I keep hearing that argument: "well the story is told from Bilbo's perspective, so XYZ." I'll agree that the book certainly is that way. But the movie isn't Bilbo-centric. We have the same omniscient perspective that we had in LOTR. I'm getting really sick of hearing that reasoning because people are using it as a way to explain away everything that could be criticized about the films.

I'm still optimistic, though. I love LOTR and it will always hold a special place in my heart. I enjoyed the Hobbit a lot, just not on the same level as LOTR. I have a feeling I'll probably enjoy this movie a lot, too. It has the same spirit as LOTR underneath it all, but the surface is different enough that it doesn't feel the same. Ultimately though, the spirit of the books is what means the most to me, so I'm still looking forward to watching this.