• Not digging the whole 3D thing in movies, but with that being said, it seems like this Peter Jackson guy knows what he's doing.  Considering the fact that all this footage is being digitally stored, it could be safe to say that this info could be altered and manipulated in the future, stepping beyond '3D film' and into the realm of virtual film as the tech develops.  Seems to me like he knows this. Great footage though, won't watch another until after the movie.  Hoody hoo!, alright Baggins!

• Ah yes, with any luck when this is all said and done my brother will finally agree that LOTR is superior to Star Wars, and I love SW but he's mistaken.

• Meh, won't be true 3D breast until you can motorboat them in the theater.

• Gandalf in bad mofo mode.  Can't wait.  And dragon awesomeness too!

• Coraline...Coraline remains the only movie that I feel has done 3D right. There were other things done wrong, but it was the first and only movie that made me amazed at 3D and what it can do. 

• Am I the only one who's glad they DIDN'T film Lord of the Rings in 3D?

• This made me very happy. I know they're going to do a wonderful job with The Hobbit, 3D or not. They're already off to a better start than the filmmakers of most other 3D movies!

• That really was fascinating.  A great look behind the scenes.  Also I don't think I'd ever heard Peter Jackson speak before, so that was kinda cool too.

• This is about the production blog. I watched episode 1 of the blog and stopped.

• I'm sure this movie will look much more natural than Avatar. I am a bit concerned that Jackson has let the CGI aspect overwhelm some of his fims (King Kong and The Lovely Bones, which looked like animated paintings), but hopefully now he's back in Middle Earth he'll go back to CGI that has a bit of depth and grit to it - and focus on his actors rather than the special effects. Great blog - and Freeman is already totally believable as young Bilbo.

• Agreed. If the movies had been totally true to the books, they've have been po-faced and tedious. There's nothing worse than fantasy/sci-fi that takes itself too seriously. Arguably Jackson and co were better at telling a story than Tolkien. That doesn't detract from Tolkien's incredible vision, or his ability to generate a fantasy world with its own history and culture. But his characters are dreadfully flat, for the most part, and their dialogue is leaden. Some of the light relief is a bit ham-fisted, but it had to be there.

• PJ is gaining weight again! Good. It suits him.

• Do I dare say that this is going to be the most ridiculously beautiful movie ever?

• Wow, that was pretty sweet.  Thanks Rob.

• Indeed. Whatever other problems Avatar may have had, it wasn't washed out coloring (even in the life-action portions.)

• I did say "better than average". For all their goofs and gaffes (I seethe every time they try to simplify destroying the ring as "destroying evil"--something Tolkien had more sense than to claim), Jackson and his posse did manage to keep more characterization than otherwise, and even added some that was worthwhile. Even some of Gimli's goofiness would have been brilliant in smaller doses.

• When added to the female squee, it becomes a Squeem. ...okay, never mind.

• I totally agree that it would be impossible to capture all the books' nuances, but I hate it when filmmakers/adapters think they're cleverer than the original writers. The best example of this in the films is the way that Gimli was turned into an ass for comedic effect and that characters' lines got switched for "character development" (i.e., Gandalf got every "wise"-sounding line from the books, even if it was something Aragorn said).

• Feh. 3D dragons. Hobbit: win. (Even with only one dragon. Smaug would not be overlorded by 3D Navi genitalia.)

• Eh, that's only one part of my problems with 3-D.  Though in the end, that simply means I won't be springing for a 3-D television nor spending the extra ten dollars on the "IMAX experience."

• Crap, I hit the "Like" button instead of the "Reply" button by accident, wish there was some to undo that. Fuck! There was so density and depth in Tolkien's original books that no movie trilogy, or even a mini-series could hope to capture all their nuances.  Still Peter Jackson created the best adaptation of LOTR one could hope for, and it was far from "a genuine travesty".  The books are still on the shelves, so quit pissing and moaning about the movies already!

• Mirkwood is not what I imagined at all, it looks a bit too Pandora-ish.  Oh well, I'll reserve judgement until I see some actual footage of the spiders scurrying after the dwarves and Bilbo. Oh, and on an unrelated note, R.I.P. Cory Smoot, a.k.a. Flattus Maximus from GWAR.

• I'm under the impression that PJ & his entourage actually screwed the pooch on character and storytelling. The visuals and overall story arc were a fine adaptation, but the LotR movies were a genuine travesty in almost all other ways. I don't mean to seem like I'm trolling (which I'm not trying to do), but I really think that these films have gotten too much credit where it was not due.

• He made all his best movies when he was roly-poly.

• We shall make you one of us...one of us...one of us....one of us...one of us.

• YOU ARE ALL WEIRDOS *closes door/window again*

• turn that frown upside down fabi!

• LOL i like this one....

• http://www.myfacewhen.com/2/

• The real life ones are great as well...especially since I can both fondle them AND hack them to bits. You can't prove anything!!!!

• Please, PLEASE don't call Fellowship "Episode 1". Episode 1 is something else, something horrible, and LotR should never be associated with it ;)

• Dunno, man. I prefer them IRL. I can feel and smell them for real and not just pretend to by reaching out to the screen, sniffing the bra I ordered online from a so called Japanese school girl ;D

• What a massive waste of resources the team is spending on the 3D camerawork. The film would be more immersive if they simply ditched the 3D gimmick and had a brighter picture. I don't want to be distracted by having pointy things poking out of the screen all the time and I hope it's not obvious in the 2D version, which is the version I will be seeing ofc.

• So... dripping ponytails?

• The washed out color stuff is addressed in the video. The actual sets/makeup/whatever is being tweaked so it looks right in the theater. 

• Smee just isn't going to catch on, so stop it.

• I wonder why they don't make polarized 3D lenses that just clip or hook on to your regular glasses, like cheap "clip-on" sunglasses?  Seems like it'd be cheaper than making the entire frame, and much more comfortable for glasses-wearing viewers.

• I would like to watch it, but I can't, simply thanks to how hard a sell Peter Jackson is trying to press with the whole 3-D thing.  I am hoping that it will die soon, but I doubt it.  Not only is it an awful device for film making, tends to ruin watching it by making the colors washed out, has led to even higher ticket prices at so-called "IMAX" theaters that aren't actually IMAX, but I think part of the reason it is hitting now is because it serves as yet another layer of DRM, or, at least, it did, at first.  By now, I'm sure some pioneering and small firm in Asia has developed a way to copy those kind of Blu-rays.  Still, it may last a while longer simply because coked up Hollywood types want to try and force it on the public.

• Scary...sexy....is there a difference?

• kinda scary thought itsn't it??

• I hate when Dr.Abraxas sums things up so perfectly.

• I agree. Bouncy blue breasts in 3-D is truly glorious to behold.

• James Cameron is fucked.

• i see pj as a bj that went south

• gasp! but navi in 3d with navi stuff in 3d 3d'ing itself in front of your face and you were merely BORED? mortal, the end of the world is simply wasted with you!

• you can have your 3d elven lords; i'd rather be overlorded by 3d navi genitallia in all of its dripping wet 3d awesomeness

• And they're clearly doing my favorite bit looking out over the tree tops of mirkwood. Don't know why but I always stop reading for the night at that point. Altered perspectives or something.

• What's more, that probably comes from Movie 2. We're seeing spoilery things from the second movie already (thanks to their multi-movie shooting process.) SMMEEEEEE!!!

• Yes, it is quite smee-worthy. (I've been testing out a masculine squee recently, at appropriate times. This seems like one such time. {guttural roar} SMMEEEEE!)

• I'm under the impression that PJ & his entourage have a better than average record involving character and storytelling, at least when it comes to Tolkien adaptations, while integrating them with eye-popping visuals that raise the bar for daring other filmmakers to jump. .... over. {inhale} So, since it isn't a post-production conversion process, I for one welcome our new 3-D Elven Lords.

• I figure it's better than the Nightman. But, I guess it's just an option. Leaving 2D folk wondering why shit's flying at the screen unnecessarily.

• I stopped watching these after seeing episode 1. I'm happy to wait and go into it knowing as little as possible about the look of  the movies.

• Oh man, they have the bit with the butterflies in Mirkwood! I can't beleive they fit that in.

• It...it makes me so happy!

• I, for one, welcome the return of Fat Peter Jackson.

• I still see PJ as the alien in Bad taste, even now over 20 years later

• I'm under the impression that it's mainly a substitute for character and storytelling

• This is just the latest of four videos? Talk about dropping the ball TR. I got bored with 3D after going to see Avatar - no wait... that was during Avatar. It adds nothing to the experience.

• I'm still under the impression that 3-D can add more depth and character to story-telling when done properly. The biggest issue right now is that NONE wants to go that extra mile and decided to just cop out with the easy way out and go back to their cocaine.

• "We subsidized a 3D camera industry, and by God, we are going to get a return on our investment. Even if some of the film-goers' heads explode in the process."

• Just go see the 2d version then, most cinemas give you a choice. i personally also wear glasses and having 2 pairs on at the same time isnt that big a deal to me.

• was that Greenman i saw at the beginning? thats an odd choice for a cameo. im happy he's excited about 3D and everything... but as a glasses wearer (and i assume our numbers among Tolkien fans are high) 3D movies are a huge pain in the ass. at the end of the day its glasses on top of glasses and it makes for an annoying filmgoing experience.

TotalComments: 62