Peter Jackson answers The Hobbit criticism / Zeiss anamorphic for September / Nikon D3200 with D800 image processor for $699

[Andrew Reid]

[html]

[img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/peter-jackson-on-set-of-the-hobbit.jpg[/img]

Peter Jackson is unfazed by criticism The Hobbit looks un-cinematic by saying the clips shown at Cinemacon were unfinished and their duration not long enough for the audience to acclimatise.

[url="http://www.eoshd.com/?p=7996/"]Read full article[/url]

[/html]

[moebius22]

Peter Jackson on the uproar over [i]The Hobbit[/i] in 48Fps:


"Eat your peas."

[Karl Jordan]

Must be crack in that pipe he's smoking.

[moebius22]

[quote author=Karl Jordan link=topic=657.msg4871#msg4871 date=1335712136]
Must be crack in that pipe he's smoking.
[/quote]

Technology can be a a hard drug to pass up.

[tony wilson]

i must say apart from the negs this new old technology is getting one amazing thing is it has made the fat boy look thin.
i assume the bloke with the crack pipe is george lucas.
the fundamentals look grim though do we really want to see the bloke from the office and lot's of munchkins in nasty eyepopping clinical digical  3d :'(
super high res hot swedish teen romp maybe  ;)
but not little people with big noses from munchkin city.

i believe that uncle petes been smokin a lot of dope and watchin reruns of his masterpiece braindead.

[MaxAperture Films]

Tough to see the genius of LOTR replaced by 3D gimmickry.  Maybe they can drop every other frame and apply a 180 degree shutter in post to conform to 24fps... perhaps release it as a "2D cinematic version" for dinosaurs like myself who love the look of film and hate getting "flickered" by 3D glasses.

[kirk]

[quote author=tony wilson link=topic=657.msg4883#msg4883 date=1335748057]
i must say apart from the negs this new old technology is getting one amazing thing is it has made the fat boy look thin.
i assume the bloke with the crack pipe is george lucas.
the fundamentals look grim though do we really want to see the bloke from the office and lot's of munchkins in nasty eyepopping clinical digical  3d :'(
super high res hot swedish teen romp maybe  ;)
but not little people with big noses from munchkin city.

i believe that uncle petes been smokin a lot of dope and watchin reruns of his masterpiece braindead.
[/quote]

You display such a fine tuned sense of taste... really gives weight to your arguments...

[Axel]

[quote author=MaxAperture Films link=topic=657.msg4896#msg4896 date=1335791154]
Tough to see the genius of LOTR replaced by 3D gimmickry.  Maybe they can drop every other frame and apply a 180 degree shutter in post to conform to 24fps... perhaps release it as a "2D cinematic version" for dinosaurs like myself who love the look of film and hate getting "flickered" by 3D glasses.
[/quote]

Film is business more than craftsmanship. And cinema certainly is a dinosaur. I have a film review from 1977 on [i]Star Wars[/i], predicting the end of cinema as it had been until then. No longer would audiences be satisfied with little, cheap movies of the kind of a Roger Corman shocker. No more experiments with subversively playful plot-turns. Star Wars was the first of the openly stupid big blockbusters. Films that no longer offered an alternative to the collective conscience of TV (which Huxley portraied as Big Brother in [i]1984[/i]). There still is a lot to love about cinema, but it's roots have already been cut off. Let 48p come. Why not 480p? Why not 40k? Does all this matter at all?

[MaxAperture Films]

I don't see Star Wars as having ruined anything from a big-budget standpoint ($11 million film that grossed over $400 million!), but everyone is entitled to their opinion and I respect yours.  Also, the frame rate wasn't butchered by Lucas and much of the effects simply involved using miniature models to project a much more massive and dramatic world... not so much a technological achievement as it was an artful and [i]technical[/i] one.

Not trying to bash anyone who wishes to push technological boundaries, simply questioning those who seem to push those boundaries out of a desire to be more in line with "where things are going."  I don't like to see filmmakers give up the look and chemistry that made their prior films beautiful, artful expressions in favor of doing "what's new" or "what's next" at the expense of the aesthetic.

I once thought Spielberg was a bit old-fashioned for shunning direct-digital acquisition in favor of film, but now I see where he's coming from with regard to the romance of film's overall presentation, [i]especially[/i] the frame-rate.  For me the allure of digital acquisition is only the high portability and exceptional cost-benefit reward, not the reinvention of cinema.  But to each their own, I suppose.

[MaxAperture Films]

Good news!!  The Hobbit to be made available in 6 formats -

[url=http://blogs.crikey.com.au/cinetology/2012/04/30/peter-jacksons-the-hobbit-coming-to-cinemas-near-you-in-six-different-formats/]http://blogs.crikey.com.au/cinetology/2012/04/30/peter-jacksons-the-hobbit-coming-to-cinemas-near-you-in-six-different-formats/[/url]

Kudos to Jackson for accommodating everyone's taste in his latest rendition.

[Leang]

[quote author=Axel link=topic=657.msg4898#msg4898 date=1335792915]
I have a film review from 1977 on [i]Star Wars[/i],Star Wars was the first of the openly stupid big blockbusters. Films that no longer offered an alternative to the collective conscience of TV (which Huxley portraied as Big Brother in [i]1984[/i]). There still is a lot to love about cinema, but it's roots have already been cut off. Let 48p come. Why not 480p? Why not 40k? Does all this matter at all?
[/quote]

well we all know Hollywood in what it ethnicity it favours...there was a conspiracy theory on how many theaters 20th Century Fox distributed globally, more than half not reported, and only focusing on the profit.  This is huge cultural politics!  There are insiders that Oliver Stone and Lucas did blow at an event which they discussed how certain executive producers were biased morons to anything powering American Jews in show business.  this makes sense.  If you look at the clothing of Jedi's and royalty it's no different than Paul Newman's outfits in Ben Hur or the females like the ''princesses.''  Think about it.  ımo Star Wars is more of a knock-off of Ben-Hur than anything Kurosawa all the way to the dialogue.  Lucas was a genius to introduce adapted plots and convince executives as to what the visual analogies would be and they would be, and then playing them like fools with rights he wanted soon after.  Look at the outfits of the generals and admirals from the Empire.  what WWII enemies do they resemble?  anyways the point is to understand why Star Wars was pushed to be the number 1 hit ala superb science fiction for the modern age of cinema.  20th Century Fox wanted to prove that.  all political bullshit if you ask me.  Oliver Stone wanted to use a black actor for his sequel to Wall Street and they said absolutely not.  go figure.  aside from the gear BOY is there a bigger picture to worry about!  lol

Long live Marlon Brando. 

[moebius22]

[quote author=MaxAperture Films link=topic=657.msg4906#msg4906 date=1335821209]
Good news!!  The Hobbit to be made available in 6 formats -

[url=http://blogs.crikey.com.au/cinetology/2012/04/30/peter-jacksons-the-hobbit-coming-to-cinemas-near-you-in-six-different-formats/]http://blogs.crikey.com.au/cinetology/2012/04/30/peter-jacksons-the-hobbit-coming-to-cinemas-near-you-in-six-different-formats/[/url]

Kudos to Jackson for accommodating everyone's taste in his latest rendition.
[/quote]

I doubt the studio or the exhibitors gave him a choice on that one.

[Axel]

[quote author=MaxAperture Films link=topic=657.msg4904#msg4904 date=1335812930]
I don't see Star Wars as having ruined anything from a big-budget standpoint ($11 million film that grossed over $400 million!), but everyone is entitled to their opinion and I respect yours.[/quote]

I just say that the blockbuster movies are kitsch, and that the cinema they represent has lost it's right to exist long ago. I am no snob, but for the sake of my argument I throw Jackson, Bay, Spielberg, Emmerich and Cameron together. Imho there is no need to imply conspiracies, it's enough to realize the mainstream as dull, viscous and shallow river.

[i]Avatar[/i] for example builds up pseudo civilisation critique to squeeze out one or two tears (excuse my weird idioms, germanisms), that is more and less than solid entertainment at the same time. It's cynical and detestable. Compare it to [i]Soldier Blue[/i] from 1970, a film flawed in many ways, but what a statement!

Too long the industrie exploited the "good old cinema magic". The filmmakers (to quote Stanley Kubrick) [i]indulged themselves with the audience[/i], they pushed the usual buttons to trigger the good old pawlovian reflexes and let the masses applaud. And we, the DSLR filmmakers, aspiring amateurs as well as low budgeted pros, fell for it too.

The last film camera has been delivered, the last 24p-bound film projector is getting disassembled for scrap, what are we lamenting about? If this isn't the hour of the re-invention of cinema!

So Jackson now is tamed and rows back. The better to conceal the fact that the golden calf we're dancing around is hollow, and the chocolate inside rotten and full of maggots. 24p never meant anything.

[bradleyg5]

What kind of quality is the expectation from DSLRs? Seems like blu-ray 1080p is the benchmark. I can't imagine any lower consumer format being able to discern the sharpness difference between a GH2 and other DSLRs. No way you could realistically tell the difference over broadcast HD since it's almost as compressed as Youtube.

[tony wilson]

kirk
You display such a fine tuned sense of taste... really gives weight to your arguments...
[/quote]

captain kirk it was a joke you know ha ha.

but you clearly are warped if you prefer seeing digital 3d munchkins in red sterile vision.
so yes i would prefer to see nice girls..i am guilty.

my point is this is bullshit politics,money and marketing each director on different deals.
with the last big film man standing seeming to be christopher nolan.
so i will wait.
my guess is i will prefer the exotic analogue beauty of a batman using tools that seemed good enough for welles,kubrick,tarkovsky and truffaut.
over the new way's of cameron,lucas,scott and jackson  monsanto like poisonous and plastic.
i will wait to eat my words.
will scotts new vision best bladerunner.manns best heat..jacksons lotr..lucas thx1138 etc.
some of these nazi's actually want film to die..
unless they are being paid by some corporation why bother being negative about negative.
it is hilarious they want it to die but they use it as a constant f ing reference.
film look this and that.