Movie: The Hobbit

[Ithekro]

Some of the CG work is taking one background and adding it to another. PJ even said in one of these that they intended to replace the sky in several scenes with the neat clouds they filmed in another location.

[C.A.]

Originally Posted by Kyero Fox

But still I mean stuff like scenery, it looks like THE HOBBIT will have a lot of natural background. I know smegal will be CGI lol and maybe some of the fight scenes, but what their fighting on is mostly real.

The LOTR did have lots of natural backgrounds, they can't waste the great New Zealand scenery lol

What they usually do with background CG is lighting and shadow adjustment to create specific moods of the scene.

Stuff like adding dark thunder clouds and volcanoes to the mountains for Sauron or bright and holy lighting for Minas Tirith and of course CG sets.

Also alot of background extras actually wear green or blue suits to have CG armour added to them later.

Making armour prop on a large scale for the background is not as cost effective as digital armour lol

[Endless Soul]

On the other hand, most movies on the SyFy channel are a good example of how NOT to do good CGI work.

Endless "Gargoyles" Soul

[C.A.]

It really depends on budget and time lol, for example, some scenes of Avengers were so heavy, it took 7 hours to render each frame.

EDIT: Oh and manpower and skill, a single scene can easily be worked on by 7 teams of the best digital artists.

[mystogan]

i remember watching it's trailer some months ago and saw that it is going to release in december , that's so long,
i hope it gives the same epicness the first three film gave

[Ithekro]

Peter Jackson confirms 'Hobbit' will be divided into three movies

http://movies.msn.com/movies/article.aspx?news=746962

"We know how much of the story of Bilbo Baggins, the Wizard Gandalf, the Dwarves of Erebor, the rise of the Necromancer and the Battle of Dol Guldur will remain untold if we do not take this chance," Jackson wrote.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

So it does sound like Peter decided he had cut too much out. The good thing is that it sounds like he will film new scenes, rather than just edit existing footage.

[FlareKnight]

I just hope this is a good choice. That's a lot of movie for one book. I mean sure won't have to really cut much out in that case, just want this to all work out for the best.

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

So, three movies for one book.

I wonder will each movie has beginning, middle, and climax-resolution like the previous trilogy, or Hobbit 1 will be beginning, Hobbit 2 middle, and Hobbit 3 Climax-resolution.

[Ithekro]

Technically they are making more than just one book. They are making all the material that surrounded the book as well. Tolkien made a lot of material. A whole lot of material. The Hobbit touched on some thing that were explained or made into story form in other sources. Just hinted at second or third hand in The Hobbit itself.

The Battle of Dol Guldur and the Necromancer are good examples of really important things that happen "off screen" in The Hobbit. We only hear about them in passing from Gandalf for the most part. Yet these events directy impact the story that is The Lord of the Rings.

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

Hmm..interesting.

So I guess the source material won't be stretched out (unlike that cash-grab Twilight 4 part 1 & 2).

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by Obelisk ze Tormentor

Hmm..interesting.

So I guess the source material won't be stretched out (unlike that cash-grab Twilight 4 part 1 & 2).

For all intent and purposes, it is pretty hard to stretch out novel adaptations. There is never enough screen time to replicate the entire book.

[ChainLegacy]

Plus, lots of scenes were 'glossed over' in the book (definitely not the right term since it's Tolkien, but comparatively less-described) - their capture in Mirkwood for example. They might also give Beorn a bit more 'descriptive' screen time to justify all the epic praise he is given.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by Amorok

I think the first three LOTR movies were impressive enough that I'd trust the same people to make an adaptation of the Hobbit. My only concern is that they're splitting the story into two movies, which strikes me as a blatant attempt to squeeze as much revenue out of the adaption as they can.

Normally, I'd be willing to chip in the few extra bucks it'd take to watch two movies instead of one, but seriously -- the Hobbit? As two movies? There was barely enough action in the book to fit into one!

ehhhhh, it doesn't sound like we read the same book but whatever... Peter apparently plans to include a lot of flashbacks and visual recreations of events described by the characters but not seen directly in the book. This is likely to be a very wonderful thing.

[Master_Yoma]

Now thats milking it 3 movies for 1 book I wonder how long each movies will be

[Ithekro]

With the number of battles and events in and around that one book? Two and a half hours each.

[Vexx]

Okay.. either its been too long since some of ya'll read the book or ya'll never read it in the first place. You could make a freaking mini-series out of the book

[kyp275]

Maybe one day they'll decide to make movies out of the Silmarillion, there's enough stuff in there for Jackson to make as many movies as he wants

[Endless Soul]

Originally Posted by Vexx

Okay.. either its been too long since some of ya'll read the book or ya'll never read it in the first place. You could make a freaking mini-series out of the book

Indeed! Add in all the extra source material, it could be quite lengthy.

I wonder how Smaug will be portrayed. I'm hoping he'll be very impressive.

Endless "Barrel rider" Soul

[Mr Hat and Clogs]

Smaug needs his own movie imo, in either the style of Silence of the Lambs or Interview with a Vampire.