POLL TIME! Plus Some Notes & Early Reaction to The Hobbit

[eldritchhobbit]

I've seen The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey twice now, and I'm planning to work up a proper review shortly. Nutshell version: it's definitely a flawed film (mostly related to the writing and special effects), but the positives far outweigh the negatives, and I enjoyed it more than any of Jackson's adaptations since The Fellowship of the Ring. The acting, in particular, is fantastic. Martin Freeman is J.R.R. Tolkien's, Ian Holm's, and his own Bilbo Baggins, all at the same time, brilliantly. Richard Armitage's Thorin Oakenshield and Ken Stott's Balin are both exactly how I always imagined them, only better.

A few notes:

* The Call for Papers is now available here for "The Future of Harry Potter: The 2013 PotterWatch Conference" at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (April 6, 2013). I was the Keynote Speaker for the 2012 PotterWatch Conference, and I had a fantastic time at the event. If you're interested, I highly recommend taking part. (Thanks to gods_lil_rocker.)

* Great news for fantasy lovers: G.L. Gregg's wonderful novel The Sporran is now available for Kindle.

* My narration of Jeff Carlson's novel The Frozen Sky is now available not only on Audible (where it's currently $12.97 for members as part of the site-wide sale), but also on Amazon and on iTunes.


POLL TIME! What new Spring 2013 TV programs (if any) are you going to watch?

[Poll #1885008]

We're planning to give The Following and Ripper Street a try in January.

For Fall 2012, we "test drove" several disappointing "clunkers" (Elementary, Revolution, 666 Park Avenue, and Copper), but we've ended up enjoying Last Resort thus far - which, of course, means it was cancelled.

(After living in Nashville for seventeen years and knowing so many people in the industry and locations where it's filmed - including my alma mater - we also have to watch Nashville. It's particularly fun to see the talented Kimberly Williams-Paisley in an interesting role. Her husband, Brad Paisley, not only graduated from and supports Belmont University, but he's also said publicly lovely things about the experience and impact of having my husband as his professor, so it's no surprise that I have a huge soft spot for him!)

Comments

[ace hamilton (from livejournal.com)]

I agree with you about 3-D. We are still far away from acceptable 3-D. I saw the film in 3-D HFR. It was not even the best 3-D I've seen. The image was divided into 3 very flat images, one near, one far, one in the middle distance. In 2-D my mind fills in the third dimension without constantly reminding me I am watching a movie. I think I am going to avoid 3-D altogether for at least 5 years.

I had reason to expect to prefer the high frame rate but I can't even recommend it. I know it may be largely due to a whole life of 24 frames per second, but after viewing the whole film I believe there is something more to my negative reaction.

I have long understood that film is not realistic and imparts a somewhat dreamlike quality. 48 fps does in fact come closer to our natural vision, but still isn't realistic, and introduces other problems that weren't evident before.

A number of people have suggested that those who don't like the HFR are just old fashioned, hopelessly stuck in the past. They have compared the new format to the advent of color in motion pictures. But this brings up a point which I don't believe any one else has mentioned.

When movies began to introduce color, it took some time for cinematographers to adjust. Most early color films just did not look good, as the techniques needed differ markedly from those used in filming black and white. Perhaps eventually adjustments will be made and this will be a viable format, at least for some applications, but we are not there yet.

The Hobbit appeared overlit, not surprising considering the 48 frame process requires much more light. Riddles in the Dark? I have been to restaurants darker than Gollum's lair.

[eldritchhobbit.livejournal.com]

This is one of the very best analyses of the technology I've read. I'm so grateful to you! And I'm less anxious to see the film in 3-D HFR now (not to mention relieved that I haven't missed something spectacular in my 2-D viewings).

In 2-D my mind fills in the third dimension without constantly reminding me I am watching a movie.

Yes! Well said.

Your comparison between this "revolution" and the move to color films, and how the new technology solved some problems while creating new ones, makes so much sense. It's a shame to hear that the Riddles in the Dark scene in particular was overlit, but from what you describe about the process, I see how that could happen.

Avoiding this technology for the next five years while the filmmakers work out the kinks sounds like a wise plan! Thanks for "shedding light" (but just the right amount!) on this for me. I really appreciate your insights.