Category: Peter Jackson

THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY – The Review

They say you can’t go home again. But what if the home in question is that fabled land called Middle Earth. That’s the speculation surrounding celebrated film maker Peter Jackson. His LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy broke box offices records around the globe while collecting a chest full of awards (including the Best Picture Oscar for the final entry RETURN OF THE KING). Much like Bond fans, Rings devotees have had to wait several years for all the legal and financial battles to be settled. For a time it looked like Guillermo del Toro (PAN’S LABYRINTH) would be directing this Rings prequel, but as the negotiations dragged, del Toro had to move on. When the dust cleared, Jackson decided that he would not only produce but also direct this new Tolkein screen adaptation. Is the magic back? Film goers will finally find out with the release of THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY.

This tale beings with a history of Lonely Mountain, the realm of the dwarves. After surviving a brutal attack from the gruesome orcs, their treasure is seized by the dragon Smaug. The kingdom is in ruin and the dwarves are scattered through the lands. But all is peaceful in the Shire, especially at the home of a hobbit named Bilbo Baggins (played by Ian Holm in the Rings trilogy here his sixty years younger version is Martin Freeman). That tranquility is shattered with the arrival of Gandalf the Gray (Ian McKellen). The wizard wants Bilbo to join him and thirteen dwarves on a journey back to reclaim their home and treasure. Bilbo will have none of this adventure nonsense. That night his quiet home is invaded by those warrior dwarves led by the fearless Thorin (Richard Armitage). When Bilbo awakes the next morning, the rowdy dwarves and the wizard are gone. But the hobbit has a change of heart and catches up with them. On the long journey they encounter elves, orcs, trolls, rock giants, and a cave-dwelling, ring-loving, raspy voiced creature as they near closer to the land ruled by a brutal fire-breather.

Although this is set sixty years prior to the Rings trilogy, many familiar faces do pop up (including one very welcome surprise). But it’s McKellen as Gandalf that’s the most dominant. He’s slips into this character like he’s easing into a pair of comfy old slippers. He’s funny, wise, and a forbidding conjurer. And Sir Ian plays very well against this film’s most inspired addition of TV star Freeman (“The Office” “Sherlock”) as the timid title character. Their initial meeting is a delightful bit of whimsical wordplay and banter. For most of the initial scenes Bilbo goes from exasperated to worried panic. Once he commits to the quest he truly comes alive even as he flails about with his new sword, Stinger. There’s not enough time for each of the dwarves to stake out much in the way of personality, but Armitage makes a quite impressive small-sized swashbuckler.

But what really impresses here are the breathtaking visuals. As in the previous trilogy, the main characters trudge through all manner of majestic scenery. I’m sure this film will give New Zealand another nice tourism bump. The sets are epic and grand particularly a visit to the Elf kingdom. And the special effects are state of the art, especially in an encounter with three ravenous trolls (frightening and funny). But the most spectacular sequence doesn’t involve multiple beasties and battles, but a quiet quiz between Bilbo and the glorious Gollum, who continues to be one of filmdom’s most amazing creations. He’s more expressive than ever thanks to advanced CGI technology and the wonderful acting of Andy Serkis, the maestro of motion-capture. Speaking of tech, a lot has been written about the use of HFR (High Frame Rate in select theatres). Supposedly the projection of 48 frames per second instead of the standard 24 has caused some queasiness in audiences. My eyes adjusted fairly quickly, but I noticed that any movement (by the camera or actors) zipped by very fast. As a friend pointed out, you get no blurs at 48 so your brain has less to fill in (all the details are there). It is a sharper image, but nothing like live TV as was earlier reported (oh, and the 3D’s nice, but not essential as with LIFE OF PI). Much has also been made about the decision to make three films out of this single Tolkein story. Nothing seems padded here to warrant those accusing the producers of a “money grab”. After the frenetic slapstick of the dwarves trashing Bilbo’s home, the film almost resembles an old Saturday morning serial with one unsurvivable cliff-hanger after another. Sometimes the spectacle is overwhelming with endless nasties popping up to be sliced and speared, but Jackson really makes everything work. It’ll be fun to have that holiday tradition from nearly ten years ago once again. If you enjoyed the Rings then you’ll look forward to spending the next couple of Christmases with this unlikely furry-footed hero.

4.5 Out of 5

Peter Jackson Shooting THE HOBBIT “48 Frames Per Second”

On Sunday, Peter Jackson revealed to everyone on his official Facebook page that, “My first video post from the set of THE HOBBIT will be landing here soon!” Today the director posted the following explanation on how the film is being shot and promised said video very soon.

Time for an update. Actually, we’ve been intending to kick off with a video, which is almost done, so look out for that in the next day or two. In the meantime, I thought I’d address the news that has been reported about us shooting THE HOBBIT at 48 frames per second, and explain to you what my thoughts are about this.

We are indeed shooting at the higher frame rate. The key thing to understand is that this process requires both shooting and projecting at 48 fps, rather than the usual 24 fps (films have been shot at 24 frames per second since the late 1920’s). So the result looks like normal speed, but the image has hugely enhanced clarity and smoothness. Looking at 24 frames every second may seem ok–and we’ve all seen thousands of films like this over the last 90 years–but there is often quite a lot of blur in each frame, during fast movements, and if the camera is moving around quickly, the image can judder or “strobe.”

Shooting and projecting at 48 fps does a lot to get rid of these issues. It looks much more lifelike, and it is much easier to watch, especially in 3-D. We’ve been watching HOBBIT tests and dailies at 48 fps now for several months, and we often sit through two hours worth of footage without getting any eye strain from the 3-D. It looks great, and we’ve actually become used to it now, to the point that other film experiences look a little primitive. I saw a new movie in the cinema on Sunday and I kept getting distracted by the juddery panning and blurring. We’re getting spoilt!

“Here’s me at our 3D video set up on the set.”

Originally, 24 fps was chosen based on the technical requirements of the early sound era. I suspect it was the minimum speed required to get some audio fidelity out of the first optical sound tracks. They would have settled on the minimum speed because of the cost of the film stock. 35mm film is expensive, and the cost per foot (to buy the negative stock, develop it and print it), has been a fairly significant part of any film budget.

So we have lived with 24 fps for 9 decades–not because it’s the best film speed (it’s not by any stretch), but because it was the cheapest speed to achieve basic acceptable results back in 1927 or whenever it was adopted.

None of this thinking is new. Doug Trumbull developed and promoted a 60 frames per second process called ShowScan about 30 years ago and that looked great. Unfortunately it was never adopted past theme park use. I imagine the sheer expense of burning through expensive film stock at the higher speed (you are charged per foot of film, which is about 18 frames), and the projection difficulties in cinemas, made it tough to use for “normal” films, despite looking amazing. Actually, if anybody has been on the Star Tours ride at Disneyland, you’ve experienced the life like quality of 60 frames per second. Our new King Kong attraction at Universal Studios also uses 60 fps.

Now that the world’s cinemas are moving towards digital projection, and many films are being shot with digital cameras, increasing the frame rate becomes much easier. Most of the new digital projectors are capable of projecting at 48 fps, with only the digital servers needing some firmware upgrades. We tested both 48 fps and 60 fps. The difference between those speeds is almost impossible to detect, but the increase in quality over 24 fps is significant.

Film purists will criticize the lack of blur and strobing artifacts, but all of our crew–many of whom are film purists–are now converts. You get used to this new look very quickly and it becomes a much more lifelike and comfortable viewing experience. It’s similar to the moment when vinyl records were supplanted by digital CDs. There’s no doubt in my mind that we’re heading towards movies being shot and projected at higher frame rates.

Warner Bros. have been very supportive, and allowed us to start shooting THE HOBBIT at 48 fps, despite there never having been a wide release feature film filmed at this higher frame rate. We are hopeful that there will be enough theaters capable of projecting 48 fps by the time The Hobbit comes out where we can seriously explore that possibility with Warner Bros. However, while it’s predicted that there may be over 10,000 screens capable of projecting THE HOBBIT at 48 fps by our release date in Dec, 2012, we don’t yet know what the reality will be. It is a situation we will all be monitoring carefully. I see it as a way of future-proofing THE HOBBIT. Take it from me–if we do release in 48 fps, those are the cinemas you should watch the movie in. It will look terrific!

Time to jump in the car and drive to Bag End for the day. Video coming soon!

THE HOBBIT films are co-produced by New Line Cinema and MGM, with New Line managing production. Warner Bros Pictures is handling worldwide theatrical distribution, with select international territories as well as all international television licensing being handled by MGM. The two films are planned for release in late 2012 and 2013, respectively.

“The Hobbit” is set in Middle-earth 60 years before Tolkien’s “The Lord of the Rings,” which Jackson and his filmmaking team brought to the big screen in the blockbuster trilogy that culminated with the Oscar-winning “The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King.”

The two films, with screenplays by Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, Guillermo del Toro and Peter Jackson, will be shot consecutively in digital 3D using the latest camera and stereo technology. Filming is taking place at Stone Street Studios, Wellington, and on location around New Zealand.

Check out THE HOBBIT’s Facebook page HERE, Peter Jackson’s Facebook page HERE and The Lord of the Rings Trilogy Official Facebook Page HERE. Visit the official HOBBIT blog HERE.