seems that we're going to wait more for the Hobbit...
http://www.cinematical.com/2010/04/28/t ... d-to-2013/
I apologize if this was posted elsewhere.
| The One Ring http://gbain.powweb.com/ |
|
| 'The Hobbit' Officially Pushed to 2012 http://gbain.powweb.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=18292 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | MuslimRohirrim [ Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 'The Hobbit' Officially Pushed to 2012 |
seems that we're going to wait more for the Hobbit...
http://www.cinematical.com/2010/04/28/t ... d-to-2013/ I apologize if this was posted elsewhere. |
|
| Author: | captain krak [ Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Nope. 2012. Check further down on the notice where it was updated. That was an incorrect press release. The second movie will come out in 2013. |
|
| Author: | MuslimRohirrim [ Fri Apr 30, 2010 11:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
right, I just took the title off the page. it's still one year later than original date. hope this i not old news... |
|
| Author: | Maermaethor [ Sat May 01, 2010 4:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
OFMG ARE YOU @!#$ SERIOUS??!?!?!?!? .................................. I was already looking forward to this movie for next year. |
|
| Author: | Warlord777 [ Sat May 01, 2010 5:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
MAD MAX 4!!!!! AWESOME!!! BETTER HAVE MEL GIBSON! Hey who stars Bilbo? Ian MCwhatsISname should play Gandalf (again) |
|
| Author: | zilegil [ Sat May 01, 2010 5:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
And chris "I forgot his name too" lee as gollum. Lol, no. He needs a part, I think smoug should fit his low pitched, corrupted, mutter. |
|
| Author: | Warlord777 [ Sat May 01, 2010 5:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
zilegil wrote: And chris "I forgot his name too" lee as gollum. Lol, no. He needs a part, I think smoug should fit his low pitched, corrupted, mutter.
Al Pacino= Smoug. Whooaaaaaa!!!!  Cant you see him saying "Say hello to meh lil friend" *Breath Fire*
But seriously I think Robert De Niro or Al Pacino would be perfect. |
|
| Author: | Hellfury [ Sat May 01, 2010 10:09 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Its a bummer that it is being released that far away. But atleast we have official press from warner about it finally. Good to see a fellow South Padre Islander here, Warlord777. Even though I dont live in corpus anymore, I miss the days of sea sculptures and J.P. Luby surf pier during spring break even if it was hotter than satan's easybake oven.... |
|
| Author: | imrail [ Sat May 01, 2010 10:28 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
To bad that the movie is pushed back. But that leaves more time for a better script etc. |
|
| Author: | General Elessar [ Sat May 01, 2010 10:38 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
imrail wrote: To bad that the movie is pushed back.
But that leaves more time for a better script etc. Yeah, much better for it to come out later than for them to rush it and mess it up so it comes out on time. |
|
| Author: | BurningMithril [ Sat May 01, 2010 7:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Agreed, Elessar. I heard about this on The One Ring, though it was actually a April Fools prank. That was right, apparently. |
|
| Author: | imrail [ Sun May 02, 2010 6:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
BurningMithril wrote: Agreed, Elessar. I heard about this on The One Ring, though it was actually a April Fools prank.
That was right, apparently. The one Ring..? You know you are posting on the One Ring right? |
|
| Author: | Jamros [ Sun May 02, 2010 7:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
imrail wrote: BurningMithril wrote: Agreed, Elessar. I heard about this on The One Ring, though it was actually a April Fools prank. That was right, apparently. The one Ring..? You know you are posting on the One Ring right? What a hilarious misunderstanding!
This push back better not be because they suddenly decided to make the movie 3D or I'm gonna be TICKED 
|
|
| Author: | BurningMithril [ Sun May 02, 2010 7:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Agreed. If they make it 3-D, I hope that they at least make a 2-D version available. No, I meant theonring.net, not this site. |
|
| Author: | Raukov [ Wed May 05, 2010 5:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
BurningMithril wrote: Agreed. If they make it 3-D, I hope that they at least make a 2-D version available.
There's no precedent to suggest they wouldn't, unless cinemas switch to some kind of 3D exclusivity in the next couple years Why would you want to see it in 2D if there was a 3D version available? |
|
| Author: | BurningMithril [ Wed May 05, 2010 6:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Actually, yes. 3D gives me a headache. |
|
| Author: | captain krak [ Wed May 05, 2010 7:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Agreed. 3D seems more of a gimmick than a solid addition to the enjoyment of a movie. I thought this article by Roger Ebert summed up my feelings about 3D pretty nicely: http://www.newsweek.com/id/237110 |
|
| Author: | Jamros [ Wed May 05, 2010 8:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thank you for the article. 
3D is not condusive to creating a powerful and compelling storyline as should be represented in film through Tolkien's works. Instead, it is a trick used to awe an audience. I don't care how immersive or advanced it is. |
|
| Author: | Hellfury [ Thu May 06, 2010 1:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
My opinions on 3D are this: If it is a movie that is clearly visually stunning as Avatar or LotR then 3D can really help bring out those strong visual aspects. But if I am going to watch a romantic comedy, then its a trick that is completely worthless. There are also varying degrees of 3D. Movies made using the technology and movies made in 3D after the fact, or during post production. Examples of 3D in mind are Avatar and Coraline. Movies made with 3d in post production in order to squeeze a few more bucks out of the viewer is Clash of the titans. Clearly one is more superior than the other and it is quite obvious to the viewer. Thats not to say there shouldnt be 2D options of these visual feasts available as I know many people who get major vertigo/disorientation/headaches/eye strain from 3D movies. Its not for everyone. 3D will remain a gimmick for sometime, although it is a mainstream gimmick and not as haphazard as it once was during its inception 50 years ago or even 20 years ago. Its a gimmick that is here to stay because there is too much money to be made from it. That said, I haven't heard of a recent #D movie where a 2D option wasn't offered so I think people worried about that should allay their fears. |
|
| Author: | Jamros [ Thu May 06, 2010 1:42 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
No, no, I don't mind if they decide to make 2D and 3D versions of The Hobbit, I'm just going to be really ticked if this delay was the result. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|