A Tale of Two Hobbits

Rating: 7/10 (20 December 2012)

Typically I only watch a film in 3D only after I've seen it in 2D. Sometimes it feels like 3D comes across as a gimmick and I'd hate to give a film a bad review based on a gimmick that did not work out well. I watched the Hobbit in both 2d and the much advertised 3D High Frame Rate of 48FPS. From what I understand 3D films suffer significant motion blur with scenes that have fast movements in them. Peter Jackson wanted to eliminate that problem by shooting in the higher frame rate which lends a much sharper image. I'm not an expert cinematographer so thats my best attempt to explain why the film was shot that way although I'm sure that's not the only reason. I can only commend Peter Jackson on having the stones to take that risk especially with a project of this magnitude. He is a pioneer and willing to push the envelope of filmmaking. However I feel the technology in filmmaking is moving so fast that the practices and how to apply them effectively are taking a back seat. Watching the Hobbit in two different formats resulted in two different experiences.
Hobbit 2D:
The Hobbit fell right in line with the Original L.O.R. trilogy minus the the apocalyptic tone and raging body count of Return of the King. Although the general mood is the same you can feel that the tone of this story /book is a bit milder than that of L.O.R. This story brings back all the familiar faces and places of middle earth plus some new stuff. ORCS,Goblins,Dwarfs,Elves,and Hobbitzes are all back in the usual stylings. The story starts with a Hobbit sporting a familiar last name enjoying life where he is as Hobbits do. He is reluctantly drafted to embark on an adventure which Hobbits hate. The plot is set 60 years prior to the Fellowship of the ring but follows a similar formula. Some familiar faces such as Gandalf,Saruman and the beautiful Lady Galadriel are back in usual form. A decade later it seems that for the most part the actors have not aged and picked up right where they left off. Over all the CGI,Cinematography and Lighting are top notch as it always seems to be with Peter Jackson and the action is no less heart pounding or suspenseful than expected in middle earth. However the story does seem to take it's time getting started and it feels like the first act is a never ending collage of filler scenes designed to extend the new trilogy. Overall if you did not like Lord of the Rings then you will not like the Hobbit. If you did enjoy Lord of the Rings then you will most likely enjoy the Hobbit but will notice the subtle differences. My Grade is a B.
THE HOBBIT 3D HFR
The most impressive and yet jarring quality of the 3D HDR version of The Hobbit is the ridiculous clarity and focus. As the sensors on cameras become more and more sensitive and the practicality of shooting films in 4k and 5k increases I believe films shot in HFR are here to stay.(at least for a little while). The clarity is astonishing as every detail in every frame is in full focus. It's like looking through a very clear window. With the High Frame rate comes the loss of the "Persistence of Vision Theory" associated with traditional 24fps.The result is the Hobbit looking more like pristine video. Too much is in focus too much of the time and it affects almost every shot. The extreme focus is too distracting and takes away the ability to be immersed in the world you are watching. It's most evident in close up shots as you now notice all the makeup effects and prosthetics on the characters. The motion of the characters looks weird in HFR as well. Almost like an old Chaplin film with a sped up camera. The lighting in the HFR version is not very forgiving. I am unsure if there is a different color grading process for High Frame Rate but it seems to affect the lighting. All the warm tones in the lighting seem to go cold. Yellow and golden hues seem to become white in the HFR version. There are hot spots in many shots and several scenes almost feel overexposed. These issues were not not a problem in the 2D version. Especially in the lighting. The 2d version was a beautifully lit film. Where the HFR excelled was on the sweeping long and wide shots. Landscapes and skies were reproduced beautifully. Over all the experience of the HFR provided too many distraction in all it's high clarity glory and at times felt like I was watching a video game or a pixar movie screened on LED TV. I believe HFR is here to stay but it will take some time for the other disciplines,(i.e. lighting,make-up,postproduction services) to catch up. Then I believe the end product will be amazing! My Grade C-