Technology is undoubtedly one of them. When "The Lord of the Rings" was released more than ten years ago, it was already called an audio-visual feast, but 3D movies were still rare at that time, and now if you shoot a movie without providing a 3D version, you will even be able to. Suspected of insincerity, and of course you will not be considered sincere if you provide a 3D version, because 3D is no longer surprising now. Therefore, if only 3D technology was used in this film, it would not be worth mentioning. This time, the bearded brother Peter, who succeeded in losing weight, played the 48-frame technology that is said to be the fifth technological revolution of the film. This is more than the traditional 24-frame technology. The technology of flipping the number of frames per second has greatly improved the fluency and clarity of the picture. It is said that the picture is so clear that it is unreal. Even the Hollywood props, which have become perfect, are exposed under such high-definition gaze. It is a pity that this technology is not yet popular, and it is limited abroad, and it seems that it has not been introduced in China.
The technological progress brought about by time is of course undoubted and taken for granted. In fact, what I am looking forward to more is the temperament of the story itself. What changes will there be due to the accumulation of directors, actors, and even the audience in those years? , this change did happen, but it was not what I expected. If the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy is like a boy's most magnificent and fearless adventure, this "The Hobbit" trilogy is more like a grown man's carefully calculated business plan. Ever since I heard that Peter the Bearded was going to arrange The Hobbit into a trilogy like The Lord of the Rings, I suspected that these two works are not the same size at all. How could they both be made into a trilogy? ? The only reason I can think of is this: in business, making one film can only be considered a one-shot deal, while a trilogy can be sold three times, so it needs to be more profitable anyway. The way I can think of doing this is to patch and elongate, which is pretty much synonymous with tediousness. As expected, I struggled with sleepiness in the second half of the movie, and I didn't have the excitement and excitement I had when watching "The Lord of the Rings", especially "The Two Towers". Of course this may also be because I am ten years older.
From this, it can be understood why the plot of the story is so thin, and the half-orc team can't finish killing it, and why the giant dragon is so talkative, how can one book be made into three parts if not so What about a two-and-a-half hour movie? Fortunately, our bearded director is not yet exhausted, and the Hollywood film team also has good business quality and ethics, so this movie that is destined to be filled with water does not seem to be very special, even for some people who are not familiar with the ring. To the audience of Wang's story, the movie still looks a bit difficult. It's just that compared with "The Lord of the Rings", it always seems to be less pure in taste, even if its special effects have surpassed the former, it seems that feelings are really difficult to replace with technology.
View more about The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug reviews
