Tolkien Podcast: Books vs. Movies
Last week I was invited to be a guest on a podcast debating the works of JRR Tolkien vs. the movies that Peter Jackson made based on them. It was an invigorating discussion filled with nerd rage (on both sides), fun personalities, and lots of geeky info!
Moderator: Jim Ryan of Crucible of Realms and much more!
Panelists:
Richard Rohlin with Grapple Gun Publishing
Denise Lhamon of the Accessories Not Included blog
Kimi of The Golden Lasso and Happy Jack’s RPG Podcast
Jon of Crucible of Realms
Thanks for inviting me to be part of the fun, Jim!
Magic in Marvel Movies
The internet is buzzing with rumors about the casting of Marvel's Doctor Strange. While some really great names have been linked with the role of earth's Sorcerer Supreme, there is another reason that I am thrilled to hear that Stephen Vincent Strange will be appearing on the silver screen.
It means REAL magic will be appearing in a modern comic book movie universe for the first time.
Yes, I know that Loki has been using his hologram-like tricks since his first appearance, but Marvel has been very careful to explain away magic. Asgardians aren't gods, they are super advanced aliens who occasionally come to earth to pretend to be gods. It's not a Soul Forge, it's a Quantum Field Generator. Jane Foster lays it out for us when she explains, "Magic is just science we don't understand yet." While they have been pushing the envelope with each new film, there still hasn't been anything that has been expressly described as magic. Doctor Strange's power is completely based on magic and I don't think that they will risk the wrath of fans to try to explain it away with some advanced science. The technology-ruled Marvel movie universe is officially going to cross the line that they've been so careful to tiptoe with Thor.
This is a huge deal when many people claim that some characters, like Wonder Woman, can never appear on screen with their magic-based powers and backstories intact. These people argue that the modern audience won't accept magic in comic book movies, and so these iconic characters must be altered to fit neatly into the expected norm. It's refreshing that Marvel doesn't agree.
This adds a huge number of amazing possibilities for upcoming DC and Marvel movies! Scarlet Witch, Wonder Woman, Zatanna, John Constantine (for real this time), Enchantress, and so many others now have hope of appearing on screen intact. While adding a few technological advances to the Amazons might smooth the transition (maybe a cloaking device hides Paradise Island instead of magic?), I believe that the magical foundation to Wonder Woman's powers and her magical items can succeed on the big screen. DC's movies have had a very different tone than the Marvel movies, but I believe that they can build upon the foundations laid by the successful Marvel franchises. The average moviegoer isn't going to separate the DC and Marvel movies into exclusive categories. If they accept Loki and Doctor Strange in an Avengers movie, they will accept Wonder Woman or John Constantine in a DC movie.
Framing The Hobbit
The Hobbit is one of the most anticipated movies of all time. After the bar was set so high by the Lord of the Rings trilogy (except for the horrific abomination that is the battle of Helm's Deep... don't get me started) Tolkien fans are champing at the bit to see how this big-budget prequel turns out. With an amazing cast and proven source material, how could it fail? The answer may be held in a fraction of a second.
As all followers of The Hobbit movie know, Peter Jackson is pushing the film to be viewed in 48 frames per second. What does this mean? Well normal movies and TV shows are shown at 24 frames per second and our minds naturally fill in the missing bits. We don't even realize that it's happening. However, soap operas, home movies, 
and other videos are shot at 30 frames per second. This is why you can instantly tell a soap opera or reality TV show from other programs just by looking at it for a few seconds. In general, our minds link video and high frame rates to low budget programs. Despite Peter Jackson's assurance that it will revolutionize movies, many fans are worried about him using The Hobbit as a guinea pig.
Jackson has been praising the new frame rate for months, claiming that it was "more attractive" and "more lifelike." He sings its praises and never fails to mention how it will improve the 3D experience for movie goers (how thrilling..not). In April, Jackson and Warner Bros debuted about 10 minutes of footage at CinemaCon. This footage was shown at 48 frames per second and was met with a resounding "Ugh" by pretty much everyone in attendance. The consensus seems to be that it looked TOO real. It looked like a home movie and wasn't "cinematic" enough. The level of detail and realism distracted people from the movie rather than adding to the experience. Even directors like Chris Nolan and Neill Blomkamp (considered by many to be Peter Jackson's protege) have gone on the record as hating footage shot in 48 frames per second.
Last week at San Diego Comic-Con, Jackson debuted twelve minutes of footage at The Hobbit panel. (No, I didn't wait in the ten hour line to see it in person, I had too much cosplay stuff planned this year and am uncomfortable sleeping overnight on public sidewalks.) This time the footage was shown at 24 frames per second and the crowed went crazy for it! Peter Jackson stated, "With our 48 frames per second presentation, negative bloggers are the ones the mainstream press runs with and quotes from. I decided to screen the Hobbit reel at Comic-Con in 2-D and 24 frames per second, so the focus stays firmly with the content and not the technical stuff. If people want 3-D and 48fps, that choice will be there for them in December."
Interesting. So now the big question, was it the frame rate or the people in the audience that made the difference? Would the CinemaCon critics have found problems with the unfinished footage no matter what? Would the hardcore Tolkien freaks have loved anything they were shown at ComicCon after being in the hot sun for 8+ hours, regardless of the frame rate? Just like 3D it will be a matter of personal taste. Jackson claims that 48 fps is the future and that once we get used to seeing such crisp, clear footage we will never want to watch 24 fps movies again.
Maybe Middle Earth is the perfect place to show at a higher frame rate, and I'm sure many fans (myself included) will see it both ways. We'll see how it goes. I have a Quenya-to-English dictionary on my desktop and have Elvish baby names picked out for my future children, but I seriously doubt that even Tolkien can make me like 3D.