I finally saw the movie last night.  And it was thoroughly enjoyable!  I like the fact that they did another prologue.  Given how much Tolkien fleshed out the world of Middle Earth in appendices and such, you really do need some background before getting into the story.  And I REALLY liked that Peter Jackson gave the Dwarves some really good established backstory.

Another interesting thing?  Almost everyone came into this having seen The Lord Of The Rings trilogy.  And when we saw that we knew Gandalf and Bilbo to be old friends.  Seeing their introduction as Gandalf tries to enlist Bilbo into the company of Dwarves was enlightening.  Especially Gandalf talking about Bilbo's Took lineage.  And then to contrasting these scenes with the first part of the animated version of The Hobbit?  The difference is like night and day!

I'm definitely going to see it again in the theater, time permitting.

The reviews of the 48 FPS presentation have been mixed.  People seem really accustomed to 24 FPS projection, and it's really a result of their eyes having been trained by a lifetime of movie-going.

The general sentiment I've been reading in articles is that the first 30 minutes tend to be an acclimation period.  And after that a lot of viewers are able to forget about the higher frame rate & resolution, and finally focus on the story.

Darth Maul and Mandalorians, pleeeeeeease be the next arc!

Hate to say it, but I think the mid-season hiatus (complete with re-runs) will be the next arc.  I think we might have about 1 or 2 more new episodes before the hiatus, with new episodes probably resuming in February.

I'm perfectly fine with the TLC2013 line being delayed.  Until Hasbro gets this inventory mess sorted out with the remaining cases of The Vintage Collection, the works are going to get gummed up.  Let them work it out and get the distribution system running correctly.  And then we can *HOPEFULLY* get back on a regular schedule where we see a new wave at retail every 4 - 6 weeks.

However, I'm disturbed to see some Star Wars collecting websites abandoning reason and throwing out alarmist nonsense like "THERE'S GOING TO BE NO NEW PRODUCT FOR 2 YEARS"!  Really?  Based on what?  If you want to call yourself an authority in the Star Wars online collecting community and you go spouting off nonsense like that, you'd better be prepared to back it up.

This bit of news from Hasbro regarding the return of TVC figures to the pegs took a lot of people by surprise, but it's far from unexpected. We knew from a number of statements from Hasbro that they had a tremendous backlog of TVC basic figure inventory. This was caused by Hasbro's massive miscalculation on the level of demand for the EPISODE I themed wave of Vintage Collection figures. And Hasbro has openly acknowledged that they over-produced the TPM wave and that had a ripple effect on subsequent waves of The Vintage Collection getting out to retail chains. This led to an overstock of later TVC basic figure waves in Hasbro's warehouses.

Hasbro also announced that they would be offering a great deal of TVC basic figure stock to closeout chains like 5 Below, TJ Maxx, Big Lots and others. But there were still at least 5 WAVES of TVC basic figures that followed the EPISODE I wave. So what to do with those? As much as I like buying TVC figures for $5 a piece at 5 Below, I can't see that chain and TJ Maxx being able to take on the tremendous backlog of stock that must have been the result of the TPM wave logjam. Hence this announcement that 2012's wave 4 & 5 will be returning to brick & mortar retail!

So where does that leave things? Very likely, we're probably going to see TVC basic figures continue to ship through the new year and Q1 of 2013. That gives Hasbro and the retailers about 4 months to try to work through this backlog of TVC stock. And Hasbro will probably transition over to THE LEGACY COLLECTION of basic figures & vehicles for Q2, which begins in April 2013. Plus, the way the toy business works, we usually see new licensed lines launch within a month or so of Toy Fair. And that takes place in mid-February.

Quote

Then there's the resolution.  The image resolution has been increased far beyond current HDTV standards.  The images in The Hobbit  will have 4 - 5 times more pixels than a standard 1080p HD image.  So the image will be immensely sharper, too.

Even most digital presentations far exceed 1080P, and film stock definitely does.  48FPS is not about the resolution of the frames, but the number of them.  The 24FPS version will have the same resolution, just fewer frames.  The 4K is completely independent of the 48FPS.  Most BluRay discs masters are 4K transfers downgraded to 1080P.

That said, I agree with all your points.

Uh, Jim...

You didn't happen to notice that there are a series of points in the post you quoted, right?

First, the frame rate.  They decided to go for 48 FPS because that was a rate at which motion blur became minimized.  24 FPS has a long history, but it was based in economy.  That was the lowest frame rate at which film could be projected without the viewer noticing the space between frames.  Essentially, it was done in order to save film stock (and print stock, too).  But during high speed movement 24 FPS will show motion blur.  The 48 FPS specs eliminate a lot of that blur.

Then there's the resolution.  The image resolution has been increased far beyond current HDTV standards.  The images in The Hobbit  will have 4 - 5 times more pixels than a standard 1080p HD image.  So the image will be immensely sharper, too.

That first graph is about the frame rate.  And the second one was specifically addressing the 4K scanning technology.  Pardon me if I didn't make that abundantly obvious in the original post.  I was going based off of the radio interview I had caught with Andy Serkis.  In addition to his role as Gollum, Serkis has also served as a director for Second Unit shoots for The Hobbit.  And part of his interview got into the varying layers of new technology that the upcoming Hobbit trilogy would be introducing to audiences.  Among them the 48 FPS frame rate and the 4K scan technology.

For clarity's sake, existing film stock for the past forever still contains more image "data" than HD or even the new 4K process.  This 48FPS does not contain more "resolution" than a 24FPS presentation does, just twice as many frames per second.

I don't think anyone said that.  The 4K process is what adds the higher resolution.  48FPS helps to elimate motion blur.

But film stock is far more tempermental to work with.  And it's also more expensive to buy and process.  It also doesn't hold up well in the post-production process.  Then there's exhibition.  A film print quickly degrades, and after perhaps half a dozen showings it will show significant degradation.  All of these reasons are why the industry has been moving away from 35mm film stock.

There is definitely the likelihood that movie-goers who have been watching films as far back as the 1980's are going to find the 48 FPS / 4K presentation TOO VIVID for their tastes.  But this seems to be a harbinger of things to come, and we're probably going to see more movies shot this way.

Yeah.  The absence of the Imperial Naval Commander and Emporer's Royal Guard are pretty glaring if you're going to call this wave "Fan Favorites".

I caught a good deal of the press tour that some of the cast was doing in New York.  One of the topics that kept coming up was how the movie was shot.  And it's definitely cutting edge technology.

First, the frame rate.  They decided to go for 48 FPS because that was a rate at which motion blur became minimized.  24 FPS has a long history, but it was based in economy.  That was the lowest frame rate at which film could be projected without the viewer noticing the space between frames.  Essentially, it was done in order to save film stock (and print stock, too).  But during high speed movement 24 FPS will show motion blur.  The 48 FPS specs eliminate a lot of that blur.

Then there's the resolution.  The image resolution has been increased far beyond current HDTV standards.  The images in The Hobbit  will have 4 - 5 times more pixels than a standard 1080p HD image.  So the image will be immensely sharper, too.

Add in the 3-D component next, and you're adding depth to the image.

As for viewer reviews?  I heard one avid movie-goer describe it as being an amazing visual experience.  One comparison I heard was that it was akin to watching a stage production, since the images were that vivid.  Younger viewers who are active video gamers will probably be drawn more into the experience than people who have more traditional film tastes.