It appears they've taken some liberties and added stone buildings. I'm sure there will be a lot of wooden pillars and docks in any case.

It will definitely be on a lake though.

For reference, here's an illustration by Alan Lee



and one by John Howe (best I could find)



The movies have done a really good job of being faithful to Lee/Howe illustrations, but at the same time making it their own and really making the locations pop on screen.

i know in the LOTR production, jackson and Weta would frequently point to very specific Lee/Howe drawings and basically bring those to life. it's cool that they actually worked on the films

I don't think those construction pics are of lakewood. In the production video, Jackson is on the lakewood set and it is an all wood building...

Could it be the Wood Elf King's castle?

Alan Lee

I'm interested to see how Beorn turns out. If they were doing it in one movie I bet they would have cut him out Bombadil style, but he is an awesome character.

I wouldn't be surprised if Beorn was cut out, he kind of had the dues ex machina thing going on.

quote:

---

Could it be the Wood Elf King's castle?

---

Unless deviating far away from The Hobbit novel, no.

Thranduil, the Elvenking, lived in underground with his Silvan elf peeps. Thranduil himself was a Sindar, but the Silvans made his father, Oropher, their king.

Besides, I don't think the movie would show elves living in a castle after showing them in trees in LOTR.

quote:

---

I wouldn't be surprised if Beorn was cut out, he kind of had the dues ex machina thing going on.

---

Oh my God guys...really? It literally took me 10 seconds to do this...let's learn to not make ridiculous speculations...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0903624/fullcredits#cast

If that set's not the dale, I'd guess its the external fortifications of the Lonely Mountain. The style makes me think Dwarves more than lake-men for some reason.

quote:

---

let's learn to not make ridiculous speculations...

---

The speculation was that if there were only one movie, this would be one of the things to get left out.

Despite my (repeatedly stated) concerns about stretching this to two films, the obvious upside is that there is little excuse to leave anything out.

quote:

---

The style makes me think Dwarves more than lake-men for some reason.

---

Wouldn't Dwarves be more grey stone than Mediterranean? It would fit Dale maybe, but not Lake Town. Of course Dale was in ruins during the Hobbit, so that might not work either.

Different human settlements have varied architectural styles based on their regions and ethnicity, so I don't think it would be too much of a stretch to give various dwarven societies unique architectural styles as well.

The only dwarven areas we saw in LoTR was Moria, which was entirely indoor. I think the Mediterranean buildings would look much better than a drab gray built onto the side of a mountain in the setting sun.

I guess it depends if they make the mountain look gloomy and dark like Mordor, or if they make it look brighter and warmer. I'm thinking they go with warm colors since its a journey home for the dwarves and home's tend to have warmer palettes.

[This message has been edited by Aggie_Journalist (edited 3/23/2012 3:01p).]

Dale is not the same thing as Laketown. Laketown is in Esgaroth on the Long Lake. Therefore, those pictures can be of Dale, and not adding stone to Laketown. Reference this map.

yikes. sorry for the huge image.

Laketown IS Esgaroth

You're right. But it's not Dale.

Ah yea, thanks Redline. That makes much more sense (that it's Dale, not Laketown).

My mistake. It's been a while.

Not saying it's NOT Dale, but Dale was in ruins until after Smaug was toast. Those pics don't look like a ruined city, but who knows? Again, this could be a deviation from the source. Of course it could be Dale prior to Smaug.

Here's an actual picture of the Laketown set.



All there is to go off right now.

THERE'S A SEVERED HUMAN HEAD ON THE SET!!!!

What you don't see is the stake it's stuck on. It's actually one of the Goblin King's kills. Probably a Man of Dale.

Hearing a lot of buzz that 10 mins of footage that will be shown tonight at Cinema Con in Vegas (in 3D and in 48 fps).

One of the guys from theonering.net was granted access and will be talking about it tonight on a live webcast.

Can't wait to hear this thoughts. I'll update this with his feedback later tonight.

zomg!!! want to see

Uni, if you wanna check out the webcast, the link is here.

Bad news, but some early reports say that the 48 fps is too realistic and comes off looking like soap operas.
http://www.avclub.com/articles/the-hobbits-gamechanging-3d-may-be-a-little-too-ga,73007/

isn't realism what we want? I don't understand the concept of "too realistic"

quote:

---

isn't realism what we want? I don't understand the concept of "too realistic"

---

Movie sets are sets and not the real thing. When you get close enough, or enough detail look really fake. They use bright lights to make things show up, so you see that. Actors use makeup that you can see. Actors over emote to get emotions across on a big screen. All of that comes across when things are too realistic. The article compares it to badly calibrated HD TVs you see at Best Buy, made for TV movies with bad sets, and soap operas. Think about how bad some of the early and not good 120 Hz TV looked.

[This message has been edited by Quad Dog (edited 4/25/2012 12:51p).]

The guy who saw it from theonering.net loved the content and said the landscape shots were amazing. The clearest and best shots he's ever seen. Lots of troll fighting, shots of Tauriel, Legolas, and Radagast, and scenes from The White Council.

That said, a lot of people will probably hate the 48 fps, say it's "too real", etc. I can understand the concern, because it probably doesn't look quite as cinematic. But that's to be expected with new technology that people aren't used to.

I will reserve judgement until I see for myself, but it really shouldn't concern most of us since most of us will probably see it in 24 fps anyway. Most theaters won't have the upgraded projectors.

In any case, the most important thing is the content, and that sounds like it was great.

I am still very excited to see this.

quote:

---

isn't realism what we want? I don't understand the concept of "too realistic"

---

Film is actually pretty far from realistic if you step back and look at it. Life in general isn't really full of witty dialogue, beautifully lit environments, etc.

The filmmaker's goal is to inspire certain feelings or reactions in the audience but the finished product that gives us those feelings is usually nothing like reality.

Full analysis of the footage: http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2012/04/27/55378-hobbit-footage-review-massive-spoilers-full-coverage-analysis/

We are so looking forward to this one. Due to purist tendencies, I had a love-hate-love-LOVE-hate-love relationship with PJ's trilogy, but I don't think changes will bother me as much this time.