They're shooting it in 3D. Lame.
Unless you are one of the few people that has a negative physical reaction to 3D, I suggest you give it a chance with this one.
3D presentation is a skill that directors are still mastering. Most of the movies you've seen in 3D weren't even shot that way, they were converted. Those that we shot in 3D were shot by people still experimenting with the medium.
The work PJ is doing on the Hobbit looks great. The amount of hardware is astonishing (something like 50 Red Epic cameras that are named), and the amount of care they have going into the production makes other 3D movies seem kind of... lame. He's got his artists drawing blue/red 3D storyboards in pencil, for god's sake, and it's all built up from there.
As an ardent 3D critic, I will say this much: When used properly, 3D can be evocative.
What was it that made me reconsider my position on 3D? Martin Scorsese's Hugo
. He did a fantastic job of allowing 3D to become part of the fabric of the film (snowflakes, train steam, crowded station) -- rather than an "effect" to wow the audience. I still think 3D is more gimmick than art. But given how purposefully and successfully Scorsese used the technology, I am willing to give The Hobbit
3D a chance.