The Hobbit Movie

[aikido]

Just saw it and thought it was absolutely fucking boss. I just fucking loved it. I was nervous as some of the reviews have been so so, but I've never known 3 hours to pass by so fast.

 

Jackson really immerses his audience in middle earth. Loved the brown wizard guy, the one with bird poop in his hair.

 

Saw it in 3D as it was the only one showing at the time I could make. I truly hate 3D. Whatever the point is it's completely lost on me. Avatar is the only half decent film I've seen in 3D.

 

Can't wait for next year for the second movie. I imagine one day I'll watch all 6 movies back to back.

[Carvalho Diablo]

The only 3D film I've seen where it actually enhanced the viewing experience was Abe Lincoln : Vampire Hunter.

 

The use of 3D in that was really, really good,

[Special K]

Went to see it yesterday. Really, really enjoyed it (even in 3d, which I despise)

 

Special shout out for Cate Blanchett too. She looks spectacularly beautiful in this film.

[Baltar]

Went to see it yesterday. Really, really enjoyed it (even in 3d, which I despise)

 

Special shout out for Cate Blanchett too. She looks spectacularly beautiful in this film.

She's so pointless in these movies though. She just stands and talks for about 2 minutes and that's it. It can barely be described as acting. Nice work if you can get I suppose.

 

Film was decent, not as great as a lot of posters have mentioned, the first hour was pretty boring. Never going to be as good as LoTR so Jackson has his work cut out to make this next trilogy special.

[A_S]

Yep, for those of you who haven't read the book, relax. 'An Unexpected Journey' has simply set the scene for the more exciting part of the story. Given how they have remained consistent with the LOTR trilogy, it's going to be fucking immense.

 

One thing they have done particularly well is give some in-depth background to what is essentially where everything began. I always told people that haven't read the books to see the Hobbit movies, as did they ever wonder why a bloke from a race of people who like nothing more than eating, drinking, gardening and a bit of shagging, would be a million miles away from home under a mountain finding a ring that 'belonged' to a creepy little creature? These movies will answer all that.

 

FWIW, I usually enjoy watching these the 2nd or 3rd time around, as the initial viewing is basically me trying to take everything in (and there is a lot going on most of the time) and compare it back to the book in my mind, which is all a fair brain strain. At least when I know more what to expect, I begin to notice little details that set these movies apart from a lot of others.

 

Bring on Boxing Day 2013!

[The Acolyte]

Same. Read it about 15 years later and it still hurt my head.

 

Read the Hobbit when I was 11-12 and the only thing I can remember is Bilbo's encounter with Gollum in the caves. Went straight to LotR but made the mistake of getting the all in one book. Over a thousand pages and print so small I now blame it for me now wearing glasses. Had that thing in my blazer pocket for weeks, don't think I got past page 50!

[The Acolyte]

Went to see it yesterday. Really, really enjoyed it (even in 3d, which I despise)

 

Special shout out for Cate Blanchett too. She looks spectacularly beautiful in this film.

 

Its wonderful what they can do with special effects these days.

[Redder Lurtz]

Film was decent, not as great as a lot of posters have mentioned, the first hour was pretty boring. Never going to be as good as LoTR so Jackson has his work cut out to make this next trilogy special.

 

Dear me. It's setting the scene, introducing characters and background, crackling with anticipation of events to come. How is that "boring"?

[Cardie]

Dear me. It's setting the scene, introducing characters and background, crackling with anticipation of events to come. How is that "boring"?

 

Because if someone hasn't read the Hobbit then the 'crackling anticipation of events to come' isn't their and the film still needs to be paced to cater for them?

 

A large chunk of the slow section didn't deal with character or background, the only real background you got was Thorin's. The background for the journey was dealt with in the first 10 minutes.

 

The whole dishwashing shit could have been dispensed with for a start.

[TheBitch]

I'm going to watch it tomorrow. I've read half the book in a couple of hours in work. Hard to understand how it can be made into 3 films.

[Redder Lurtz]

Because if someone hasn't read the Hobbit then the 'crackling anticipation of events to come' isn't their and the film still needs to be paced to cater for them?

 

A large chunk of the slow section didn't deal with character or background, the only real background you got was Thorin's. The background for the journey was dealt with in the first 10 minutes.

 

The whole dishwashing shit could have been dispensed with for a start.

 

Jackson would have been (rightly) slated to fuck if he's simply paced the film for people who haven't read the book. I haven't read the Hobbit for a number of years but the character introduction in the movie was dealt with pretty well as far as I can tell. I agree that whole 30 seconds of dishwashing stuff was a bit daft although it seems to have ruined the film for some people.

[Scott_M]

I watched Fellowship Of The Ring & The Two Towers again yesterday. I also caught a bit of the end of Return Of The King on C4 last week which I'm going to watch again in full at the weekend. Watching these again has hit home how much better they are than The Hobbit.

 

The Hobbit simply doesn't have the heart or character development of the original triliogy. Even just taking FOTR in isolation, it's not even close to that. One day the special effects in the original trilogy will look old and dated but some of the emotion put into the performances will never age. I simply didn't care for any of the characters in The Hobbit.

 

In FOTR it introduces numerous characters in the Fellowship, all with different looks and each character was given a bit of time to show they're different personalities You quickly care about they're predicament and what role they play in the story. Again, I just thought all the dwarves apart from the main one and his consigliere (they're names escape me) made no last impression on me at all. The fact I can't even remember they're names says it all.

 

Don't get me wrong, the The Hobbit has it's good moments & I'll certainly watch it again once it's on DVD but it's not even close to quality of the originals. The originals were certainly 9/10 or 10/10, The Hobbit is closer to Harry Potter or Narnia quality.

 

Edit - That dishwashing song is embarrassingly bad. The only thing I think that could ever be worse than it was if Jar Jar Binks had decided to go some Rasta Rapping in Episode 1. It didn't ruin the film for me but I certainly had a look of 'What the fuck is this?' on my face as it was happening. The 2nd song is pretty good.

[Cardie]

Jackson would have been (rightly) slated to fuck if he's simply paced the film for people who haven't read the book. I haven't read the Hobbit for a number of years but the character introduction in the movie was dealt with pretty well as far as I can tell. I agree that whole 30 seconds of dishwashing stuff was a bit daft although it seems to have ruined the film for some people.

 

Peoples complaint is that it didn't really add anything to the story and to be fair to them they are right. Thorins back story is dealt with after the journey starts, you get no real back story to any of the other dwarves during that time, the reason for the journey has already been dealt with, Bilbo doesn't get any back story save to crowbar Frodo into the mix with a bit of jumping back and for.

 

You get all that fluff and then when they start the journey you jump around from one action point to the next with little inbetween all crammed into the rest of the film.

[Dermot]

Am a massive Tolkien fan, and loved the LOTR films. Seen the Hobbit a few weeks back and want to see it again, as while I enjoyed it and understood why some of the major changes (especially including Azog) had happened, I had a number of wtf moments. The main one is at the end when Thorin hugs Bilbo, it seemed out of character in the films but is certainly out of character in the book.

[Son of L8]

Finally got around to seeing this the other day. Objectively, I thought there were some pretty major problems with the script and editing. At least, there were a lot of things I would have changed about it if I could, including some frankly bizarre decisions for experienced pros to be making. That said, though, the three hours passed in the blink of an eye and I'd happily go back and sit through it again. The riddles in the dark was superb, Freeman carried his role really well, the visuals were predictably stunning, the minute attention to detail for Tolkien fanboys to pick up on was really cool, and the story -- once a clunky script and editing allowed it to start flowing -- worked really well.

 

Overall, it had to clear a few hurdles that it set up for itself, but turned out to be a great film that I want to see again.

[RedKnight]

It's 30 minutes too long, I don't see how that can be debated. I understand some Tolkien fans would want to indulge in the cinematic world as much as possible but there were bits in it where the pace was slowed down too much to the detriment of the overall narrative. I enjoyed it, I came out of it pleased that it was good but it was too long.

[A_S]

It'll make a hell of a lot more sense once the entire story is told. If they are making any mistakes, it is releasing each part of the movie a year apart. Something of a Matrix type release where the parts were released only months apart would be the go.

[Gav]

Peoples complaint is that it didn't really add anything to the story and to be fair to them they are right. Thorins back story is dealt with after the journey starts, you get no real back story to any of the other dwarves during that time, the reason for the journey has already been dealt with, Bilbo doesn't get any back story save to crowbar Frodo into the mix with a bit of jumping back and for.

 

You get all that fluff and then when they start the journey you jump around from one action point to the next with little inbetween all crammed into the rest of the film.

 

Within the book the song is quite important to the early story.A scared aprehensive Bilbo , pissed off at seeing his larder emptied and who has clammed up with fear gets put at ease by the dwarves cheery song coupled with Gandalfs smoke rings...the song also tweaks Bilbos natural curiosity about other races and sparks the change of mind to become the burgler.

The dishwasher song ,all 72 movie ruining seconds of it are highly important to the story.What else within the realms of the book could be used to make him change his mind? I just can't believe how many people just dont get it...especially those being paid to write about it and it seems that half those bitching about it not being LOTR also seem to ignore the Pippin song for Denathors dinner

 

Aussie Scouser has nailed the rest of it with his post ...but it doesn't matter anyway really does it,this is a forum.. feet will be dug in,opinion will become more polarised as is already happening.The penny will drop at the end of the 3rd movie

 

I for one am delighted that PJ hasn't pandered to the "Why isn't this the Lord of the Rings 2" brigade and is sticking to both his LOTR format and more importantly the feckin story....and I cannot fucking wait for the Battle of the spiders and the battle of the 5 armies

[ZonkoVille77]

I've seen it twice now, in 3D and the 'normal' D if you like.

3D version in 48fps fuckin hurt my head. Scenes were wizing by and right in my mush. Didn't enjoy that version.

 

Having said that overall I did enjoy the film. Jackson has taken many liberties with it though, adding some pieces which help and changing others which were probably not needed. Just so I was sure, I re-read the book again over Christmas. I have a feeling he'll fuck about a little more with it in the 2nd and 3rd film (heard the 3rd is mainly parts to link to LOTR?)

 

It's a great film but as some have mentioned it definitely has a touch and feel or Narnia about it. Overall I'll give it a 7/10 as some scenes were hard to watch and dragged out.

 

For those who are interested here's a decent link showing the differences between the film and the book.

 

‘The Hobbit’: 19 Changes from J.R.R. Tolkien’s Novel to Peter Jackson’s Movie - The Daily Beast

[Dermot]

I think the end of 3 will be a link to LOTR but I think at least half of it will be taken up with the battle of the 5 armies, the build up to it (I assume that 2 will end, as the title suggests with Smaug v Lake town) and its aftermath.

[Redder Lurtz]

Happy 121-tieth birthday Tolkien, lad.

[Son of L8]

Happy 121-tieth birthday Tolkien, lad.

 

Twelvety-oneth?

[Gav]

Happy 121-tieth birthday Tolkien, lad.

 

By right you should be negged for not using Elvish

 

Aur onnad meren Tolkien lad...

 

 

J.R.R. Tolkien Quotes: Our Favorites On His 121st Birthday

[Paul]

Saw it in ordinary 2D today. It was fine.

[Gav]

This is seriously brilliant

 

[YOUTUBE]PJ5lHwVVcv0[/YOUTUBE]