The Hobbit - Part 1

The new trailer is supposed to be released some time this month, right?
 
Oh God, that looks so wonderful.
Love Gollum's younger look too and his banter.
 
Saw the second trailer yesterday. I pooped. Looks like we're in for another epic Tolkien adaptation.

It will rain Oscars.
 
I've been shying away from any trailer or any articles related to the Hobbit, because I want it to be a total surprise (I'm excited as ****ing hell, though). Just came here to say I cannot ****ing wait. I wish we could have a huge HL2.net viewing.
 
I may be going to an early screening on the 13th :D
 
Red carpet premier was last night, looking forward to seeing it in two weeks. I'm fairy certain Sauron (The Necromancer) will make an appearance in one of the films, which I think would be a nice piece of foreshadowing.

 
I just got back, quite tired so I can't be bothered typing much, but:

Great movie, (lots of CGI this time around, most of, if not all goblins were CG), and amazing visuals. It definitely seems like much more of your average fantasy high adventure than an epic, and the lightheartedness from the book is definitely there. Lots of LOTR references and the stuff with the "Necromancer" is great too.

If you're expecting a film that follows the book almost to a point you may be disappointed. As far as I could tell there were a lot of changes to the way certain things happened. Characters may seem slightly different etc.

Definitely has a very different feel to LOTR, as did the book, and despite changing a few things around has the same feel that the book has (for me, anyway).

My main complaints were the huge use of CGI and the pacing of the film, but neither of these bothered me too much. PJ has done a great job of fleshing out the events and story though. There are a lot of new bits, including story events and characters, but it all fits nicely.
 
I like the pacing. The CGI has improved greatly over the years, I hardly thought about it.
 
I thought it was set up so that, once all of the movies have come out, it will have been paced with a beginning relative to a viewing of the entire saga.
 
I didn't like the movie very much. I found so much at fault with it. It was way too silly and goofy for its own good I thought.

Also...

****ing mountains throwing rocks at each other I was just sitting there going... WHAT THE **** IS HAPPENING!?

No context... none at all.
 
Having read the book a few months ago I can definitely say there's nothing in it that would resemble mountains throwing rocks at each other.
 
"When he peeped out in the lightning-flashes, he saw across the valley the stone giants were out, and were hurling rocks at one another for a game"

Yep, it's there.
 
Yeah, it's just not entirely clear if they're made of stone from what I remember.
 
I thought it was okay. They did a good job giving the dwarves more personality, and Radagast was cool.
 
morgs said:
"When he peeped out in the lightning-flashes, he saw across the valley the stone giants were out, and were hurling rocks at one another for a game"

Yep, it's there.
Click to expand...
It was silly in the novel, and it's silly on screen. They should've cut it.
 
Dog-- said:
Whether he did or not, it shouldn't be a requirement to read the books to watch the movie.
Click to expand...

Er, I didn't say it was. I was referring to his "silly and goofy" comment.
 
Well if it's been ~17 years since I read it for school, should I do a refresher?
 
That was good shit. Saw it in 48FPS 3D. Good shit. The high frames looked weird to my eye for the close up parts but I reckon it helped with the mine scene were everything was moving fast. I also thought the 3D added to the film, **** the haters. Great film though. But they left out the best song!
 
Just saw this last night and loved it. Didn't see it in 3D, but didn't really feel like I was missing out. I was concerned that only a third of the Hobbit would be kinda boring to watch, but they managed to include plenty of interesting scenes and flesh out the story a bit more. Some of the events were out of order if memory serves, but not a huge deal for me.
 
ríomhaire said:
That was good shit. Saw it in 48FPS 3D. Good shit. The high frames looked weird to my eye for the close up parts but I reckon it helped with the mine scene were everything was moving fast. I also thought the 3D added to the film, **** the haters. Great film though.
Click to expand...

This.

I've seen it twice, both times in 3D and both times with the different frame rates. It really does make a difference having double the frames. A lot of the long swooping landscape scenes were very crisp, but quite blurry at 24FPS due to all the motion blur. I also didn't feel any strain in my eyes from the 3D, whereas after 3 hours with them at 24FPS I did. 3D was fine in my opinion too.

It did feel as though the people had been sped up at 48FPS for the first 30 seconds or so but I quickly adjusted to it and it felt fine after that.

I loved the film, the Goblin King and Trolls looked awesome and Andy Serkis did amazing with Gollum again. Some of the landscapes and the mines and Dwarf city looked so epic. Had a few chuckles throughout the film too. Lots of fun in my opinion.

Then again I love LOTR so I was probably destined to enjoy this too.
 
Destructo-Bot said:
Too much fun. imho. I wished it was more serious, ala LOTR.
Click to expand...
While I get this completely, The Hobbit isn't meant to be as dark and serious as LOTR. I liked that there was a lot more light-hearted stuff in it to mix in with the overall tone of death, loss and displacement.
 
Let me rephrase; the beginning of the Fellowship of the ring was light-hearted without being silly while keeping its verisimilitude. That's the tone I was hoping for. The Hobbit went too far on the silly scale for my tastes. I still liked it, but I could have liked it better.
 
Overall it was pretty good. The visuals on landscapes and such were incredible. Martin Freeman did a great job as Bilbo. I have a few beefs with it though

1) Bad stoner humor. Saruman's bit about Radagast and the mushrooms and Gandalf offering Radagast his pipe. I don't mind stoner humor but it doesn't have a place in middle earth. The little bit in Fellowship was about as far as it should have gone.

2) Azog sucked. The CGI on him looked like shit and he wasn't menacing at all.

3) Bunny sled. Would have been cool in a harry potter movie, but WTF

4) The action was too Kingdom of the Crystal Skulls-ish. Like the part where the dwarves and gandalf fall hundrefs of feet to the bottom of the Orc-stronghold on a bridge and get up without a scratch

5) The ****ing storm giants. Cool scene, but a little too much liberty taken with the source material imo

6) Sting doesn't glow blue during the orc chase.


but i enjoyed it quite a bit. looking forward to the next one
 
I agree on all points, except maybe Azog. I liked him. Didn't notice the sword during the orc bit though, seems like quite an oversight.
 
Yeah Azog was pretty menacing I thought, as much as a generic orc villain in a kid's adventure tale can be. On the other hand, I didn't really like Martin Freeman's performance, or at least not as well as I would have thought. He fit the role really well, but he doesn't really have the emotional range to pull off some of the film's more dramatic moments. Mostly he still looks like he's just standing there despondently, like he does in everything else.

 
Still haven't seen this, is it true they've somehow stretched the Gollum scene to last like a half hour?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

love_nutz2
Telltale's Back to the Future - the game
Replies
36
Views
2K
ríomhaire
ríomhaire
SpArKs
Why Go To The Cinema When You Can Just, Play The Games!
Replies
29
Views
778
Apocalypse89
Apocalypse89
thenerdguy
'Rings' hits $1 billion box office mark
Replies
8
Views
661
AmishSlayer
AmishSlayer
Back
Top