Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: I AM KING UNDER THE MOUNTAIN!!!!! [Simple Stevie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Suck it up Princess. Got in at 530 this morning after being up for 24 hours, slept 3 , drove 1:15 to get my daughter then an hour to the theater and just sat through the hobbit which I've watched probably 20 times. After this In get to take her back home and then drive back. Tap into your inner elf and drive on!

The nerds were all well behaved during the first movie so hopefully that continues.


~
"You lie!" The Prophet Joe Wilson
Quote Reply
Re: I AM KING UNDER THE MOUNTAIN!!!!! [Rodred] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'll say more later but just a warning to those who want to see the movie DO NOT see the high frame rate version. At times it is basically as bad as we were warned it would be.


~
"You lie!" The Prophet Joe Wilson
Quote Reply
Re: I AM KING UNDER THE MOUNTAIN!!!!! [Rodred] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Doesn't look like any high frame rate theaters in my area, but we did get tickets for IMAX 3D.

--------------------------
The secret of a long life is you try not to shorten it.
-Nobody
Quote Reply
Re: I AM KING UNDER THE MOUNTAIN!!!!! [mck414] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
all of the 3-d in this area is HFR. I dont need 3-d at all and I might go see the movie again in the regular version just to see the difference.


~
"You lie!" The Prophet Joe Wilson
Quote Reply
Re: I AM KING UNDER THE MOUNTAIN!!!!! [Rodred] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I got off work early today, and headed to do some shopping. I didn't see any line at the theater, so I figured I'd check it out. Got in to see the movie, and the theater wasn't even half full. No elves in line, no nerds waiting to be seated, etc.



SPOILERS BELOW


I have to say, I was very disappointed with the visuals. There were parts of that movie that compare to what I would expect to see on the SciFi channel. I don't remember any of the other movies looking that poor on the big screen. I don't know if it was a high frame rate issue (I didn't see it in 3D) but some of the movie had the Mexican Soap Opera look, some of the effects looked jarringly obviously CGI, some of the scenes did not do a good job of blending an obvious CG background with a live action character, etc. This was the worst movie I've seen in a long time, strictly from a visuals point of view. The biggest set piece, Smaug, sometimes looked great, and sometimes looked really bad.

Overall, the plot, acting, etc were all decent, and about what we've come to expect from Jackson. So long as you understand this isn't a movie of the book, as much as it's a movie based on the book, you'll be fine. There's the obvious inclusion of a hot elf and a romantic subplot that was not in the book. There's also the inclusion of Legolas, also not in the book. There's not much character development, and although the movie is basically told with Bilbo as the "hero," you don't even really find yourself quite as invested in his story as you might think. In general, this is like the rest of the movies. Group has to get from point A to point B within X amount of time, and surprise, obstacles lie in their way. Shockingly, Gandalf leaves in the middle to have his own little side story, while the rest of the group carries on without him. Sound familiar?

Overall, if it weren't for the fact that this is a big blockbuster and part of the trilogy and everyone loves the story, I'd have a hard time recommending it to anyone but the really Tolkien nerds.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: I AM KING UNDER THE MOUNTAIN!!!!! [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Will comment on the rest later but Jackson is really pushing the hfr so even though you didn't see it in 3D it is possible you were exposed to it. I am jot sure who the hell is telling Jackson and others that it looks good but they need to stop trying to change simply for the sake of change. Same goes for the plot but as I said I'll have to sit down for those comments.

I watched the double feature and within about 3 minutes I was thinking "oh shit. This is the 48fps version" because it SAS very obvious since I've watched the hobbit so many times. I didn't tell my daughter because Incident want her focusing on it but it was the first thing she mentioned when DOS ended. The barrel riding scene was really bad. Your comparison is pretty dead on.


~
"You lie!" The Prophet Joe Wilson
Quote Reply
Re: I AM KING UNDER THE MOUNTAIN!!!!! [Rodred] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I didn't notice any of the visual short-comings so I guess I must have seen a normal version of it. I thought the spiders, Beorn (sp?) and the dragon were well done visually, beyond that it was like the rest of his films. Little realism, mostly cartoonish. I was bored for the first half but the action at the end was entertaining. Overall, same shortcomings (IMO) as the rest; basically the acting isn't great, nor is the dialogue, no character development, it's all sort of stilted and seriously over-acted at times (which I can only blame on the director as it happens with lots of different actors). I find the music annoying and over the top melodramatic, in fact, I'd say in the place of quality acting and story-telling the music is used to try to get some sort of emotional response. Why he feels the need to use silly comic relief in what are suppose to be life and death situations I have no idea?

Overall it's Hollywood kitschy "action" film-making, relying on formula (e.g. the requisite "love" story) and visuals rather than quality story-telling, acting, dialogue, etc.

Kids' loved it, which I guess is really the target audience.

Shame they couldn't have made these and then also licensed it to be made by a serious director and made an "adult" version (really applies more to LOTR since The Hobbit was a kid's story). Never going to happen but I would have loved to have seen it made more in line with the books' tone, realism and epic nature.
Last edited by: ThisIsIt: Dec 15, 13 3:24
Quote Reply
Re: I AM KING UNDER THE MOUNTAIN!!!!! [ThisIsIt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I went with my daughter and husband to the 10:20 show Saturday night. The only seats we could get were in the 5th row of IMAX 3D. It sucked because we were way too close. For most of the action, it was just blurry.

The movie was so-so, IMO. Some fun and interesting parts, but I found it pretty boring for the most part. Way too much plot addition that I think was added solely to stretch the story out to 3 movies. Bilbo and the Dragon were the best parts, I think. Hated the ending. What a crappy place to end it. I feel a bit cheated.
Quote Reply
Re: I AM KING UNDER THE MOUNTAIN!!!!! [DawnT] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
We took the kids to a Sunday matinee IMAX 3D. Waste of money, IMAX 3D didn't add anything to the experience IMO. My son preferred to watch without the glasses anyway so that'll be his last 3D flick.

Overall I found the movie entertaining, though a few parts I don't recall being in the book (Gandalf being imprisoned at Dol Gudoor and the whole dwarfs being imprisoned by the elves). Guess I need to re-read the book.

--------------------------
The secret of a long life is you try not to shorten it.
-Nobody
Quote Reply
Re: I AM KING UNDER THE MOUNTAIN!!!!! [DawnT] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
DawnT wrote:
Bilbo and the Dragon were the best parts, I think. Hated the ending. What a crappy place to end it. I feel a bit cheated.

I'm convinced a quality director rather than a Hollywood hack could have made a single movie following the arc of the book more faithfully and made it a character piece about Bilbo that would have been great. I agree Bilbo and the Dragon were probably the best part. Bilbo gets lost in this telling and you ultimately couldn't care less about him (or for that matter any of the other characters) as Jackson fills the screen with CGI fluff and action scenes, some of which just looked ridiculous. The whole barrel scene looked like something from a Six Flags Amusement park water flume ride.
Quote Reply
Re: I AM KING UNDER THE MOUNTAIN!!!!! [ThisIsIt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"The whole barrel scene looked like something from a Six Flags Amusement park water flume ride."

Totally agree, although half of it I couldn't follow because everything was so blurry in the 5th row. <sigh>

I also agree with how much better this movie would have been had it been made into a single movie focused on Bilbo. I just love the actor that plays Bilbo (he's also in Sherlock and I love him there too), but he's relegated to a minor role in this movie. Really too bad and a real missed opportunity to make an amazing movie.
Quote Reply
Re: I AM KING UNDER THE MOUNTAIN!!!!! [mck414] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mck414 wrote:
Overall I found the movie entertaining, though a few parts I don't recall being in the book (Gandalf being imprisoned at Dol Gudoor and the whole dwarfs being imprisoned by the elves). Guess I need to re-read the book.

I couldn't remember either so I picked up the book on Saturday afternoon and read the few chapters that pertain to this movie. The whole Gandalf/Dol Guldor story line, obviously the female elf/love story thing, essentially the stuff about Bard, the whole being chased by Orcs/Elves chasing them, that scene at the beginning in Bree, Smaug chasing the Dwarves around was added.

So basically the book story line would have been Beorn's house, Gandalf leaves them (not to be heard from again in this movie), get lost in Mirkwood, fight the spiders, captured and imprisoned by Elves, Bilbo gets them out and they float to Laketown, appeal to the Master for help, he gives it, they go to the mountain, Bilbo sneaks in and interacts with Smaug a couple of times, Smaug flies out and destroys the secret door entrance, so now Dwarves/hobbit stuck inside between the blocked entrance and what they think is a waiting dragon below, Dragon flies off to deal with Laketown...the end.

This leaves only a few chapters to go (Dragon killed by Bard who enters the story for the first time here and then a big battle as they all fight over the spoils) which somehow Jackson is going to stretch into another 2.5 hour movie I presume.
Quote Reply
Re: I AM KING UNDER THE MOUNTAIN!!!!! [Rodred] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So yeah, I saw this with the family today -- in 2D. That, evidently, was a wise choice. I already knew that I wanted no part of HFR and 3D.

Overall I see the weaknesses in these Hobbit movies more so than the LOTR series. LOTR wasn't centered around just one character like the Hobbit should be centered around Bilbo. Jackson has a great actor there IMO, he just hasn't come through with the story telling. I definitely agree with the other posters about this issue.

I continue to have issues with Jacksonian action. It's all unbelievable -- even in the context of the movie. Why doesn't Legolas and a couple of elf friends just go out and kill every single Orc that walks the earth? There's no danger in it for them. Orcs are like bumbling idiots and key stone cops compared to the elves with their "feel the force" ability to anticipate every Orc battle move. Would it just be too boring and that's why the elves don't do it? What else are they doing with eternity that's so exciting?

By the same token Smaug is supposed to be BAD-ASS and evil to the core. This is an ancient Dragon, spawn of Melkor. The more he puts off killing Bilbo, and the more he chases a bunch of dwarves all over that cave (without hurting any) the more ridiculous he seemed to me. Smaug is going to destroy miserable lake town? With Bilbo standing RIGHT in front of him? What?

I like to bitch, but I still liked the movie. I always appreciate Jackson's interpretation of how monsters and characters must have looked -- Smaug here, the Balrog in LOTR, and Sauron the Necromancer here -- some of these other items I like to complain about, but overall I'm still a fan.
Quote Reply
Re: I AM KING UNDER THE MOUNTAIN!!!!! [ThisIsIt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ThisIsIt wrote:
mck414 wrote:
Overall I found the movie entertaining, though a few parts I don't recall being in the book (Gandalf being imprisoned at Dol Gudoor and the whole dwarfs being imprisoned by the elves). Guess I need to re-read the book.


I couldn't remember either so I picked up the book on Saturday afternoon and read the few chapters that pertain to this movie. The whole Gandalf/Dol Guldor story line, obviously the female elf/love story thing, essentially the stuff about Bard, the whole being chased by Orcs/Elves chasing them, that scene at the beginning in Bree, Smaug chasing the Dwarves around was added.

So basically the book story line would have been Beorn's house, Gandalf leaves them (not to be heard from again in this movie), get lost in Mirkwood, fight the spiders, captured and imprisoned by Elves, Bilbo gets them out and they float to Laketown, appeal to the Master for help, he gives it, they go to the mountain, Bilbo sneaks in and interacts with Smaug a couple of times, Smaug flies out and destroys the secret door entrance, so now Dwarves/hobbit stuck inside between the blocked entrance and what they think is a waiting dragon below, Dragon flies off to deal with Laketown...the end.

This leaves only a few chapters to go (Dragon killed by Bard who enters the story for the first time here and then a big battle as they all fight over the spoils) which somehow Jackson is going to stretch into another 2.5 hour movie I presume.


Funny, my wife asked me if I enjoyed the movie, and after a bit of thought, I said "no." There was so much added that just didn't "happen" that it was very annoying. Why introduce a goblin named the same as the son of Azog (Bolg)? Why does the only female character outside of Galadriel have to have a love interest? Why have a comic scene with Bilbo chasing after the Arkenstone while talking to Smaug? Why? Because Jackson could, I guess.

That said, there is material that describes events during the time of The Hobbit that is not in that book (think Unfinished Tales), that enabled Jackson to make three movies. Included in this material is the description by Gandalf of his "chance meeting" in Bree with Thorin (I believe he told this story to the hobbits after the Ring was destroyed):

Quote:
"Yet things might have gone far otherwise and far worse. When you think of the great Battle of Pelennor, do not forget the battles in Dale and the valour of Durin's Folk. Think of what might have been. Dragon-fire and savage swords in Eriador, night in Rivendell. There might be no Queen in Gondor. We might now hope to return from victory here only to ruin and ash. But that has been averted--because I met Thorin Oakenshied one evening on the edge of spring in Bree. A chance-meeting, as we say in Middle-earth."

In addition, the Dol Guldur incident did occur, but totally different than what Jackson portrayed. It was the White Council (Gandalf, Saruman, Elrond, Galadriel) that combined power to drive the Necromancer out of Dol Guldur (indeed, this is why Gandalf was absent from the company when they went into Mirkwood). Gandalf was no match for Sauron, and he knew it, and so the idea that he would have gone into Dol Guldur alone, knowing that Sauron was there is silly (although he did go there by himself much earlier: that's actually where he got the map and key!)

(delving into way too much detail)

Sauron allowed himself to be driven from Dol Guldur because his preparations in Mordor (Barad-dur complete, etc.) were done. Saruman agreed to do it because he was worried that Sauron was looking for the Ring near the Gladden Fields, and Saruman was worried Sauron might find it before he did. This is all in the Tolkien "gospel".

I'd guess that Hobbit III contains
  • Destruction of Laketown/death of Smaug
  • White Council battling to free Gandalf from his cage
  • Bilbo conspiring with the Elves/Gandalf over the Arkenstone
  • Battle of the Five Armies
  • Funeral of Thorin/distribution of loot (expect lots of Irish dirge-y music)
  • Return journey of Bilbo (hence the "There and Back Again" title)
  • Possible other scenes of Sauron/ringwraiths setting up in Morder to foreshadow the Lord of the Rings books/movies

I don't think they'll go into the Aragorn/Gollum/Mordor stories (no Viggo), or Balin's return to Moria. There is an unexpected name in the imdb entry for Hobbit III with some speculation as to whether it is actually the character so named. Left to the curious for more info (hint: the character had been dead for about 6,000 years before the events of the Hobbit).

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Quote Reply
Re: I AM KING UNDER THE MOUNTAIN!!!!! [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So you're, like, really into Tolkien, huh?

Seriously though, I haven't seen the movie, no real desire unfortunately. I enjoyed the three LOTR movies, love everything about the books, but man was the first Hobbit bad imo. I'll eventually see this one, I'm just dreading the experience because I feel like a bad movie experience takes away from the novels.
Quote Reply
Re: I AM KING UNDER THE MOUNTAIN!!!!! [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Wild conjectures...

The unexpected name in the credits will be involved in a flashback concerning the mingling of the kindreds, which will be relevant because Tauriel and Kili get together sometime during Hobbit 3.

or...

The unexpected name in the credits will be involved in a flashback concerning Elrond's lack a enthusiasm for Arwen's love for Aragorn -- no one should marry their cousin!
Quote Reply

Prev Next