The Hobbit Film Trilogy

[cypruss11]

The 48 fps was amazing, and made 3D look spectacular. Never liked 3D until now. This movie wins best of the year in my book. The only part I didn't like was the singing at the beginning. I liked that they actually sung, but it felt a bit overdone.

[born2beagator]

The 48 fps was amazing, and made 3D look spectacular. Never liked 3D until now. This movie wins best of the year in my book. The only part I didn't like was the singing at the beginning. I liked that they actually sung, but it felt a bit overdone.

Meh. It wasn't anything spectacular. Certainly not film of the year. Remember Avengers and Dark Knight were this year too.

My biggest complaint was

Spoiler:

Azog. He was dead hundreds of years before the events of the hobbit, his son Bolg was in charge.

That and the excessive use of CGI. One of the things that made LOTR so good to me was how realistic the creatures looked.

[Eltee]

Mman, 'triology' looks so archaic! I totally want go misuse my mod powers to chop that O out.

I saw the movie in 3D with the regular framerate. I thought it was tastefully done. *shrug*

'Carefully with the Plates' was a bit cringe-worthy, but I liked 'Far over the Misty Mountains.'

I very much liked the dwarves, I dunno. I didn't mind how they were a but more human, and I quite liked how they were able to make a dozen dwarves all memorable, which I was slightly worried about.

Spoiler:

The bit at the end at the eagles eyrie when yo could see the Misty Mountain in the distance gave me goosebumps.

[Musicman247]

Don't know what you're talking about, Eltee. you might want to glance over your own post for a couple errors as well

Wife and I will be seeing The Hobbit together on New Years Eve at 48fps 3D. She had never read the books, so I'll get her opinion on the film. She watched the LotR extended films with me and even dressed up as Arwen to my Aragorn for a midnight launch party for Return of the King, so it's safe to say she likes the films...or maybe just me

[Chaos the N'wah]

I liked "Blunt the Knives" (Aka "That's what Bilbo Baggins hates")

But then I tend to like campy, endearing songs and tend to hate movies that take themselves too seriously

[born2beagator]

Mman, 'triology' looks so archaic! I totally want go misuse my mod powers to chop that O out.

I saw the movie in 3D with the regular framerate. I thought it was tastefully done. *shrug*

'Carefully with the Plates' was a bit cringe-worthy, but I liked 'Far over the Misty Mountains.'

I very much liked the dwarves, I dunno. I didn't mind how they were a but more human, and I quite liked how they were able to make a dozen dwarves all memorable, which I was slightly worried about.

Spoiler:

The bit at the end at the eagles eyrie when yo could see the Misty Mountain in the distance gave me goosebumps.

Was hoping for more with the eagles, like one having a speaking part; specifically their leader Gwahir

[Archea47]

Was hoping for more with the eagles, like one having a speaking part; specifically their leader Gwahir

Well ... it's a little unclear if the leader of the Eagles in The Hobbit is actually Gwaihir and how that would fit into continuity with PJ's adaptations of LOTR. I don't watch the LOTR movies because they upset me from their disservice to Tolkien's writing and haven't seen them in a long while; did Gwaihir talk at all or wear a crown in those movies?

Spoiler:

At the end of The Hobbit he's awarded a crown to wear as King of the Birds for his participation in the Battle of five Armies

But it doesn't help get my hopes up too much for the house of Beorn and its table-serving animals. I can understand embellishing things like them actually being on the stone giants instead of seeing them far off but I don't appreciate the omissions - especially when it wasn't an issue of time because most of the movie (all of Radagast's actions, for example) was inventions of Peter Jackson & Company

All that said I did enjoy the movie (I was a little desensitized having some past-frustration with PJ). I couldn't say that when I saw PJ's adaptation of Fellowship of the Rings in the theaters. I expect I'll see the next two in theaters, which I didn't of LOTR

[cypruss11]

The 48 fps was amazing, and made 3D look spectacular. Never liked 3D until now. This movie wins best of the year in my book. The only part I didn't like was the singing at the beginning. I liked that they actually sung, but it felt a bit overdone.

Meh. It wasn't anything spectacular. Certainly not film of the year. Remember Avengers and Dark Knight were this year too.

My biggest complaint was

Spoiler:

Azog. He was dead hundreds of years before the events of the hobbit, his son Bolg was in charge.

That and the excessive use of CGI. One of the things that made LOTR so good to me was how realistic the creatures looked.

I liked Avengers well enough, definitely a 9/10. I was less impressed with Rises. Probably an 8/10. I usually get horrible headaches watching 3D, but the 48 fps fixed this issue which is why I am so pleased with it.

[Believe]

I'm going to see it tonight. Probably won't bother with any of this 3d, 48fps, whatever-else [&@%!].

A movie is a movie, I find that as long as I have popcorn, and the movie itself isn't crap, I have a good time.

[Stormborn]

Am I the only one who is going to wait until all three films are out before watching them?

[Musicman247]

Probably. You would be waiting for nearly four years for them all to come out on some form of home media.

[philfredobob]

eh ... I'll wait for the DVD

Cinema is too far away, and too bloody expenisve !

[Archea47]

I'm going to see it tonight. Probably won't bother with any of this 3d, 48fps, whatever-else [&@%!].

A movie is a movie, I find that as long as I have popcorn, and the movie itself isn't crap, I have a good time.

Oh, lighten up grinch

The movie(s) were shot and rendered in 3D so unlike the past it's, as far as I understand, converted back to 2D for conventional viewing. Same with the 48 frames deal.

It's not like when I grew up watching 3d where once in a while there would be something popping out of the screen as a gimmick - the whole movie's 3d. I saw it again last night with a friend and he was pretty impressed. I haven't seen it without 3DHFR so I can't compare it to the 2D or standard 24 frames

[ArmchairCommander]

I've seen both. 3D 48FPS is best, IMO.

[umadbro?]

Saw it in 2D. Loved it. Though they added a lot of battle sequences which weren't in the book. Hey, I'm not complaining though.

[lostlast]

Am I the only one who thought why didn't they just use the birds to fly from Shire to destination in one go. Why all the mucking round?

[Archea47]

Am I the only one who thought why didn't they just use the birds to fly from Shire to destination in one go. Why all the mucking round?

Oh you troll

In the book the Eagles say that they won't fly farther than where they will be dropped off in the beginning of the next movie because they don't want the men of the wood shooting at them or some such. The eagles get involved only because they see the great milling of wargs among the trees, don't like them, and swoop down to ruin their party. That Thorin & Company get helped by them seems to be incidental and motivated by Gandalf in the past removing an arrow from a wound of their leader

Peter Jackson's films re-tell Tolkien's tales like he read them 10 years ago and fills the parts he doesn't remember with embellishments for what he thinks will be the fascination of his audience

[umadbro?]

Am I the only one who thought why didn't they just use the birds to fly from Shire to destination in one go. Why all the mucking round?

Oh you troll

In the book the Eagles say that they won't fly farther than where they will be dropped off in the beginning of the next movie because they don't want the men of the wood shooting at them or some such. The eagles get involved only because they see the great milling of wargs among the trees, don't like them, and swoop down to ruin their party. That Thorin & Company get helped by them seems to be incidental and motivated by Gandalf in the past removing an arrow from a wound of their leader

Peter Jackson's films re-tell Tolkien's tales like he read them 10 years ago and fills the parts he doesn't remember with embellishments for what he thinks will be the fascination of his audience

Plus that would just make the book boring.

[Dark Spark]

Am I the only one who thought why didn't they just use the birds to fly from Shire to destination in one go. Why all the mucking round?

Oh you troll

In the book the Eagles say that they won't fly farther than where they will be dropped off in the beginning of the next movie because they don't want the men of the wood shooting at them or some such. The eagles get involved only because they see the great milling of wargs among the trees, don't like them, and swoop down to ruin their party. That Thorin & Company get helped by them seems to be incidental and motivated by Gandalf in the past removing an arrow from a wound of their leader

Peter Jackson's films re-tell Tolkien's tales like he read them 10 years ago and fills the parts he doesn't remember with embellishments for what he thinks will be the fascination of his audience

Plus that would just make the book boring.

"Will we get air support?"
"What? Are you kiddin'? Son, you are the support!"

The best hanging of a lampshade, evah.

[Archea47]

Plus that would just make the book boring.

FWIW The Hobbit wasn't written for publication - not originally. He wrote many tales to read to his children; some others can be read in Tales from the Perilous Realm and Letters from Father Christmas. The Hobbit was special among them in that it drew from the legendarium he started writing during his time in WWI (the works of middle earth's first and second age, greater in scope and length than the Hobbit and LOTR and never published while he was alive).

LOTR, on the other hand, was written for publication (not to detract its worth)

[umadbro?]

I knew it was written for children but I didn't know that it was never intended to be published. Definately gives me a different perspective. Thanks.

[Marcus Vorenus]

good film not bad in 3D, Richard Armitage legend!

[Archea47]

I knew it was written for children but I didn't know that it was never intended to be published. Definately gives me a different perspective. Thanks.

Another great example is the tale Roverandom (not published until ~15 years ago), a story he wrote to help his son Michael's grieving over losing a toy dog at the beach one day. It goes on to tell how it was once a real dog, but was turned into a toy by a wizard, and then went on to have all sorts of adventures after being left at the beach

[Unionhack]

It works.

What doesn't work, are the dwarves. Half of them look like very short humans, while the other half has potatoes for noses and hair that could pass as tasteless home decoration.

I actually kinda like how they did the dwarves...

[Travalanche]

My coworker saw it yesterday and said it was fairly good although not to the same extent of the other 3 films in the prior trilogy and that it starts a bit slow which may or may not be a negative for you.

I think I'll wait for DVD like I do for 99% of the movies I watch, haven't went to a theater since like 2007.