The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
So, do you think the first part of the movie drags?



Ereinion Nénharma
Lorien

Dec 13 2012, 1:24pm


Views: 1344
So, do you think the first part of the movie drags?
I know I do.
''Do not fear the shadows, for seeing them means light is near...''


Cave Troll
Rivendell

Dec 13 2012, 1:31pm


Views: 922
Perhaps it has one scene too many...
but, no, I don't.

Riddles aside, it was far and away my favourite part of the film.


Rolfina
Rivendell


Dec 13 2012, 1:37pm


Views: 885
No, not exactly
It felt a bit clunky (is that the word I'm looking for?) because we have been presented with so many scenes from Bag End already, that it felt weird seeing familiar scenes with new ones, all interwoven and sometimes wondering if the order and placing of familiar quotes actually made sense. I imagine it'll actually feel more fluent on the next watches.


musterd
The Shire

Dec 13 2012, 1:50pm


Views: 840
I am
the complete opposite. Loved the first part of the movie because the character moments are my favourite parts of the film. The action sequences were actually of less interest to me.

Riddles in the Dark was an amazing combination of both.


Azaghâl
Lorien


Dec 13 2012, 1:52pm


Views: 886
It is by far the best
For the first hour or so I felt so immersed in the story. I was back in middle earth. Then it kinda went downhill after the troll scene. From there on it felt more like a drag. It switched around once more with riddles in the dark.
*Baruk khazâd! Khazâd ai-mênu!*


Ereinion Nénharma
Lorien

Dec 13 2012, 2:14pm


Views: 799
Funny...
it was exactly the opposite for me. The prologue was brilliant btw. But the scenes at Bag End are just way to long for me.
''Do not fear the shadows, for seeing them means light is near...''


macfalk
Valinor


Dec 13 2012, 2:23pm


Views: 779
Completely the opposite
I loved everything about the Bag End scenes and the first hour of it. After the troll scenes I felt it went downhill until they left Rivendell, then it picked up the pace again.


The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.


waaimasjien
Bree

Dec 13 2012, 2:32pm


Views: 781
Yes!
The film as a whole should have been 30 minutes shorter and that has for a large part to do with first hour. I loved the prologue but I think Frodo and Bilbo should have been cut. Then there's this terribly long 'merry gathering' - the worst part of it being so slow is that it makes the songs very awkward. By themselves, the songs are good, but in the context of the film they become an annoyance. Like 'gosh, there was this whole bunch of slapstick and now, instead of getting on with it, they're singing?!'

I also felt the Stone Giants sequence could have been cut. Apart from defying the laws of nature where gravity and body health are concerned, it served absolutely no purpose and felt like Episodic over-the-top action sequence number so-and-so.


Ereinion Nénharma
Lorien

Dec 13 2012, 2:37pm


Views: 746
Yes...
the stone giants disappointed me too. It should have been handled much more subtle, just as in the book, where you are not sure whether or not it really are stone giants tossing rocks or that it's 'just' mountains suffering the weather, if you get what I mean.
''Do not fear the shadows, for seeing them means light is near...''


macfalk
Valinor


Dec 13 2012, 2:43pm


Views: 748
I don't get it.
They sing this song in the book. The dwarves spend one night in Bag End. There is comic relief throughout "An unexpected party". Why rush it? I don't get it. The wonderful "Misty Mountains song" was the perfect ending to that long segment when cut to Bilbo waking up, all alone.


The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.


Ereinion Nénharma
Lorien

Dec 13 2012, 2:50pm


Views: 726
It just takes to long...
I think it's like an hour and a half before Bilbo encouters his first danger, the trolls. While in LOTR, which is not at all ''rushed'' the Nazgul are on Frodo's tail after 20 minutes or so.
''Do not fear the shadows, for seeing them means light is near...''


Rolfina
Rivendell


Dec 13 2012, 2:52pm


Views: 732
Wasn't that just a great scene?
Bilbo going to sleep to the tune of that song, then waking up, wandering his empty halls, and you can plainly see his relief turn into puzzlement and then grief over a missed chance of a lifetime. I absolutely loved it.


macfalk
Valinor


Dec 13 2012, 2:55pm


Views: 685
Great scene //
 


The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.


Azaghâl
Lorien


Dec 13 2012, 2:57pm


Views: 698
Not really true
I just saw the theatrical release during a marathon screening. And it's more like 45-60 minutes into the movie before they get out of the shire.
*Baruk khazâd! Khazâd ai-mênu!*


Ereinion Nénharma
Lorien

Dec 13 2012, 2:59pm


Views: 694
Yes...
but the danger begins much earlier. With the ring being present and awoken and Nazgul coming for 'Shire, Baggins'.
''Do not fear the shadows, for seeing them means light is near...''


Asy
The Shire


Dec 13 2012, 3:11pm


Views: 687
Goodness no!
None of the film dragged! I really enjoyed the first part and actually wished there were more scenes! I hope the EE has more scenes of the unexpected party Smile
All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us.


unexpectedvisitor
Rohan

Dec 13 2012, 3:12pm


Views: 668
lol
such a diversity of opinions. and the stone giants scene that some are complaining about? multiple critics (seriously, like ten or so that i've read) talked about that scene as a highlight and fantastic filmmaking. oh man...


morgenstern
The Shire


Dec 13 2012, 3:12pm


Views: 679
I'm not sure why anyone would think it drags
But I do wonder if the EE will include a sufficient number of additional scenes to retroactively push the arrival at Rivendell into the second film.


Crunchable Birdses
Rohan


Dec 13 2012, 3:16pm


Views: 672
Short answer: no.
Long answer: Hell no.

Really, it did not feel long. It felt exactly as long as it needed to be.
* crunch *


waaimasjien
Bree

Dec 13 2012, 3:24pm


Views: 675
Because it's not a book, it's a film.
One element of film's specificity is that it is a medium that plays in time. The way the events in the film are structured and distributed in time is fundamental for how the film plays as a whole in the end.

In a way, it can be compared to telling a joke: there is no scientific rule for it, but everyone feels that if you take an hour to get to the punchline of a joke that can be told in a minute, the audience will have wandered off.

So yes, in the end it's entirely subjective, but I think most people who have seen their share of films or have studied it will agree with me.

I'm not saying it has to be rushed, it just should be more condensed than it is now.


(This post was edited by waaimasjien on Dec 13 2012, 3:25pm)


unexpectedvisitor
Rohan

Dec 13 2012, 3:43pm


Views: 635
there are a lot of different rhythms and breaks that a film can employ
it's not even close to a science. i studied film myself and if we agree not to define how a film should be cut based on its genre, then we can allow a movie like The Hobbit to take its time in getting going (especially when, proportionately, 45 minutes isn't nearly too long to set the stage for a 9-hour adventure). the LotR movies had plenty of passages that may have dragged on in the sense of traditional action-adventure film pacing, but those passages were true to the nature and character of the story and the world-building that was happening. it gives these films some of their character, a character lacking in your average blockbuster.

now, i am of the opinion that the LotR EEs, at times, did push things a little too far in the direction of sacrificing pacing, as momentum that was building up towards a climax often got thrown out the window by some long extra scene introduced late. with complaints for The Hobbit's pacing being mostly relegated to the introductory part of the story, though, i'm not worried. like i said, i think it only appropriate that this beginning part of this long adventure be given some time to breathe and amble.

what will be very interesting to see is how they handle the beginning of DOS. Beorn's stuff is lovely in the book but i imagine they are going to have to do a fair bit of "adapting" to make that material work as the start for movie two.


Shagrat
Gondor

Dec 13 2012, 3:48pm


Views: 620
Nothing dragged
I was immersed by it all. I would only add; not subtract.


dormouse
Half-elven


Dec 13 2012, 3:54pm


Views: 625
No, not at all
Have just come back from seeing it, and loved it.

I'm delighted they took their time because it meant we did get things like the 'Good morning' conversation which people felt would be left out. There were one or two tiny bits of dialogue that seemed a bit out of place but I can't even remember what they were now. Otherwise I think the film is breathtaking and I can't wait to see it again - and from the reactions in the cinema, others thought so too.

It made me laugh, it made me cry (and there aren't many films that do that). I think it's brilliant. (There's even a moth.....)


DanielLB
Immortal


Dec 13 2012, 4:03pm


Views: 633
I just came back too dormouse!
And agree with everything. Absolutely, 100%, AMAZING.

I couldn't wish for anything better. I was surprised by how fast it went.

Want Hobbit Movie News? Hobbit Headlines of the Week!


namarie
Rohan


Dec 13 2012, 4:12pm


Views: 589
nope
I finally saw the movie last night.
I didn't felt that the movie dragged in the first part at all.
I loved that they took their time with Bag End, I even felt that it was too short and I wanted more.

Same for Rivendell :)

There is always hope


waaimasjien
Bree

Dec 13 2012, 4:16pm


Views: 374
I study film too...
and I do think the humanities are in fact part of what we call 'science'. Wink Although there is of course no rule or hard evidence on how a film should be edited to achieve the intended effect on an audience.

I don't think you can discuss pacing of a single movie in the context of later sequels though. Of course it's one story, but these are three distinct films. Hence the way you're discussing the beginning of DOS as a beginning. The problem with the pacing in AUJ is that in that first hour the same point is made over and over again. The dwarves are hysterical (all in their own individual way, of course) and Thorin really wants his homeland back. We get it. It's just too much of the same thing at the same time. You can do world- and character building throughout the film instead of cramming it all into one sequence (because, let's face it, most of the dwarves are established here, but have virtually nothing the do in the rest of the film).


Artemis Roach
Bree


Dec 13 2012, 4:26pm


Views: 383
Condescending twaddle
Quote
In the end it's entirely subjective, but I think most people who have seen their share of films or have studied it will agree with me.
In the beginning too, it's entirely subjective, most people who have seen their share of ADD and/or have studied and recognize short attention spans completely agree with you.

Quote
I study film too...
That's why I defer to an expert. I've been schooled!


(This post was edited by Artemis Roach on Dec 13 2012, 4:32pm)


waaimasjien
Bree

Dec 13 2012, 4:39pm


Views: 366
I didn't intend it to be condescending
I take it your comment was, though?

Anyway, I do think most people who enjoy the sequence enjoy it because they want to see as much of the book they've read on-screen, not because it's good film-making.

I can appreciate films that are slow and need a long attention span, I just don't think the pacing is fitting for this particular film.


jimmyfenn
Rohan


Dec 13 2012, 4:42pm


Views: 359
no
NO just saw it , thought its was just incredible!
"You Tolkien to me?!" - Hobbit de Niro


Azog
Bree


Dec 13 2012, 4:48pm


Views: 362
opposite actually
I just got back from seeing it and the first hour was by far the best,unlike most critics I felt it went way too fast after bag end,it almost felt rushed if I'm honest,so the shire was a welcome pace for me


Artemis Roach
Bree


Dec 13 2012, 4:50pm


Views: 350
Funny how it works that way
Quote
I didn't mean it to be condescending.
Nobody ever does. Not even the ones nailing their film qualifications to the mast and sniffily telling others about their superior film knowledge.

I get that film snobs believe movies - sorry, films - cannot violate certain cookie-cutter parameters. Understood: "You. Shall. Not. Pass."

Film School 101: Lesson No. 1. In any movie with 13 dwarves, excise ten of them. Which is to say, if Tolkien was petrified and restricted himself to rules imposed by Literary Snobs (and all the people who study literature and agree with them), we'd never have even heard of The Hobbit or LOTR.

There and Back, Again...


(This post was edited by Artemis Roach on Dec 13 2012, 4:54pm)


entmaiden
Forum Admin / Moderator


Dec 13 2012, 5:19pm


Views: 326
Let's just assume
that the people here have good intentions, and that sometimes the restrictions of communication through the written word causes misinterpretations.


Durhil
The Shire


Dec 13 2012, 5:22pm


Views: 326
No, not all
it felt almost as long FOTR, but a bit longer and if it really was one hour long than I sure as hell didn't notice it, but I can't imagine that it took really 1 hour.


waaimasjien
Bree

Dec 13 2012, 5:39pm


Views: 310
Referring to your background
when making a point has nothing to do with feeling or wanting to be superior. It's just a way of saying where your knowledge and opinions come from.

Quote
Film School 101: Lesson No. 1. In any movie with 13 dwarves, excise ten of them. Which is to say, if Tolkien was petrified and restricted himself to rules imposed by Literary Snobs (and all the people who study literature and agree with them), we'd never have even heard of The Hobbit or LOTR.
That's a good point, and I think Tolkien was indeed more interested in creating a mythology than writing acclaimed literature. I'm probably a terrible snob again, but I don't like Tolkien's writing style that much. I do however enjoy the mythology behind it.

Anyway, I take it you did like the pacing in the Hobbit? Maybe you could elaborate on why that is, instead of attacking me personally?


macfalk
Valinor


Dec 13 2012, 5:46pm


Views: 306
Not really
"So yes, in the end it's entirely subjective, but I think most people who have seen their share of films or have studied it will agree with me."

As you can see here, the majority disagrees with you. Sure, they may not have studied films, but that does not matter at all.



The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.


painjoiker
Grey Havens


Dec 13 2012, 5:58pm


Views: 304
So you even liked,
the Goblin Kings death-line...? Wink
Vocalist in the semi-progressive metal band Arctic Eclipse


waaimasjien
Bree

Dec 13 2012, 6:48pm


Views: 268
True
and you don't have to have studied films to like or dislike a movie.

I do however think the reasons for liking it for most people here have nothing to do with the pacing, but with the fact that they can't have enough of Middle-Earth-material. That's the reason I will buy the extended edition and will buy a new edition of LotR if all deleted scenes are included as bonus features. Making the Hobbit a trilogy alone is an enormous fan service.

So I guess that's what you get on a fanforum :) . But just look at the reviews on RT. Even most positive reviews mention it's a bit overstuffed.


unexpectedvisitor
Rohan

Dec 13 2012, 7:20pm


Views: 265
here's another question, though
when you are making a movie that is based on source material that is DEEPLY loved by millions of people worldwide and has been for many years...is it "good" filmmaking to sacrifice any and all fan service for the sake of more conventional pacing? as you can see, most of the Tolkien fans on here actually wish the first part was LONGER! so, does the best cinema adaptation of a beloved book try to do just one or the other--please the fans or please the film genre and the general audience--or is the most noble path the much more difficult challenge of trying to achieve a balance between both, even though it is impossible to please everyone?

you make a good point about some of the information being redundant, i'm sure that's true, but you have to bear in mind that getting handed an intro to a story where 13 new characters, all dwarves that the source material takes very little time to describe, pop up all at once is a bit of a raw deal for a filmmaker. so, while some Tolkien fans will want to lap up every second of screen time they get to spend with them, no matter how redundant some of the actual content, general movie-goers (whether they realize it or not) will also need some time just to "hang out" with the dwarves and grow accustomed to their different looks and mannerisms with the hope being that they will be able to differentiate at least a little bit between the dwarves once the adventure takes off, even if there's really only enough time to invest character development into a couple of them in the first part of the story. fine-tuned, non-redundant character development for 13 different characters that are in actuality very similar to each other in a lot of ways, and all within the span of 30-45 minutes WHILE you also have to set up the narrative and establish the main character, Bilbo, not to mention his interactions with Gandalf...i mean, i don't think even the best of filmmakers could have pulled that off. so PJ went with more of a leisurely party atmosphere--like i said, "hanging out" with the dwarves--and will hopefully find ways to work in more character development for some of them as the movies progress.


Ereinion Nénharma
Lorien

Dec 13 2012, 7:56pm


Views: 260
You can talk all you want...
...but it does not change my opinion that a large part of the movie was just kind of boring. Because nothing really happened.
''Do not fear the shadows, for seeing them means light is near...''

(This post was edited by Ereinion Nénharma on Dec 13 2012, 7:57pm)


unexpectedvisitor
Rohan

Dec 13 2012, 8:25pm


Views: 259
i'm not trying to change your opinion
i'm just stating that there are plenty of valid reasons for the filmmaking choices that were made (and choices that will appeal to many people besides you), whether you personally choose to recognize those reasons as sufficient or not.


Ereinion Nénharma
Lorien

Dec 13 2012, 8:28pm


Views: 250
What I'm trying to say...
...it's that I don't give a rats ass if they had 'valid' reasons. I find it dragging and at times boring. And the statement 'that will appeal to many people besides you' is wrong. There are others here who have said the same thing and everybody in my company agreed too. I really belief only really big fans do not find it dragging.
''Do not fear the shadows, for seeing them means light is near...''


unexpectedvisitor
Rohan

Dec 13 2012, 8:39pm


Views: 244
if you don't care that they had valid reasons
then you aren't trying to have the least bit of objectivity about the movie. and that's fine, ultimately all of our reactions to the movie are going to be more subjective than anything, but if you want to have a reasoned argument about the movie you have to at least try to look at it from both sides, no matter which part of the divide you fall on. if it dragged for you, it dragged for you, obviously i can't argue against that. and i didn't say "most" people would react differently, only "many," which has already been proven true by the many people who have come on here saying they thought it was perfect or not long enough. will Tolkien fans be the only group that contains viewers who feel this way? maybe, but probably not. there are bound to be some people who just enjoy the scenes for what they are.


entmaiden
Forum Admin / Moderator


Dec 13 2012, 8:48pm


Views: 242
Your reaction to the movie is your own
but extrapolating that reaction on to others is not reliable. When you say that "only really big fans did not find it dragging", you are imposing your perceptions onto others, which is equally wrong as you assert of unexpectedvisitor. Everyone is different, and what appeals to you might not appeal to others, and vice versa.


Ereinion Nénharma
Lorien

Dec 14 2012, 8:28pm


Views: 178
I really do think...
that the only people who do not find the first part dragging are the 'real' fans.
Literally EVERYBODY I have spoken about The Hobbit finds it dragging...
''Do not fear the shadows, for seeing them means light is near...''


Kassandros
Rohan


Dec 14 2012, 8:40pm


Views: 173
Agreed.
It was too rushed toward the end, not too slow toward the beginning.

I'd have removed the orcs and wargs before Rivendell, though. Seemed unnecessary and slowed down the movie. More dialog and less combat would have been better.
all we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us...


totoro
Lorien

Dec 15 2012, 7:59pm


Views: 189
I guess my son and I are "really big fans"
Or True Scotsmen.

We vote: First part did not drag.