|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ereinion Nénharma
Menegroth
Dec 11 2012, 9:58am
Post #51 of 66
(678 views)
Shortcut
|
''And he calls the Necro glimpses almost horror-like''
That sounds like it is now, what it should have been already in LOTR!
''Do not fear the shadows, for seeing them means light is near...''
|
|
|
BornOutOfTheWest
Ossiriand
Dec 11 2012, 11:13am
Post #52 of 66
(669 views)
Shortcut
|
That youtube review by Jeremy Jahns is pretty fair unbiased view IMO. For me, if you watch some of his other reviews he is clearly a very good reviewer with accurate points. The only negatives that he seemed to mention was the 'Slow start' and the addition of Radagast whom he didn't particularly like. All in all a pretty positive review.
|
|
|
Finrod
Nargothrond
Dec 11 2012, 2:07pm
Post #53 of 66
(604 views)
Shortcut
|
From the UK, the Shiznit’s review gives the film 3 out of 5, but counts as a “fresh tomato”.
The opening paragraph tells the tale: (bold emphasis mine)The biggest problem stems from the fact that The Hobbit is supposed to be Tolkien’s introduction to this fantasyland, introducing us to the many myths and creations populating his world. But we’ve already seen it all. And while Peter Jackson does a remarkable job of redirecting the story for an audience already familiar with Middle Earth’s inhabitants, there isn't much else to keep us gripped. But the closing summary paragraph gives us this: (bold emphasis mine)Overall, the film seems at odds with itself. The moments when it tries too hard to be like the previous Tolkien films are both its biggest flaws and triumphs. What we ultimately get is a film that ends up being much the same as The Lord of the Rings, only far less impressive. And yet, every now and again, being much the same as The Lord of the Rings is no bad thing.
…all eyes looked upon the ring; for he held it now aloft, and the green jewels gleamed there that the Noldor had devised in Valinor. For this ring was like to twin serpents, whose eyes were emeralds, and their heads met beneath a crown of golden flowers, that the one upheld and the other devoured; that was the badge of Finarfin and his house.The Silmarillion, pp 150-151 while Felagund laughs beneath the treesin Valinor and comes no more
to this grey world of tears and war.The Lays of Beleriand, p 311
|
|
|
Cave Troll
Ossiriand
Dec 11 2012, 3:05pm
Post #54 of 66
(575 views)
Shortcut
|
That's pretty negative stuff for a "fresh tomato"!
I know there's disagreement about this but I'm really glad I've read so many reviews. Feel so prepared for this now and I expect to enjoy it a whole lot more than I would have seeing it blind.
|
|
|
Annael
Elvenhome
Dec 11 2012, 3:53pm
Post #55 of 66
(600 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I think this comment on a review by Mary Ann Johanson might sum it up
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
LOTR
---------
Fans: He left out Bombadil! No scouring of the Shire!
Everyone else: Wow, cool movies!
Hobbit
----------
Everyone else: Man, this movie is taking forever.
Fans: Ah, he kept everything! Cool movies!
The way we imagine our lives is the way we are going to go on living our lives.
- James Hillman, Healing Fiction
* * * * * * * * * *
NARF and member of Deplorable Cultus since 1967
(This post was edited by Annael on Dec 11 2012, 3:53pm)
|
|
|
utku
Ossiriand
Dec 11 2012, 4:13pm
Post #57 of 66
(589 views)
Shortcut
|
My opinion on The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey HOLY JESUS LORD HOLD ME UP THAT MOVIE WAS PERFECT IN EVERY WAY I HAVE LOST THE ABILITY TO BREATHE MY GOD IT WAS SPECTACULAR Source
Spoilers! I just finished watching the press release of “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey”, and I can honestly say that you should all watch it! The cinematics are simply amazing, the actors go all too well into their roles and every bit of digital art has been worked in with stunning accuracy. I am rendered speachless by the wonders of this film. BUT, and there will always be a ‘but’ in movies ‘till the end of time, my only critic is that there were a few too many shots of the gang up upon the top of mountains and cliffs. I think I counted about six of these kind of scenes throughout the film. Source
A spoiler-free review
I went to the midnight showing of the Hobbit. AND IT WAS AMAZING. AMAZING. Source.
Another short review (some self-censored vulgar vocabulary here, just saying  )
Omg the hobbit was amazing and kili was amazing he will always be my favourite dwarf but omg my sister and i accidentally walked away from the counter without paying for our food so yay free popcorn and stuff Source
And another one here.
Ehh, they are keep coming and coming. You can check the rest here:
http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/the hobbit
(This post was edited by utku on Dec 11 2012, 4:17pm)
|
|
|
HiddenSpring
Menegroth
Dec 11 2012, 5:04pm
Post #58 of 66
(495 views)
Shortcut
|
By far the most evocative, most well-written review so far. And he has an amazing understanding of the book.
|
|
|
unexpectedvisitor
Nargothrond
Dec 11 2012, 5:33pm
Post #59 of 66
(491 views)
Shortcut
|
i don't get how that New Yorker review grades out at 60 for Metacritic. i guess when you look at it the perspective of being 3 out of 5 it could make sense (and 3 out of 5 for a movie like this from a hoity-toity publication like The New Yorker would be quite the achievement) but since there wasn't a rating assigned i think the tone of Mr. Lane's review is closer to 75 than it is 60. 60 makes it seem like yet another review that just begrudgingly admits the movie was well-made but too long, and i think this particular review comes off more positive than that.
i know Metacritic is more choosy than RT about what reviews they include but they are really doing The Hobbit no favors right now. there are a whole host of "respected" review sources that have given The Hobbit grades equivalent to 75% or higher but Metacritic have chosen not to include many of those reviews yet, for whatever reason.
|
|
|
ElendurTheFaithful
Ossiriand
Dec 11 2012, 5:44pm
Post #60 of 66
(483 views)
Shortcut
|
if there is any sanity left in this world top critics will at least balance out with rotten and fresh.
and then we hit 80% mark
|
|
|
unexpectedvisitor
Nargothrond
Dec 11 2012, 5:55pm
Post #61 of 66
(492 views)
Shortcut
|
|
yeah, it's definitely one of the better ones
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
still not sure i like it better than the Empire review, which was a little more clearly communicative, whereas Lane's review has a few moments where he gets so lost in his own verbiage you're wondering how much he liked or didn't like a certain aspect (maybe why Metacritic just kind of shrugged a 60% onto it though the general gist is very positive)...but i agree, it's a fair bit better and more insightful than most of the other reviews out there, which can't seem to muster comments that amount to anything more qualitatively than "AWESOME!" or "TOO LONG!" or "I LIKED THIS BUT I DIDN'T LIKE THAT."
|
|
|
sauget.diblosio
Dor-Lomin
Dec 11 2012, 7:00pm
Post #62 of 66
(467 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I honestly believe that RT's "top" critics are sandbagging The Hobbit.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
They're letting extranious stuff like how long the book is, or HFR, color their reviews, when niether of those things should factor into a review of the film itself. I can see having issues with the pacing, or a slow first act, or bad/too much cgi. But should those factors weigh more heavily than it's universally lauded acting, visuals, action and music? Those are the questions critics should be asking, not how the book was only 300 pages, or how a completely *optional* way to view the film was distracting (and if it was distracting, you owe it to the film, and your professionalism, to see it again at 24fps).
I have never followed RT before, so it's funny to see how these "top" critics are falling into lockstep over factors that ultimately have nothing to do with the film itself. So many of the reviews i've read have been very complimentary overall, yet somehow come down in the negative. And i'm kind of shocked by that.
At least people really seem to be loving it, and the film will be a success regardless.
|
|
|
ElendurTheFaithful
Ossiriand
Dec 11 2012, 7:13pm
Post #63 of 66
(443 views)
Shortcut
|
Why is it on RT when somebody who's non-top critic gives fresh, rating goes +1, but when somebody who's also non-top critic gives rotten, rating goes -2?
|
|
|
Crunchable Birdses
Nargothrond
Dec 11 2012, 7:24pm
Post #64 of 66
(440 views)
Shortcut
|
There are less rottens than freshes, so if you add +1 rotten, it marks a bigger increase in rottens, so it contributes to a bigger difference in overall score.
* crunch *
|
|
|
|
|
