|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BilboBagshot187
Rivendell
Dec 19 2012, 1:17am
Post #2 of 19
(1137 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Just seen it for a second time - 9 out of 10 for me
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I genuinely cant understand the negativity towards this film, its an incredible piece of cinema in my opinion, It manages to take the first 6 chapters of the hobbit and turn it into a thrilling adventure that not only captures the heart and comedy of the hobbit but also manages to set the scene for the bigger things at work in middle earth. I have read various reviews that said the film dragged, I never felt this at all it moves at such a pace. There were some weaknesses like Azog who I thought was a bit plain and the Bunny Sled sequence (what were those rabbits eating?) but at the end of the film I was gasping for DOS.... just one year....breathe
'Everywhere I lie theres a dirty great root sticking into my back!'
|
|
|
Lalaith7
The Shire
Dec 19 2012, 2:08am
Post #3 of 19
(1097 views)
Shortcut
|
When I went to see the film, I was a little apprehensive after all the reviews, but I was captivated from the first moment (although the HFR took a little adjustment, but I ended up liking it). The Shire, Rivendell, riddles in the dark, the eagles, and especially Martin Freeman as Bilbo - all exactly as I imagined or better. In fact, I was astonished by how short it was! I don't know how it could ever possibly have been two movies, as there was almost nothing I would have cut. No, it was not LotR - and I was glad. While LotR is cinematic magic, I truly believe the Hobbit is as well, in a different way. It wasn't LotR because it wasn't supposed to be. I was overjoyed with this film because it was so perfectly The Hobbit, and it captured the same sense of childlike wonder that I felt when I first had the story read to me when I was five. I couldn't be more pleased! 
|
|
|
kareniel
Lorien
Dec 19 2012, 3:07am
Post #4 of 19
(1099 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Me too. Loved it! Hate all the grousing.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Think I'll lay off the Hobbit message board for a while. Too much negativity and nitpicking. I don't want it tarnishing the glow I feel about going to see the film for the third, fourth, fifth, etc. time.
|
|
|
Simon
Rivendell
Dec 19 2012, 4:06am
Post #5 of 19
(1061 views)
Shortcut
|
And i'm sure that i will enjoyed even more the EE and the next two ones will have the right progression to make another masterpiece as a whole! I'm pretty sure of it! A solid 8.5 from me for AUJ!
|
|
|
Gurtholfin
Bree
Dec 19 2012, 4:40am
Post #6 of 19
(1182 views)
Shortcut
|
|
This Will Probably Go Over Well...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I posted part of this in a different thread in answer to a query. I'm putting it here so I can add my "review" to the rolls. I can't imagine that this will make me too popular, but not every huge fan of the books and the first trilogy will just accept anything.
I was very excited for this movie to be made. Couldn't hardly wait to see the additional things that would be added coz as a lifelong fan (read the books - all of them - for the first time 33 years ago and multiple times since) I wanted to see more and more of PJ's Middle Earth.
PJ did a great job with the first trilogy and while my eyebrows were raised with a few of the changes in canon, they ultimately worked or at least didn't detract. It was so much better than it would have been in anyone else's hands. Couldn't have been happier.
This Hobbit however is a disaster, both in terms of an adaptation and just as a straight up movie. I kept looking at the screen and wondering if I was actually seeing this. I had such faith in PJ to get it right that it was shocking that he could get it this wrong.
The more I remember some of the things that were said leading up to the premiers (by people around the movie), the more I start to wonder if it wasn't rushed in the end to its ultimate detriment. I mean, where's the new music in the soundtrack?
Here's the reasons that I feel that this movie failed on an EPIC level:
1) Bilbo's Character Arc: They changed this completely. He didn't wake up and chase down the dwarves on the road. He certainly wasn't ready to fight a goblin one on one in the tunnels at that stage. I mean, one moment he's getting the best of a goblin who's spent his whole life in combat and the next he can barely hold his sword steady in gollum's presence? I also didn't like Gandalf planting the morality in Bilbo outside the troll den. That was Bilbo's inherent nature, not Gandalf's doing (unless I'm remembering this completely wrong). Finally, that Bilbo would suddenly rush to Thorin's defense and best another orc warrior on a warg is just flat out implausible. We didn't need Bilbo to prove his worth to the party by the end of the first movie - which will most likely be PJ's reasoning in the commentaries. Would have been a better ending to leave it uncertain. To leave Thorin doubting. Bilbo proves his worth in Mirkwood and beyond. Plenty of time for that later.
2) The retreads: It's like they ran out of ideas. Here's what we saw in the first trilogy that we also saw in AUJ.
• The camera pans. While the prologue was probably my favorite part of the movie, the camera pans were so similar to what we saw in Isengard that my sense of wonder at what I was seeing in Erebor was compromised and distracted.
• Weathertop. Why do the orcs have to meet at Weathertop? Show me something new.
• Radagast being chased in essentially the same area as Arwen was. I get that we're showing that the dwarves are on the same path or in the same area, but why another chase in the same spot? I was just waiting for them to get to the ford of Bruinen and have the river claim the wargs. Certainly wouldn't have surprised me by that point.
• When the elves on horseback surrounded the dwarves in Imladris. Was way too similar to Eomer's company surrounding Aragorn, Gimli & Legolas. Again, we've already seen this. In addition, this is not the manner that they enter Rivendell. They are welcomed. I understand that Thorin's enmity for the elves needed to be explained, but the Elves of the Last Homely House are not the same as the Woodland realm. There was no history between Elrond's people and Thorin's other than in the second age between Moria and Eregion, and that wasn't a negative history - at least nothing for Thorin to still have a burr in his saddle over.
• When half the party was stuck on the stone giant (which even my wife said reminded her of Transformers - and she's never seen a Transformers movie), it was the same setup as the flight through Moria. Oh no, they're stuck on a ledge and could fall. Oh my!
• Bilbo hanging from a ledge. Looked an awful lot like Frodo in Orodruin or even Gandalf in Moria.
• Using the moth (again) to summon the eagles. I realize it would/could be hard to explain why the eagles just show up, but how about a new idea? How about it being explained by Gandalf after they are set down in the eerie.
• The music. I know that they wanted to use some similar themes, but in most places it sounded like exactly the same music as the first trilogy. In addition, why in the world would they use ringwraith music for Thorin's charge?
It can be said that these decisions were made for continuity's sake, but they could have come up with new ideas that fit the tenor without showing us the exact same things.
3) Cheesy parts. The hedgehog? The walking stick insect? The Great Goblin? The goblin messenger on the winch (I though we were in that Harry Potter bank place)? The horribly cliched ending where Thorin pretends to be angry and then hugs Bilbo. This movie tried to straddle the Kid friendly Hobbit and the darker trilogy and didn't succeed at being either. Just ended up in the muddled middle ground. Many of the things that were added as humor were not funny - painfully unfunny at times.
4) I'm not even going to get into the twisting of physics, but it was over the top at times. Saw King Kong a few weeks back on TV and it suffers from the same stupid action sequences.
5) Changes in Canon.
• The woodland elves swore fealty (or however it was described) to the King Under the Mountain? Seriously? As with the elves at Helm's Deep being easily slaughtered by orcs, PJ forgets that the elves are the top of the chain, both in haughty attitude and in fighting ability. Even the wood elves wouldn't allow another race's king to rule them. In addition, the Dwarves were not ruling all of the land around, they were living in harmony and prosperity with their neighbors, to the benefit of all.
• The rewriting of the Witch King's history. I know we've already gone round and round on these boards about this, but this isn't elves showing up at Helm's Deep. This change goes so much further and doesn't fit with how powerful he was in ROTK. Why not just say that he withdrew after destroying the North Kingdom (of which Weathertop is a relic) and the wise don't know what became of him? Why change the canon in such a drastic way?
• The less-than-friendly arrival at Rivendell. Not only did this make Rivendell a place of tension - which is completely contrary to it being the "Last Homely House West of the Misty Mountains" - it took away all of the magic that Bilbo was feeling in first seeing the elves. He fell in love with Rivendell which is why he goes there after his birthday party. How has this been set up in any way with what we saw in this movie's Rivendell?
• The spiders came from Dol Guldur? Why? Mirkwood is over the edge of the wild. Why can't creepy things live there just because? Sure, unwholesome things had taken up residence in Mirkwood because of the Necromancer's presence, but he didn't need to make them - which is what's implied.
6) Lack of tension. Even though I knew that the Fellowship would always survive, I was often on the edge of my seat when they were in a pinch. I was never on the edge of me seat in AUJ - other than maybe the prologue with the dragon.
7) Lack of character development. A big part of what made the first trilogy were the character performances. Boromir was great. Theoden was stunningly great. Saruman, Grima, Aragorn, Legolas & Gimli, Merry & Pippin, Denethor, Gollum and on and on and on.
Thorin and Balin have potential. Fili & Kili are supposed to be the Merry & Pippin. Bilbo was missing from the screen for long stretches. What we got instead of character development were Azog, an utterly uneventful white council, a stone giant battle that was BORING, an Indiana Jones escape scene in Goblin Town and a bunch of other silly action sequences.
UGH!
Ultimately, the story of the Hobbit is about Bilbo and his personal journey from helpless to self reliant to the leader of the party. Thorin, much like Aragorn is a great second character path to follow. The Necromancer is another secondary story line. The way that this movie was presented muddled all of this together to the point that there is no dominant story to follow.
PJ got all of this exactly right in the first trilogy and even talked about it in the commentaries - about how the movies were about the hobbits and the little people doing big things and more specifically about Frodo and Sam (and Gollum). I was expecting that he'd get that right again in this trilogy because he seemed so aware of it 10 years ago. He didn't. He forgot.
Look, I wanted to see more of Middle Earth. I wanted to see the White Council and Dol Guldur and Radagast, but the story still needed to be primarily about Bilbo and to a slightly lesser extent Thorin. At this point, it's all over the place.
Unfortunately, Peter & company appear to believe that they know better how to present this story than Tolkien did and they couldn't have been more wrong.
|
|
|
Ardamírë
Valinor
Dec 19 2012, 4:49am
Post #7 of 19
(1078 views)
Shortcut
|
I agree with lots of what you wrote, not all, but lots.
I remember PJ being initially wary of directing because he didn't think he could top the LOTR trilogy. I think AUJ proves that he was more concerned with topping LOTR than with just telling a good story.
"...and his first memory of Middle-earth was the green stone above her breast as she sang above his cradle while Gondolin was still in flower." -Unfinished Tales
|
|
|
Silverlode
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Dec 19 2012, 7:17am
Post #8 of 19
(1033 views)
Shortcut
|
|
It always takes a while for people's mental movie to make room for PJ's.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
We all have a mental movie that we created when reading the book, and a lot of us have to take some time and a few viewings before we make our peace with the things that are there in PJ's version but "shouldn't" be, or aren't there and "should". I know I tended to enjoy the LOTR movies more on multiple viewings, as I got used to what it was and not what I expected or hoped or whatever, and now PJ's movies and my mental movies live happily together in more-or-less parallel universes.
In other words, some of the complaining and nitpicking is done out of shock, and will get less over time. And some things people will never be happy with. I  the LOTR movies, but don't ask me how I feel about Frodo sending Sam home unless you want an earful. 
Silverlode
|
|
|
DwellerInDale
Rohan
Dec 19 2012, 8:36am
Post #9 of 19
(1034 views)
Shortcut
|
Often a movie like this can seem to go by too quickly; one misses many subtle points. Your review contains a number of factual errors; here are just three:
-> Thranduil doesn't swear fealty to the dwarf king. He would never do that.
-> Bilbo doesn't fight a goblin who has been "in combat all his life". Why assume this? He looked as scared as Bilbo.
-> The company's arrival at Rivendell is not in the least unfriendly. The first thing Elrond does is welcome Thorin and invite the dwarves to dinner.
Don't mess with my favorite female elf.
|
|
|
Pimmiko
Bree
Dec 19 2012, 9:40am
Post #10 of 19
(991 views)
Shortcut
|
some posts make very happy and you feel kind of comraderie but then all this nitpicking...yes yes everyone has right to have their own opinion but it does make me feel a bit sad. And I don't want to, after such a wonderful film.
|
|
|
imin
Valinor
Dec 19 2012, 10:46am
Post #11 of 19
(990 views)
Shortcut
|
That would suggest people are looking for tiny flaws and going on about them. People have expressed faults with the film that are about whole scenes or how the film was made in general, that's not nitpicking but just genuine dislike, don't patronize people just because you don't agree with them, i don't say people who like all of the film are willing to accept a sub par film as they are too simple to see the flaws.
It's hard not to kinda take something personally when one really likes something e.g. a film. But a negative review or even one which is mixed shouldnt effect what you feel for the film and it shouldnt make you feel like there is any less camaraderie.
Perhaps think of it like this - you are one of the lucky ones as you didnt see anything wrong with the film and enjoyed it immensely.
|
|
|
Arannir
Valinor
Dec 19 2012, 11:08am
Post #12 of 19
(1020 views)
Shortcut
|
So, after some time and a second viewing I updated my review :)
Maybe as a movie this was just good. But as a Tolkien adaptation it was brave, marvellous and almost better than the Lord of the Rings.
It has the pace of the book, which I find truely epic. You can already feel that this is going to be a three-piece saga. Some may criticize that but I do not even want to start imagining an editied version of this in two movies.
Yes, as a movie (speaking about the crafting that is filmmaking) it may not be 5/5 when it comes to editing. But this - at the same time - makes this movie more than a Hollywood blockbuster. It takes it time. It has scenes purely for the fans. Which filmmakers have been this brave when it comes to adaptations and the mass taste?
The HFR (which is amazing in the grand picture) reveals some of the CGI and make-up. But then again, only in minor moments. In others, it looks better than anything I have ever seen before. Most outstanding was the sequence of the flying eagles when it comes to the look. Just breath-taking.
The acting is superb - although I do understand why Freeman and McKellen will go without major nominations. As of yet, there were not the 100% Oscar-moments in their performances simply because the screen-time is split because so many characters. Although the scene "It is the small things that keeps the darkness at bay" should get some special award for "two masters of their art acting the sh*** out of this world". Epic.
The highlight - and I can only repeat others here - the game of riddles. What can I say? Serkis is the only actor I would have hoped for some nominations... but I guess the fears of awarding CGI characters is still too big for that. But the scene is simply like a major scene in a staged play. Tony-worthy. The two actors connect so amazingly well that it is heart-breaking to see how Bilbo later looks at the crushed Gollum. Both Freeman and Serkis are the one-and-only actors for these two roles.
So, only a fanboy's praise? Not entirely. The tune of the "Misty Mountains Song" is too often repeated. And although the recycling of LotR score is epic in some parts (first time we see the ring, Shire, Lorien-theme) it is a bit weird in others (Nazgul-theme in Thorin's final stand, Return of the King-theme when Thorin and Bilbo hug). I hope that it was the plan to underline the similarity between FotR and AUJ through the score and that more new music will hit our ears once we reach Mirkwood, Esgaroth and Erebor.
Also, the troll-scene - though a good adaption of the episode in the book - does not settle completely with the rest of the movie. While all the other comic moments go well with the characters this is the only truely childish-scene imho. Nice to finally see on screen - but that could have been shortened a bit, I guess.
All in all - I am back in Middle-Earth and cannot wait for my third time.
Thank you, PJ and company, for being brave enough to make a fan-film, by the hyper-nerd for the little nerds :)
|
|
|
Gurtholfin
Bree
Dec 19 2012, 12:54pm
Post #13 of 19
(1009 views)
Shortcut
|
Often a movie like this can seem to go by too quickly; one misses many subtle points. Your review contains a number of factual errors; here are just three:
-> Thranduil doesn't swear fealty to the dwarf king. He would never do that.
-> Bilbo doesn't fight a goblin who has been "in combat all his life". Why assume this? He looked as scared as Bilbo.
-> The company's arrival at Rivendell is not in the least unfriendly. The first thing Elrond does is welcome Thorin and invite the dwarves to dinner.
Of course Thranduil wouldn't. IIRC, the prologue says something to that effect. I was quite surprised to hear it.
The Goblin attacked Bilbo. Didn't look scared to me. Looked quite menacing. And Bilbo, who's never held a sword or probably even been in a fistfight, bested him.
Elves on horseback with spears surrounding the dwarves as they clutch their weapons and back into a defensive formation is "not in the least unfriendly?"
|
|
|
Ardamírë
Valinor
Dec 19 2012, 3:51pm
Post #14 of 19
(959 views)
Shortcut
|
was the best thing that ever happened to those movies! 
Ok, not really. I think the excuse that Sam ate all the lembas was ridiculous. Would Frodo ever believe that? No way. But I do understand that PJ, Fran, and Philippa wanted Frodo to enter Shelob's lair with Gollum. It could have been done better, but I like how Sam comes in all swash-buckly to fight Shelob.
Waiting for that earful now...
"...and his first memory of Middle-earth was the green stone above her breast as she sang above his cradle while Gondolin was still in flower." -Unfinished Tales
|
|
|
Pimmiko
Bree
Dec 19 2012, 4:16pm
Post #15 of 19
(945 views)
Shortcut
|
|
"Nitpicking" only from my point of you
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
as I loved the movie, every flaw others mention feels like nitpicking to me if you understand what I mean? And I take rather that but when I read that someone says the whole movie is a disaster, that hurts.
I think I should take a break.
|
|
|
Lusitano
Tol Eressea
Dec 19 2012, 4:34pm
Post #16 of 19
(939 views)
Shortcut
|
as you feel that it hurts, so doe sthe other side can feel outraged that you consider it a great film, when they hate it.
|
|
|
Silverlode
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Dec 19 2012, 7:40pm
Post #17 of 19
(908 views)
Shortcut
|
I've got very little online time for the next few days - family coming into town, lots of holiday prep left to do....but if you still want to hear my rant after the holidays, remind me and I'll oblige you. 
Silverlode
|
|
|
Ardamírë
Valinor
Dec 19 2012, 7:54pm
Post #18 of 19
(901 views)
Shortcut
|
If I can remember to!
“But Ungoliant went into Beleriand…but whither she went after no tale tells. It is said that she ended long ago, when in her uttermost famine she devoured herself at last.” -Morgoth’s Ring
|
|
|
Elenorflower
Gondor
Dec 19 2012, 11:33pm
Post #19 of 19
(900 views)
Shortcut
|
cherish it and dont let others influence you. I love LOTR and it hurts when people critisize it. I understand your feelings.
|
|
|
|
|
Official Hobbit Review Thread #26 - Please post all Hobbit movie reviews in here
