Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
The Hobbit will almost certainly hold up as a bona fide chapter in a larger classic film series, despite the mixed and overly cynical reviews. .
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All

Captain Salt
Tol Eressea


Jan 19 2013, 8:30pm

Post #26 of 97 (317 views)
Shortcut
In fact just the opposite... [In reply to] Can't Post

These boards are a grand echo chamber for those who can't admit TH was flawed. The mainstream audience, the critics, and the industry all found the film lacking compared to FotR, and it was NOT mainly in comparison. I understand what you're saying, but being new or novel created other problems for FotR (such as unfamiliarity with the world or complaints about overuse of exposition), problems which it was able to surmount not just with urgency, with with strong story telling, emotion, humanity, a living, breathing world, and competent character development. AUJ is widely (and rightfully) thought of as lacking in these departments, and not just compared to FotR.

Go to any group outside the hyper-fan echo chamber, and you'll find that opinions ranging from accepting, to mixed, to downright despicable...the opinion that AUJ is great or even good is certainly not the majority. Certainly, not all of these people are comparing AUJ to a film they probably saw once eleven years ago?

BTW, Transformers has grossed an insane amount of money. The fact that TH made money means nothing in regards to quality.

My Top 5 Wish List for "The Hobbit"
5. Legolas will surf down Smaug's neck
4. Bilbo will be revealed to a Robot
3. Naked PJ cameo as Ghan-Buri-Ghan
2. Use of not only 3D, but smell-o-vision, plus the inclusion of axes coming out of the seats and poking the audience when appropriate
1. Not only keep the claim that Thorin & Co. ran amok in Mirkwood "molesting people", but depict said incident in vivid detail!!!!!


bborchar
Rohan

Jan 19 2013, 8:35pm

Post #27 of 97 (293 views)
Shortcut
Thank you... [In reply to] Can't Post

You said it better than I did...the reason RotK swept all of the oscars was because the critics sort of "withheld" their judgment until after the final film. Yet, even ten years later, and many movies made like it, we still jump the gun and try to judge a movie trilogy based wholey on the first installment. That's why I refuse to say that a certain plot device or element doesn't makes sense, etc. The thing is, I don't know. No one does. They haven't even finished shooting the movies. We won't know what makes sense and what could have been left out until TaBA has been released.


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Jan 19 2013, 8:50pm

Post #28 of 97 (288 views)
Shortcut
Exactly my sentiment. [In reply to] Can't Post

I wanted this film to have a measure of the elegance, majesty and beauty of LOTR. But I DEFINITELY did not want it to be a LOTR redux. I wanted charm, and a touch of whimsy, and humour. . . and, yes, fun.

I LOVE the melancholia of Lord of The Rings. The sorrow and fading of The Elves, which I feel Peter did not explain fully enough, and I still critisize his failure to keep Galadriel's lines about connections between The Three, The One, and the fate of her people.

Yet I did NOT want a melancholy hobbit! Watching The Hobbit, aside from the unpleasant dispepsia I suffered as a result of the entire history of The Dwarf versus Orc war being re-written, I generally felt much the same a I had when, as a wee wee tot, I saw movies like Willow, The Return of The Jedi and The Neverending Story. And, while the film wasn't perfect, it delivered that feeling which was more or less what I wanted.

In Reply To
that I can call "fun" -- which, strangely, is quite rare.

It's almost 'fun as fun was when you were a kid', and that is something I truly appreciate. Smile


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


Captain Salt
Tol Eressea


Jan 19 2013, 8:52pm

Post #29 of 97 (284 views)
Shortcut
A film should work on its own merrits. [In reply to] Can't Post

FotR and TTT were both nominated for Best Picture, BTW, so judgement wasn't really as withheld as has been suggested.

My Top 5 Wish List for "The Hobbit"
5. Legolas will surf down Smaug's neck
4. Bilbo will be revealed to a Robot
3. Naked PJ cameo as Ghan-Buri-Ghan
2. Use of not only 3D, but smell-o-vision, plus the inclusion of axes coming out of the seats and poking the audience when appropriate
1. Not only keep the claim that Thorin & Co. ran amok in Mirkwood "molesting people", but depict said incident in vivid detail!!!!!


bborchar
Rohan

Jan 19 2013, 9:01pm

Post #30 of 97 (278 views)
Shortcut
I don't think anyone is saying... [In reply to] Can't Post

AUJ isn't flawed. EVERY movie, whether it's Transformers or Godfather 2, has flaws. I could name at least 10 problems with this particular movie right now. I could name at least that many with FotR, or any of my other favorite movies. I could also point out the flaws in the books. But for me, the flaws don't distract from the overall enjoyment of the movies or books. And the internet was made for complaining...that's what people come to message boards to do. It's like politics...I'm not expecting to change someone's opinion. I just want a good discussion with valid points.

But I will argue that the opinions of AUJ are overall good. Rotten Tomatoes gives it a fresh rating of 65% of critics' reviews, and 84% of users. That's far from being "in the minority". I've watched this movie more than once, and in 2D and 3D-HFR. I saw a few of the issues that were discussed the second time I saw the HFR, but I chalk that up to me not sitting in a good spot for it. Storywise, I actually enjoyed the movie in 2D the second time I saw it. I really couldn't make up my mind about it the first time I saw it. In between viewings, I reread the book. And the second time, I really appreciated the changes that were made even more.

I think this film was saddled with high expectations, which were not there with FotR, and that's why I think it had the initial reception. Everyone figured with LotR: "This movie can never be made, it will fail, and fail badly." Not so with The Hobbit. Everyone's thinking "Oh, it will be just like LotR, just better, since technology is better". And then it's hard to not feel disappointed when it's not what you expected.


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Jan 19 2013, 9:03pm

Post #31 of 97 (281 views)
Shortcut
Well, we are all entitled to our opinions, and varying tastes. [In reply to] Can't Post

I have seen An Unexpected Jurney about 5 or 6 times. I expect to make 7 this very evening. And I have enjoyed it every time. I love The Return of The King. I love many moments of The Two Towers (the fall at the onset, the return of a certain Wizard, Arwen and Aragorn, Arwen and Elrond, The Story as forseen from Lothlorien are all especially beloved by me, and are some of my favourite moments in the series, though there is something of a drab feeling to other aspects of Towers). And I certainly loved Fellowship. This movie has more of the more simple, youthful, cozy and pastoral charms that I loved in the early parts of Fellowship.

It might not hold up for any one looking only for the High and Epic. . . but there are other things that are also good, if not good in the same way. The general audience response to these movies has been very positive. Much more positive than the responses of hardened critics or of the lore learned. And, as one of the lore learned, I DEFINITELY have problems with some of the alterations in this movie. But they don't make it a bad film, just a less great one than it might have been. Also, they aren't what most of the critics are complaining about. Any critic who feels that the Erebor backstory was bloat, or that the singing of Far Over Mountains Cold by the fireside was self-indulgent excess is a critic to whom I need no longer pay much attention, lol.
I know of plenty of viewers who enjoyed this movie more than some of the Rings films, because it was more inviting to casual fans, and moved at a lighter, more brisk pace, without becoming a complete featherweight. Audiences have liked this move a lot, though the luke warm reception of certain critics will certainly have affected some opinions.

I would be surprised if you were not at least impressed by the Erebor sequence, and pleased with The Unexpected Party. And good luck telling me that you didn't enjoy Balin. Who could NOT enjoy Balin?! Sly

You and I agree profoundly on many matters, Captain Salt, but here I think your assesment of this movie is perhaps more severe than it merits.

In Reply To
I just watched Return of the King for the umpteenth time, and it still holds up insanely well. Meanwhile, I have no desire to watch AUJ again for the foreseeable future, despite my viewing all three of the LotR films endlessly, and rabidly, from their release onward. There's much more about AUJ that's doesn't work than does, and it's certainly more likely a "skip over it" for me in the ME series. And given the general reaction, it's not as beloved now as LotR, let alone where it'll be in ten years, ETC.

However, it of course is nowhere as bad as Phantom Menace. First of all, the characters actually have human inflection in their voices.


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


jtarkey
Rohan


Jan 19 2013, 9:22pm

Post #32 of 97 (279 views)
Shortcut
It will sit fairly well next to LOTR on a shelf, but... [In reply to] Can't Post

Reviews aside, most people I've talked to have a very lukewarm feeling about the film. Yes, there are flaws in every film, but IMO, there are some BIG flaws in AUJ.

The difference for me is this; Even though LOTR has flaws of it's own, I almost never think about them. I'm always too preoccupied with how amazing those films are. What may be problems for fans of the book with LOTR, were not really problems the general movie going audience had. LOTR succeeded so well on a cinematic level, that pointing out it's problems is really just nitpicking.

With AUJ, there are cinematic storytelling problems that exist regardless of whether or not you've read the book. It has an odd balance in tone between graphic violence, immature jokes, and ridiculously staged action set-pieces. I don't buy that just because The Hobbit is a lighter story than LOTR that it had to have less depth. There are other themes of human nature to be delved into besides apocalyptic melodrama. AUJ was seriously lacking in character development and emotional pull.

The biggest problem for me is the fact that the film talks down to it's audience. The jokes in the film are obviously "for kids", and pretty much everything is spelled out on screen for everyone. I find it odd that the cartoon version of The Hobbit was darker than this movie. Childrens films are at their best when they make kids try, instead of just appealing to the lowest common denominator.

Films like Secret of Nimh, Land Before Time, Myazaki movies, some Pixar films, are great examples of films that fill kids with wonder, instead of seeming like a visit to Toys r' us (ok kids love toys r' us so thats probly not a great example, but you get what I mean).

I just think AUJ could have benefited from being a somber, mythic, fairytale. Rather than a super light hearted action adventure film.

"You're love of the halflings leaf has clearly slowed your mind"


burrahobbit
Rohan


Jan 19 2013, 9:26pm

Post #33 of 97 (289 views)
Shortcut
FotR got a good critical response... [In reply to] Can't Post

before TTT and RotK had been released. The 2001 reviews are far from cautious:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/...ws/?type=top_critics

It also was nominated for a fantasy record breaking 13 oscars, including the most prestigious best director and best film, and it won three in the more technical categories. This is all before TTT and RotK. Fellowship was a brilliant film in its own right.

I can't really agree with the various explanations for AUJ getting a bad critical response, like it was the the 48fps or it was due to comparison to LotR. It just didn't deliver on the character, storytelling and emotional levels you expect from a great film. The mixed reviews weren't restricted to North America, for example here's a summary of the luke warm UK reviews:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/...inment-arts-20676582

Occasionally critics get it very wrong, but not that often. It's a Wonderful life was nominated for several Oscars, as was Wizard of Oz, which won a couple.


Roheryn
Grey Havens

Jan 19 2013, 9:26pm

Post #34 of 97 (299 views)
Shortcut
*bangs head on keyboard* [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
These boards are a grand echo chamber for those who can't admit TH was flawed. The mainstream audience, the critics, and the industry all found the film lacking compared to FotR, and it was NOT mainly in comparison. I understand what you're saying, but being new or novel created other problems for FotR (such as unfamiliarity with the world or complaints about overuse of exposition), problems which it was able to surmount not just with urgency, with with strong story telling, emotion, humanity, a living, breathing world, and competent character development. AUJ is widely (and rightfully) thought of as lacking in these departments, and not just compared to FotR.

Who are we to judge whether a movie is flawed? What's the definition of a flawed movie? I'll wager there's as many opinions on that as there are people who share their opinion (i.e., it's subjective). I suspect you're paying attention to the negative reviews, because they support your opinion. I've seen plenty of positive reviews too. But you know what? I really don't care what anyone -- general audience, critics, or industry -- thinks; I think it's a great movie and a wonderful adaptation of a book I love -- and I choose to seek out others who will engage in thoughtful, interesting, and/or humorous discussions of it. Doesn't matter to me whether we're in the minority, majority, or any other -ority, and I'm not going to get my knickers in a twist over it. I happen to think AUJ has plenty of urgency, wonderfully strong story telling, a welcome (and unexpected) depth of emotion, beautiful humanity, a living breathing world, and quite competent character development (think Thorin and Bilbo). I know I'm not alone in this. Sure, there were little bits of the movie I didn't care for, but that doesn't mean the movie is flawed. It means we're human: we all have diverse reactions to the same thing. I choose to focus on the positive, and AUJ's positives (for me) vastly, hugely outweigh the very few negatives (for me). In the end, each of us has our own opinion; I'm not going to change anyone's opinion by anything I write, and that's fine with me. These boards were, in the site's own words, forged by and for fans of Tolkien. That's why we're here. We're not exactly an unbiased group. And that's okay! I will never understand why those who dislike something spend so much effort trying to convince others they should dislike it too.


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Jan 19 2013, 9:37pm

Post #35 of 97 (254 views)
Shortcut
Thank you, Friend [In reply to] Can't Post

Sly *little curtsey*.

In Reply To
Nice job :)


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


bborchar
Rohan

Jan 19 2013, 10:51pm

Post #36 of 97 (246 views)
Shortcut
Nice way of putting it... [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm the same way.


glor
Rohan

Jan 19 2013, 11:16pm

Post #37 of 97 (233 views)
Shortcut
Oscars and critics two different ball games [In reply to] Can't Post

..the Oscars often get it wrong...Chicago anyone? The 1974 best actor award going to Art Carney instead of Al Pacino in the Godfather II or Jack Nicholson in Chinatown! The Oscars with a few exceptions aren't about what's best or what lasts in cinematic terms, and are not voted for soley by critics but by the 'industry'.

Rotten Tomatoes is a meta site, which doesn't always reflect the text of reviews, just a point scoring system. Although I never said FOTR didn't get good to great reviews, just that there was a cautionary element to them, and the ecstatic Greatest trilogy of all time, they are a masterpiece of modern cinema consensus was not and could not be made until ROTK hit the cinema.

All the reviews of AUJ in the UK were not luke warm, again such journalist pieces are selective in their representations of reviews, failing to quote from the good 4 star review in The Times, or Philip French's Sunday Observer review. Les Mis has had worse reviews this side of the pond and that has been nominated for an Oscar as well as other prestigious UK based film awards.(I saw the trailer/preview prior to AUJ and was squirming and cringing in my seat especially when Russell Crowe started singing, OUCH)

Has AUJ recieved the same critical response as FOTR no it hasn't, I wasn't expecting it too, regardless of the quality of the film. The politics of critical discourse were not in play for FOTR, it should have been an awful film, it was fantasy afterall, and until FOTR Fantasy films were bad films, the best anyone could have hoped for before seeing FOTR on cinematic release was that it was almost as good as the first Harry Potter film released a month before FOTR. There were no careers to be made or broken by the critics or those involved with the LOTR films, the expectations were that the entire endeavour would be a massive flop commercially, there were no constructs to be dismantled, no bubbles to metaphorically burst, no careers to deflate and no positive expectations, which all inform the context of criticism. The only thing at stake when FOTR came out was the financial state of New Line.

Some of the criticisms of AUJ were valid, not the bloating or the running time ones though, I for one thought the tone of Goblin town scenerio was off and should have had a more sombre mood. However, AUJ suprised and charmed me in ways I wasn't expecting, and whilst I will defend it vehemently regarding some of the scenes that the critics hated, e.g Blunt the Knives, and the bits that are iconic from the book, it wasn't faultless, but then there are only two films I have ever seen in my 45 years of life that I regard as true faultless masterpieces: Bladerunner and Lawrence of Arabia.

Oh and I still haven't seen a fantasy film in the last 11 years that is as good as LOTR or AUJ, so if anyone has any suggestions as to ones I may have missed please tell me. I would genuinely appreciate it.


burrahobbit
Rohan


Jan 19 2013, 11:56pm

Post #38 of 97 (216 views)
Shortcut
... [In reply to] Can't Post

the "politics of political discourse" as you call it are surely always in play. There was plenty of critical mileage to be gained by laying into FotR- it was a multi-million dollar adaptation of one of the 20th centuries most popular books in a very critically unfashionable genre- fantasy. It had many big name stars, and if it was a bad film, critics would have delighted in deriding it.

If expectations are the main driver of critical reception as you argue, then most big-name director films making new films should get tough receptions. The Dark Knight Rises was, like AUJ, a franchise film by a big namer director Christopher Nolan- it was well received. Ditto Skyfall, big franchise, big director, good reviews. Lincoln by Spielberg was well received. Expectations rise with big name directors, because usually big name directors are capable of meeting those expectations.

The bbc link I provided does quote the times four star review by Kate Muir. It just happens that this positive review was out of line with the Telegraph, Guardian, Mail and Independent. Hence the entirely correct title "Hobbit gets mixed reviews".

You will definitely struggle to find a fantasy film better than FotR, as I think we can both agree. I would consider Pans Labyrinth, Spirited Away and Life of Pi more accomplished films than AUJ.


IdrilofGondolin
Rohan

Jan 20 2013, 12:34am

Post #39 of 97 (211 views)
Shortcut
Have the opposite reaction [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
I just watched Return of the King for the umpteenth time, and it still holds up insanely well. Meanwhile, I have no desire to watch AUJ again for the foreseeable future, despite my viewing all three of the LotR films endlessly, and rabidly, from their release onward. There's much more about AUJ that's doesn't work than does, and it's certainly more likely a "skip over it" for me in the ME series. And given the general reaction, it's not as beloved now as LotR, let alone where it'll be in ten years, ETC.

However, it of course is nowhere as bad as Phantom Menace. First of all, the characters actually have human inflection in their voices.


I have seen AUJ 4 times and am trying for a 5th before it leaves the theater.

I did not do this for any of the LOTR movies. I own the EE of LOTR and try to watch them. Love the TT and watch that more than the others, but can't manage to re-watch ROTK. I just can't get passed the changes to Aragorn's character and the changes to Frodo and Sam's relationship. But must admit I will watch the Battle of the Pelannor Fields endlessly.

For me there is much more to dislike in the changes in the LOTR than in AUJ. But that's just me.

Am looking forward to the EE of AUJ and watching that again and again.


glor
Rohan

Jan 20 2013, 12:37am

Post #40 of 97 (199 views)
Shortcut
I think we may agrere to disagree on the post-modern politics of criticism but.. [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
I would consider Pans Labyrinth, Spirited Away and Life of Pi more accomplished films than AUJ


Spirited Away is animated, perhaps I should have been more precise about live action fantasy. To be honest visually Pans Labyrinth was interesting to look at beyond that it didn't do anything for me. Life of Pi i have yet to see it looks nice from the trailers but doesn't intrigue me enough to get my 45 year old backside into a cinema. Of course I forgot a film that pre-dates LOTR, the magnificent Brazil by Terry Gilliam, although that is more social metaphor than fantasy.



Old Toby
Gondor


Jan 20 2013, 2:27am

Post #41 of 97 (214 views)
Shortcut
Um, I assume you only speak for yourself [In reply to] Can't Post

Since we won't know the general reaction until all three films have been released, I think it a bit premature to say "it's not as beloved now as LOTR, let alone where it'll be in ten years" unless you're psychic. I loved ROTK (although I still love FOTR best of the three), but I also love AUJ. I've been to see it 11 times now, and intend to go back several more times. So I would say that there's more that works in AUJ than doesn't. At least for me, and I'm sure there are many others who feel the same otherwise they wouldn't be going back again and again. (I've noticed in the theaters now, the audience tends definitely to be what I term "repeat offenders", and yes, geeks. Including myself.)

"Age is always advancing and I'm fairly sure it's up to no good." Harry Dresden (Jim Butcher)


Old Toby
Gondor


Jan 20 2013, 2:45am

Post #42 of 97 (220 views)
Shortcut
You're a breath of fresh air here! [In reply to] Can't Post

Thanks for your post! And I agree wholeheartedly with you! And you made me laugh with this:

"I really don't care what anyone -- general audience, critics, or industry -- thinks; I think it's a great movie and a wonderful adaptation of a book I love -- and I choose to seek out others who will engage in thoughtful, interesting, and/or humorous discussions of it. Doesn't matter to me whether we're in the minority, majority, or any other -ority, and I'm not going to get my knickers in a twist over it."

Honestly I've never understood how people let critics determine how well they will like or not like a film before they've even seen it. I know personally several people who won't go see a film if it's gotten bad or mediocre reviews even if they were looking forward to seeing it for whatever reasons. I can't fathom letting someone else's opinion, which is subjective when dealing with the arts, dictate my tastes. Can't they think for themselves? Ditto in spades for the various award organizations. (BTW I went to see it again for the 11th time today....I swear, just to see Thorin's hair! hahaha!)

"Age is always advancing and I'm fairly sure it's up to no good." Harry Dresden (Jim Butcher)


Magpie
Immortal


Jan 20 2013, 3:05am

Post #43 of 97 (216 views)
Shortcut
I'm kind of curious if this is age related at all [In reply to] Can't Post

My husband and I really enjoy going out to the movies and have a nice, cheap theater very close by. We often would invite our sons - in their mid to late 20s - to go with us and the #1 reason given for not wanting to go was 'it isn't getting very good reviews'. Now, I have lots of movies I don't have much interest in seeing and some of those are because it doesn't look good to me. But I'd say most of the movies we attended they didn't want to see were worth 2 hours and 3 bucks to watch. We enjoyed them enough to feel we got our money's worth and we didn't waste our time. And a good number of those I thought my son's might have liked had they given it a chance.

Just in our little microsampling of the world, I think my husband and I, both in our 60s, remember when movies were mostly light entertainment. It was an excuse to get out of the house, maybe stop off for ice cream after. If the movie was good, that was a bonus. If it was great, then wow... we didn't stop talking about it with our friends.

Now, if the hordes of the world - especially as represented by the interwebs - isn't on board with it being a must see film, then there seems to be this attitude that it isn't worth even checking out. I don't know if people just have more things to do and going to a movie isn't what it used to be... or they just can't take the chance they might be bored or dissatisfied for 3 hours... or if they can't take the risk that they might not be on the inside of whatever in crowd they wish to be in on.

For me, I figure any movie (or any other activity) that amused me more than it annoyed me is worth something. I love being amused. I'm even happier to be enlightened, or moved, or transfixed, or challenged. Things don't have to be perfect to do any of those things. We just have to open up our minds and our hearts, let them have half a chance, and then be willing to forgive them for their failings. If you can't forgive them, well... you sigh a little (or maybe grumble or even rant a little) and then move on to the next experience.

My first reaction to THAUJ was more than 50% positive but I can't say how much more. I gave it another viewing and it rose quite a bit. But it wouldn't matter if it was at 65%... I'd still enjoy discussing the things that entertained or delighted or amused or moved me. I look forward to Roheryn's posts and all those similar ones that find what they liked to discuss. Because... I did like it. I could qualify that as 'I liked parts of it' but why bother. It's easier to let go of those parts I'm not fond of and just focus on what I liked. That brings me joy. Focusing on what I didn't like makes me grumbly. I'm a bit of an Eeyore to begin with I don't need to actively work at it! ;-)


LOTR soundtrack website ~ magpie avatar gallery
TORn History Mathom-house ~ Torn Image Posting Guide


entmaiden
Forum Admin / Moderator


Jan 20 2013, 3:25am

Post #44 of 97 (200 views)
Shortcut
Yay Ro! [In reply to] Can't Post

I agree. I love The Hobbit movie and it's not important to me what others think. It's MY movie experience.


Starling
Half-elven


Jan 20 2013, 3:35am

Post #45 of 97 (184 views)
Shortcut
No, [In reply to] Can't Post

it's MINE. Laugh


Roheryn
Grey Havens

Jan 20 2013, 3:56am

Post #46 of 97 (206 views)
Shortcut
More like a breath of rather old air. :-) [In reply to] Can't Post

These boards were my playground too, once upon a time, and I love them too much to let negativity reign. At least, when I've got time to drop in! I've had a lot of Unexpected Journeys thanks to these boards, and as Legolas might say, I owe them my allegiance. Or something like that.

*grumble* Trying to work in my own viewing #11, and haven't succeeded yet. I think I might just follow your lead and see it just for Thorin's hair! Cool LOL!


Kimtc
Rohan

Jan 20 2013, 3:58am

Post #47 of 97 (206 views)
Shortcut
If I dig deep enough, I can find all kinds of fault with LOTR as movies. [In reply to] Can't Post

But I don't. Is it because I'm a mindless member of the echo chamber? Maybe, but I'd like to think not. It's just that there are precious few perfect things out there, and I can find a way to take apart anything if I have the time and inclination (example: Lawrence of Arabia is a masterpiece, but, hey, there are no female characters and Anthony Quinn's nose looks fake). So if I really like something and have a good time, I will ignore plot holes and story changes because it ultimately doesn't matter to me. I have seen AUJ seven times, because I just think it's a fun, enchanting movie. I saw Skyfall three times because it was thrilling and Daniel Craig; I didn't look for plot problems (I'm sure there are several) because, again, I enjoyed the movie. If I don't enjoy a movie, I forget about it and move on.

Then again, I waited the better part of a decade for TH, so it was going to have to be Ed Wood bad to have disappointed me. I didn't have any expectations, just anticipation.


Roheryn
Grey Havens

Jan 20 2013, 4:09am

Post #48 of 97 (204 views)
Shortcut
Could be... [In reply to] Can't Post

But Mr. Ro and I probably fall half-way between you and your sons, and our inclinations would be more towards yours -- if we had the time! Three young kids don't let us get out much. :-)

I'd rather decide for myself whether a movie is worth seeing or not, rather than trust someone else's review. Why should I agree with some reviewer? There are certainly movies that get good reviews that I'm not about to see. I'd rather think for myself, and I sometimes think younger people aren't encouraged enough to think for themselves (I speak with the experience of having taught young 20-somethings for some years). But that's a whole 'nother issue!


peace1993
Bree


Jan 20 2013, 4:12am

Post #49 of 97 (206 views)
Shortcut
That's not the situation [In reply to] Can't Post

1) Rotten tomatoes: 65% (90% of the negative reviews focused on the limited release 48 fps version, a journalist on CNN even went as far as to call it the worst movie of 2012 because of the 48 fps)
Next time they shouldn't show the film at 48 fps at the premieres to avoid this.

2) IMDB has the Hobbit at 8.3/10 based on around 200, 000 reviews.

3) Rotten tomatoes user reviews are at an average of 4.2/5

4) The American audience awarded it a rating of "A" on Cinemascore with the audience below 18 awarding it an "A+."

5) The Hobbit DOS was voted the most awaited movie of 2013 on Fandango.com, the No.1 online ticket site.

6) The Hobbit DOS is in the Top 5 list for the most awaited movie of 2013 on all the major sites I have seen.

This proves that the vast majority of the film-goers loved AUJ.

Sam: Trust a Brandybuck and a Took.
Merry: What? That was just a detour, a shortcut.
Sam: Shortcut to what?
Pippin: Mushrooms!


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Jan 20 2013, 5:02am

Post #50 of 97 (190 views)
Shortcut
Flawlessly stated. [In reply to] Can't Post

And so true. I do feel that we have become far more demanding and particular about such things. Maybe the culture of "you deserve to be happy," has led to too much not being properly thankful for every bit of happiness. lol. I don't mean to detract from valid criticisms. People have every right to complain (complaining makes some people happy), and I think there are legitimate things in this movie to complain about. Yet the same was true of the others. 7 viewings later I still cannot see where this was a bad movie, unless you are the type of person who just plain dislikes episodic adventures involving warriors and Wizardry (and thus would not really have been keen on Rings either, save maybe that parts of it made you so sad it had to be good. Wink )

In Reply To
My husband and I really enjoy going out to the movies and have a nice, cheap theater very close by. We often would invite our sons - in their mid to late 20s - to go with us and the #1 reason given for not wanting to go was 'it isn't getting very good reviews'. Now, I have lots of movies I don't have much interest in seeing and some of those are because it doesn't look good to me. But I'd say most of the movies we attended they didn't want to see were worth 2 hours and 3 bucks to watch. We enjoyed them enough to feel we got our money's worth and we didn't waste our time. And a good number of those I thought my son's might have liked had they given it a chance.

Just in our little microsampling of the world, I think my husband and I, both in our 60s, remember when movies were mostly light entertainment. It was an excuse to get out of the house, maybe stop off for ice cream after. If the movie was good, that was a bonus. If it was great, then wow... we didn't stop talking about it with our friends.

Now, if the hordes of the world - especially as represented by the interwebs - isn't on board with it being a must see film, then there seems to be this attitude that it isn't worth even checking out. I don't know if people just have more things to do and going to a movie isn't what it used to be... or they just can't take the chance they might be bored or dissatisfied for 3 hours... or if they can't take the risk that they might not be on the inside of whatever in crowd they wish to be in on.

For me, I figure any movie (or any other activity) that amused me more than it annoyed me is worth something. I love being amused. I'm even happier to be enlightened, or moved, or transfixed, or challenged. Things don't have to be perfect to do any of those things. We just have to open up our minds and our hearts, let them have half a chance, and then be willing to forgive them for their failings. If you can't forgive them, well... you sigh a little (or maybe grumble or even rant a little) and then move on to the next experience.

My first reaction to THAUJ was more than 50% positive but I can't say how much more. I gave it another viewing and it rose quite a bit. But it wouldn't matter if it was at 65%... I'd still enjoy discussing the things that entertained or delighted or amused or moved me. I look forward to Roheryn's posts and all those similar ones that find what they liked to discuss. Because... I did like it. I could qualify that as 'I liked parts of it' but why bother. It's easier to let go of those parts I'm not fond of and just focus on what I liked. That brings me joy. Focusing on what I didn't like makes me grumbly. I'm a bit of an Eeyore to begin with I don't need to actively work at it! ;-)


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.