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:
What do you dislike the most: TH AUJ Pt. 2
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All


Feb 22 2013, 4:57am

Post #1 of 37 (2255 views)
What do you dislike the most: TH AUJ Pt. 2 Can't Post

Sad to see this thread fall off the front page so fast. I love the film (or else I wouldn't post about it), but I enjoy being able to share my frustrations with others. If this is deemed inappropriate, feel free to remove it.

Just wondering if anyone else cares to share their problems and frustrations with the film. Maybe give a look in to what you would have done differently.

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


Feb 22 2013, 5:56am

Post #2 of 37 (1813 views)
Some more 'dislikes' [In reply to] Can't Post

Going by "What I wish had been done differently" (highly subjective and bordering on nit-picking)

Gross stuff
- Ori's burp. I wouldn't have minded so much if it was not in slo-mo or so 'offensive'.
- Snot in the pot during the trolls' scene. Funnily I didn't mind the snot on Bilbo as much, because the troll's confusion at what came out of his nose got every audience roaring with laughter every time, so I guess that one works.
- Mild annoyance at Radagast's bird poop. Not a big deal, really, and one can of course always 'double-think' it into lichen :P

White Council
- Didn't really like the whole business with the Witch-King and his sword... I think it takes the magic out of it by having it explained that way. Something also bothers me about the Witch-King's tomb.
- Galadriel's interaction with Gandalf is also a bit questionable... but I guess we will have to see how it will play out in the next two movies

The goblins
need to be way more evil to justify all the easy, throwaway deaths. The Goblin King's falling on the bridge seemed cruel to me -- because it's a corpse falling, played for laughs. Maybe it's just me, but I feel that the dead should be accorded proper respect.

The pacing
Especially near the end, where it's just action, action, action. I think this will be fixed in the EE, where we see more of the long-awaited character moments :)

That's all, I think. I love the rest of the movie


Feb 22 2013, 8:27am

Post #3 of 37 (1732 views)
I would've included ... [In reply to] Can't Post

the talking purse. Tongue

I think Rivendell needed to be fleshed out a bit more. There are going to be a large amount of people who see/saw AUJ and have not yet seen any of the LOTR films (or read the books). I think the Company arriving at Rivendell brings up a lot of questions - who's Elrond, Galadriel, Saruman (and so on), and will probably leave many people confused as to what's going on. The one advantage of this though is encouraging people to read the books and/or watch the LOTR trilogy.


Feb 22 2013, 4:01pm

Post #4 of 37 (1749 views)
Drug Reference [In reply to] Can't Post

This has bothered me since LOTR. Pipeweed is not pot. And I didn't like Saurman's chiding Radagast for use of mushrooms.

Tol Eressea

Feb 22 2013, 4:06pm

Post #5 of 37 (1623 views)
Thank you good idea [In reply to] Can't Post

I was thinking of creating a sequel since the first one wa such a success! Here's the previous thread:


Vous commencez m'ennuyer avec le port!!!


Feb 22 2013, 4:22pm

Post #6 of 37 (1603 views)
Sequels are rarely as good as the first lol [In reply to] Can't Post


Lucky Luke

Feb 22 2013, 4:57pm

Post #7 of 37 (1631 views)
Orcs / Gobelins [In reply to] Can't Post

What happened with the design of the orcs and goblins? In LOTR all of them were awesome, in TH AUJ, not so much. The problem seem's to me the use and abuse of CGI at the expense of prosthetics. I was not conviced by PJ's idea to give the orcs and gobelins less humanoid characteristics. In my mind, they are humanoids, elf descendants, and the LOTR has shown them as such. Could it be that the RED cameras did not respond well with the prosthetics? I also noticed that the orcs and gobelins, in TH, were mostly seen in bunch and from far away and felt kind of blurry : I may be wrong but I remember very few close-ups. When the film did single out an orc or gobelin, the results were not as good as in the LOTRO (with the exception of the Goblin King) : the warg riders or the ugly thing that attacks Bilbo in the goblin caves left me unimpressed (I did feel sorry for Gollum to have to eat such an ugly and blurry thing). And don't get me started on Azog!


Feb 22 2013, 5:32pm

Post #8 of 37 (1587 views)
Actually [In reply to] Can't Post

I rather like the Orcs and Goblins, but most of all in the high frame rate, in which they are quite sharp, as is the whole Goblin town and the running fight between the Dwarves and Goblins.

When it comes to Azog, I was a bit undecided about him, but looking at his movement in the battle outside the Mines of Moria, and listening to his deep voice speaking in the Orkish tongue, he is really pretty good. I prefer him, for instance, to Gothmog in ROTK he was so encrusted that you couldn't see any expression on his features. (Sometimes less is more.) The only critters that were better in LOTR than the CGI Goblins and Orcs in AUJ were the Uruk-hai, who were non-CGI. I didn't like the Wargs in TTT, and I don't like them in AUJ.

Tol Eressea

Feb 22 2013, 5:47pm

Post #9 of 37 (1582 views)
Lets change the tradition [In reply to] Can't Post


One thing i didnt care for was the choice for a darkless, blueish, overly lit Goblin Town. Having seen many movies that used darkness in very effective ways i cant help but sigh at the sight of the goblin city and tunnels...

The whole scenario feels like a grotesque, over the top, fake, indiana jones theme park...

And it could have looked a bit more scary, hellish, and impressive :


At 1: 17 minutes, for example.

Vous commencez m'ennuyer avec le port!!!


Feb 22 2013, 5:58pm

Post #10 of 37 (1582 views)
This is actually something that doesn't bother me at all. [In reply to] Can't Post

It's been a running joke in LOTR fandom since the 60's, so the films aren't really at fault for keeping up the gag. At risk of turning this into a drug debate, I will only say...a little weed never hurt anyone Smile

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


Feb 22 2013, 6:31pm

Post #11 of 37 (1546 views)
Agreed [In reply to] Can't Post

I know PJ said he tried to shoot it the same way he shot LOTR, but it sure didn't feel like it.

A lot of the lighting and overall aesthetic of the film fell victim to technology. I kind of knew we were in trouble when they were talking about the red cameras eating color. Couple that with the 5k and 48fps and the result looks very strange. I still noticed the whole look of the film was a little off, even in 2D 24fps.

Now I'll talk about what I would have done in PJ's position in regards to all my problems with the film...

I would have shot on film, literally the exact same way LOTR was shot. This alone would have helped these films flow more with LOTR. It's a mistake that a lot of directors seem to make when returning to a franchise. They think they need to push some kind of visual envelope, and forget what made their original films so appealing in the first place. I still would have amped up the color pallet for the film, just to give it a little more of a fantasy feel.

I would move the Erebor flashback to the unexpected party. I would still start with the Bilbo/Frodo intro, but I would have gotten Ian Holm THE SAME WIG!!!!!!!!!! I would have put the dwarves into 2 groups. Thorin, Balin, Bofur, Fili, and Kili in the "main dwarves" group. The rest could just be like the roadies of the quest. They would stay in the background and not try too hard to make you care for them. Although, they could be made to look more similar so they act more as a group of their own.

Radagast can stay, minus his rabbit sled and the bird poop. The Idea of Azog's inclusion wouldn't be bad if it was handled differently. To be honest, it must have been tough for the production to create a villain who's main purpose is to speed up pace. I don't know what I would do differently there, it's a tough one. I would also keep the stone giants, but I would have them be in the distance. Give the company and Bilbo a few shots of being in awe. Maybe one stray boulder comes close to them, so they decide to go into the cave.

I would have built some new outdoor sets for Rivendell. That's something I miss terribly in the film. If I'm not mistaken, the company stayed there for a while in the book. So I would maybe have a short sequence of showing nights by the fire with elves, some little "Bilbo falling in love with Rivendell" moments. Get rid of Ori complaining about the food and Bombour breaking the table. I would want to show that the elves had true hospitality, and that Rivendell really felt homely.

I'll stop there at risk of going on and on.

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

The Shire

Feb 22 2013, 8:05pm

Post #12 of 37 (1561 views)
Gross stuff [In reply to] Can't Post

There seem to be a lot of people bothered by the 'gross stuff' but I think the thing people forget is that this is a kids story which has been appropriated by adults. Go and see the film with a nine year old and the gross stuff makes them howl with laughter. Burping, snot, daft jokes...all good as far as a kid is concerned. My nine year has seen it four times and laughs every time at the Great Goblin gag - yes, the one that everyone hates. I think PJ did a great job of keeping the kids happy while adding the serious back-story for the fans.


Feb 22 2013, 8:15pm

Post #13 of 37 (1551 views)
The problem with that logic for me is... [In reply to] Can't Post

It assumes that kids can only be entertained by potty humor and tasteless jokes. Sure, I bet it is perfectly entertaining for them. But when I think about my favorite childrens films, and films I loved as a kid, I don't remember snot jokes and burping. I remember being mesmerized by great stories and characters that resonated with me.

It's so easy to forget what it's like to be a kid, so I don't blame filmmakers for using these sorts of things to appeal to them. Kids will grow out of this sort of humor, they won't grow out of an amazing story with amazing characters.

I think it's more important to make a film that respects it's younger audience, and aims to stand the test of time. Something that will grow up with them.

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


Feb 22 2013, 8:31pm

Post #14 of 37 (1572 views)
I'm not going to rant about Azog again... [In reply to] Can't Post

Because apparently I go overboard (according to everyone in my family). *ahem*

I was a little disappointed in Saruman's overall presence. He didn't have that ominous and overwhelming "scariness" that he had in LotR. The way Gandalf and Galadriel communicated telepathically and Saruman's voice was reduced to background murmuring made him seem so unimportant. Maybe Sir Christopher is just getting old. Crazy
Feel free to tell me if you feel differently about this. It just felt this way to me.

I liked things other people seemed to dislike - Radagast and his bunny-sled, The Goblin King's last line, Ori, The trolls (including the parasites!), Thorin hugging Bilbo and lots of other things I can't seem to think of now.

Another thing: No speaking Eagles!?

Legless Lego Legolas...there is nothing more epic.

"Ten percent of nothin' is ... let me do the math here ... nothin' into nothin' ... carry the nothin' ... " - Jayne from Firefly

Tol Eressea

Feb 22 2013, 8:38pm

Post #15 of 37 (1510 views)
Very much agreed [In reply to] Can't Post

"Couple that with the 5k and 48fps and the result looks very strange. I still noticed the whole look of the film was a little off, even in 2D 24fps. "

Take a look at this with 1080p:


At the 53 seconds mark we see ridendell..and it is the worst looking rivendell i have ever seen, the digital obviousness is so glarent and crisp that it looks video gamish and fake. The trees, the buildings all scream FAKE and CGI.

Now, move on to the statues shot and freeze frame it there...take a good look at it....and as you say, it feels strange and off and unbalanced and fake...The super high 5k resolution or the sheer power of the Red Camera, or the DP's style of lighting everything with those big studio lights rather than beautifull natural light or the the lack of time to bette rrende rthese shots or simply the fact that Weta is not entirely yet capable of handling these immenselt crisp and digital images with the post vfx...i dont know what it is...but when i look at that shot ...i dont see a real life location called Rivendell.

I see a set- the statues- that looks just like a set, and the rest which is obviously a digital vfx..the crispness is so unforgiving that it is almost impossible to blend all the elements of the footage into a believable, wordly grounded location that feels real, palpably natural, historical a and fantastical at the same time. Which was achieved with Lotr!

You can definitely feel the 3dness of the image but that is a fault in my view because framing the camera in such a way doesnt really allows a director to create the visual look that is more suitable for middle earth whihc is that painterly look that lotr had, achieved primarily by the use of film, super 35mm.

By the way, Del Toro was planning on filming TH with 35mm. Unsure

Take a look at the following waterfall shot to see one of the worst shots in the movie...it looked terribly fake when we first saw it in the teaser, now it still looks fake.

One of the complaints from cinema con was the lack of darkness and obvious fakeness present in many scenes.

I agree with everything you say next except with the inclusion of the prologue, i love it at the beginning and feel it is very appropriate and provides a fantastic beginning for the film.

And Dwalin, he should be one of the main dwarves. I love him in the film, alebit his ridiculous beard, and its a pity we didnt seem more of him.

I am hoping that some of that lost feel of homely house might be restored with the EE...well see...

As to the cinematography, i wish they had used a different DP , with a dfferent approach. There is not a single shot in TH that is as well lit and crafted as this :


Which is amazing, if you think about it...a multi million dollar production actually looks worse than a TV production with a much more limited budget...

Vous commencez m'ennuyer avec le port!!!

(This post was edited by Lusitano on Feb 22 2013, 8:43pm)

Tol Eressea

Feb 22 2013, 8:46pm

Post #16 of 37 (1528 views)
Yes [In reply to] Can't Post

i thought C Lee was very poorly used...when he goes on about the mushrooms, i i was thinking ....what on earth?? This is they brought in fo? Crazy

And then they dont even give him a proper goodbye...did he disapear into thin air also? Tongue

Vous commencez m'ennuyer avec le port!!!


Feb 22 2013, 8:50pm

Post #17 of 37 (1494 views)
Exactly [In reply to] Can't Post

Honestly, I could go on and on and back and forth on this subject.

The most frustrating thing about it for me is that this is basically history repeating himself. George Lucas made the EXACT same mistake with his Star Wars prequels. Granted, even AUJ looks way better than those "films".

Star Wars and LOTR honestly have so much in common. PJ has to notice this, and he has to know that Lucas' prequels, and the crisp digital look of them, were highly criticized. I was really hoping for PJ to show the world how a great prequel trilogy can be made. Instead, he only fixed a few of the problems with prequels. At the same time, he fell in to the exact same trap.

Bummer Unsure

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


Feb 22 2013, 9:23pm

Post #18 of 37 (1517 views)
They were very limited in what they could get him to do. [In reply to] Can't Post

I'd rather they included Lee in a short scene (like the White Council one), than re-cast the character, and have the new Saruman do something incredibly ridiculous.

And I doubt we've seen the last of Saruman. Since they've made so much effort, I imagine Gandalf, Saruman, Galadriel and Elrond will be the 4 characters in all 6 films.


Feb 22 2013, 9:37pm

Post #19 of 37 (1532 views)
Should be grumpy not dopey. (Book plot spoiler warning for the two people who haven't read it yet). [In reply to] Can't Post

My real dislike was in the loss of the main theme of the book - which is grumpiness. It's a book about a grumpy hobbit, dragged out of his comfortable existence by a bunch of bickering dwarves, led by a grumpy deposed heir to a kingdom; the whole troupe being guided by an often rightfully irate wizard. On their journeys they meet the remarkably non-grumpy and amenable Elrond, after which things go downhill, with an encounter with some mean and angry goblins and a malevolent and hateful lake-dwelling creature. After Bilbo escapes the latter, he is wandering along, grumpily deciding that he has to go back to try to save the 'bothersome' dwarves, when he runs into his companions, who are in the middle of an extremely grumpy and bad-tempered argument, with their equally irascible and annoyed guide, with everyone blaming each other for losing their nuisance of a burglar.

There follows a brief thaw in relations within the group, during which they are chased by a band of extremely annoyed goblins, and run into some wolves who they greatly anger by chucking flaming fir cones at. Fortunately, they are rescued, by chance, by a group of rather standoffish eagles, who agree to set them down near the house of a huge man, who is so bad-tempered and dangerously grumpy that they have to approach in twos, in order to avoid annoying him. After this, they head off into a dark forest, where they get really vexed with each other - especially with the fat one, who falls into an enchanted river and has to be carried, fast asleep, by his complaining companions. In the middle of all this wandering around blaming each other and getting into moods, they run across some merry woodland elves, who they proceed to irritate by constantly gatecrashing. In the ensuing confusion, they get captured by some evil spiders. Bilbo manages to save them, by getting the spiders to become extremely annoyed and rashly follow him into the forest.

After rescuing the (still rather grumpy) dwarves, they run again into the wood elves, who are now so piqued that they take the dwarves captive, which makes the dwarves even more grumpy and unreasonable, resulting in their imprisonment by the increasingly irate woodland king. Bilbo sneaks in and explains his rescue plan - which makes the dwarves grumpy, as it promises to be uncomfortable and dangerous. Bilbo, in turn, gets extremely peevish and tells them what's what, so the dwarves reluctantly agree to escape. On escaping, Bilbo gets the dwarves out of the barrels, - by now they are both sorely grumpy and ungrateful. Things perk up when they go to Lake Town, but once they reach the mountain the grumpy, bad tempered arguing resumes.

The dragon, who goes from being slightly, to very, annoyed, goes off and gets killed, prompting the Lake Towners and the Elves to turn up, seeking recompense from the dwarves. This makes the dwarves very grumpy and unreasonable - surprise surprise - and they manage to further provoke both the elves and the Lake Towners, to the point that war breaks out. Bilbo tries to solve the impasse, which makes Thorin murderously angry, and things are about to go from bad to worse, when the goblins (who have by now gone so far past grumpy that they are armed to the teeth and out in full force with all their mates) turn up and attack. A lot of angry fighting happens, after which, the survivors forgive each other and niceness triumphs. Until Bilbo gets home, that is, when he finds that a lot of people are very grumpy at discovering him still alive.

So what does Mr Jackson do? He leaves out nearly all the grumpiness in the group, with the exception of a couple of angry outbursts, and inserts heartfelt and smaltzy speeches instead. I trust, though, that he will pull it all together in the next film.

Tol Eressea

Feb 22 2013, 9:40pm

Post #20 of 37 (1481 views)
I agree [In reply to] Can't Post

but iwasnt talking about actual different movements ..i was referring to his lines ...an actor of the calibre of CLee and such a character...his time, to me, felt unproductive, more as if they wanted hom to give a cameo but to not really stand out and have a more impressive speech...

But i suppose his age is something to consider...

If he shows up at Dol Guldur,and we have an extended council scene, i will be happier

Vous commencez m'ennuyer avec le port!!!


Feb 22 2013, 9:45pm

Post #21 of 37 (1496 views)
I would be a little peeved if I was C. Lee [In reply to] Can't Post

After cutting him from the theatrical ROTK, he was disappointed. He is more well versed in Tolkien than any other actor in the films, and most of his dialogue in AUJ fades to the background. It totally diminishes his character and immediately makes him seem uppity and unimportant.

They really should have had Saruman say some truly wise and comforting things. Make you truly believe he is actually good. Why is he even head of the council if 50% of it's members think it's fine to just tune him out?

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


Feb 22 2013, 9:47pm

Post #22 of 37 (1504 views)
Poor Gollum! And a different thought about Orc/Goblin portrayal [In reply to] Can't Post

In Reply To
(I did feel sorry for Gollum to have to eat such an ugly and blurry thing).

I'm sorry, but this made me laugh out loud for some reason. Laugh

And speaking of Orcs and Goblins, I didn't really like the idea of them as separate races. It's not such a big deal, but Tolkien himself said the words mean the same thing and it kind of bugs me that the filmmakers either didn't know about it or ignored it. Orcs are Goblins! Goblins are Orcs! And if anyone doesn't agree I will give them this look: Mad.

Want to chat? AIM me at Yami Liokaiser!

Tol Eressea

Feb 22 2013, 9:47pm

Post #23 of 37 (1473 views)
Well [In reply to] Can't Post

i feel youre on to something, though i dont appreciate comparisons between Lucas and PJ Tongue . I feel that the digital look for SW, is not as detrimental as to TH. In fcat SW, due to the elements of the universe is more suited for digital cameras than mythological ME with its rolling green hills and forests..

If youre saying he fell in to the more studio work, more cgi, more digital stuff, i wholeheartedly agree. He said he learned to trust the studio more...when i read that, my heart sank a little...then i shrigged it off ...now i feel as if all the fears i had when i heard about digital photography, 5k resolution, 3D , much more prominence given to studio and green screen work etc...were actually well founded.

What problems do you suggets he fixed with the prequels?

Vous commencez m'ennuyer avec le port!!!

Tol Eressea

Feb 22 2013, 9:51pm

Post #24 of 37 (1475 views)
Right [In reply to] Can't Post

his dialogue fades to the background...i can only remember a few different lines...and what else?Unsure

I felt Galadriel had to do that with Gandalf because she didnt dare interrupt him like that again..out of respect.

Vous commencez m'ennuyer avec le port!!!


Feb 22 2013, 9:59pm

Post #25 of 37 (1481 views)
Unimportant to us, perhaps? [In reply to] Can't Post

I think the general audience would appreciate what's going on - Elrond and Saruman on one side of the fence, and Galadriel and Gandalf on the other. It's such a short scene that I don't think there's any need to dwell on it. It would be different if it were a 20 minute scene, with Saruman speaking 1 line. The current scene gets the message across.

It's also like to get extended. Saruman talks about the 7 Rings, so that *should* be included.

First page Previous page 1 2 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.