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 has a strange quality to it...
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

Radagast-Aiwendil
Gondor


Apr 8 2013, 9:07pm

Post #1 of 29 (1909 views)
Shortcut
The Hobbit has a strange quality to it... Can't Post

It seems, at least for me, to improve with additional viewings.

When I first watched the film I will admit that I did not know quite what to make of it-perhaps because it was so different to what I expected (and most of my disappointment was generated from a knowledge of moments of canon-inaccuracy, and as a consequence knowing how upset some of you on the board would be.) But since I couldn't come to a stable conclusion I gave it another try a few days later. To my astonishment I was absolutely blown away and it was probably one of the best film viewing experiences of my life. I saw it in a completely different light.

And in similar fashion, the film has improved with each viewing. Tonight on my now fourth *full* viewing, I have appreciated it more than ever, and I think it is a true masterpiece, on par with and in some areas better than LotR (Yes, occasionally worse I admit). Indeed I now think I understand why some of the negative critics belittled it: on their (most likely only) viewing, they may have been left in a similar boat and since they neither enjoyed nor despised it, tried to draw attention to their otherwise undecided article by simply writing it off as a bad film. Whether they expected it to be similar/different to LotR, they ended up looking at (at least on a first viewing), a rather mixed bag.

Anyone else found that it improves when watched again/viewed differently?

"True courage is about knowing not when to take a life, but when to spare one."

(This post was edited by Radagast-Aiwendil on Apr 8 2013, 9:08pm)


cats16
Valinor

Apr 8 2013, 9:21pm

Post #2 of 29 (852 views)
Shortcut
Completely agree with you [In reply to] Can't Post

Same sort of thing has happened to me. I think now that I know the sequence of events inside and out, I can put my focus on other things (the usage of the score, editing, etc.) that I really seem to have grown fond of. And by editing, I mean more like the organization of intercutting rather than simply the cuts themselves.

And also, I am still in awe with everything regarding the characters (mainly the dwarves). There's just so much to take in, mostly the interrelationships that are at work within the Company. Just knowing that Dori, Nori, and Ori are more privileged than some of the others, I love seeing how the others view them and how this affects their interactions. I could really watch this film on loop for quite awhile, lol.

And yes, I do think several parts of this film surpass LOTR ( and some do...not reach that level, also). The climax of the eagles rescue, specifically when Thorin is carried away, just gives me chills every single time. Shore's score, at that moment, is probably at one of its best moments, IMO. Felt for a second like I was watching certain parts of ROTK again.

This is why I am so giddy in regards to the next two films. Knowing what we have so far, I am so excited to continue on this journey with our characters. 6 more hours of ME! (Maybe 7 with EEs, lol) Wink


Fredeghar Wayfarer
Lorien


Apr 8 2013, 9:47pm

Post #3 of 29 (792 views)
Shortcut
Partly agree [In reply to] Can't Post

I think it improves on subsequent viewings. But I certainly wouldn't call it a masterpiece or on par with LOTR though. All my issues with the film (trilogy structure, Azog, Radagast, stone-giant action scene, lack of talking eagles, etc.) still bother me. But I've enjoyed the movie more on later viewings now that I know the changes Jackson made and can sit back and appreciate the ride. I realize that many of my issues stem from being so fond of the source material. My dislike is partly me being a purist, not necessarily flaws of the movie. Taken on its own, AUJ is still an enjoyable fantasy adventure film. It's just not the Hobbit movie I wanted.


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Apr 8 2013, 9:57pm

Post #4 of 29 (798 views)
Shortcut
Very much the same. I still HATE the lore inaccuracies, but by my third viewing I was [In reply to] Can't Post

certain that this was one of my favourite movies in this life thus far even with its failings.

In Reply To
It seems, at least for me, to improve with additional viewings.

When I first watched the film I will admit that I did not know quite what to make of it-perhaps because it was so different to what I expected (and most of my disappointment was generated from a knowledge of moments of canon-inaccuracy, and as a consequence knowing how upset some of you on the board would be.) But since I couldn't come to a stable conclusion I gave it another try a few days later. To my astonishment I was absolutely blown away and it was probably one of the best film viewing experiences of my life. I saw it in a completely different light.

And in similar fashion, the film has improved with each viewing. Tonight on my now fourth *full* viewing, I have appreciated it more than ever, and I think it is a true masterpiece, on par with and in some areas better than LotR (Yes, occasionally worse I admit). Indeed I now think I understand why some of the negative critics belittled it: on their (most likely only) viewing, they may have been left in a similar boat and since they neither enjoyed nor despised it, tried to draw attention to their otherwise undecided article by simply writing it off as a bad film. Whether they expected it to be similar/different to LotR, they ended up looking at (at least on a first viewing), a rather mixed bag.

Anyone else found that it improves when watched again/viewed differently?


"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."


sauget.diblosio
Tol Eressea

Apr 8 2013, 10:06pm

Post #5 of 29 (733 views)
Shortcut
Yeah, i've come to appreciate it more, [In reply to] Can't Post

and overlook some of the things that bothered me about the film the first couple of times i saw it. And some things that i enjoyed earlier, i enjoy even more now (i'm on my 8th viewing). But i would not call it a masterpiece, and it's not close to attaining the heights achieved by any of the LotR films. Because there are some things that i see as real problems that just stick out more and more with each viewing. Unless the EE works some minor miracles, i don't see this situation drastically changing (i do expect the EE to be better, though, i just don't know by how much). But that'd be ok, because there's a lot to enjoy in AUJ.


jtarkey
Rohan


Apr 8 2013, 10:12pm

Post #6 of 29 (741 views)
Shortcut
Meh, it switches back and forth for me [In reply to] Can't Post

I've honestly seen it more times than I can count. Each time, I either think it's better than I give it credit for, or worse. Either way, it remains a fairly disappointing film in my mind.

It's especially jarring watching a movie I love, and then watching AUJ shortly after. It always makes everything about AUJ seem very lazy, like they simply shot parts of a story and pasted them together. I know that pretty much every movie is parts of a story pasted together, however it's different with AUJ. None of the characters really grow, or make me care for them. Their are no real arcs for any characters. It seems like they are merely going through the motions. It makes me feel like I'm watching the story unfold from afar instead of being right there with the characters.

During my latest viewing, I was fantasizing about AUJ without the prologue, necromancer, radagast, etc.. and something dawned on me. If AUJ had the same running time, but was focused soley on Bilbo and the quest, it would have been much stronger. Having a cold start, with Bilbo meeting Gandalf, would have been far more engaging. It would have made me feel like I was in the story instead of watching it. Moving the prologue to the unexpected party (to be told by Thorin) would have given the idea of the quest much more weight. It would have introduced it to us the same way it was introduced to Bilbo. Knowing about Erebor before the dwarves arrive only serves to make the "unexpected" party a very "expected" one.

I also realized something unexpected. The Rankin Bass Hobbit got A LOT of things right. Sure, some of the designs, and details are pretty horrendous. But I feel like that little cartoon captured the spirit of the book better than this 3 hour, souped up, LOTR lite adaptation ever could.

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


Glorfindela
Valinor


Apr 8 2013, 10:24pm

Post #7 of 29 (731 views)
Shortcut
Radagast-A, I agree with you [In reply to] Can't Post

For me also it improves with every viewing. I've seen it about fourteen times in the cinema (in the UK, so still waiting for the BR DVD), and each time I notice details I've missed. So far, also, my attention hasn't dropped while viewing the film, which does happen in the case of LOTR, particularly when viewing certain scenes in ROTK and TTT – these were OK for two or three viewings, but after that they really dragged for me.

I love the characters, acting, visuals, music and colours of The Hobbit. It works for me and I can't wait for the next film.


IdrilofGondolin
Rohan

Apr 8 2013, 10:33pm

Post #8 of 29 (721 views)
Shortcut
This Has Been My Experience [In reply to] Can't Post

Once I finish visiting with you all tonight (it's 6:30 pm where I live, I'll tune in again to Bilbo and Co. because this movie is like fine wine. It improves with age. Admittedly I have some fine whines about it, but in general I too enjoy it more and more with each viewing.


Kimtc
Rohan


Apr 8 2013, 10:48pm

Post #9 of 29 (711 views)
Shortcut
It has become one of those movies where there aren't scenes I want to skip. [In reply to] Can't Post

I can't say the same of all of LOTR, and I truly love those films. But the more I watch it, the better it gets. It also goes by very quickly for such a long movie; I have to admit that I now start getting antsy by the 2/3 mark in ROTK.


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Apr 8 2013, 11:24pm

Post #10 of 29 (714 views)
Shortcut
I largely agree. The proof is in how the skipping is done. I do the least skipping in this film, possibly [In reply to] Can't Post

excepting Fellowship. With TTT and ROTK, I am more skipping to my favourite scenes (Gandalf, Rivendell/ Arwen-Elrond/, some of Treebeard's commentary, Saruman's, The Mountain of Fire, the Multiple Endings [except for the Sam piece] etc.) and not watching the rest unless I am really in the mood, while with The Hobbit and Fellowship it is more a matter of skipping over a choice few scenes that I can really count on one hand, but watching the vast majority of the movie, and it is the same with the Extended Fellowship, as most of the added scenes are scenes I love and wish had been present in the theatrical version.

In Reply To
For me also it improves with every viewing. I've seen it about fourteen times in the cinema (in the UK, so still waiting for the BR DVD), and each time I notice details I've missed. So far, also, my attention hasn't dropped while viewing the film, which does happen in the case of LOTR, particularly when viewing certain scenes in ROTK and TTT – these were OK for two or three viewings, but after that they really dragged for me.

I love the characters, acting, visuals, music and colours of The Hobbit. It works for me and I can't wait for the next film.


"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."

(This post was edited by AinurOlorin on Apr 8 2013, 11:25pm)


jimmyfenn
Rohan


Apr 9 2013, 12:17am

Post #11 of 29 (702 views)
Shortcut
intro [In reply to] Can't Post

i can see past all the things that i dont like with it, same with lotr for the main, but i wish they would just get rid of the intro.

frodo looks worse than after he went to mount doom, and bilbo looks like a weird cgi version of himself. its horrible.

"You Tolkien to me?!" - Hobbit de Niro


Dwarvenfury
Lorien

Apr 9 2013, 1:06am

Post #12 of 29 (669 views)
Shortcut
hehehehe [In reply to] Can't Post

one of the things about DoS is that it won't have to set it's self up like AuJ. It can just start right into the pertinent story.
one of the difficulties with auj was probably the appearance of older bilbo, not just the physical appearance, but the sort of
expectation it creates for the real story. it can hard for young bilbo and the real story to get itself going when you physically see
the older narrator or know who the narrator is. by the time young bilbo and the real story takes off, our allegiances can be divided between
old bilbo looking back at everything and being in the present with young bilbo and the dwarves. in short, the audience gains the perspective of old bilbo
and his recollection. this can be a difficult factor for the real story as we will be looking at the real story from ahead or from behind and rarely as in the present
with young bilbo. this, i think could be due to knowing and seeing the narrator. i'm not sure this is attributable to this factor, it is just a supposition. maybe it's something else.
but i think films who adopt this format of starting with a known narrator have to face this issue. the only exception seems to be if the audience doesn't know who that narrator
is in the beginning. in fotr we hear a narrator but we don't know who it is or how connected they are to the story that's being told. it's not necessarily a character that's telling it per se, but
a distant memory relating events. in auj, we have a known character looking backward, and our allegiances are split and perspective warped. in DoS, it shouldn't have to deal with this much, unless
older bilbo comes back and begins the story once more. start immediately with the erebor prologue without narrative dialogue, then thorin's hammer hits the anvil going dark to end prologue, and we start again with young bilbo and '60 years earlier' subtitle, and we're off on our thrilling adventure, absolutely in the present with the company of thorin oakenshield?
does this make any sense? what do you think about this or is it something else, or is the old bilbo prologue bring added nuance to film? wat you think?


Dwarvenfury
Lorien

Apr 9 2013, 1:18am

Post #13 of 29 (622 views)
Shortcut
actually [In reply to] Can't Post

it then wouldn't be 60 years ealier Cool


MouthofSauron
Tol Eressea


Apr 9 2013, 5:49am

Post #14 of 29 (576 views)
Shortcut
well in hindsight.... [In reply to] Can't Post

for obvious reasons it would have made more since for TH film(s) to come out before LOTR's....Now that didn't happen, so the audience (fans of the movies not the books) are going to see prequel films....So if they began TH like the book the audience with younger Bilbo talking about the shire & hobbits would have been confused and it would have been just a repeat of the beginning of FOTR. I think it was smart to have older Bilbo thinking back on his adventure and talking about Erebor/Smaug...So now LOTR's and TH films will flow as a film series instead of two different stories separated by 60 years.


take me down to the woodland realm where the trees are green and the elf women are pretty....Oh will you please take me home!!

(This post was edited by MouthofSauron on Apr 9 2013, 5:56am)


DanielLB
Immortal


Apr 9 2013, 8:33am

Post #15 of 29 (511 views)
Shortcut
I already loved it [In reply to] Can't Post

So it doesn't really improve with viewings (for me).

But, on a general note, I do think it has the X Factor a re-watchability factor to it. After all the times I have seen it, it doesn't seem to get anymore boring. The first half hour is so fantastic that you time seems to pass so quickly.

Smile


Balrogslunch
The Shire

Apr 9 2013, 9:01am

Post #16 of 29 (482 views)
Shortcut
Loved it even more the second time [In reply to] Can't Post

I saw it for the second time yesterday in standard blu ray....the first time i saw it was on the day of release in hfr3d......I enjoyed it a lot more the second time :)....partly maybe because i was concentrating on the 3d and hfr the first time and not concentrating on the story.......

The things that i didnt quite like the first time....Radaghast and the Necromancer i could understand a lot better.....and i wonder if they have edited the film slightly as Radaghast didnt seem so comical...whether his antics stood out more in 3d i am not sure but i was at ease with him and the Rivendell section a lot more.....also the beginning played a lot better and still doesnt seem drawn out to me (was just about right) and i enjoyed the role of Azog more and also the Goblin King......so am really happy.....

It also still plays like a 1hr.45 minute film and goes really quickly leaving you wanting more and i think in future years when added with the two other films it will be loved just as much as the Lord of the Rings ones...

.the only thing i still slightly miss is i wish when Bilbo left the dwarves i wish he was in near darkness and the darkness had more impact on him and how he stumbled more into finding the ring near to Gollums cave....because it gave the impression he saw gollum drop it (from his pouch) and he found it straight after.....whereas really the ring shouldve sort of found him....

But overall really happy with it.....and sets things up nicely for the films to come....cant wait to watch it again!


Dwarvenfury
Lorien

Apr 9 2013, 9:10am

Post #17 of 29 (473 views)
Shortcut
bagend [In reply to] Can't Post

imo the sequence from dwalin's arrival to bilbo waking up to an empty house is one of the more rewatchable scenes in all of movies.
it ranks up there as some of the best stuff from tolkien stuff translated to the screen imo. try to watch it just in its isolation, it's quite entertaining.


Dwarvenfury
Lorien

Apr 9 2013, 10:05am

Post #18 of 29 (428 views)
Shortcut
interesting. [In reply to] Can't Post

that's true. after more entertaiment of viewing the film, i think it does need this prologue. I like the prologue in and of itself yet it is possible for it to impress an unconventional
balance and perspective to the main story. yet i think the main story clearly needed something to give it a bit more soul and purpse, for the cumulative hobbit trilogy and in auj
itself. i think the prologue erebor and old bilbo/frodo does this. it gives the main story a little more swagger actually imo. i keep going back and forth with the opening part and its effect on
the main events hehe, but i think it ultimately needs it. plus, there's a certain soulful and primal touch that old bilbo and frodo (before his ringbearer days) brings to the scene. they are able to epitomize
the hobbit way of good food and warm hearth. furthermore, without old bilbo, would we even know that this is in large part bilbo's journey? it must be difficult to visualize all this story and how it comes together.
thanks goodness for pete jackson and co.!


Elessar
Valinor


Apr 9 2013, 12:59pm

Post #19 of 29 (412 views)
Shortcut
Loved it the first time [In reply to] Can't Post

I loved it the first time but I will say that love for it has grown with each viewing. For me really there is no issue with feeling that The Hobbit is part of the same universe as The Lord of the Rings. Jackson really did nail that the best of all IMO and for me I can't wait until all six movies are ready to go and watch Middle-earth play out on my TV. Its going to be pretty darn cool. Cool



t_bomb
Registered User


Apr 9 2013, 2:59pm

Post #20 of 29 (383 views)
Shortcut
In the LOTR extras, PJ says more than once, [In reply to] Can't Post

"Pain is temporary, film is forever." Where else would "forever" exist, except in our home theaters? I believe that he has made some editorial choices that, while they may have drawn certain criticisms for the piece as a theatrical release, are welcome and appropriate when the film is experienced in the comfort of one's own Hobbit hole.


Salmacis81
Grey Havens


Apr 9 2013, 5:31pm

Post #21 of 29 (310 views)
Shortcut
I would say that... [In reply to] Can't Post

when I first saw it in theaters, I was just so glad it was finally here, and was so blown away by the spectacle of it all, that I had a hard time criticizing it. Even though it wasn't at all what I was expecting, I couldn't wait to get back to the theater and see it again. For my next few viewings, however, the changes to lore became more glaring to me, and it bothered me for a bit. Probably around my 6th or 7th viewing, I had finally just accepted the changes and was able to immerse myself in it without comparing it to the book. I still wish PJ would have stayed a bit closer to what Tolkien wrote though, but all-in-all I loved it. I think now I'm going to hold off on watching it again until the EE comes out, because I don't want to be sick of it, plus I want to give it a whirl again before DoS comes out.


R11
Lorien

Apr 9 2013, 5:42pm

Post #22 of 29 (359 views)
Shortcut
If you need to watch it multiple times [In reply to] Can't Post

 to convince yourself that it's good it should be pretty evident that it's not what it should/could be.


ron


(This post was edited by Altaira on Apr 9 2013, 5:57pm)


Luinnár
Rivendell

Apr 9 2013, 6:11pm

Post #23 of 29 (292 views)
Shortcut
I love it anytime! [In reply to] Can't Post

When I first saw the pictures of the dwarves, I was a bit nervous that I would never see them as any of the dwarves...but then I had the same reaction with Legolas when FotR came out. Laugh


elostirion74
Rohan

Apr 9 2013, 7:16pm

Post #24 of 29 (294 views)
Shortcut
Changed from the first to the second, not so much since [In reply to] Can't Post

I´m glad to hear the film has improved for you with each viewing, since there´s a lot to enjoy in the film.

While I did enjoy it more on my second and third viewing than my first, my experience of the film hasn´t changed noticeably since. I was prepared for a number of changes in advance and having spent quite a bit of time reflecting on what I could expect of differences from the original. I felt it was much easier for me to get used to the adaptation as an adaptation compared to LoTR, where I needed much more time.

In general I enjoy AUJ quite a lot, especially when it comes to the wonderfully rich and enchanting texture of the landscapes and the colours in so many parts of the story. Even so I still think there´s a marked disparity between the quality of several parts/segments of the film and this disparity is quite unusual in other films I enjoy. When you for instance contrast Bilbo´s expression when he sees Rivendell for the first time with the rather stereotypical and self-indulgent depiction of the culture clash between dwarves and elves at dinner, it feels a bit odd how the same film can be so satisfying and so generic in a short space of time.
And I could name several other examples.

It´s not difficult for me to imagine that critics who feel that the film is uneven, might also react to the sheer amount of exposition in the film and how it affects the pacing. I´m afraid I´m not so sure if they would judge it differently if they had seen the film several times.


Radagast-Aiwendil
Gondor


Apr 9 2013, 7:54pm

Post #25 of 29 (295 views)
Shortcut
Not so sure about that one [In reply to] Can't Post

The reason I found it hard to enjoy the first time was for several reasons-mainly being a fool and becoming put off by the opinions of those around me-throughout the film there were multiple sighs and groans from certain people (particularly during the Radagast scenes) and at other moments too such as when Balin calls Sting a "letter opener". So that somewhat impacted on the experience. In addition to that the cinema I was in was not of a high standard: indeed it seemed that it hadn't been refurbished or updated since the 1980's, and it was quite uncomfortable (I chose to go here instead of the local cinema because I wanted to see it on the 13th instead of the 14th). In essence, the entire experience was marred (and I won't lie that having some board member's preconceptions/critic's voices in the back of my head didn't really help much).

The second time I was less tired and I was at my local cinema, and consequently I was able to see the film's high qualities along with its (mostly forgivable and understandable) faults.

"True courage is about knowing not when to take a life, but when to spare one."

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.