Movie: The Hobbit

[Rahan]

Actually, 81% after one day for a movie with much hype and a big fandom (ie movie that "started" with a high rating) is not very good (well, it's "fine" as you said, but the rating can only go down from there)

I didn't like it. The humor (mostly in the beginning) didn't amuse me and the journey was boring.
Only 4 dwarves are focused on (Thorin, Balin and 2 brothers) but that doesn't mean the other characters are well developped. They are all totally bland.
Also, some more action-ish scenes, like the Radagast and his rabbit sled were surprisingly bad.

On the other hand, it was visually splendid, but that wasn't enough to make the movie.

[Kyero Fox]

Sounds like too much nit picking atm, I'm gonna see it later tho so we'll see. So far the two reviewers I follow instead of uptight critics say it's full price.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Though it sounds like this isn't gonna be Oscar material. which is fine. LotR is too tall a yardstick to match after all.

[Xagzan]

Originally Posted by james0246

What a horrendously bloated and overwrought film. Ridiculously padded and hideously paced (at times), Unexpected Journey is like the car ride on a bad family vacation - endless, boring, with a few decent sights but ultimately you are filled with nothing but loathing at the end. What a disappointing film and a very inauspicious start to a new trilogy (hopefully, Jackson will edit out all the useless dwarf crap, and really all the unneeded non-Hobbit crap, and just give us one more film that actually ends the story instead of two more ludicrous entries more padded than an insane asylum). 60/100.

edit: a brief caveat, I came to The Hobbit mostly for the 9-minute Star Trek segment...which was very good .

Wooow. I never thought I could disagree with something to such an extent!

Then again, I'm biased. Although while I can see what problems non-Tolkienites might have with the film, I don't at all think they're that severe. What, should everything be rushed from point A to B? A bit of padding and slow pacing now and again never hurt, and in the case of Middle-earth, is highly welcome. It's good to just stop and smell the roses and let the world come to life once in a while, whether it's a feast scene or a song.

And yes, objectively the parts with Galadriel and co were absolutely unnecessary and could've been removed without any impact on the rest of the movie. Well, so what? I still adored seeing the setup for the epic events that lie on the horizon. And even if their appearance was just fanservice, well, it was a hell of a good one I always wondered how PJ might bring to life Dol Goldur and the Necromancer.

Aside from that, also objectively, I can admit that the beginning took a while to get going, some of the toilet humor was excessive (though this was a children's book), and the CG for some of the creatures was eyebrow raising (Crixus Azog and the you know whats at the end looked ehhhh).

But honestly, it's funny, so many of the criticisms I've seen so far, they simply make it seem like the person has not read the book, or maybe didn't even know there was one! Really, people were expecting this to be as powerful and dramatic as LotR? Sorry, but that's on them, for having unrealistic expectations--because the Hobbit book isn't as good as the trilogy (in my opinion anyway). So why would the films be? Despite my desperate attempts to lower them, I went into this with pretty high expectations, but even so, I kept them on a smaller scale, because I knew that's what The Hobbit is. This movie is as good as any film about the (first third of the) Hobbit book could be, and let's be real, any problems with the story on the whole is ultimately an issue with the original novel.

No, it's not Lord of the Rings. Yes, it's slow going. Yes it has "unnecessary" elements. Maybe these are just appealing and immersive to fans, and I do think those who already know a bit about and love Tolkien's world will generally like this more than the casual moviegoer, but I still think the latter can find good enjoyment in the film if they aren't looking for a quick, in and out cinematic fix.

That's my two cents anyway. Or at least what I can remember of it since I thought it up.

Oh right! Just also wanted to praise Andy Serkis, for an obviously great job. And Gollum's facial range in this one, it was quite stunning. As tragic a character as ever. Then Freeman, McKellan, definitely thought they were great. And, despite my trepidation about him when he was cast, I really did like Armitage as Thorin. He didn't look like I'd always imagined the dwarf king to look, but he had the same bearing and gravitas.

EDIT again: Where is my head, I'm just forgetting things left and right Loved the score, that I never doubted

Spoiler:

especially nice was the surprise Return of the King refrain at the end,

and particularly the ending song. It's been out for a while, I know, but I held back from listening to go in fresh. And boy was it beautiful.

Spoiler for Song of the Lonely Mountain:

[Vexx]

It looks to be a film for already confirmed fans who just want to see Jackson's imagining of the events. I'm mostly going for the visuals, a few memorable moments, and to see the 48fps effect.

[GDB]

Originally Posted by Kyero Fox

Sounds like too much nit picking atm

This. I fully enjoyed it. However, I did get a headache during it, which usually never happens. I'm not sure if it was all the jerky camera movements or the fact I had barely eaten in about 24 hours, but yeah. Unusual.

[TheForsaken]

Originally Posted by Rahan

Only 4 dwarves are focused on (Thorin, Balin and 2 brothers) but that doesn't mean the other characters are well developped. They are all totally bland.

Well, it's the same in the book.
Even now I still can't remember the names of the dwarves other than the four you mentioned, and Bombur (comic relief) and Gloin (just because he's Gimli's father).

[Xagzan]

Originally Posted by Vexx

It looks to be a film for already confirmed fans who just want to see Jackson's imagining of the events. I'm mostly going for the visuals, a few memorable moments, and to see the 48fps effect.

Oh yeah, speaking of, I only saw the 24, so had none of the 48-associated problems others did.

Originally Posted by GDB

This. I fully enjoyed it. However, I did get a headache during it, which usually never happens. I'm not sure if it was all the jerky camera movements or the fact I had barely eaten in about 24 hours, but yeah. Unusual.

Did you see it in 48fps? Or just 3D? I know that's the only time I get even slight headaches at the movies, when I have to wear those awful keep-sliding-down-your-nose glasses the whole time.

[GDB]

Originally Posted by Xagzan

Did you see it in 48fps? Or just 3D?

Neither. Standard digital. That's why it was so weird. Like I said though, I think barely eating for nearly 24 hours had something to do with it.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by GDB

Neither. Standard digital. That's why it was so weird. Like I said though, I think barely eating for nearly 24 hours had something to do with it.

One thing I didn't like about LOTR (and many other recent films) is the fascination with both the jittery cameras and the "zoom too close and blur during combat" bullshit. Sorry director guys, but that's not how I experience lethal situations at all.

My wife just closes her eyes because it makes her nauseated (jitter or blur).

[kyp275]

Saw it last night, it was a bit slow, and had some pacing issues IMO, but I kinda went in expecting that already since they're stretching that one book into 3 long movies. The movie is definitely designed to appeal more to those who are familiar with the Tolkien lore, as the significance of many of the events will simply be lost on those who don't know.

[monster]

I just came back from watching it and I love it. I don't remember the story anymore, but that's fine.

Spoiler for Should be harmless, but just in case:

I thought they were going to end it literally a cliffhanger, but they went a little bit more. (Well, I suppose they still ended at a different, more peaceful and hopeful cliff scene.)

[Mr Hat and Clogs]

I think people nitpicking and comparing it to LOTR do tend to forget the Hobbit is a MUCH simpler story, meant for children. They have had to take a fair amount of liberties (ie the fight sequences) to get it at least close to LoTR in scale.

[ninryu]

I went to see the movie yesterday - it was awesome. I haven't enjoyed a movie like that in a while.

[Kyero Fox]

Originally Posted by GDB

Neither. Standard digital. That's why it was so weird. Like I said though, I think barely eating for nearly 24 hours had something to do with it.

I took my 3d glasses off during some spots and they still looked 3D, that may be why.

I Loved it, a lot of the parts look insanely real. I felt like i was in that house during all that dwarfness mess.

Parts were stretched sure But I give it a 9.5/10. Would have been a 10 if Gandalf used magic at a certain part of the movie.


Best part of the movie was at the credits when I shouted

"The Ring gets destroyed and Bilbo is lives!"

Everyone started laughing.

[Xagzan]

Originally Posted by Vexx

One thing I didn't like about LOTR (and many other recent films) is the fascination with both the jittery cameras and the "zoom too close and blur during combat" bullshit. Sorry director guys, but that's not how I experience lethal situations at all.

My wife just closes her eyes because it makes her nauseated (jitter or blur).

I wouldn't imagine you experience lethal situations from any kind of third-person perspective

[GDB]

Originally Posted by Kyero Fox

Best part of the movie was at the credits when I shouted

"The Ring gets destroyed and Bilbo is lives!"

Everyone started laughing.

In my theatre, someone shouted "DUN DUN DUNNNNNNNN" at the end. That got a good chuckle out of everyone.

[Kyero Fox]

Originally Posted by GDB

In my theatre, someone shouted "DUN DUN DUNNNNNNNN" at the end. That got a good chuckle out of everyone.

Yeaaa that last part was pretty dumb imo.

[ChainLegacy]

Originally Posted by james0246

What a horrendously bloated and overwrought film. Ridiculously padded and hideously paced (at times), Unexpected Journey is like the car ride on a bad family vacation - endless, boring, with a few decent sights but ultimately you are filled with nothing but loathing at the end. What a disappointing film and a very inauspicious start to a new trilogy (hopefully, Jackson will edit out all the useless dwarf crap, and really all the unneeded non-Hobbit crap, and just give us one more film that actually ends the story instead of two more ludicrous entries more padded than an insane asylum). 60/100.

edit: a brief caveat, I came to The Hobbit mostly for the 9-minute Star Trek segment...which was very good .

Well, I wasn't too pleased. The beginning was way too long and the part with Frodo was completely unnecessary and goofy. Didn't like their interpretation of Radagast, nor the awkward 'forcing' of Thorin into an Aragorn type role. I feel embarrased for being so naive and confident this would be done well. I suppose it stems from how pleased I was with the Lord of the Rings movies, but I should have known better. I apologize also to james who predicted this outcome and I stupidly disagreed! I suppose I should trust your opinion in the future.

I am a huge fan of The Hobbit and this could have been done much better. There was no need for stretching or extra exposition, as Tolkien already had enough extra material for them to work off of. Additionally, they came on way too strong with information - the book slowly unveiled info as it was needed. Here we got hit by a tsunami wave of flashbacks and explanations for why people are acting a certain way. Totally unnecessary. Again, my apologies for making a fool out of myself earlier in this thread for being so confident they'd get this right!

Also, I'm not a big moviegoer so I don't care what happens, but I'm not a fan of 3D movies. Both ones I've been to (Avatar and this) have left my eyes in pain/discomfort. Not to a degree that I'm wincing in pain, but pain in my eyes while watching a movie is pretty annoying.

[Chiibi]

I just saw it and it kicked ass. (Non-3D version). There was nothing boring about it except maybe a few minutes during the intro....but we were unable to meet up with a third friend who was supposed to see it so I was badly distracted the first fifteen minutes in. :/

Rivendell was EXTREME scenery porn at its finest. :'D The action scenes were great. (Sometimes it felt like it was too much. We need time to breathe, yo!)

But 'boring'? Hell no. That's the last word I'd use. I enjoyed it a good deal more than Fellowship.