It’s heartening to see so much support for the movie and Peter Jackson’s vision. I think a lot of people have been too cynical and ignorant in their reviews of the film. I loved the movie, and I look forward to the sequels.
[quote]sen say wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
I’ve figured out Azog’s role (he’ll survive until the Battle of the Five Armies). [/quote]
How long did this take you?
Just kidding…I saw it with my 3 sons and we all came to the same figuring. Should be cool.
Good points on the character development.[/quote]
It took me a while: I figured they were going to have Thorin kill Azog then I realized Billy Connolly is playing Dain II Ironfoot, and I was busy geeking out at Azog being played by Crixus.
I read a feature in a magazine which listed all the dwarf profiles. I’ll see if I can find them online and post them. They really make Jackson’s direction clearer. It’s not something that could be achieved in one film.
[quote]challer1 wrote:
[quote]HamishMcTavish wrote:
Anyway, seriously, all the haters out there who said it doesn’t have enough action are completely full of it- there was a ton of action, and it was a suspenseful good movie with a helluvalot of detail and Jackson obviously did his homework regarding the original Hobbit book. I originally thought it was lame of him to make it into 3 pieces for commercial reasons, but now think it was more his ultimate geekdom homage of the Tolkein fan in him that made him do it the way he did. I never started out to be a Jackson and/or Tolkein worshipper, but holy shiza these movies are above and beyond the pale here… acrew the haters, seriously. I love the Hobbit and can’t wait for the rest. :)[/quote]
There was plenty of action, but there was no meaningful action.
There was tons of action in the movie but outside of when the dragon took over the lone mountain place all of the action in the movie was pointless. Pointless battles versus pointless antagonists. Yawn.
Actually, it wasn’t that boring at the time I was watching it, but when the movie ended, I was pissed. I wasn’t the only one - people in my theater were booing when the movie ended. People clapped and cheered at the end of the other LOTR movies.
Side note: The Goblins are all so weak and pathetic as well - worst antagonists ever. When the Goblin King was like “OMG THAT IS THE FOE SLAYERR~!~!” it was so cheesy I felt embarrassed for whoever wrote the script.
[/quote]
OP here. Couldn’t agree with this post any more. And yes, I am a huge Tolkien fan…I loved LOTR films, read the LOTR a dozen times, and even visited Tolkien’s grave when backpacking England back in the day. The reality is, Peter Jackson’s vision of The Hobbit is a bloated mess, had a ridiculously long drawn out ending, and failed to resonate with me. I hope he recovers with the next two films, but he hasn’t made a good film since Return Of The King.
[quote]challer1 wrote:
Side note: The Goblins are all so weak and pathetic as well - worst antagonists ever. When the Goblin King was like “OMG THAT IS THE FOE SLAYERR~!~!” it was so cheesy I felt embarrassed for whoever wrote the script.[/quote]
So you admit to not having read the book?
Movie was cheesy and craptastic. Peter Jackson is the new sam raimi (think spiderman)
I honestly was bored to tears the entire time. The bridge scene bordered on naked gun esqe.
When the final scene was over i was like “wtf, this is the ending”. Looks like another cash cow franchise on the way. I’m thinking only die hard hobbit fans will enjoy this movie.
is Sam Jackson in this movie?
Is he?
no - he is not.
this movie is bound to suck.
imo~
[quote]Edgy wrote:
is Sam Jackson in this movie?
Is he?
no - he is not.
this movie is bound to suck.
imo~[/quote]
Dont you have something better to do? Like pillage England or something?
[quote]farmerson12 wrote:
[quote]Edgy wrote:
is Sam Jackson in this movie?
Is he?
no - he is not.
this movie is bound to suck.
imo~[/quote]
Dont you have something better to do? Like pillage England or something?[/quote]
been there, done that, got the t-shirt
[quote]gregron wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I liked the idea of Prometheus. I liked how they portrayed Wayland’s daughter…but hated how they killed her off. I hated Idrise Elba’s fake country accent (even though I loved him as an actor and the part he played).
It was like a movie with great potential that had it’s writer die half way through script.
It left way too many open ends and answered NOTHING. It was like cutting x-Files off in the middle of season two and saying, “Taddaaa!!”[/quote]
Aren’t they doing a sequel to the prequel? Lol
It really felt like they were setting it up for another prequel.[/quote]
They are doing a sequel but one of the writers has walked (surprise). It was a two-hour-long con trick.
The whole point of the movie was to find out where the Space Jockeys came from, why they were on earth and what hand they had in our creation. U-uh…wrong planet.
[quote]ProRaven wrote:
[quote]challer1 wrote:
[quote]HamishMcTavish wrote:
Anyway, seriously, all the haters out there who said it doesn’t have enough action are completely full of it- there was a ton of action, and it was a suspenseful good movie with a helluvalot of detail and Jackson obviously did his homework regarding the original Hobbit book. I originally thought it was lame of him to make it into 3 pieces for commercial reasons, but now think it was more his ultimate geekdom homage of the Tolkein fan in him that made him do it the way he did. I never started out to be a Jackson and/or Tolkein worshipper, but holy shiza these movies are above and beyond the pale here… acrew the haters, seriously. I love the Hobbit and can’t wait for the rest. :)[/quote]
There was plenty of action, but there was no meaningful action.
There was tons of action in the movie but outside of when the dragon took over the lone mountain place all of the action in the movie was pointless. Pointless battles versus pointless antagonists. Yawn.
Actually, it wasn’t that boring at the time I was watching it, but when the movie ended, I was pissed. I wasn’t the only one - people in my theater were booing when the movie ended. People clapped and cheered at the end of the other LOTR movies.
Side note: The Goblins are all so weak and pathetic as well - worst antagonists ever. When the Goblin King was like “OMG THAT IS THE FOE SLAYERR~!~!” it was so cheesy I felt embarrassed for whoever wrote the script.
[/quote]
OP here. Couldn’t agree with this post any more. And yes, I am a huge Tolkien fan…I loved LOTR films, read the LOTR a dozen times, and even visited Tolkien’s grave when backpacking England back in the day. The reality is, Peter Jackson’s vision of The Hobbit is a bloated mess, had a ridiculously long drawn out ending, and failed to resonate with me. I hope he recovers with the next two films, but he hasn’t made a good film since Return Of The King.
[/quote]
It wasn’t supposed to have an ending. If you expected one you should’ve waited for the last movie.
He could have killed off Azog as a climax but he didn’t because there’s a bigger picture here.
Jackson has admitted that his movies are long, but he is the guy who took four years to film Bad Taste, filmed it on weekends and worked the rest of the week to fund it.
He’s payed his dues. Cut him some slack.
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
While I did enjoy it, as a story, it’s just not the same caliber film as LOTR, especially for people who only know the LOTR story, and expected the Hobbit to be of similar intensity and scale. My previous exposure was the old Ralph Bakshi cartoons from my childhood, so obviously Jackson’s visions blew me away. In terms of lagging moments in the films,… well, if a director cuts something too short, it’s bad, and if they let it go too long, it’s bad. No one will ever be completely satisfied, so I guess I sort of grant film makers a certain amount of leeway (sp? -lol).
S[/quote]
I agree with the above… especially about the old toon films and the level above that Jackson’s epics have been. Of course there were dragging moments in this film! I think we’re all romanticizing our time with LOTR a bit though. After watching the 1st film again, no one thought that was boring until the river turned to horses? This film, like the first LOTR film, is the set-up for what’s to follow. I mean, we really only got about 5 sec of one of Smoag’s eyes. I thought this was about what I expected, having recently watched the LOTR trilogy with my youngest son to get him prepped for the Hobbit.
[quote]imhungry wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
It wouldn’t have worked as a single movie. I’ve been pretty vocal about my dislike of trilogies being made for the sake of it, but one thing that isn’t immediately apparent is the amount of work Peter Jackson has put into making each of the dwarves stand as individuals.
The journey has to be protracted so relationships can form. Jackson has done an amazing job of giving them defined personalities, each with different reasons for joining the quest. That won’t be apparent until the ebd credits roll on the last movie. Thorin, Balin and Bofur got most of the attention in part 1, with the rest getting their moments to shine in the sequels.
And Smaug will blow our minds.
I’ve figured out Azog’s role (he’ll survive until the Battle of the Five Armies). [/quote]
[/quote]
Yep. Smaug is gonna fuck shit up.
I loved it. LOTR fan. Read the books. I was satisfied.
The movie was a beautiful rendition of the book, as well as some of the Unfinished Tales. I enjoyed every minute of it and, I wished it’d gone a little bit longer. Looking forward to seeing what Jackson has concocted for the next instalment.
Ps: ID, go see it. Your people NEED you to see it!! There’re haircut and beard braiding ideas you can pick up from them too.
[quote]roybot wrote:
It wouldn’t have worked as a single movie. I’ve been pretty vocal about my dislike of trilogies being made for the sake of it, but one thing that isn’t immediately apparent is the amount of work Peter Jackson has put into making each of the dwarves stand as individuals.
The journey has to be protracted so relationships can form. Jackson has done an amazing job of giving them defined personalities, each with different reasons for joining the quest. That won’t be apparent until the ebd credits roll on the last movie. Thorin, Balin and Bofur got most of the attention in part 1, with the rest getting their moments to shine in the sequels.
And Smaug will blow our minds.
I’ve figured out Azog’s role (he’ll survive until the Battle of the Five Armies). [/quote]
So is the battle with Smaug and the 5 armies going to be in Hobbit 2 or Hobbit 3? Or is he going to separate them?
He has to have a lot of filler to make it 3 movies.
Just watched the Hobbit cartoon, brings back memories.
[quote]fnf wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
It wouldn’t have worked as a single movie. I’ve been pretty vocal about my dislike of trilogies being made for the sake of it, but one thing that isn’t immediately apparent is the amount of work Peter Jackson has put into making each of the dwarves stand as individuals.
The journey has to be protracted so relationships can form. Jackson has done an amazing job of giving them defined personalities, each with different reasons for joining the quest. That won’t be apparent until the ebd credits roll on the last movie. Thorin, Balin and Bofur got most of the attention in part 1, with the rest getting their moments to shine in the sequels.
And Smaug will blow our minds.
I’ve figured out Azog’s role (he’ll survive until the Battle of the Five Armies). [/quote]
So is the battle with Smaug and the 5 armies going to be in Hobbit 2 or Hobbit 3? Or is he going to separate them?
He has to have a lot of filler to make it 3 movies.
Just watched the Hobbit cartoon, brings back memories. [/quote]
Lake Town is in the next movie (The Desolation of Smaug), Battle of the Five Armies will probably be kept for There and Back Again.
I like it more than LOTR
Finally saw this last night. As a fan of the LOTR trilogy i have to say i enjoyed it, and am looking forward to the next installment, but it was not up to par with the LOTR.
My gripes concerning The Hobbit:
Too many drawn out scenes that dragged on way too long. Examples: The excruciatingly long shire scene with the dwarves coming to bilbo’s house, the scenes with Golem.
Trying to hard to insert humor. What stands out most to me here is the dialogue with the 3 trolls and i cringed when the troll king dude said “That’ll do it” after Gandalf gutted him.
This probably wouldnt bother me if the original LOTR didnt exist but Hobbit seemed way over the top compared to LOTR. From some ridiculous choreography during action scenes to the stone giant battle. (which just didnt seem to fit in with the LOTR/Hobbit feel at all and looked kind of stupid) There was also way too many miraculous last minute saves.
While the movie overall looked beautiful and CGI was generally great, at times it was pretty poor as well.
None of this was enough to kill my enjoyment of the movie and anticipation of the rest of the series though.
Id go 7/10.
Well this thread is rather old, but since the second instalment have been released, I want to share how I feel about the two instalments.
As a simple fantasy-action Movie it delivers, but it is an insult to the book and the fictional world created by Tolkien.
Here are some of the Things that bothered me.
-
Some of the dwarfs looked like shit, especially the 3 who arent of the house of Durin + that guy With the geek hair( Oin I think )
-
Too much action scenes, especially in the second one. I thought the first one where better here, especially the Shire scene and the Gollum scene. The conversation between Bilbo and Smaug was the best scene in the second Movie IMO.
-
Too many “scare you” scenes. I hate being startled and I hate horror Movies, the book is not a horror book, so I dont understand why the film have to be. I also have aracnophobia so the spider scene where especially horrible for me( I understand it needs to be there since its in the book )
-
I hated what they did to Radagast and Beorn. Its cool that they bring Radagast to life on the silverscreen, but the rabbit sled was idiotic and dum. + Radagast is an Ainur who is older than Arda( the Earth in Tolkiens universe ) so its a shame to see him be reduced to a Comic relief. Beorn on the other hand looked ridiculess.
-
The Dale scene in the second Movie was bad and its culture was in my opinion out of Place in Middle-earth. It looked to modern compared to the Gondorians and Rohirrim in the Lord of the Rings Movies. And I dont understand why there was any actions scenes there, completly unecessary. Only good thing With Dale was the fact that Stephen Fry played the Lord of the town.
-
The Battle between the dwarves and Smaug. Not in the book and also pointless. I would rather seen Bilbo and Smaugs little chat where expanded.
-
In the book there are small glimpses to the past of Middle-earth, for instances when Elrond sees Orkrists and Glamdring he mentions Gondolin. I am sad that that was omitted from the first Movie and I wish there could have been some more glimpses to the first and second age of middle-earth. ( I know Jackson and friends dont have rights to “the Silmarillion” and other of the books edited and published by Christopher Tolkien, but there is enough in the appendixes of Lotr for him to use ).
The stuff I liked.
-
The beginning of both of the films where great and epic.
-
When Balin tells of the fight in front of Moria between the orcs and the dwarves is awesome.
-
Smaug looks great.
-
The Choice to show what Gandalf and the white councel did while Bilbo and Thorin and Co where on their adventure.
-
Azog looks cool and for ones a orc is presented as something that is not phatetic. ( always hated that, in both the films and the books )
Thats it for now.
Ps. As always will I apologise in advance for my butchering of the English Language.
In a nutshell, I think Peter Jackson should’ve stuck to 2 movies as he originally planned. My main gripes in Hobbit II is the overly drawn out river scene and the dragon fight scene was way too long too. I think it would’ve been better if they kept the dwarf and dragon interaction out of it like in the book. And I’m the type of person who loves action movies and scenes typically. It’s bad when I want an action scene to already be over with.
What I did really like was the scene where Gandalf and Sauron battle. I don’t think that was in the book but still pretty cool.
And I’m totally with you Florelius on Radagastar being reduced to comic relief. Just terrible. There’s so many dwarves, I can’t even remember all there names, they should’ve used one of them more for that.
Overall, I still enjoyed the movie but not up to par with LOTR. Although, I’m still anticipating the 3rd. Where I’d give LOTR a 9/10, I give Hobbit 7/10.