The Hobbit films, previously to be directed by Guillermo del Toro and now to be directed by Peter Jackson again.

Don't really GAF what ain't it cool, Empire or any nerd service sites think tbf. This thing could be a botch or a fumble but who knows, the people involved are pretty fuckin smart and they surprised me before.

the Aint It Cool review of Dark Knight Rises was ridiculously over-the-top in its geekery and seemed to be out of step with everyone else on the planet's opinion give or take. is it always like that these days?

Haven't they always been like that? I find AICN's house style utterly insufferable.

totally

the AICN review seemed reasonable. They're not all Harry Knowles

"Mr Beaks", who works at AICN, is excellent.
The others - not.

yeah, this is a bit of an ordeal. You really feel the stretching of the source material.
It seems like he sort of wanted it have a lighter feel than LOTR (Radagast and his ridiculous bunnies, Barry Humphries as comedy goblin king) but couldn't resist laying on the moody flashbacks, overwrought score and endless hordes of cgi goblins. I feel like the only reason for these movies to exist was to see Smaug realised on screen and of course you don't even get that with this one.

maybe when this is eventually released on DVD, instead of doing extended editions like they did with LOTR, they will make reduced editions. I would probably watch those.

so... what are the second and third films going to be called? idgi

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

The Hobbit: There and Back Again

The Hobbit IV: Creature of Hobbit

I didn't notice the 48fps business at all btw. I think there might be something wrong with me

it only works on special projectors/screens iirc?

Yeah, only select theaters. Folks say it is akin to the atrocious "soap opera" setting of hi-def TVs.

They also say the image is so sharp the flaws are massively apparent. One review mentioned seeing Sir Ian's contact lens edge, another the fact that the staffs and stuff now look like cheap resin replicas.

no, my screening was in 48fps

oh right, it's probly shit then

It was basically the only reason i went so i was a tad miffed. Maybe i am visually impaired in some way though

bought a ticket to see this in glorious 48FPS 3D at Cinerama on Friday evening. Pretty much planning on more or less hating this, but maybe it'll get the better of me.

my mom is totally psyched for this

just not excited about this in the slightest. not sure why; maybe the negative advance talk, but also, it just seems anticlimactic after LotR.

^^^ this. I cared when the film was announced but it just seems like a chore now.

if you want to know what the future of the Hobbit movies will be like, imagine a big hairy foot stamping on a human face, forever

Eh, it will be by Jackson, it will have Hobbits and such, I will merrily watch it while my butt goes numb.

numb yr ass and yr mind will follow

Not sure what I want to sit through less, this or Del Toro's upcoming joint.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vKz7WnU83E

Ouch:

http://www.filmfreakcentral.net/ffc/2012/12/the-hobbit-an-unexpected-journey.html

Seeing this in 48fps tomorrow morning, whee

It looks pretty bad imo but I want to see a 48fps movie on a nice screen.

http://www.filmfreakcentral.net/.a/6a0168ea36d6b2970c017d3ec21f9b970c-800wi

otm

I think 48fps is the only way i'd want to see this in a theater.

old hobbits die hard

That review is pretty terrible, but yeah hard to take anyone serious if they are going to compare something to the Star Wars Holiday Special right out the gate. All the bitching about Jackson "manufacturing" villains and plot points and stuff.... the reviewer realizes this is fiction, right?

It's fiction, but it's also based on a beloved text.

tbh one of the things i am most anticipating is seeing what kind of invented business Jackson/Walsh et al have imported into the book's story. It's totally fine with me as long as it's awesome.

Via a friend on FB:

According to a post on thehalloffire.net from someone who's gotten a copy of Brian Sibley's "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey Official Movie Guide", this is the quality dramaturgy we have to look forward to in Jackson's HOBBIT movies:

"According to Barry Humphries [who plays the Great Goblin], the Great Goblin's throne doubles as a toilet, with a hole in the seat... 'The Goblin King is, among other things, grossly incontinent so if he hears the call of nature it doesn't need to interrupt his conversation and, from time to time, a beautifully crafted urn beneath the throne receives a compliment of matter from the Goblin King, generally speaking of ill-digested Dwarf.'"

Very Meet the Feeblesy.

A follow-up comment indicates this isn't actually IN the film, but perhaps...implied.

That sounds kind of great?

It was also implied in the Fellowship film that Saruman fucked mud to generate uruk-hai iirc

being an H Shore fan in general, I got the Special Edition of the film score last night at lol Best Buy. The booklet includes a cue by cue rundown, which I stopped skimming pretty soon as it became evident that this is gonna be nothing like the book. That actually made me more eager to see the film...

(will post more on the score later, am finishing it up now)

It's not the deviation from sacred text that rubs the wrong way but the simultaneous fealty and extrapolation. I think there is legit reason to roll eyes when a 250 page book for kids is padded out into the same three-part, nine-hour epic format that an epic trio of books ostensibly for older readers merited. Whoever hoped there would be a shorter cut on DVD was OTM, since my understanding is that every fleeting mention of conflict in the novel is expanded into a full-on battle, and that what begins as dwarf adventure is bogged down both by portent - the ring! my precious! - and dwarf frivolity.

Basically, Lessons in the Perils of Trying to Please Everyone, Part 343.

didn't notice the Great Goblins's throne but he basically has a ballsack for a face

If it's just a matter of inflating every incident in the book into a set piece then that will, indeed, suck. My sense is that there's completely invented stuff though? Forgive me for not having read the reviews on AICN and its ilk; maybe I would already know these things if I had.

xpost

It's kinda both Jon

didn't notice the Great Goblins's throne but he basically has a ballsack for a face

I was wavering but now I am definitely seeing this movie

There's apparently invented stuff, extrapolated stuff from other books and also overblown set-piece stuff that warranted passing mention in the book.

Yeah one of the things that leaps out rereading the book vs LOTR is how quickly the perilous incidents are wrapped up. It really is a survival from the old kind of fantasies that feel like written-down hearth tales. You don't get bogged down in details of battle choreography. I love that.

hoping for a whimsical scene set to "The Greatest Adventure (The Ballad of the Hobbit)"

The modern genre storyteller's obsession with tension and release is just not there.

xpost to self

man if they followed the book there would be SO many songs; I'm surprised they retained as many as (judging from the sdtrk) they did.

Also, I'm astonished to report that the Neil Finn song is pretty dope and apt.

There's a Neil Finn song? That's the first thing that's made me want to see this.

Unless it's just "Don't Dream It's Over" again, which would also be apt.

There are two songs, both quite brief