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

not nearly as bad as critics have painted it. I would have rather have seen the del torro version, I think, especially after reading up on how it would have had more of a fairy tale atmosphere and undoubtedly would have been shorter. But Freeman is exceptional in the role and I liked all the dwarves. some of the battles scenes seemed excessive but whatever. Nice Sylvester McCoy turn. Deviations from the book didn't bother me very much. Also, saw it in 2d, and no idea if it was 42fps or whatever, but it looked great, no extra fakeyness and none of that motion smoothing at all. Didn't feel like it missed a thing by being in 2d.

Went against all my previous promises and decided to see it. Was painfully aware of all the textual deviations, some inconsequential but pointless (in the book he invites Gandalf to tea so he is expecting a visitor, just not dwarves); some I can grudgingly accept for reasons of upping the pace (warg attack before Rivendell); some heavy world tinkering that kinda makes sense but I'm not overly thrilled about (extended grudge match between dwarves and elves). What really winds me up though is how every scene of mild peril becomes an extended tableaux of ridiculous and implausible calamity. They can't just see a fight between stone giants, they have to spend five minutes getting swung about on the leg of one. They can't just be surprised and captured through a gap in the cave, they have to fall into a giant rollercoaster mousetrap contraption. What had me rmde more than anything was the protracted nonsensical escape from the goblin city.

But it wasn't all bad, against my expectations Freeman acquitted himself well, riddle scene was pretty well done (minor deviations excepted), I liked the eagles but why didn't they stick around for a chat? Elves were the usual lol up themselves. Radagast was pure batshit but I liked him. It didn't really drag at all.

HFR was immediately apparent, if you didn't spot any difference then you can't have seen it. Keystone Kop thing very noticeable but I think it wore off. CGI and greenscreen v v obvious in parts - first warg attack in particular - but not in others. Most of all it looked incredibly real, like you honestly could step into the screen, and in a couple of scenes I thought characters were going to step out - and I think that was down to HFR, not 3d. It doesn't have the traditional 'magic' of film but it does have the magic of high quality Planet Earth style nature documentary and that's definitely worth something.

I meant tableau of course.

I think the biggest problem with the film really is that there is too much action, and not enough Hobbit. Freeman is so good, but he doesn't seem like he's at the center of the story most of the time. I wish the film was a bit more from his POV.

There was a lot more whingy selfish Baggins in the book, complaining about being cold and tired and hungry, thinking of his hearth and home "not for the last time". Was expecting Freeman to do that quite well, instead he was pretty upstanding all the way through, even his attempted exit from the cave in the mountains was painted v sympathetically. I know you don't want yer hero to be a complete arse but a little more ambiguity as per the book would have been good.

this ruled

What really winds me up though is how every scene of mild peril becomes an extended tableaux of ridiculous and implausible calamity. They can't just see a fight between stone giants, they have to spend five minutes getting swung about on the leg of one. They can't just be surprised and captured through a gap in the cave, they have to fall into a giant rollercoaster mousetrap contraption. What had me rmde more than anything was the protracted nonsensical escape from the goblin city.

you're kinda selling me on seeing this tbh

that all sounds pretty fun!

I finally saw this today and really enjoyed it! The goblin king's ball chin was very disturbing, especially in 3d.

saw it in HFR 3D, at first I thought I was watching one of those 10 minute movies they show at history museums, like George Washington Chops Down A Cherry Tree

then it was like, vintage PSX FMV

also did christopher lee and peter jackson make up?

I guess what was most unsettling was that they found the guy who could most approximate aragorn's screen presence while also being short to play thorin

I mostly liked this though during the stone giant scene I suddenly recovered a suppressed memory that Peter Jackson made King Kong and I saw it and it was shitty.

then it was like, vintage PSX FMV

OTM

Omg fuck Sylvester McCoy bottle feeding a fucking porcupine in "hfr" 80s BBC yakety sax quality, who thinks that looks good?

hate to be the one to tell you this but ... it was a hedgehog

I guess what was most unsettling was that they found the guy who could most approximate aragorn's screen presence while also being short to play thorin

Armitage is actually six foot two. Movie trickery, gotta love it...

Anyway to my honest surprise this thing seems to be actually gaining a little steam based on the box office returns, even after the expected drop off over the second weekend. My initial impression really was that it just was too out and out OTT to have a chance to come close to Fellowship, say, but it seems like it is, while plenty of people I know who don't know the story said they loved it.

also did christopher lee and peter jackson make up?

Based on the LOTR documentaries that happened during the publicity tour for ROTK in Copenhagen, so there ya go.

i had so much fun seeing this. Serkis and McKellen were better than ever and worth the price of admission by themselves and then there was a lot of other great stuff besides them.

I'm glad the consensus is positive, the only person I know who didn't enjoy it IRL is my brother, who has been getting all boring Tolkien purist about it. And I suspect he liked it more than he'll admit.

i respect the opinions of the people who are well versed in the books and have issues w/ these as adaptations (and someday i will reread The Hobbit/finish LOTR) but just as movie magic spectacles i love the LOTR trilogy and this feels right in step with those, if with different strengths/weaknesses in spots. so people who liked the previous movies but not this one confuse me.

The tone's a good deal more frivolous, if you like your fantasy all portentious and brow-furrowed I can see this might not hit the spot for you. Conversely my Dad, who was bored stiff by LOTR, thought this was a hoot.

yeah but that seems like a response to the difference in source material, although yeah i guess that would provide different opinions of the films nonetheless

If anything Jackson's found a way to make the stories even more consistent that Tolkien ever managed. Tolkien never did a full rewrite of the Hobbit -- he started once but it soon gave out -- but he retconned a chunk of it, mostly to do with Gollum, for an edition in the mid-sixties that's now the standard one.

the dwarves reminded me of travolta in battlefield earth

Tolkien never did a full rewrite of the Hobbit -- he started once but it soon gave out -- but he retconned a chunk of it, mostly to do with Gollum, for an edition in the mid-sixties that's now the standard one.

― Ned Raggett, Friday, December 28, 2012 7:59 PM (30 minutes ago)

Mostly to do with the ring iirc... originally the ring was just a magic trinket more or less, not THE ONE RING.

http://i.imgur.com/Xjtv3.gif

My new favorite gif.

some of the comic relief made me grit my teeth but man this movie was fun

also it helps to think, when you're watching this, that you're just marathoning a tv series, doesn't feel long at all

except for the year between episodes

My mates are seeing this today. Even though I've seen it already I'm jealous I can't go

also did christopher lee and peter jackson make up?

― 乒乓, Friday, December 28, 2012 5:10 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Well, he did have Gandalf and Galadriel talk telepathically or whatever during most of Lee's dialogue, which was pretty hilarious.

except for the year between episodes

seasons, my man, year between seasons

Woah, really? There was an old Christopher Lee sci fi movie called Starship Invasions where he also speaks telepathically, and it's pretty funny.

I didn't know Christopher Lee and Peter Jackson had a falling out... anyone have a link on the story? Certainly Lee couldn't have been upset that he was playing a villian... did he get screwed out of money or something?

Nvermind I found it... funny that I don't remember his scenes being cut in ROTK because I have only been watching the extended editions for the past 6 years or so and there's plenty of Lee action in the extended cut.

http://static.winterdrake.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/hobbit2.png

I don't often do See Image Info but that one had me right clickin' in a second.

This was pretty dire. Started off well, but once they hit the road it went to shit. Absolutely loved the riddle scene though; no surprise that Serkis tore it up and Freeman finally became Bilbo, if only for that short while.

Once I noticed that the pale orc looked like Peter Garrett in a muscle suit I couldn't take him seriously.

throughout the whole movie I was sitting there thinking "damn, they spent all this money on this and it still looks fake as hell"

Serkis should get a damn oscar nod already imo

As a nerd, I enjoyed this movie. But I can't say I'd recommend it to the average person on the street.

I got up to pee while the dwarves were singing and washing dishes. When I got back, that was still happening.

Still, I may go catch it in IMAX as I personally love to be submersed in these fantasy worlds. The original novel is a great story, but has that annoying "I'm reading this aloud to my grandson" tone. So I'm personally all for interjecting more mythos into the story.

Bottom line: Rankin & Bass did it better, even if they abridged it in the process.

I got up to pee while the dwarves were singing and washing dishes. When I got back, that was still happening.

new board description

It was funny to me at the time ass well.

At least I have good instincts about when to pee!

christopher tolkien gave his first ever interview this year:

Invited to meet Peter Jackson, the Tolkien family preferred not to. Why? "They eviscerated the book by making it an action movie for young people aged 15 to 25," Christopher says regretfully. "And it seems that The Hobbit will be the same kind of film."

This divorce has been systematically driven by the logic of Hollywood. "Tolkien has become a monster, devoured by his own popularity and absorbed into the absurdity of our time," Christopher Tolkien observes sadly. "The chasm between the beauty and seriousness of the work, and what it has become, has overwhelmed me. The commercialization has reduced the aesthetic and philosophical impact of the creation to nothing. There is only one solution for me: to turn my head away."

I think he is far, far overestimating the effect Jackson's films will ever have on the way people read these books.

I think the key point is more how people won't read the books when they have the movies!

that's part of what I mean, I think he's being way too pessimistic about that.