Cool News
Nordling Loves Returning To Middle-Earth In THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY!

Nordling here.
Middle-earth, I’ve missed you.
How much you enjoy Peter Jackson’s THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY depends on you. I’ve read a few reviews now, and many of them say that it’s too long and too full of extraneous material. Technically, I understand where they are coming from. It is a long movie – almost three hours, and much of its running time sees Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman), Gandalf the Grey (Ian McKellen), Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage), and the assortment of Dwarves getting into one scrape or another. If you weren’t much of a fan of THE LORD OF THE RINGS, THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY certainly won’t change your mind.
However, I’m not one of those people. I’ve watched the Extended Cuts of THE LORD OF THE RINGS so many times now that I’ve lost count. I greatly love this world that Peter Jackson and the team at WETA have created for the screen, and coming back to Hobbiton to the dulcet tones of Ian Holm as Bilbo, telling the history of the Dwarves and Erebor, was like falling back into bliss. I found it very difficult to put my critical hat on when watching, and after a while, I simply stopped bothering. What that means to you as an audience member I leave up to you. Coming from a real place of love and admiration for these movies, I really thrived on the experience.
For those unfamiliar with the story – all four of you – this is the story of how Bilbo Baggins came upon that wonderful Ring and his adventures in Middle-earth. THE HOBBIT is the prelude to the events of THE LORD OF THE RINGS, J. R. R. Tolkien’s epic war saga. Thorin Oakenshield, with twelve other Dwarves, must reclaim the ancient kingdom of Erebor and recover their lost gold, which is now in the hands of the dragon Smaug (Benedict Cumberbatch). To do that, they need a burglar to figure out how to get inside the mountain fortress, and the Dwarves think they’ve found one in Bilbo. But Bilbo is unused to adventure, and even a recommendation by Gandalf isn’t enough to convince Thorin. But Bilbo comes along, and what he experiences will change him forever. Meanwhile, the White Council senses that something is amiss in Middle-earth, and Gandalf decides to investigate matters while helping the Dwarves return to their home.
So yes, THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY feels a little smaller, a little more whimsical in comparison, and that’s appropriate. None of THE LORD OF THE RINGS movies, for example, had a song about being careful with Bilbo’s plates and cutlery, all sung and performed by a plethora of Dwarves. Certainly none of them featured a character like Radagast the Brown (Sylvester McCoy), a wizard so unaware of his own appearance that he has a stream of caked bird shit on the side of his face, as he investigates a rising dark power called the Necromancer in the forests of Mirkwood. Radagast has his own sled pulled by rabbits, and talks to himself, and for many he might be a bit Jar-Jaresque.
THE HOBBIT isn’t so separated from THE LORD OF THE RINGS to render everything new – Jackson has taken great care to make sure that the world feels the same – but the stakes don’t feel as high, at least not yet. This is a world that has not seen the real darkness of THE LORD OF THE RINGS, and I’m curious if future moviegoers can watch these movies in the proper order. Considering how THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY opens, with Ian Holm telling his story while Frodo (Elijah Wood) prepares for Bilbo’s famous birthday party, most people will likely want to start at THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING and work their way through.
So was THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY worth the nine year wait? I can only speak for myself in this regard - I happily sunk into those warm waters of Middle-earth again. As usual in these movies, the performances help sell the verisimilitude, and Martin Freeman is pitch-perfect as Bilbo, a hobbit who enjoys the simple pleasures of food, pipe-smoking, and absolutely no adventures if he can help it. But Bilbo also comes from a long line of more courageous hobbits, and when Gandalf decides to thrust Bilbo into adventure, Freeman gives the character a real spirit and spark. McKellen falls back into Gandalf with ease – this time, the younger Gandalf is more uncertain of himself, and when he deals with the likes of Galadriel (Cate Blanchett), Elrond (Hugo Weaving), and Saruman (Christopher Lee), Gandalf is very much a lesser power. I always found Gandalf the Grey a more interesting character than Gandalf the White, and McKellen’s return to the role is welcome.
Andy Serkis’ Gollum also returns, and the Riddles in the Dark scene between Gollum and Bilbo is probably the best scene in the movie. Gollum isn’t quite the desperate schemer he is in THE LORD OF THE RINGS. Here, Gollum is at the pinnacle of his existence; with the Ring in his possession, Gollum happily lives in his cave eating fish and any unfortunate goblins that come his way. Jackson, Boyens, Walsh, and Guillermo Del Toro’s script wisely sticks very close to Tolkien’s work in this scene, as it was probably the best written moment in the entire novel. As for the CGI, it’s flawless – Gollum may as well be real at this point. With Serkis’s performance and the motion capture technology, Gollum really is one of the most compelling characters ever created.
The performances are excellent across the board. Richard Armitage’s Thorin, like Boromir in THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING, is actually improved in the transition from book to screen. Armitage brings nobility and passion to Thorin, and when his honor overrides his good sense, you understand where he is coming from, even if it leads to some poor decisions. We also learn why Thorin is called Oakenshield, through an intense battle sequence. Some of the padding that Jackson uses to fill the story into three films feels a little extraneous, but not this sequence and Armitage carries himself admirably in the role.
We don’t really spend as much individual time with the other Dwarves, but Balin (Ken Stott) stands out a bit more than the others. Perhaps in future films we’ll get more of the other Dwarves’ characters, but the fact is that it’s a bit difficult, even in a movie as long as AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY, to spend much quality time with them.
As expected the movie looks spectacular, with New Zealand again making Middle-earth feel like a real place. The CGI has improved exponentially since the original movies, but that comes with a price – at times, there’s just too much of it. It’s especially noticeable in 48FPS, where everything is given a strange ethereal look to it. It also doesn’t help that the quality changes throughout the movie – the Goblin King (Barry Humphries) looks straight up CGI, while the formidable Azog the Defiler (Manu Bennett) looks, well, real. So do many of the other creatures that inhabit Middle-earth. But there’s so much of it that it feels a bit overwhelming. One battle sequence, full of sight gags that audiences will really enjoy, probably wouldn’t be possible without CGI, and it’s one of the most fun battles in all of the films. Another, with two mountain giants fighting each other, feels truly epic and made me curious to know what a kaiju movie from Peter Jackson would look like.
A few words about 48FPS. I’ve seen THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY twice now in this format, and this weekend I’ll be seeing it in good old-fashioned 2D. 48FPS takes some getting used to. It’s so aesthetically different from film that many will flat-out reject it. I’ve always thought that there was something magical about 24FPS, something tactile and soothing about it, even in old 35MM. 48FPS in its way has a more striking palette; everything is sharper, there’s very little motion blur, and gives everything a weight and a movement that comes close to reality, or at least as close as it can. But it also has the effect of making sets look more like sets, and even outside shots have a strange disconnect to them.
Perhaps it’s because we’re not used to it. In 3D, the images are much more pronounced – Gollum really feels “there” this time in a way that he never really felt before. It’s almost as if 48FPS brings CGI into a kind of reality. The problem is, it’s not reality - it's obviously CGI. Sometimes it works, like in the work with Gollum. Sometimes it just makes what isn't real even more fake-looking. I’d really love to see this technology used, perhaps in just a regular action movie that’s not so full of computer-enhanced imagery, to see what it would look like. I recommend seeing it in this format at least once to decide for yourself, but it is jarring. For the first few minutes, everything looks like it moves faster than normal, but it’s because there’s no blurring anymore. After a while, I got used to it. The format does make landscapes pop, and more than any other 3D before it, I really felt the depth of scope on the screen. When we’re looking down a hall in Bilbo’s house, it really feels like a hallway, with a real distance to things. And I’ll also say this – it felt like there was very little eye strain in seeing THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY in 3D, much less eye strain than in a normal 3D movie. If they can just make sure the screen is bright, perhaps this technology will become the new normal. But I suspect that this will simply be one way to see a movie, and won’t replace good old-fashioned 24FPS. Time will tell.
THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY is long, full of fat, and I loved every moment. Whether or not you’re passionate about these movies makes a difference; if you’re like me, you’ll happily spend hours in this world. If not, perhaps you’ll feel the length more acutely. If THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY is bloated, it’s bloated in the way you feel after Thanksgiving dinner, spending time with old friends, enjoying the company and laughing at every story. I anticipate that the next two films will feel much the same to me, and I’m happy that I get to spend time in this wonderful world again.
Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus-
+ Expand All
-
....chip the glasses crack the fucking plates.
-
This is one of your better reviews...and people that bitch about the 'bloatedness' of the films haven't read the books were fucking Tolkien spends two pages describing the relief on a god damn door. I prefer getting more than getting less... ...and I likes mine...raw....
-
The Hobbit, an unexpected trilogy.
-
There's the gimmick and title for Die Hard 6.
-
If you like LOTR you'll like this. I'd say it's on par, not obviously better than any of them on 1st viewing, but a great prequel. I didn't see the bloat issue really, I thought most exposition was there for good reason. The dinner scene takes long because a) they want you to like the dwarves so they start things on a light note instead of super-serious let's talk about the mission and b) they have to convince Bilbo, a hobbit with no experience or need to do this, that ain't gonna happen in a second (but it does happen overnight :)) Stone giants are crazy awesome. Last orc fight is intense and unpredictable/creative Lots of humor throughout but excitement as well. They set up a lot for next 2 films, 3 villains plus a mysterious wizard. 3D and 48fps is pretty unique, crazy experience. And true film geek will want to at least try this out for themselves. Feels like a theme park ride sometimes.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 4:47 p.m. CST
Poeple who cannot adjust to the 48fps are like those old timers that couldn't deal with SOUND in the talkies
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 4:48 p.m. CST
Nolan and Spielberg who want to keep using film instead of going digital are prehistoric filmmakers that are out of touch
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 4:48 p.m. CST
*If you weren’t much of a fan of THE LORD OF THE RINGS, THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY certainly won’t change your mind. *
by DoctorWho?
Correct. It feels like the Hobbit was made BY fans FOR the fans. I welcome the long-running time, the bloat, the added material...etc.<p> If you weren’t much of a fan of THE LORD OF THE RINGS...kindly back the fuck up-and-out of the talk-back while we celebrate good film.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 4:49 p.m. CST
Peter Jackson is the visionary filmmaker of our time and The Hobbit is the best thing hes done since King Kong
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 4:49 p.m. CST
I don't mind a little bloat, but the fact that this is a trilogy still bothers me
by NoQuarter
It's obvious that the Hobbit was split into 3 films for monetary reasons, and I'm skeptical that Jackson et al. will find a way to justify an 8-9 hour Hobbit trilogy artistically. That said, it's a foregone conclusion that I'll see all three films. I just hope the final product turns out better than I fear it will.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 4:50 p.m. CST
The Hobbit proves that Peter Jackson stills got that magic touch
by TheKiller7
-
And I don't think more time in Jackson's versions od Middle-Earth would be a bad thing at all. As long as there's not more dwarf tossing and shield surfing, then I'm absolutely kewl with being that silent fly on the wall during Bilbo's long supper with the dwarves that some have complained about. I missed Tom Bombadil in LotR even though it was a reasonable cut. Other bits as well...I won't make judgments on others choices but I could watch a 5 hour Middle-Earth movie if it was akin to any of the LotR films. I've done the full 3 extended versions triple-feature all together once or twice and it's quite an experience. im highly looking forward to see if jackson can continue his triumph in bringing these films to life (even with all the back and forth with the tolkien estate and his living heirs, the missing parts or inaccuracies, even the added parts, etc...not so much the self-aware silly stuff like dwarf tossing and surf legolas but still..a triumph)
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 4:53 p.m. CST
Anyone that hates The Hobbit should consider giving up watching movies.
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 4:55 p.m. CST
Fuck this, I'm just gonna stay home and watch Willow with my HDTV set to 120hz motion smoothing mode
by lv_426
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 4:55 p.m. CST
Is there a black and white version being shown somewhere?
by Simpsonian
-
NO SHAKEY CAM! The battles are immensely clear and beautifully choreographed. Yes so much of them are CG but it's really well done CG. Every individual is clear, the aerial and wide shots are breathtaking watching all of this chaos and design and the 3D and 48fps I think truly cause that. Physics are out the window here as they were in LOTR, it's fantasy of course. People (dwarves) fall down chasms hundreds of feet deep and don't suffer any real injuries. They do things in battle which are basically impossible. Much of it feels video-gamey because of that along with the way it's shot, but in a welcome way. It's fun and different, if you're down for the ride you'll enjoy yourself. Bitchers will bitch though. If you think of this as children's fantasy especially, it's a great flick. It's popcorn, not serious theatre. Be entertained.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 4:57 p.m. CST
flames gotta eat -- yes, but are there any nice titties flopping around in The Hobbit in 3D at 48fps?
by lv_426
Game of Thrones has an abundance of ta-ta, so why bother leaving the house to see The Hobbit?
-
48FPS is a must for 3d films in future I think, way less eye strain and blur. 2D movies, I think will be purely an aesthetic choice for frame rates. It was definitely a bit jarring going between sets, locations and FX shots, they need to sort out some of the technicalities of shooting in the format better as a lot of the old 24fps rules of camera work do not apply. I thought the film played about the same as an extended cut of one of the LOTR movies. That is, if you loved the extended cuts you will love this. If they were too long for you, this may be too long.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 5:01 p.m. CST
glad to finally have a review that isn't all about the 48fps
by oisin5199
I'll be falling somewhere in the middle, seeing this in IMAX 3D, but at 24fps. Maybe I'll see it again at 48fps.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 5:02 p.m. CST
Thanks to the 48fps the shaky cam effect is lost during action scenes. Peter Jackson is RIGHT to use it and to promote its use in Hollywood
by TheKiller7
-
After seeing The Hobbit I shall commit seppuku with an officially licensed Lord of the Rings replica of Sting.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 5:07 p.m. CST
Extended edition is the ONLY version of Lord Of The Rings.
by JackSlater4
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 5:09 p.m. CST
Yes 48fps helps prevent shaky but it's also how Jackson shoots it..
by Flames gotta Eat
he doesn't shoot much action with handheld cameras, he likes static to panning shots and lots of wide and aerial shots and that gives battles so much scope and geography. Sure you lose a bit of the intensity but it's beautiful to look at.
-
Haha, but if that's what you want yes I'd say stay home. Funny enough, there are almost NO women in the Hobbit, only Cate Blanchett with any real role. And NO humans this time around either.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 5:14 p.m. CST
flames gotta eat -- sucks that there are no titties in The Hobbit
by lv_426
I heard there is a troll or goblin with a big flabby nut-sack chin though. Peter Jackson is trolling (literally) us with such things yet barely any women.
-
Now I have to deal with the entire screen being pushed to the left until I push a fucking button? After all these years no fucking standards?
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 5:15 p.m. CST
Haha, the Goblin King's chin is no worse than Peter Griffin's balls chin :)
by Flames gotta Eat
-
Are the same ones who would complain about The Hobbit being lighter and lesser than LOTR and vice versa.
-
That is why he is feeling bloated.
-
And my eyes took to it immediately, with no adjustment period needed. I'd like to see every 3D movie filmed and presented this way from now on. It was the best theatrical viewing experience I've ever had.
-
glad you confirmed what I already thought. I will not like this movie. The first trilogy was melodramatic glossy shit, no need to revisit that world.
-
I think this is kind of a straw-man argument. Obviously people who hated LOTR aren't going to like The Hobbit either. But most of the mixed-to-negative reviews I've read of The Hobbit are from people who absolutely loved the prior trilogy and feel that Jackson got too self-indulgent this time around.
-
Watching the LOTR EEs and their special features was one of the greatest home viewing experiences of my life (along with the Alien Quadrilogy). Now it looks like we'll be getting the same deal with The Hobbit trilogy. Bring on the sweet bloat!
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 5:30 p.m. CST
lv_426 - wait for Piranha 5 running in 48fps if you want tits in that resolution
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 5:31 p.m. CST
The Hobbit >>>>>>> everything that came out this year & the decade before it
by TheKiller7
-
must be forgetting the reality of LOTR. There is just as much bloat or more in LOTR, so if they're complaining about the Hobbit in that respect I hope they say the same of LOTR. And I didn't read the books but to my understand aren't the books even worse with description and minutiae? So this "bloat" is intrinsic to the stories is it not? What is anyone complaining about? You're saying you don't like the whole story not just the films.
-
...to see this in 3D 48fps.
-
Because they want something to complain about, it seems. Its easy to hate on someone who had major successes and then a misfire, and I think they're sharpening their knives in preparation for the new one.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 5:43 p.m. CST
King Kong was twenty minutes of plot and 2 and a half hours of fat
by Squinty CGI Flynn
hopefully this is more worthwhile
-
if so, what did you think?
-
I haven't seen it myself, but I know a few people who have and whose judgment I trust. They all hated it. I'll admit I'm curious to see what it looks like, but I don't want to risk marring the experience of returning to Middle-earth so I'll save that little bit of new tech-tasting for some other occasion.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 6 p.m. CST
I'm not expecting to be blown away like I was with LOTR. It's a smaller, sweeter story. But I still can't wait for Friday.
by FuckinAmateurMan
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 6:03 p.m. CST
"I just want to see it in regular ass 24fps" - then it will look like ass despite being the best movie in years.
by TheKiller7
-
This movie sucks and is for little children and 30 year-old losers who collect Star Wars figures. Just BOOOOORING!
-
major skull fuckery by way of thine eye sockets.
-
I'm very optimistic about it.
-
The best looking film I've ever seen. I pity those who refuse to see it that way. Their negativity makes them sound like cranky old seniors who wander around the grocery store muttering about socialism.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 6:16 p.m. CST
I'm looking for any and all feedbach regarding HFR. It's a bit of a hike to a HFR theater, but if it's worth it I'll do it
by FuckinAmateurMan
-
Loved it. First time I've liked 3D since Avatar. At first it seems a bit strange but you quickly adjust.
-
Fucking Christ!
-
Saw it last night on digital projection and faux-IMAX screen, 3d, 48fps. Yes there are problems, some quick human movements and some effects shots look like video games or as someone said, British TV. BUT the pros outweighed cons for me. It's a very unique experience, I've never quite "seen" a movie like this. It goes beyond film IMO, much more absorbing. The detail and crisp quality, especially during battle scenes is unparallelled. And it compliments 3D perfectly. I don't think any true film nerd can scoff at the idea of at least giving this a shot to see what you think. It's a new experience, isn't that what we all want?
-
....short story. Loved it more than I thought I would. It certainly drags a lot(at an hour in nothing significant has happened at all), but it is definitely entertaining enough and the great moments are truly great. Personally loved 48fps, but there's no denying it takes a while to get used to and it's harder to let the little mistakes go(wonky special effects, or some prostethics). All in all I'd heartily reccomend it! They should have left it at two films though, cause I think the first one would've been a classic if it had been edited a little tighter and the story progressed a little more.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 6:21 p.m. CST
I also think it should've been just 2 movies. The book was way too short and even with the extra LotR material, its not enough for 3 movies. Other than that HOOBIT RULES
by TheKiller7
-
Just watched Alien. Could not believe how much of a bloated mess that film was! Had to wait a whole two hours for the fucking alien to show up! Not enough Brian Cox! No explosions! No lense flare! No BWAAAAAAAUMS! Damn you Steven Spielberg! I've seen it for a month now, and once you see the film, you will know what that means...
-
http://thefilmstage.com/trailer/trailer-for-guillermo-del-toros-pacific-rim-brings-robot-vs-monster-mayhem/ Since AICN hasn't put anything up yet.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 6:30 p.m. CST
*A talkback from 1979* - No internet and thus no AICN ... oh and no one knew what to expect back then. So no one was 'waiting for the alien to appear'
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 6:31 p.m. CST
No one knew what to expect when Alien came out... who would survive and who was a robot and stuff. Plus there was no ALIEN BOOK like The Hobbit
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 6:32 p.m. CST
So no comparisons to be made there. The Hobbit is the best film of 2012 no doubt!
by TheKiller7
-
Seeing it Friday at the Alamo in Winchester. VA.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 6:35 p.m. CST
Since some of you keep asking: TRAILER OF PACIFIC RIM HERE
by TheKiller7
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-ZcqwvQbas
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 6:36 p.m. CST
NODLING IS A CLOSET TWINK, SO ANY WONDER THAT HE'S IN LOVE WITH A MOVIE ABOUT A CLEAN SHAVEN BOY BEING TAKEN ON AN ADVENTURE BY A BUNCH OF BURLY HAIRY MEN!!!FACT!!!
by CreepyThinMan
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 6:37 p.m. CST
Pacific Rim Q&A with Guillermo del Toro posted by AICN TV
by TheKiller7
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhellFhEcU8
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 6:37 p.m. CST
creepythinmanlives likes to grab his ankles and have a wild donkey up the ass FACT
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 6:38 p.m. CST
That's why we can expect creepythinmanlives to bring the gay slurs in 1... 2..... 3
by TheKiller7
-
I hated fake-looking Gollum. And listening to people telling me how 100% real Gollum looked. And I guess I'll be hearing the same crap with the Hobbit. I just hope Jackson isn't so enamoured with his "accomplishment" this time around that I have to sit through superfluous Gollum scenes.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 6:38 p.m. CST
Okay fucknut, *A telegraph response via the Pony Express from 1979*
by Pete Susoev
Don't get your Torch of Gondor all in a tussle, my precious.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 6:39 p.m. CST
moakaka wathc the movie first and then complain about stuff you don't know for a fact
by TheKiller7
-
http://www.forbes.com/sites/markhughes/2012/12/12/watch-the-pacific-rim-trailer/
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 6:41 p.m. CST
Pacific Rim trailer up on Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-ZcqwvQbas
by TheKiller7
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-ZcqwvQbas
-
A retarded monkey, perhaps?
-
Trailer didn't blow me away like I thought it would, but then again that film has been hyped so much by this point it probably won't be as big a deal to some of us that have listened to the geekerati gush about it for like the past 2 years. Thing is it looks like what you'd expect, a big kaiju vs. mech movie done up with a massive Hollywood budget. One can't complain about that really. It should be fun times at the movies.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 6:45 p.m. CST
They obviously cannot show much in the PACIFIC RIM trailer since the monsters and mechs are the main atraction
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 6:46 p.m. CST
Its like the shark in Jaws or the xenomorph in Alien... LESS IS MORE
by TheKiller7
-
He lets you know right up front with "I found it very difficult to put my critical hat on when watching, and after a while, I simply stopped bothering." that this is an ass-kissing, not a review so you don't have to waste time reading the rest.
-
A guy who fucked a hot chick ten years ago, doesn't see her again until now, finds she is a little fatter and wrinkled and her pussy is not as tight as it was, but he enjoys banging her again coz she was once super hot. I'm still looking forward to this, but this review told me absolutely nothing.
-
Yes! Can't wait!! I am just glad it has minimal of that faggot Wood in it with his stumpy neck and goggly blue eyes declaring every 5min in slow mo - oh sssaaaammmmm, tttthhhaaaannnkkkk yooouuu ssssssaaaaammm. Tolkin didn't write many female characters in his book so don't blame Jackson for the lack of tits.
-
seems like a perfect match.
-
which is why I'll be very dissapointed if like the hobbit movie is like the star wars prequels and has better bigger more epic shit in it than the original movies. Sorry to blab on, but I'm a fanboy, it's what I do... Not like I have a pair of tits to occupy me or anything. But yeah, that pisses me off. Just because you CAN make a bigger more epic movie than the previous ones doesn't mean you SHOULD. I know we all have only one life to live. One day you're going to be like 70 or 80 and sitting down watching some tv and then you'll fucking die. I get it. But for the love of God, show some restraint peter Jackson. It's what makes great movies great. Oh well, we'll see. I'll check this out when I go to work on friday. I work in a big ass shopping center so I can just go to the movies whenever I want. I've got it good man...
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 7:28 p.m. CST
If there's ever an argument for fat, obese lazy people to lose some weight, it's this movie... Believe me, sitting your far ass down for 3 hours is going to kill you AND the chair
by Avon
You know it makes sense fat people! Lose the flab, respect your ass and the chair you are fucking with..
-
See you.. in the.. Ah ree nuh! IDK who Azog the Defiler is, but sounds like a damn cool character for him to play.
-
I wouldn't trust their opinions anymore then.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 7:40 p.m. CST
I don't buy the "you aren't a true Tolkien fan if you aren't in favor of 3 long movies and all the extra padding. All the extra material was thrown in for the REAL fans"
by Joey Stars
BULL-SHIT!! I am a fan of the Hobbit and have read it many times. It's meant to be a breeze of a read, read in 1 or 2 sittings. I absolutely love that some songs & Tolkien lyrics will be depicted on screen but I hate the fact that I have to wait an additional 2 years for the conclusion of the Hobbit. Do we really need to see Radagast, hell no! I also hate the look of the Dwarves. If JRR Tolkien were to see the Hobbit movies and hated all the bloatedness, would people accuse him of not being a true fan?
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 7:52 p.m. CST
@avon - As you know from experience, lazy fat people don't get out of their couches and walk from the parking lot to the movie houses.
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 7:52 p.m. CST
Instead they stay at home and wait for the DVD/Bluray or go for that illegal download.
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 8:33 p.m. CST
Great review! So, is Beaks the only one at AICN with a dildo up his ass?
by Matt Schlotman
-
It seems like Nordling didn't much care for the movie other than the fact it was set in the LOTR universe. Pass.
-
Some of you try to hard to be 'true' AICNers, whatever the fuck that means
-
..while the masters bait. History of the World just popped into my head...man, too bad Brooks is aged, be fun to see him take his turn with LoTR.
-
Nowhere near pumped as I always thought I would be the night before seeing the motherfucking THE HOBBIT!!! I remember before seeing FOTR, TTT and ROTK I literally could not get to sleep the night before because I was so fucking excited. Now, I'm in bed dozing off with a cup of cocoa and my iPad thinking "Well, as long as it doesn't suck..." Maybe I'm just old and jaded now, but I really miss not having a massive geek boner for Middle-Earth anymore.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 9:14 p.m. CST
As long as there's no Jar Jar Binks type childish humour in it.
by LORDOFLIGHT
And it's fairly faithful it'll probably be ok.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 9:14 p.m. CST
Teabaggerharry chill the fuck out your unbridled enthusiasm for the hobbit is annoying as fuck.
by ndally
Jesus Christ. Go find a lady and/or man(resist the urge to show off the fact that you speak elvish or entish or whatever the fuck) to let all your childish attention seeking antics out. I don't even know you but your mere presence on this site disgusts me for some reason. Now go jerk off to the sound of Howard Shore's score and a picture of Martin Freeman's big, hairy hobbit feet. You little annoying taint.
-
Certainly sounds like it's worth watching.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 9:23 p.m. CST
Why don't they release even shorter versions for the cinema though?
by LORDOFLIGHT
Say 2 hours. And then release the rest as an Extended edition.....3/4 hours or more. Seeing as the average movie audience has the attention span of a gnat.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 9:24 p.m. CST
Tom Cruise should've played Bilbo Baggins - you wouldn't even need any CGI trickery.
by Gary Makin
-
Uh-oh.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 9:28 p.m. CST
I’ll wait for the DVD on the first two, and watch them just before the third one comes out, and see that theatrically.
by Gary Makin
You know, because it should’ve been ONE movie.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 9:36 p.m. CST
Rotten Tomatoes can be a shit indicator as to what's good or not.
by LORDOFLIGHT
There's been 1 or 2 crap films on there that have got a high percentage.
-
There was an Internet in 1979, dumbass
-
Because the book just wasn't that long. Less than 300 pages. A trilogy seems like over-kill.
-
But he was moved to the second movie when The Hobbit added a third film. So expect to see him in "The Desolation of Smaug"!
-
It seemed fair and Nordling didn't let his emotions dictate his consideration of the work itself. I plan on watching this film in IMAX 3D, 48 fps 3D and regular digital projection (no 3D). I am approaching it HOPING to like it...but prepared to dismiss it. I will say this: From this review and others that I have read, it seems that 48 FPS might not be suited for CGI (yet). Since it is so close to "real life," it makes me think that this might be most effective and best suited for a life drama.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 10:47 p.m. CST
Critics don't understand what people LOVED about the movies that makes all what they find negative about the Hobbit totally redundant!
by CeejayNightwing
If you haven't watched, rewatched, done Extended Editions, supplementary material, Commentary tracks and listened to every soundtrack again and again like all the people I know who like nothing more than to immerse themselves into these movies, then you'd never fathom how much and how long those people are waiting for more material to do the same. Bloat? There is no bloat, just more material Tolkien wrote that he never seeded into the main narrative just as he did for LOTR and The Silmarillion. Tolkien wrote so much stuff about what happened at the same time as the Hobbit which explains how Gandalf obtained the key and the map as well as the White Council meetings and first encounters with the return of Sauron as the Necromancer. This stuff is only known generally to die hard fans who read EVERYTHING. Most people stopped at just The Hobbit and LOTR. Most people don't even read the Appendixes. Peter Jackson and his crew aren't most people, they're fans and that's why the movie experience of the Hobbit has to be more than just one book adaptation telling one perspective (Bilbo's) as its written. All the RottenTomatoes scores in the world is not going to stop people climbing over themselves to get back to the adventure every Christmas for the next three years. They may have liked the other movies but we LOVE them!
-
...fan of large budget fantasy films who hasn't actually read _The Hobbit_. The Hobbit isn't a prequel for LOTR, it's a single stand-alone novel and it has an entirely different tone and narrative style. Peter Jackson trying to meld it with the earlier film trilogy is a travesty, and anyone who is familiar with this book and who has with half a brain knew it would be bloated as soon as they announced it would be filmed in three parts. I'm not an Internet hater but the only conclusion I can make is that Jackson sold out artistic integrity for triple the revenue.
-
Dec. 12, 2012, 11:43 p.m. CST
"Peter Jackson trying to meld it with the earlier film trilogy is a travesty"
by D.Vader
Well that's just a completely ignorant statement. Good bye.
-
EVERY book is "stand alone." However, THE HOBBIT and LOTR was written by the SAME author about the SAME characters in the SAME lands involving the SAME underlying struggles. Remember: THE HOBBIT came first. LOTR returned to the same land as THE HOBBIT. The same thing happened with HARRY POTTER and NARNIA books. You built upon what the audience knew of the earlier books. In this case, Peter Jackson is trying to reverse it...and he has every right to do so. He is trying to tell THE HOBBIT story in a more adult way. It can be done.
-
A novel is more than just its plot material ccchhhrrriiisssmredux. Jackson took the plot material of the Hobbit and appears to be tossed out other things that made it a good book, to wit its less-serious tone, its style and its succinctness. The point of the book wasn't to introduce Middle Earth to the world or to introduce later books. Everything that was in the book was sufficient for what it was- a sort of bildungsroman/adventure that included an eloquent anti-war statement. The movie fanboys just want to soak in their fantasy world for as long as possible. I wanted a film that reflects how good this was as a complete novel, not a piece of commodity-fiction.
-
Dec. 13, 2012, 12:12 a.m. CST
There isn't that much material in the first film from the appendices, actually.
by tomandshell
It's mostly a leisurely paced journey through the first third of The Hobbit with a few scenes included from the appendices to flesh out the Necromancer storyline touched upon in the book. The characters of Azog and Radagast are brought into the story along with the White Council, but I think it worked just fine. I enjoyed the measured pace of the film, and it definitely feels different from the urgency we got with LOTR. This is much more, "Hello, let's introduce ourselves, have a good meal, sing a few songs, get a good night's sleep and go on an adventure in the morning--and don't forget to bring a clean handkerchief." That's pretty true to the book. Bilbo wasn't being chased by Ringwraiths. It's a gentler story with a slower pace at first--but even if you don't like that, once they leave Rivendell, I think the rest of the film stands up nicely alongside the LOTR trilogy in terms of action and epic imagery.
-
Both lighter and at the same time important and serious.
-
Sounds like the fan editors will have their work cut out for them, though.
-
Even if you have not read the "Unfinished Tales" book of works Tolkien was working on or "The Silmarillion" both published by his Son after his death. The fact that he wrote these extra tales in appendixes to explain what was going on in Middle Earth with Sauron/The Necromancer, the White Council meetings and the growing threat of evil returning to Middle Earth all during the time of Bilbo's adventure in the Hobbit, links everything to the three books of LOTR. These movies are adapting the time-line, not just a singular tale. The narrow-minds of people like you never cease to amaze me. At no point was this film going to just be called "The Hobbit" a direct adaptation of just the events from the book as told from only Bilbo's perspective. It was always going to be more than that, the sum of the parts of everything Tolkien had to say about that time period, in fact. These books and tales are pure narrative in need of dramatisation in order to make them film worthy. This is something that escapes too many of you who don't realise the different styles in which Tolkien began his work and finished it. He may have started the Hobbit as a singular tale but from that he ended up expanding the history of middle-earth and giving it more tales than he could fit into the narratives of the books which is why he wrote the Appendixes.
-
Dec. 13, 2012, 2:59 a.m. CST
I do not understand people complaining about the length
by slappy jones
Yes. it starts slow...of course it fucking does. They have to introduce 13 new characters...14 really including Bilbo. If the beginning was short all you would be hearing is that it has no characters and its just all action wah wah wah.....but it doesn't even start that slow. I am shocked at how negative SOME of the reviews have been. It also bums me out to see it being talked about as if its being savaged by critics. It has still received more positive reviews than bad and only a few vicious OVER THE TOP out right pans. And any cunt comparing it to Phantom Menace is talking a load of shit. Not even close. The bar is so high for this film...I have seen 4 out of five star reviews on so,e sites and the message boards below it say "OH NO!! He hated it" and "yikes...now I'm worried" under a clearly positive four star review. So basically anything short of five stars is a failure for this film. Nothing can live up to that. If you go in expecting an entertaining return to middle earth and not to have the most earth shattering life changing film experience you have ever had you will have a great time. I thought it was fun as fuck and can't wait to see it again.
-
If you can scrape together three films from a one paragraph synopsis on the back of a toy box you can three films out of a book.
-
We are going to get a film called THE DESOLATION OF SMAUG. How can anyone be annoyed at that.
-
Dec. 13, 2012, 3:07 a.m. CST
Nordling, thanks for one the FIRST and ONLY reviews to mention the benefits/drawbacks of why PJ mainly used 48fps, to enhance the 3d.
by awepittance
One of the only few movies of this caliber to actually photograph in 3d as well, and if PJ learned anything from working with James Cameron at Weta studios i would expect the 3d to look at least as good as all the live action 3d camera work in Avatar (which arguably looks better than Pandora in 3d, especially scenes like Jake waking up in the ship, shit looks 100 feet deep)
-
Dec. 13, 2012, 3:08 a.m. CST
re: matts71, the proper term is 'stick' up the ass, a dildo might actually stimulate the prostate, leading to orgasm
by awepittance
-
Is it shown anywhere in 2D with HFR? Haven't found any info about it. Would love to see 48fps but not in 3D.
-
Dec. 13, 2012, 7:05 a.m. CST
"I get the sense that people who complain about bloat...' Holy fuck Vader, you're comparing a single small novel to a trilogy? just fuck off.
by quantize
-
Dec. 13, 2012, 7:38 a.m. CST
shialebutt: nope, appears you have to take the 3D with the HFR
by nametaken
-
I can't imagine sitting through one of the extended editions of lotr in the theater. Back in the day they used to give you a 10-15 minute pee break half way through and u could smoke in the balcony.
-
Dec. 13, 2012, 8:27 a.m. CST
=How much you enjoy Peter Jackson’s THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY depends on you=
by P
In other news, today is Thursday and everybody dies eventually.
-
You should have listened to your mother when she told you you'd go blind watching 3d in 48fps. She was right. She was right about hair growing on the palm of your fap hand too.
-
Like I said, the people complaining about bloat seem to be the type who would also complain that the movie was lighter and lesser than LOTR. Its a double-standard. I didn't say anything about the book's length. But yesssss, fuck you too, since you want to play that game.
-
Dec. 13, 2012, 9:41 a.m. CST
NO ONE cares about professional reviews at Rotten Tomatoes!!!
by Matt Schlotman
I absolutely do not need, nor will read, any 'professional fucking reviews from the douchebags at Rotten Tomatoes I do enjoy some of the AICN point of views, even if I disagree (DAMN YOU BEAKS)!!!!
-
Dec. 13, 2012, 10:15 a.m. CST
Any true Tolkien fan knew it would be bloated when it was going to be two films.
by cozy
-
Dec. 13, 2012, 10:33 a.m. CST
Each time I adjusted to 48fps, it would rear up and kick me in the eyes
by Drsambeckett1984
It's horrendous, makes everything seem sped up, makes CGI look even more fake and shows up the fakery of certain sets.
-
Dec. 13, 2012, 11:04 a.m. CST
I'm getting a very "The Phantom Menace" vibe from this movie
by Atticus Finch
People are excited to be back in the universe the same as TPM, but once the excitement wears off, the fact that the film wasn't that good will start to sink in. I'm already seeing all kinds of "apologies" from the slurpers about the bloat and the fact that not much happens other than a few cool scenes like the stone giants (kind of like the Darth Maul duel).
-
Dec. 13, 2012, 11:43 a.m. CST
"made me curious to know what a kaiju movie from Peter Jackson would look like" You're kidding, right? Kong really wasn't very good.
by MichaelH
-
Dec. 13, 2012, 12:24 p.m. CST
As The Hobbit Turns. 48fps makes it look like a Soap Opera.
by Orionsangels
-
Dec. 13, 2012, 12:34 p.m. CST
as a huge fan of The Hobbit the moment it was announced it would be a trilogy I was ecstatic
by AntonStark
9 hours is about right for the Hobbit. i always thought it would make a fantastic mini series. ever since Ian McKellen suggested it a decade ago. but 9 hours of film works too!
-
Dec. 13, 2012, 1:38 p.m. CST
@ndally - ride my dick, you fucktard. You can always not read my posts.
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 13, 2012, 1:39 p.m. CST
@klytus_i.m_bored - The Internet existed but not in the way we all know it since the mid 90's... you cock-holster.
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 13, 2012, 4:32 p.m. CST
I trust this review since it is coming from someone who actually LIKED Jackson’s LotR.
by frank
Can’t wait to see The Hobbit tomorrow!
-
I'm a die hard Tolkien fan and all, but man, you are making us all look bad. Pack a bowl and relax, yer starting to get all Gollum and shit over your precious.
-
Frodo goes through puberty
-
Dec. 13, 2012, 5:34 p.m. CST
and i really every bit of it. 3d was awesome. makes avatar look like titanic
by patrick cruz
-
I can't compare 48fps to a soap opera, because I've never watched one.
-
I like it here.
-
Monday, December 17th @ 6:50 pm at Loews Lincoln Square. SO EXCITED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
I'll go see The Hobbit. I'm just a little tired of Prequels. To me prequels just take something out of a movie. No matter what the subject it's just like I'm going in without the excitement of wanting to know how things end...well, becasue...I know how it ends! It's as if you recorded a football game and someone told you how it ended...not as exciting watching vs. ot knowing the outcome. Prequels just seem to "bring it down a notch". I liked the original trilogy, not as much as many, but it was good. Worth seeing the Hobbit...just not in a rush.
Top Talkbacks
- Spoilery early review of MAN OF STEEL!! -- 118 total posts 86 posts
- Holy Crossover!! Magneto’s Boy Quicksilver To Speed About In Whedon’s AVENGERS 2 And Singer’s X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST?? -- 243 total posts 31 posts
- That rumor about Sony selling SPIDER-MAN? Don't you believe it for a second! -- 444 total posts 16 posts
- Next on the Reboot assemblyline? TIMECOP!! -- 154 total posts 12 posts
- Ron Howard's latest trailer sure is a RUSH!!! -- 41 total posts 12 posts
- The METALLICA THROUGH THE NEVER Teaser! -- 197 total posts 12 posts
- Green-Band and Red-Band trailers for the new Jason Sudeikis & Jennifer Aniston VACATION ripoff, WE'RE THE MILLERS are here!! -- 101 total posts 9 posts
- So where is FAST AND FURIOUS 7 going to take place!?! -- 95 total posts 8 posts
- Papa Vinyard thinks that HANGOVER: PART III was a paycheck grab for a buncha people who are already rich!! -- 180 total posts 5 posts
- Lance Henriksen On HANNIBAL!! Ruffalo On KIMMEL!! New WIPEOUT & ANGER!! The Premieres Of SAVE ME And HAVE TO GO!! AMERICAN BIBLE CHALLENGE And GOING TO HELL Finales!! Herc’s Thursday TV Talkback!! -- 21 total posts 5 posts

