Cool News
Capone gladly steps back into Middle-Earth with Peter Jackson and THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY!!!
Hey everyone. Capone in Chicago here.
Some people like returning home, to a place that felt like a safe haven from the dangers of the world around them. For others, home isn't such a great place, and they are not particularly eager to return. For me, stepping back into Middle-Earth with members of the Baggins clan, a greying wizard, some familiar elves, a wiry, fractured creature named Gollum and director Peter Jackson feels like going home. And while there are stretches of THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY that feel like, well, they're being stretched, I never was bored or exhausted by the untold number of dwarves, orcs, goblins, trolls or hobbits, because seeing them on the screen again (or for the first time) was somehow comforting, satisfying and tonally familiar. Nothing wrong with any of those feelings while watching a movie.
I'm not here to dwell on frame rates and visual quality. I've seen AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY at both 48 and 24 frames per second, and I'd say they both have their advantages and disadvantages. Since much of the film takes place at night or underground, the 3D is problematic at 24fps; things are simply too dark. The 48fps presentation doesn't have these light issues, but it does result in a bizarre-looking video-esque style that, in these darker moments, looks pretty great. But in scenes set in broad daylight, something ain't right. If you're ultra curious and open minded about high frame rate, seek out a theater screening the film that way. Otherwise, stick with what you know. It's not great, but at least it looks like a movie.
I loved the sidetrips out of J.R.R. Tolkien's THE HOBBIT text that Jackson and his co-writers take us on. And clearly much of what we're shown here is simply prologue to the next two films. AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY falls victim to some of the same issues that THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING did—there's a lot of meeting characters, exposition, and setting up of the grand adventure to come. Jackson fills in the exposition with a few fun action sequences, although far too many of them seem to involve Gandalf (Ian McKellen) vanished for a stretch only to save the day at the last minute as his charges get into one bind after another.
Among those traveling to reclaim the lost Dwarf Kingdom of Erebor from the dragon Smaug are 13 dwarves (led by Thorin Oakenshield, played by the noble Richard Armitage, taking over the hunky slot for Viggo Mortensen in THE LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy) and the hobbit Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman, playing the younger version of the character Ian Holm played in Rings). Needless to say, keeping 13 dwarves straight in one's head is a challenge, and I'm not convinced that distinguishing them is even something Jackson succeeds at. But enough of them establish individuality that I started to find favorites among the short, hairy creatures. Armitage's Thorin doesn't offer much emotional depth in this chapter, and his knee-jerk reactions to certain threatening events grow tiresome after a while. I'm hoping he becomes a little more subtle later in this journey.
I was especially impressed with Freeman, who found a few wonderful mannerisms originated by Holm to play with, while adding a sense of fear and anxiety about leaving his home in the Shire. I was moved by Bilbo finding his motivation in going on this adventure in the plight of the dwarves, who have lived several decades with no home. Bilbo loves his own home so much that he wants to assist the dwarves in finding their own place of permanence in the Lonely Mountain. And during the course of the film, Bilbo goes from helpless creature to warrior in the making.
And by the time he arrives at his encounter with Gollum, during which he acquires the famed One Ring and enters into a game of riddles in the dark, it's difficult not to be transfixed. The lengthy exchange is the high point of AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY, and it's impossible not to be impressed with Andy Serkis' return to Gollum, who seems more vicious and conniving here. It's the kind of moment that makes you hold your breath and pry your eyes open so you don't blink and miss a word. More than maybe any other part of the film, the riddles exchange feels the most like what I love most about The Lord of the Rings movies.
Probably my second-favorite sequence is the one set at the Elf kingdom of Rivendell. I don't think I'm ruining anything by saying that Cate Blanchett and Hugo Weaving return, and while they are meant to be revered, they seem a more grounded as characters thanks to a bit of humor and some disdain thrown at them by the dwarves, who have reason to distrust elves.
Less impressive is the villainous presence of the Pale Orc, the mortal enemy of Thorin. I'm not sure why, but they guy just didn't feel menacing to me, despite his ample scarring and crude replacement arm (taking the place of one Thorin hacked off in battle years earlier).
But when it comes down to it, AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY comes down to the touching relationship between Bilbo and Gandalf, who takes on the role of mentor both in battle and in philosophical approach to looking at the many wonderful and dangerous corners of Middle-Earth. Gandalf gives Bilbo the sword known as Sting, but then makes it clear that its as important to know when not to use it as it is to master the art of combat.
We get a taste of things to dark things to come, including the battle with Smaug, a Necromancer who is about to bring dark times the the land, giant spiders that are seen briefly, and that Pale Orc is still living at the end of this movie. I love that AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY begins with a prologue that takes place right before the beginning of Fellowship, just as Holm's Bilbo is beginning to write down his adventures with the dwarves. The connective tissue is strong between Jackson's two trilogies, and I suspect the connections will get stronger as he gets deeper into this story. Jackson's mission with this film is to get things rolling and not necessarily to plunge us neck deep in epic battles, and I'm willing to be patient as long as things pick up in the next two films. The great tribute you can pay to any director is to be excited to see what they do next. It helps that we know what Jackson's doing next, and I'm especially excited to continue the adventure with him in this world with this remarkable (and expanding cast).
-- Steve Prokopy
"Capone"
capone@aintitcool.com
Follow Me On Twitter

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus-
+ Expand All
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 10:09 a.m. CST
Am I the only one who doesn't want to give Andy Serkis a bj?
by Fries Against
-
Dont they meet him early in the book???
-
The movie ended abit earlier than that..I was abit disappointed but it ended well methinks
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 10:23 a.m. CST
I can't imagine sitting through this film let alone two more.
by MainMan2001
-
movie's too long, it's a kid's book and simple, Jackson's a hack, doesn't need to be 3 movies, "prequels suck", etc. and so forth.
-
In Richard Armitages defense Thorins reactions are pretty knee jerk in the book too, thats what causes a lot of the conflict over the Arkenstone.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 10:28 a.m. CST
movie's too long, it's a kid's book and simple, Jackson's a hack, doesn't need to be 3 movies, "prequels suck", etc. and so forth
by Stifler's Mom
All valid arguments.
-
Noooooooooooo! Rankin-Bass Hobbit could overtake it (67%). PJ how could you??? **cries**
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 10:34 a.m. CST
When's the last time PJ made a movie that WASN'T too fucking long?
by Stifler's Mom
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 10:38 a.m. CST
Funny how Serkis has become to go-to guy for mo-cap monkey performances
by CRISPIN_GLOVERS_ACID_FLASHBACK
Piss on this fucking turd.
-
Capone, I figured you would want to know. At least you had the hyphen.
-
Took me a month to get through it, but I've seen it.
-
meh.
-
"Knee-jerk" Thorin and hard to distinguish dwarves, though PJ did a better job than Tolkien in that regard.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 10:57 a.m. CST
Andy Sirkis is the sexiest tomboy, beanpole on the planet!
by Sequitur
I'm bringing it back!
-
Pretty good overall but seriously someone buy Peter Jackson the dvds of Game of Thrones quickly before he starts directing the other two. Man it is boring in some parts. I dozed off for a minute. The stuff at Bilbo's house is almost an hour long. One word Peter Jackson: BLACKWATER
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 10:59 a.m. CST
Am I the only one that thinks being 'amazed' by Serkis's Gollum is so 2000 and late???
by kindofabigdeal
-
Seriously, this movie is not getting good reviews from anyone other than apologists who are excited to see another movie set in Middle-Earth. Once that excitement wears off, you'll be left with The Phantom Hobbit. Saying a movie is a bore but you liked it because it felt like going home is not a review, it's just sad.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 11:03 a.m. CST
Ian Holm being too old to play young Bilbo just makes me sad
by Smartacus
It's a missed opportunity and I think that will be the one thing that falls short about this in the end. Once this whole thing is finished and someone with a little more restraint than Peter Jackson has edited it into a tidy 2-3 hour version that will play more like the book for those of us who want that, it will be a fine film. I look forward to seeing it. I really wish we could have had Ian Holm as Bilbo though. Just a damn shame this took so long to be made.
-
Question carried over from the KIDDback. What did you think of the 48fps? I'm officially on the fence as to which I'm going to see.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 11:07 a.m. CST
Been using the visio 120htz tv which converts 24p to 48. You can learn everything you need to know about this tech from the visio. I think
by UltraTron
that it takes one look at hd porn at 48p to know what the deal is. Yes it is closer to reality. Comparing any movie is fun because you can switch off the added frames and compare. I think if you get a visio 120htz set and feed it the proper 24p it needs to do the perfect conversion you will find you prefer this look for everything. Performances are actually better. Things look more like reality instead of flickery film. So it's a matter of filmakers embracing the reality look and working to even out lighting across the entire production. It's hard because flickery film blends elements together like we're used to. It's easier to do 24 frames and just chop everything together. I say the visio does such a perfect conversion that everything is already 48p if you want it.
-
To come out of the cinema happy despite the ridiculously high expectations put on the film just tells you quite how good a job they've done. They've taken a vastly inferior book and somehow managed to live up to the LOTR films. While no where near FOTR or ROTK, this is miles better than the dull TTT. Well done PJ + Team I was expecting it to be poor having read the reviews but it seems molehills have been turned into mountains. * Still laughing at the Rabbits joke
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 11:17 a.m. CST
Should have stayed with GDT to direct this. After spending all summer 2005 waiting for the fucking Venture to reach Skull Island my body can't be bothered to hibernate for another marathon slog thru what was originally a short story...
by cameron
Jacksons attained Lucas mythical levels of pomposity in his film making and like Lucus no one is brave enough to confront him on it for fear of being exiled from the cash cows ranch. Without the need for obvious moneymaking by the studio The Hobbit could have easily been a one picture movie & better for it, instead we got the unsurprising news of it being a 2 parter & then the even less surprising news 'Hey, actually, we can make even more money by cutting the sandwich into 3 pieces.' An abrupt ending is almost insultingly bland as we're told to wait till next year for more, but i wont bother...
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 11:20 a.m. CST
You ever fart in the car and have it ripple up through your balls?
by Jason R
Maybe it's just me? Anyways, is the flick too long? Probably. Why is stretched to three films? To complete Jacksons vision, and to make more money...of course. Am I going to see it and form my own goddamn opinion? Certainly.
-
aka: The Hobbit: the Unexpectedly Long Ass Journey
-
I thought he was a well-designed villain. All cgi too. Looked great.
-
http://www.ign.com/videos/2012/12/13...lu-ray-trailer
-
http://www.ign.com/videos/2012/12/13/willow-blu-ray-trailer
-
They should have put that on the poster.
-
Stick to YouTube since its clearly closer to your attention span. I can't wait to see everyone NOT bitch about DJANGO's run time, which is identical to HOBBIT. Hypocrites.
-
I always loved The Hobbit, but I thought the dwarves were too dim-witted in the book. These dwarves have their silly moments, but they are not idiots. I have no problem with Jackson extending the story to show Gandalf's side adventure. It's what Tolkien would have done had he known that he was going to write The Lord of the Rings. After all, Tolkien himself changed the beginning of the Hobbit to reflect the later revelations about the ring. This first movie is awesome, and I expect no less from the others.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 11:37 a.m. CST
More Hobbit reviews, please. There's just not enough of them on the internet.
by Fries Against
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 11:37 a.m. CST
But in scenes set in broad daylight, something ain't right-Digital in a nutshell
by Samuel Fulmer
I actually like digital for night scenes, getting the added details that are usual missing shooting on film, but there always seems like there's something off when you have films shot digitally with daylight scenes. They don't seem to have enough contrast to me.
-
For people who like this sort of thing, this is the sort of thing they like. I would hope for, but not expect more serious film reviews from this site.
-
Ready in an overly obvious attenmpt to sink another film! It makes me ill! Sighting RT before a Friday night! Really! Summing up the reviews before the first official night! Really? It makes me ill.
-
That quote would be great on the Blu ray cover.
-
http://www.forbes.com/sites/markhughes/2012/12/12/the-hobbit-review-peter-jacksons-return-to-middle-earth-is-a-triumph/
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 11:56 a.m. CST
ultratron -- that would be kinda sad since it has been over at least a decade that people have been trying to get the *film look* out of everything from miniDV to RED and ALEXA cameras
by lv_426
Now could audiences end up craving the *reality look* due to The Hobbit as well as years of reality television and found footage films? I guess on the bright side, filmmakers can finally just focus on the story then and not have to jump through so many expensive and time consuming hoops for the coveted *film look*!
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 11:57 a.m. CST
The Hobbit is brilliant! I was floored at how realistic the effects were!
by Quake II
They looked like REAL ACTORS playing the Hobbits, not CGI. Totally photorealistic. The mouths moved properly and the hair looked real as well. This movie is destined to win an Academy Award for best visual f/x and a best director Oscar for this Pete Jackson fellow. He's an up-and-comer to keep an eye on. I see him doing BIG things in the future....Perhaps another Hobbit movie? We can only HOPE (this one leaves it wide open for a sequel!).
-
Is it odd that I crave the Willow blu-ray more than The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey? Now, I do also want to see The Hobbit, but Willow on blu-ray is great news.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 12:04 p.m. CST
I think the 48fps thing has actually been kind of a buzzkill for me
by lv_426
It is too much tech for what is a story about a far off magical land that is based around a medieval era technology and societal model. If the 48fps thing had been debuted on say, a Matrix prequel or sequel or something like that, I think the idea of hyperreality might actually make sense. It just doesn't make sense for The Hobbit. The thing that seems odd is that it doesn't appear that they used miniatures (or WETA's signature *bigatures* either), as this is now more of a fully digital endeavor: RED Epics, 48fps, tons of CGI, etc. I wonder if aesthetically, could this be also what is turning some viewers and critics off of The Hobbit? Has Peter Jackson gone too far away from the organic qualities of his LOTR adaptations? If so, IMO that is what will really be the saddest aspect of these three Hobbit movies.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 12:04 p.m. CST
I mean, wouldn't 48fps have made more sense on something like Pacific Rim than on The Hobbit?
by lv_426
It seems like logic is totally reversed here.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 12:09 p.m. CST
Just noticed this is playing in 48fps just a few minutes away
by Samuel Fulmer
I'll probably check it out sometime in the next few weeks just to see what 48fps looks like. I'm not really excited to see the movie, so if anything if the movie isn't good I can at least see the 48fps experiment.
-
48 fps, I'll be brief. It's weird and jarring and at first I thought "Oh no..." But then I got used to it. And the 3D looks GREAT. So do the CGI creatures. Every now and then something would take me out of it again- a big camera move, or close ups on someone's feet moving through the woods. So, I'm torn. My friend who went with me had NO problems with it. He said he adjusted after only a few minutes and it didn't bother him one bit. So it seems to be different with different people. I will say this- its worth checking out. I'll see it again in 24, but I plan to see it again in 48 too, just to see how it works a second time.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 12:14 p.m. CST
The big time critics are going to shit all over Jackson's Hobbit regardless
by lv_426
I mean, they're probably offended that he crapped out The Lovely Bones upon them. Before that, his overindulgence with King Kong (which I liked but I still see some PJ overindulgence in there). The critics (and audiences to some extent) have to gang up and punish successful filmmakers. They did the same with Nolan on TDKR, cause he had two massive successes in a row with TDK and Inception. This is partly why Cameron doesn't have Avatar II scheduled for release until 2015 at the earliest. Had he made Avatar three to five years after Titanic, he'd have fallen into that zone where the critics and the audiences still had their knives sharpened and drawn for blood against anything he did. You had all better get ready for Avengers II to be seen as an epic failure of filmmaking, cause that is what the audience and critics demand so that Avengers III can return the franchise to glory. If in some case, Avengers II is seen as good, then part III will then be considered absolute shit, worse than Ed Wood style filmmaking. That is how these things go. That is why sequels and franchises are fucking retarded for the most part. Yet we get no new stuff either because the audience is trained to only like pre-packaged and pre-approved IP. 48fps will be the final nail in the coffin before true cinematic magic is buried for good. Enjoy your Happy Meals.
-
He is no longer the most hated figure in geekdom! ***Heath Ledger Joker voice*** "Let's turn back the clocks ten years ago. None of these internet geeks would have dared cross you, Peter Jackson. So what happened? Your balls drop off? I'll tell you. The bloat, man. The solution is simple - kill the bloat, man."
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 12:16 p.m. CST
The backgrounds and motion are always the issue with 48fps. It makes it look WRONG, period.
by reflecto
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 12:16 p.m. CST
Lawrence of Arabia would get slaughtered by today's audiences and critics
by lv_426
Even though it would probably be set on an alien desert planet and be called Skywalker of Arrakis, and would have robots and superheros instead of people as the characters... It would still be considered too long and drawn out.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 12:17 p.m. CST
Everything is janky, sped up and blurred in motion or in bg. It's fucked up. The tech may be there someday but it's not yet.
by reflecto
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 12:17 p.m. CST
I think it's ashame Holm couldn't play Bilbo too.....Freeman doesn't look like him
by LORDOFLIGHT
Even though he's a good actor.
-
I thought it all looked pretty beautiful. The wide landscapes were amazing. Background wasn't an issue. Just motion. I got over it, but very now an then...
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 12:23 p.m. CST
So with 48fps the image is more real looking but the movements of said images are not
by Samuel Fulmer
See now this is a problem. Can't they make it where the image and motion both look real.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 12:48 p.m. CST
Both movies made for toddlers who like nice pictures and colours. And toys! Certainly not movies you could critique?
by larsson
-
We're just not used to it.
-
Where's the Colonel? Dammit, I've been fooled.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 12:56 p.m. CST
i aint seen't it yet - so caint comment, but the spinners on here are the exact same ones from prometheus - if you think that sucked(and it did) -then you do the math on how they are defending the hobbit
by Hey_Kobe_Tell_Me_How_My_Ass_Tastes
-
Just heard about this school shooting. Jesus fucking christ WHAT IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE. Fuck me man, shooting little children?!?!
-
Yikes. I'm really wondering if I wanna see it in the theaters now (and I was there at the first showing of all three LOTR movies, with a repeat viewing in the evening).
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 12:58 p.m. CST
I loved Prometheus but I ain't too keen on this. Reserving judgment as best I can but I am so over LOTR.
by reflecto
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 12:58 p.m. CST
BTW Prometheus had a higher RT score than this. Suck it, haters
by reflecto
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 1 p.m. CST
who really gives a crap about a RT score? really see the damn thing and judge for yerself you mindless lemmings
by Hey_Kobe_Tell_Me_How_My_Ass_Tastes
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 1:05 p.m. CST
Hope their will be a Django Unchained game, toys, fancy dress, etc...
by larsson
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 1:07 p.m. CST
larsson, frankly I don't think GDT is savvy enough to understand that. He's screwed himself out of so many beloved projects. I think he's not a good businessman.
by reflecto
-
This shooting may be the straw that finally breaks the NRA's grip on the balls of our political leaders. Even Obama is their bitch.
-
They looked like REAL ACTORS playing the Hobbits, not CGI. Totally photorealistic. The mouths moved properly and the hair looked real as well.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 1:16 p.m. CST
you are off your rocker if you think this tragic shooting will change by one iota how NRA and guns are viewed - it will simply mean a call to have armed guards at schools
by Hey_Kobe_Tell_Me_How_My_Ass_Tastes
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 1:17 p.m. CST
ultratron, that is not 48fps like The Hobbit at all
by Talkbacker with no name
Viso just enhances picture and adds duplicate frames. It's nothing like the real deal.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 1:19 p.m. CST
typical u.s. mass shooting - rumbles in congress - fortnight passes - swept under carpet - other news - typical u.s. mass shotting.... and repeat this cycle
by larsson
-
I dug it. It sags a bit in the middle (like the goblin king!), but overall a hugely entertaining movie. The final act is damned near flawless.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 1:25 p.m. CST
Frequent mass shootings are something usually associated with 3rd world countries....
by larsson
-
Actually, I don't really mind a ten-hour movie. At home. Spread out over a few days, not years. Which means I'll likely not be seeing this movie until the beginning, middle and end are ready for home distribution, prolly mid-2015, or so. The New Horizons probe should be making it to Pluto around the same time. See ya' in about 2,500 days!
-
Amen, indeed. This shits getting ridiculous.
-
Granted, It was midnight and I'd worked all day, but still. I'll enjoy this more on a Saturday afternoon on Blu-Ray or Redbox rip.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 2:31 p.m. CST
Thoughts from imax midnight show at 24fps w small spoilers
by carlotta_valdes
Many things to love (if you're a fan). Thorin's development, Radagast, White Council, Riddles in the Dark and of course Mckellen's Gandalf and Martin Freeman's Bilbo. A necessary evil in small doses...but I didn't care for the large amount of LOTR's referencing that goes on through dialogue and music. Just reminded me of special moments from the trilogy that I was missing here. One in particular felt completely out of context. In Thorin's end hero moment, who made the decision to use the Ringwraith's theme? Just felt wrong. The only new Howard Shore music that really registered for me was obviously the Dwarves theme, along with Radagast's theme. All others felt like revamps. Some great action set pieces like the goblin kingdom, but felt no true threat of danger for the characters as I did for the Fellowship. When Gandalf falls in Moria you FEEL it...as you do with Boromir at the end. There are sadly no moments equal to those here, but what you do get is a light hearted return to middle earth that sets the stage for hopefully much darker and weightier proceedings in the next two films.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 2:40 p.m. CST
Oh PER-F-LEASE! If you're BORED EVER during a 3 hour film then there's a SERIOUS problem, blaming short attention spans is PROJECTION
by quantize
-
I thought the same thing! What a misappropriation! Only thing I could think of was "Well... Azog WAS hanging out on Weathertop..." Still, that was a poor idea. Wasn't a fan of that. It changes what those cues mean in the later films.
-
When reviews list the characters followed by the actor names in brackets? That annoys the shit right out of me. Especially when they list all of the characters in a single paragraph. Surely there's a better way to do it like list them all at the end or something. Just pisses me off. Moving on.... I'm still on the fence about seeing this. I loved Lord of the Rings but I can't face sitting in the cinema through an overly long movie if its going to bore me. It'll be even worse if other people are bored as they start fidgeting and talking and ruining it. It's also money that I can't afford to spend if I'm unsure.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 2:59 p.m. CST
waiting for the bashers to come.... 3...2..1... by iamlegolas - At least change your USER name, dude
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 3:02 p.m. CST
@reflecto GDT was actually very wise in trying to keep the book within 2 films and avoid the 3D/48fps fiasco. Give him credit.
by TheKiller7
-
I had really low expectations for this one after mulling over the reviews. I'm a fan of 'The Hobbit' book and went in worried that it may be too long and bloated. Well, I was pleasantly surprised. The film looks gorgeous and doesn't feel as arduous as the previous LoTR movies which I still struggle to watch even at home going at my own pace. The Dwarves are not the complete clowns that Gimli morphed into after the 'toss' line from Fellowship and they do have more about them than the book versions which was a huge relief to me. Freeman plays Bilbo well and the change from country gent to adventurer is realised perfectly, especially after the riddle in the dark scene. That scene alone is worth the admission price with Serkis and Freeman battling wits and both bringing their best out of each other. For me, though, Thorin was fantastic. Built up well with the addition of the antagonist, Azog, chasing the company down for revenge yet still appearing like a greedy Dwarf king-in-waiting. His disdain at the choice of Bilbo was great to see and his eventual acceptance of him and what he brought to the party was stirring. A thoroughly watchable movie.
-
How do I know? Are all 3D versions 48fps and all 2D versions 24? Or are there 2D versions at 48fps, and some 24fps 3D ones?
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 3:04 p.m. CST
The Hobbit is like The Attack of the Clones - the good stuff doesn't happen until the last hour of the film.
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 3:05 p.m. CST
"Checking local listings, none of them mention 48fps" in the US only 5k movie houses will show it that way
by TheKiller7
-
Yeah I said it
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 3:10 p.m. CST
The only option that didn't seem available Big Jim...
by carlotta_valdes
...was 2D 24fps imax.
-
Anyone experience anything different at their theater?
-
A little goofy at times, but I mostly enjoyed it. Was worried about the running time, but it did manage to keep my attention. They could have maybe shaved a little off the action scenes. Glad I went with the 24 fps over the 48. It still looked really nice in IMAX. There were only a handful of scenes I would have preferred at 48. The 3d was perhaps unneccesary, but I didn't dislike it either. Didn't hurt anything, but it wasn't too immersive either. Surprised they went with the Eagle ex Machina again, but then I've never been wowed by the storyline, not even in LOTR.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 3:23 p.m. CST
Daily Express gave it 4 stars and said the it had a BREATHLESS PACE.
by LORDOFLIGHT
So I'm confused now. Some people are saying it's too slow and others are saying it moves along swiftly.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 3:24 p.m. CST
@lordoflight - that rag is lying. The first 2 hours are too damn slow. The banquet scene alone is one of the most lenghty scenes in film history
by TheKiller7
-
I came across this list: http://www.48fpsmovies.com/48-fps-theater-list/ The author says, as of now, there are no 2D 48fps versions. The list helps but still leaves some questions unanswered. I know the Scotiabank in Toronto has both Imax (real) and Ultra AVX screens (both showing The Hobbit in 3D). Given a choice, there's no choice at all between them (Imax all the way). I guess I can assume both will be projected at 48fps, but it'd be nice to know for sure before I plunk down my $20 (or whatever it is, thanks to 3D, Imax assigned seating, etc). If I'm being given so many different options for seeing a movie, I'd like to know for certain exactly which version is being offered and where.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 3:32 p.m. CST
re: "Given a choice, there's no choice at all between them (Imax all the way)"
by jim
I should have prefaced that with "All things being equal, ..."
-
Mine wasn't. The theater had it, just not in IMAX. They should say HFR next to the film times. Or just ask.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 3:38 p.m. CST
The film looks better at 24fps but without the useless 3D. See it like the previous trilogy. 3D is for kids.
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 3:43 p.m. CST
48fps should've been used for a film set in the real world. It honestly makes Middle Earth look like a film set. Avoid it.
by TheKiller7
-
I was able to find more information on Cineplex's website and their showtimes for that theater (I always use a comprehensive site for looking up movies, that covers all theaters in town). It looks like the Imax 3D is 24fps (doesn't say otherwise). It's the UltraAVX showings that lists the "High Frame Rate" 3D.
-
... PJ sucks, the movie sucks, Warner sucks, etc. I have seen Hobbit 1 three times now and I lived to tell the tale. 2x in HFR 48fps and 1x plain old 24fps, but all in 3D. The 3D looks much better in HFR. When I saw the 24fps afterwards it looked terrible. The first couple of minutes of HFR take some getting used to and then it is brilliant. I didn't see anything like a Soap Opera, I wasn't bored, I enjoyed this trip to Middle Earth and I can't wait for the BDs and the next two films. I don't get all this shit about "it is too long". I am usually not in a hurry to see movies. I take the time. I didn't even mind the 90 minutes wait we had for the playback key to arrive so the HFR 3D version could start. Free coffee for everybody. (and yes, DRM sucks) *spoilers* The only complaint I have about the film is the one sequence down with the Goblins when our gang crashes with the bridge thing down into the chasm. That looked totally weird and no dwarf fell off. That pushed it a bit too far for my taste. Rest of the Goblin sequence was great.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 3:55 p.m. CST
"I don't get all this shit about it is too long" - Learn to read: the complaints are that the film takes too long to get anywhere. It finally does after 2 hours.
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 3:55 p.m. CST
People said Kong dragged too teabagger......but it was the cartoonish scenes that spoiled that.
by LORDOFLIGHT
I didn't mind the build up to Skull Island as it built up the excitement so maybe everyone expects constant action........I dunno.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 3:57 p.m. CST
The film would've been perfect if Peter Jakcosn had not tried to make it into a trilogy. And if so, this film would've had all the extra fat PROPERLY EDITED out.
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 3:58 p.m. CST
@lordoflight - In that case, the stereotype of Kong fighting airplanes on top of a building was something that made people antsy.
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 3:58 p.m. CST
They couldn't wait for that scene and it felt long to them
by TheKiller7
-
So if a film takes a bit more time to establish things people automatically think it drags. Mind you--I ain't seen the Hobbit yet so I'm only speculating. Maybe it does drag in the first part.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 3:59 p.m. CST
But in the Hobbit, the first 2 hours are artificially prolonged well beyond what needed to be showned on screen.
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 4 p.m. CST
If The Hobbit had been set within two films, then PJ would've edited the scenes properly.
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 4 p.m. CST
"Maybe everyone's attention spans have reduced?" Nope. I am a big fan of ALIEN
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 4:01 p.m. CST
Alien takes its sweet time to set things up. But it was all done properly.
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 4:02 p.m. CST
The Hobbit takes too damn long with scenes that could've been edited and the film would've been better for it. Lot better.
by TheKiller7
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 4:07 p.m. CST
PJ gives you: Retard Dwarf, Fat Bastard Dwarf, Billy Barty Dwarf & Garden Weasel Orc!
by T
Only Fat Bastard Dwarf & Garden Weasl Orc bothered me much, though. I don't get the hate; all my quibbles are minor. Yes, my mind did wander a bit, but sitting next to beautiful girl geeks can do that to even an old dog like myself.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 4:28 p.m. CST
When I saw the Hobbit five years ago, the 48fps didn't bother me half as much as when I saw it twice in 96fps
by cozy
-
When Radaghast the Brown, and his sled pulled by rabbits, is leading the Orcs and their Wogs(?) supposedly away from our intrepid group. The medium and long shots are horribly rendered, especially a long shot that is somewhat akin to Santa Sled and his reindeer 'galloping' across the sky!
-
At 24 fps, the action and detail were often a blur. At 48 fps, it was crystal clear. Not jerky or sped up, totally discernible. Too much gets lost in the blur at 24 fps. I'll see it again at 48 fps while I still have the chance.
-
The Hobbit is FREAKING AMAZING!!!! I was worried because of some of the reviews but there's nothing to worry about. If you loved LOTR you'll love Hobbit. The cinematography has improved so much in 10 years, the 3D is the best I've seen since Avatar, and with all the added stuff like the White Council I think these could end up being even better than the book, depending on how the next two movies play out. As someone who hated the idea of Jackson turning this into a trilogy, now I say bring it on!
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 6:03 p.m. CST
talkbackernoname: agreed that its not a true 48p source but it's friggin perfect when the camera isn't too fast. You definitely get the point. Anyways I'm
by UltraTron
seeing it in 48p 3D tonight. Theater showing it offers 3D IMAX, regular 3D, 2D and EFR 3D
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 6:52 p.m. CST
I disagree that 48 fps makes Middle-Earth look like a film set.
by D.Vader
Don't avoid it. I say check it out. Experiment. Make up your own mind. There are people who find it too distracting. And there are people for whom it is NO issue at all. See where you fall.
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 6:58 p.m. CST
But the Kidd said the Hobbit sucks! This can't be right, I can't trust my own eyes that saw an amazing film either, the Kidd has to be right, right?
by Hardboiled Wonderland
-
And the movies are 20 hours long, I love Middle-earth!
-
Dec. 14, 2012, 7:53 p.m. CST
Is RT fudging numbers to keep The Hobbit ratings artificially high? Half of the 2.5 star ratings are fresh the other half are rotten.
by Baked
This is the same thing I saw from the Superman Returns reviews back in the day.
-
and I take back almost everything I 'whined' about yesterday, wanting to see it in 48fps on 2D film instead of HD digital video. I loved it, the sets and costumes were great, it certainly DID NOT look like a soap opera with flat lighting, and the sped up motion issue, while noticeable toward the beginning, actually worked for me, since it seemed to occur during humorous moments only, adding a bit of slapstick to some of the dwarves and Bilbo's comic frenzy. Best three moments for me were the depiction of Bilbo's pity upon Gollum, paying off Gandalf's prior wishes to him about mercy, the opening sequence of Erebor at it's height of glory (Wow! Powerfully Majestic!) and, the Eagles ... Maybe it was lowered expectations or whatever, but it was great. ... but I still can't help but wonder what a 2D 48fps screening of his would look like ...
-
Pay no attention to negative reviews. It’s not Fellowship of the Ring, but neither is the book. It is just a highly enjoyable return to Middle Earth in the form of a fun action/adventure movie. Riddles in the Dark alone makes it an awesome movie. Also seeing the white council together and the opening Shire scenes.
-
Dec. 15, 2012, 12:59 a.m. CST
Quote: Jackson's mission with this film is to get things rolling and not necessarily to plunge us neck deep in epic battles...
by Baked
So...why the two musical numbers and 45 minutes of preparatory dialogue at the beginning of the movie? Maybe he should have gotten rolling on getting started rolling.
-
And the musical numbers were great and probably took up about a minute and a half of screen time. All that opening stuff was probably my favorite part, other than Riddles in the Dark.
-
And I had an absolute blast. As a big fan of the EEs I thought it was rather well-paced. There are a few scenes just for the diehards (Elrond giving Thorin and Gandalf the names of their swords), but overall this is the most faithful PJ has been to the source material and the film benefits greatly from it. It also captures the jaunty spirit and lighthearted tone of the book without weighing down the material or sticking out when compared to the LotR films. I would rank it above TTT and just a hair underneath FOTR (nothing can touch ROTK, faults and all).
-
Although I wouldn’t rank it above TTT, personally. I’d say close to the quality of LotR, but not quite there. Which is more due to the source material than any fault of PJ’s, I’d say.
-
Really shouldn't be near a Tolkien movie... Though I would have had the tune for the first song done differently, the songs are necessary in this one.
-
When PJ adds something not in the original novel. There is a reason why Tolkien wrote it as he did, and had the "other events" on the side. The Hobbit is all Bilbo's story... not.... the Council's story...
-
Dec. 15, 2012, 4:45 a.m. CST
If Peter Jackson wanted to do more with Frodo.... what he should have done
by HornOrSilk
Is film a 90 min Scouring of the Shire. There, you have your third movie. Have it so that a new edit of the complete saga can be had, where TT/ROTK is edited to make room for the Scouring. Alas.
-
many scenes from the trailers were not in the movie, including Bilbo looking at the broken sword.
-
While not terrible its certainly not great. Lots of bloated pointless scenes that have no relation to either the book or bilbo's journey. While Tone and editing is atrocious.The most obvious example is th Goblin King scene's which the jar jar like slapstick it terrible (bad anyway) when cut between the (interesting) dramatic serious Golloum/Bilbo riddle scene. Martin Freeman does ok with what he was given but considering he is ment to be the main charachter, its suprising how little that is. Its a shame that Jackson is doing to the Hobbit what Lucas did to the PT. Sacrificing an interesting charachter journey for a bloated mess.
-
Even sycophantic fanboi garbage on stupid talkbacks has a limit. Saying AUJ is not a good film because of the "source material" is quite frankly the most retarded thing I've read on this site. The book is a beloved literary classic, embraced by successive generations since it's publication 75 years ago. Peter Jackson made a mess of a film, adding extraneous nonsense that are not in the book AT ALL. Blame Jackson for making a terrible movie. Don't become a Jackson apologist by trying to sully a great book.
-
The movie is going to be an action/adventure movie, like the book. I think that is the tone they went for and they achieved it well. It doesn’t have the emotional resonance of LotR for the most part. That’s less true of the latter part of the book with Smaug etc. It gets a bit more serious, for which reason I think the next two movies will probably be closer in tone to LotR.
-
I saw it in 2D 24fps.
-
otherwise I would not have seen it at all until the Extended Edition Blu-ray hits next Fall
-
Dec. 15, 2012, 11:12 a.m. CST
Forgive me if I slaughter the names, but the Council stuff was actually good.
by T
I actually dug Elronde & Gladriel stuff, they added some subtext with Gandalf. They seemed less "wooden" in this movie than I recall in Lord of the Rings, it's been a while tho. I'm not a die-hard Tolkien fan, obviously.
-
Dec. 15, 2012, 11:14 a.m. CST
I really thought stereotypical evil archer was gonna Triumph that comment.
by T
ie. " For me to Poop on! "
-
Bring back the 82 minute movie. Yeah..I'm looking at you, Tarantino.
-
Dec. 15, 2012, 3:39 p.m. CST
..and Jackson and Nolan and Cameron and Scorsese and Del Toro...
by Cassius_Crackhead
-
THE HOBBIT 5 stars out of 5 from The Dojo. In short - loved it! What an absolutely superb movie, made with craftsmanship, dedication and a good amount of kiwi affection - a particular magic that perhaps Peter Jackson doesnt get credited with enough. I dont know what a Guillermo del toro, or a Ridley Scott, or a James Cameron HOBBIT would have looked like - but I know they wouldnt have *felt* like this. Peter Jacksons amiable personality and the obvious fellowship of the cast and crew have once again produced a movie with great warmth and loveability. Forget those moaning about the long running time, its a pathetic criticism. I am already looking forward to an extra 20 minutes of footage the EXTENDED EDITION. I figure that perhaps those aicn reviewers who saw this during the arduous marathon of Buttnumbathon or those talkbackers who sat through 3 hours of movie at a midnight show might have prejudiced themselves by being tired going into the viewing. Me - my show started at 8pm and I left the cinema at 11.30pm with a massive grin on my face - elated and energized. I might also add I saw it in the regular old framerate so didnt have any of those HFR viewing issues to consider - visually it looked cinematic and a perfect tonal match for the previous LOTR trilogy. SPOILERS The opening with Ian Holm and Elijah Wood, set literally 5 minutes before the opening of FELLOWSHIP - wow! What a cool choice, and the backflash of Erebor is breathtaking. Lovely to see both those actors reprise their roles and it sets up young Bilbo Martin Freeman perfectly. Absolutely perfect segue. I dont think you could dovetail the two trilogies together any better than the opening of THE HOBBBIT does. And Martin Freeman is fantastic - the absolutely right blend of heroism and homeliness. He's also funny, and THE HOBBIT perhaps has more little laughs in it than the whole of LOTR trilogy combined. The Dwarves.... whoever said (I think it was The Kidd) that there was no differentiation - what a fucking joke. They are absolutely differentiated and I could identify each and every one, and rattle off character traits for them too. In some of the big CG heavy setpieces they do seem a bit invulnerable perhaps, but I guess thats just cos theyre dwarves, and tough little fuckers! Also brilliant to see Ian Holm, Christopher Lee, Hugo Weaving and Cate Blanchett reprise their roles - and whether this was digital trickery - but none of them look older than their previous appearances. Expertly done. And of course there is Gollum. Wow. Riddles In The Dark is without a doubt the standout sequence. Better even than the book. In the book it was a scene played out between two protagonists Bilbo and Gollum. But in the movie, it is played out between three protagonists - the schizophrenia of Gollum / Smeagol as played by Andy Serkis is just IN-FUCKING-CREDIBLE to behold. Probably my fave scene in the whole LOTR saga so far. What doesnt work so well? The wargs and Azog the orc, theyre uncanny valley and not quite there for me. Small criticism in a film that mostly blew my socks off and proudly stands alongside FOTR, TT and ROTK. Bravo PJ!
-
Dec. 15, 2012, 9:14 p.m. CST
I love LOTR had amazing amounts of CG, but now The Hobbit, meh too much CG. Haha!
by Orionsangels
-
Dec. 15, 2012, 9:15 p.m. CST
Reviewing movies based on 3D & 48fps? See it in 24fps. Judge the movie itself, not the gimmick.
by Orionsangels
-
Dec. 15, 2012, 9:18 p.m. CST
If you didn't like The Hobbit film. Then you never really loved PJ's LOTR.
by Orionsangels
Because I was back in good ol' Middle-Earth! I think some people were expecting ROTK.
-
Dec. 15, 2012, 9:32 p.m. CST
Horrible, Embarassing, Travesty of a Movie.... Do Not See This Unless Seeking a Cure for Insomnia
by ass clown
I held Peter Jackson to higher standards than this heap of dog shit. Jackson dropped the ball and the result is a boring mess of children's humor, poor voice acting, and an uncaptivatimg story. I will not see parts 2 and 3, oh no not me, I will not see.
-
I wanted to love this movie. Ultimately, I just kinda endured it. It only got fun at the end, last hour or so. But it felt like Jackson was just making a blurred carbon copy of "Fellowship." First, the same damn music cues. "Here's the Ring" cue. "Here's Gandalf being warm and wise" cue. "Here the Company/Fellowship is being chased through the an underground mine sort of thing by goblins/orcs" cue. Way too many of the same beats repeated from Fellowship to this movie. Only real saving grace was Freeman. Rest of it was kind of an embarrassment.
-
Dec. 15, 2012, 11:42 p.m. CST
A lot of you people should probably go ahead and kill yourselves.
by wcolbert
If you find no enjoyment in this...I'm betting your dumb ass didn't even read the book to begin with. No, don't claim you did if you didn't. You can lie to us...not yourself. WAHHHHHH it's too long! ....Get an attention span longer than that of a squirrel on crack and that shouldn't be an issue. Used to be that films took their TIME to tell a story, rather than whipping everything at you in bite sized pieces. You illiterate retards are probably the exact same group who are too lazy to read subtitles in films for more than a minute at a time. WAHHHHH it wasn't dark and gloomy the entire time...it was lighthearted and comical at times....wahhhhhh where's my emo hobbit with tattoos who takes vengeance on his enemies for raping and killing his wife? WAHHHHH ...it was a book for young adults and children to begin with and was much more light hearted in tone than Lord of the Rings. Get over it. WAHHHHHHHH this or that minor detail was altered... Hey, cunt flap...ever occur to you that some changes are ALWAYS necessary when translating from book to film? WAHHHHHHHH there was CGI! OMG IT haz to be like all practical and stuff! ....just die. Die already. Stab yourself in the neck and die.
-
coming out with that crap. The film is so different (riddle scene aside) its embarrassing. I'll list a few obvious ones. 1) Bilbo does not chose to run after the Dwarves but is hustled out by Gandalf, hence why he forgets his handkerchief. 2) Radagast is not in the Hobbit and his discription in Fellowship is different from a guy with bird poop on his head. 3) Gandalf gets the map and key from Thorin's father in the dungeons of Dol Gulder. As he had been captured by the Necromancer. Again no Radagast. 4) The white Orc with his blood fued against Thorin, again not in the book. He has a passing mention at best. 5) Thorin's distrust and betryal by elves. Again it doesnt happen until they meet the wood elves in Mirkwood. 6) Elrond's disaproval of Thorins quest and the white council meeting. Again does not happen. In the book Elrond quite happily helps and sets them on their way. 7) The Troll fight. Again does not happen, Bilbo gets caught and the dwarves keep going 2by2 to look for him and keep getting caught themselves. Its also Gandalf not Bilbo who keeps them talking until the sun comes up. 8) The Goblin King is not a fat slapstick, wannabe Jar Jar. While Gandalf is with the Dwarves everystep of the way and disapears when they come through a door at the back of the cave. Not down some crazy slide through the floor. There are more to list so please do not try and excuse a bad film by saying people have not read the book.
-
is a good fun adventure story with a great charachter arc/journey for the main charachter Bilbo. It should have been filmed that way rather than mixing the dark Lord of the Rings tone with goofy slapstick, that we got.
-
The critics get to determine whether they want they want their review listed as fresh or rotten.
-
Dec. 16, 2012, 3:23 a.m. CST
If Jackson had the rights to the book, he would have it rewritten to conform to his film(s). Oh, he'd like to do that with LOTR, too.
by The Comrade
-
Dec. 16, 2012, 2:21 p.m. CST
spike fan, none of those changes matter the tiniest bit, so WTF are you blathering about? You must be an idiot.
by golden tribw
-
Haters can suck it.
-
If you are open-minded and not expecting everything to be perfect, like I was, I really liked this movie. If you go in already whining about three movies and frame rates and CGI, yeah, I'm sure you'll find something to complain about. That type always does. I was surprised at how well the opening portion of the movie moved along. I came out of the theater pretty well pleased. Now, with this one all done, I'm genuinely excited for the next one.
-
Instead compare AUJ with "Willow". Lucas wanted to do LOTR very much. So after he made big money, he tried to make his own Hobbit with "Willow" and see how that turned out. Even had an Aragorn like guy with Val Kilmer. So much that many many ideas were borrowed from LOTR for SW. C3PO, R2D2= elf, and hobbit. Chewbacca = Beonor, Uncle Owen's underlevel abode = Bag End, Obi-Wan = Gandalf, Darth Vader = Nazgul/ Necromancer/ Ringwraith complete with dark flowing cloak. (think about it, powerful lord human cursed by evil power into a half undeath thing complete with mask; breathing = nazgul rasping straight from the book!) Vader's Tie fighter Advanced = Nazgul steed. Inside Death star, bottomloss pits and tall walls equal mountains of Mordor and winding trails. Death Star exhaust port = crack of doom to throw the Ring / proton torpedoes which blows everything up. Yavin forest = Middle-earth forest with ruins of Arnor lying around. Dagobah = Dead Marshes from TTT. Yoda = more of the hobbit idea. Rings of power ( I kid you not) in the original scripts of Star Wars/ look it up. Cloud city = Minas Tirith or Osgiliath. Then Lucas gave up ripping off ideas from Middle-Earth and went to cash in for the kiddie toys and muppet tie-in's with ROTJ ewoks/care bears, and later TPM. Is AUJ seriously on the same dungheap level with Willow? Of course not Goblin King worst CGI character? Jar Jar Binks Remember Jar Jar? ( or don't even try). Even Dobby the elf had a better death scene than Jar Jar , who the last we saw of him was dancing, twriling around the top of that Naboo dome in ROTJ special edition addon celebration CGI scene. He was alive with Lucas channeling his flip-off finger to the fans through JarJar! Even though JArJar made it to the screen first. PJ schooled the SW prequels overwhelmingly with Gollum. (which TTT won the oscar for best sfx). Now PJ schools Avatar this time with better 3D efx use. Avatar2 going to make a trillion dollars in a few years? Hopefully it never comes and Cameron decides to wise up and do Terminator 5 with Arnold to wrap it up right. Glad that McG sandwich guy never came back.
-
Hoth wampa monster = frost giant/troll. STORMTROOPER ORCISH looking FACE masks = orcs. ESB Assasin droid with insect legs = Giant Spiders in Hobbit/TTT ; Han and Luke stuck in the snow in the middle of nowhere = Frodo and Sam hiding and camping out on the way to Mordor. (why else is there a scene of Han and Luke actually lost together in desperate straights?) Imperial offices with the big dome helmets = helmets used by Sauron's men. Luke and Leia swinging across the chasm = Sam's use of the Elven Rope from Galadriel. The dark side cave in ESB = barrow wights. Yoda also = Tom Bombadill and his solitary abode/ remember he is connected to the life everywhere around him! The prequels screwed all that up with ninja hopping Yoda and smoking with buddies in jedi temple, but at the time of ESB, it seemed Yoda was more powerful than Vader and the Emperor but chose to stay out of it. Like Tom Bombadill who did not want to get involved with the outside. That big massive gate of Hoth Base = Mordor's the Black gate. Chewbacca = the friendly tag along Ent/troll/Beonor
-
So I could judge the movie on it's own merits. I could never get past the feeling I was watching a BBC Video production of A Christmas Carol due to the plastic feel of HFR. I had a conversation with a RED rep at work a few weeks ago and he insisted the HFR effect would eventually feel normal to me much like 3D does...never happened. Every time there was a brightly lit scene I couldn't help but think it was taken from a making of doc done for the Blu Ray. I agree with others here that this was NOT the film to bring this tech to the public.
-
Saw it in 48fps and in 3D and gotta say, I do love *new* stuff when it comes to the movies. While the new format is definitely a drastic change in the way we watch movies, and maybe doesn't really work in smaller close-up scenes (see radaghast hut scenes/early bilbo opening his drawer scenes) but for the most part I thought the film looked vibrant, vivid and jaw dropping. In a good way! While it is far too long, by 20 mins at least, and the opening hour is oddly constructed (3 flashback scenes, two of which I think, are badly placed) there is quality and genuinely great beats to the initial reintroduction to bilbo, gandalf and the shire. I like that its more of an adventurous romp/chase movie, rather than an end of world epic. I enjoyed the white council scenes, which aren't getting much love, because they do weave some early threads for the larger, later films, with some lovely character moments with gandalf and galadriel, the latter which, before this film, I always found joyless, cold and immensely boring. The final hour is a triumph and left me wanting more. If they can perfect when and when not to use the new format I think the next two films will be very enjoyable - without threading the same ground as the previous trilogy.
-
Dec. 16, 2012, 8:14 p.m. CST
This is no phantom menace.... 20 Things I loved about The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey!
by sundaycall
20. The fall of Erebor - this was a brilliant montage that sets up a wonderful new back story within middle earth. Although I would say, it may have worked better if placed later in the film to help with the disjointed beginning, and perhaps act as a way to break up the long meeting in Bag-end. Perhaps as a story told to bilbo by gandalf or even thorin himself. Just saying... 19. Storm Giants - the best excuse to hide in a dodgy cave I've ever seen... 18. Gandalf the Grey - he's younger, less important, unsure of himself and even a little lost in this era of middle earth. This gandalf is worlds away from the commander of gondors defences and the grand white wizard we once knew. Frankly, he's far more interesting, and mckellan, while older and noticeably misty eyed, plays the character quite beautifully. 17. Bofur. I'd read the dwarves don't really get a look-in during this first outing, outside Thorin. This is only a half truth - Bofur, I thought, stood out as the rascal of this rag tag group, and had a truly touching scene when the gang are taking shelter from the storm giants. Plus I'm from Northern Ireland and we love it when an actor does well without playing a terrorist, or by being Liam Neeson. 16. The Goblin King - grotesque and memorable. Great for kids too, the gasps and awe from the younger audience in my screening was quite something. Cool stuff. 15. The songs - very Tolkien. Very cool. 14. Kili and Fili - again these two stood out from the crowd. Mischievous, rash and fearless. Aidan turner especially did well with limited material. Look forward to more merry and pippin-like shenanigans. 13. *Think furnace, with wings!* - good aul Jimmy again! 12. The White Council - this scene's been getting a bit of flack and honestly, I think some people are just regurgitating what they read in a review without actually seeing this for what it was. First and foremost, it shows gandalf is a crafty bastard. Second, it casts new light on where this Gandalf the Grey, actually stands in the pecking during this era of middle earth. Not very highly(especially in sauruman's eyes) in a wide world where a greater evil is beginning to grow. This scene made gandalf even more interesting than he already was. More please. 11. Galadriel - playful, underhanded and tender. Again, i thought, worlds away from the cold and largely boring character I remember from the original trilogy. In a very short time this film cast a new dimensions on blanchetts character. Good stuff. 10. The Pale Orc - while not as imposing as Lurtz, it was a very deft move to introduce a proper antagonist for Thorin to battle throughout these films, and it gently transformed the film into a chase movie rather than a romp on the road. 9. *I wish you all the luck in the world... I truly do.* - wonderful scene. 8. Dwalin- while he didn't get much to do, again he stands out from the others. Battle hardened, Boorish and a warrior, perhaps the only warrior besides Thorin. Hope to see more of him in the next film. 7. The escape from the Goblin City. Molested my eyes. In a good way. 6. The fact that Gandalf, in his younger days, totally pumped Galadriel. And they stayed friends as well. Aww. 5. It doesn't ruin LOTR, in fact it enhances it - remember when you could watch Star Wars and not whinge about Han shooting first, lament the days of good-puppet yoda and look at Darth vader and not hear *from my point of view the Jedi are evil!!!*? Nope, me neither. The true test, I believe, of a prequel should be whether it diminishes the original movies or expands and mines greater depth to the characters and story. I believe freeman, mckellan and serkis do that with great aplomb and the story of this rag tag band of homeless midgets in a simpler, brighter time in Middle- Earth only enriches the history of the older films and will provoke deeper thoughts on these characters when rewatching LOTR. Bravo mr Jackson. 4. Thorin Oakenshield - for this film to work this is a character that they had to get right. His story has weight, his character interesting and compelling, and he is played with a great nobility and strength by Richard armitage. I buy Thorin as a wondering prince, as a general, as a warrior and also as an uncertain soul, driven by honour and even by hate. Complex and powerful. Thumbs up. 3. Balin - I love balin. Yet another dwarf that makes his mark, he's perhaps the only friend amongst the crew for bilbo when gandalf is off gallivanting. Sagely, father-like and hopelessly loyal to Thorin, his scenes with the prince and with bilbo emphasise the longing for a home and the dangers ahead. Plus, again, it enhances scenes in FOTR when gimli discovers his tomb. And at the same time makes gandalf look like a heartless bastard (*so, he is dead then*) - don't get too broken up about it old boy! Cunt. 2. Martin freeman - he's better than Elijah wood and he doesn't do the character any disservice. Throughout the middle act though, he gets a bit lost in the pack, but despite this has perhaps the greatest number of moments with true resonance throughout the movie. His final decision to join the quest and stick by his new friends was brilliantly constructed and played out perfectly with Thorin. It felt real and natural *i will help you take it back if I can.* I cheered a little inside. Plus he plays a massive part in the best moment in the whole bloody film... 1. Riddles in the Dark - serkis. Awesome. Freeman. Great. The effects. Fucking hell. This scene could not have been realised more perfectly. You'll laugh, then the next minute your skin will be crawling. AGAIN we see a character at a different stage in his life, gollum is effectively at the height of his existence. Ring in tow and all the goblinsess he needs to eat. His descent into desperation and fury, then to pathetic fear and loss is amazing to behold. It's a scene that easily bears the weight of importance that it carries, in every fan boy/girls mind, and to the larger story. Billbos final act of pity and Gollums last cry of anger and grief land true and will break your heart. If it's the last we ever see of serkis' creation on the big screen, there couldn't have been a better way to close the curtain on the character. The stars aligned for this scene. Worth the price of admission alone. P.s. I haven't listed the HFR because, while I think new tools and ideas are awesome, it needs refinement. Most of the time it looks incredible, vibrant and spellbinding. Other times it looks pretty fucking goofy. It didn't stop me enjoying the movie, but it certainly wasn't the best way to endear the masses to a story already carrying a massive weight of expectation. Ballsy but clumsy. Massive post over. Later hobbitsess.
-
Watched it in 24fps 3D as I just wanted to take in the story and not be distracted by anything else. Admittedly it's not as epic as LOTR but The Hobbit isn't that epic to start with. That's nothing to do with Jackson, he's made the most of what he has to work with. A real Sunday afternoon film to chill out to. Looking forward to the sequels and extended versions on DVD.
-
Here's Fellowship: http://akas.imdb.com/title/tt0120737/ratings The demographic breakdown clearly shows that "children" (under 18) didn't vote much. Here's The Hobbit: http://akas.imdb.com/title/tt0903624/ratings Clearly the same phenomenon can be seen. Proof? No. Evidence? Yes.
-
Dec. 17, 2012, 8:45 a.m. CST
Is PJ going to strecth and get Serkis (Gollum) into the next two films as well?
by Drew
-
Thought it looked amazing. Did not feel long at all. Bilbo rocked. The dwarves were awesome. The songs were awesome. Gollum was simply poetic. The pale orc was wicked. The necromancer will rock. The white council was a wonderful trip back home to Rivendell. How can you hate any aspect of this movie!?!?!?! My only gripe is that you can see that Christopher Lee and Ian McKellan are just getting old now. Really old in terms of Leem which is why his scenes involved him sitting and keeping his hands below the table most of the time. But what an amazing movie. I might like it more than any of the LOTR movies. I love that it is a smaller scale adventure and more playful too. Truly amazing film.
-
According to IMDB, Serkis plays Gollum in the second movie. It appears that he will not be in the third.
-
sundaycall, well done for posting that list it was a good read!
-
Dec. 17, 2012, 5:13 p.m. CST
Interesting, bilboring. I wonder what exactly Gollum will do in part 2?
by frank
Seems like the could do an after credits thing at the end of Part 3 with him slinking across the countryside, muttering about Baggins and his precious.
-
Dec. 17, 2012, 5:13 p.m. CST
I think this is a case where we really need the whole trilogy for it to feel complete.
by frank
-
I know it is at the very least really enjoyable.
-
I wasn’t crazy about the Goblin King, but I totally agree on everything else you said. I especially like your insights on the White Council scene.
-
Hey, who doesn't want to be a Ballz-on-my chin one-armed Orc in an e-phantasy?
Top Talkbacks
- Spoilery early review of MAN OF STEEL!! -- 376 total posts 344 posts
- Holy Crossover!! Magneto’s Boy Quicksilver To Speed About In Whedon’s AVENGERS 2 And Singer’s X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST?? -- 318 total posts 106 posts
- A review of Refn and Gosling's ONLY GOD FORGIVES, direct from Cannes!! -- 111 total posts 92 posts
- Tom Cruise Won’t Go Solo For MAN FROM UNCLE!! -- 79 total posts 79 posts
- Harry dives into STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS' spoilers to reveal the truth behind the blockbuster we're seeing! -- 1464 total posts 57 posts
- The Friday Docback Revisits DOCTOR WHO Season 7!! A Fuller Review Of 'The Name of the Doctor,' And More!! -- 56 total posts 56 posts
- Green-Band and Red-Band trailers for the new Jason Sudeikis & Jennifer Aniston VACATION ripoff, WE'RE THE MILLERS are here!! -- 148 total posts 56 posts
- Jon Stewart casts Gael Garcia Bernal for his directorial debut, ROSEWATER!! -- 44 total posts 42 posts
- John Ary's Video Review Of THE HANGOVER PART III!! -- 38 total posts 38 posts
- Capone makes the case that THE HANGOVER PART III is neither a comedy nor a movie!!! -- 37 total posts 37 posts

