The Hobbit movie
Discussion
Nom de ploom said:
but then you would be missing out on two important elements of the book, you can't have it both ways.
I would have cut radagast out completely and the connections implied to the witch king and the 9.
I am not looking to 'have it both ways' but to have a more tightly paced movie that has a consistent tone.I would have cut radagast out completely and the connections implied to the witch king and the 9.
The troll scene works if you are making a light hearted children's film, but doesn't really match with much of the rest of the film.
Rivendell was a case of been there seen it before (in LOTR) with the addition of the flabby council scene. Whether it is in the book or not it could easily have been cut.
I liked many of the elements that others complained about, like Radagast or the Dwarven singing as both gave it a different feel to LOTR.
They are actually bringing out an EXTENDED version of this film soon! The cure for insomniacs is coming!
It was way too padded out in standard trim, I thought.
It is quite telling that our kids still want to watch the original trilogy, but not once have they ever asked to watch the Hobbit again. (a bit like not wanting to watch the Star Wars prequels, but still loving the originals..)
It was way too padded out in standard trim, I thought.
It is quite telling that our kids still want to watch the original trilogy, but not once have they ever asked to watch the Hobbit again. (a bit like not wanting to watch the Star Wars prequels, but still loving the originals..)
DMN said:
The reviews seem much better for this one. Lets hope their on it.
...Apart from the Telegraph review:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/filmreview...
Mutley said:
ZesPak said:
I only went to see it once.
Am booked for tonight. Film2013 were a little scathing in that it is a fanboys creation rather than true to the book. But as long as it entertains (and it sounds like it will) I'll be happy
In my opinion the real fanboys are the ones who wet their pants over the PJ version of Tolkien's work.
The Hobbit (film) was a typical sloppy PJ w
kfest. Might has well have rabbits pulling a sleigh across ME for three hours.
The Hobbit (book) could have been a beautiful fantasy film, in the old tradition, instead it gets wedged clumsily and with great trauma into the LOTR canon.
The Hobbit (film) was a typical sloppy PJ w
kfest. Might has well have rabbits pulling a sleigh across ME for three hours.The Hobbit (book) could have been a beautiful fantasy film, in the old tradition, instead it gets wedged clumsily and with great trauma into the LOTR canon.
I watched the Hobbit film, I didn't enjoy it as much as the regular LOTR film, it seemed too whimsical at times. The intro with the feast in Dildo's (that was his name, wasn't it?) house, and the scene with the trolls, just too stupid for my tastes. For a start, if those dwarfs tied to the spit could happily talk away with no apparent discomfort then they were clearly not going to be cooking any time soon, or at all.
I've never read the books, but I hope the sequel isn't so goofy and lighthearted.
I've never read the books, but I hope the sequel isn't so goofy and lighthearted.
Mastodon2 said:
I watched the Hobbit film, I didn't enjoy it as much as the regular LOTR film, it seemed too whimsical at times. The intro with the feast in Dildo's (that was his name, wasn't it?) house, and the scene with the trolls, just too stupid for my tastes. For a start, if those dwarfs tied to the spit could happily talk away with no apparent discomfort then they were clearly not going to be cooking any time soon, or at all.
I've never read the books, but I hope the sequel isn't so goofy and lighthearted.
The Hobbit is only 1 book, PJ has taken the appendices from the LOTR books to flesh it out.I've never read the books, but I hope the sequel isn't so goofy and lighthearted.
The 2nd film is more action less building up and introducing
Iirc Tolkien wrote this for his kids, so while the 2nd film will
I'm undecided about going to see this second installment, the first felt baggy and stretched and I haven't bothered revisiting it on DVD.
I probably said the same this time last year, but there was too much cgi and not enough physical effects, I hated the whole goblin sequence under the mountains.
Interested to hear if this second is worth bothering though.
I probably said the same this time last year, but there was too much cgi and not enough physical effects, I hated the whole goblin sequence under the mountains.
Interested to hear if this second is worth bothering though.
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff