The Hobbit movie
Discussion
g3org3y said:
Maybe I'm getting old of late and I know kids spend all day stabbing each other and doing drive-bys but I thought it quite gory (and potentially scary in places) for a 12. Rating must have been borderline.
I know what you mean, dont go and see Jack Reacher expecting a family movie and definitly dont watch The Woman in Black expecting to sleep with the light on for at least a week 
Halb said:
Think about what a persons memory is after a hundred years, imagine having your life twisted and stretched beyond comprehension for another couple hundred years, in isolation from people and light.
He's quite pukka considerin'!
Ha. I've encountered plenty of centenarians on the geriatric wards. They may have been confused, but there knew they were humans! I know it's a bit of a pedantic thing to pick the film up on, but for me consistency is important and it did make me stop and think "hold on a sec, you were a hobbit right!?".He's quite pukka considerin'!
FWIW, Gollum did look excellent, they've got the CGI sorted perfectly. Leaps and bounds since the LOTR trilogy imo.
g3org3y said:
Halb said:
Think about what a persons memory is after a hundred years, imagine having your life twisted and stretched beyond comprehension for another couple hundred years, in isolation from people and light.
He's quite pukka considerin'!
Ha. I've encountered plenty of centenarians on the geriatric wards. They may have been confused, but there knew they were humans! I know it's a bit of a pedantic thing to pick the film up on, but for me consistency is important and it did make me stop and think "hold on a sec, you were a hobbit right!?".He's quite pukka considerin'!
FWIW, Gollum did look excellent, they've got the CGI sorted perfectly. Leaps and bounds since the LOTR trilogy imo.
He's spent several hundred years living alone in a cave, catching cave fish and strangling orcs for food while wearing an exquisitely evil magical artefact which specialises in deranging and corrupting mortal minds. On first contact with it, it induced him to murder his friend. He doesn't want to remember his former life. The correct technical term for Gollum's psychological state is "bats
t crazy".
t crazy". 
otolith said:
He's spent several hundred years living alone in a cave, catching cave fish and strangling orcs for food while wearing an exquisitely evil magical artefact which specialises in deranging and corrupting mortal minds. On first contact with it, it induced him to murder his friend. He doesn't want to remember his former life. The correct technical term for Gollum's psychological state is "my normal girlfriend material."
Corrected that for you.
Just seen it.
My concern over these films has always been that they were taking a slim children's book and making it into three 3 hour films and in part my concerns were realised. There is a very real sense that while most films are concerned with how to achieve the fastest pace possible, PJ was always thinking how can I pad this out.
Five minutes at the start with Frodo are completely unnecessary, and it has not one, but two extended flashback scenes. Meanwhile the scenes at Rivendell rather remind me of the Jedi council meetings of the first two star wars prequels.
Tonally it is all over the place as well. The childish nature of the encounter with the trolls contrasts with other scenes that are far darker. If the intention was to maintain a similar feel to the LOTR (which seems to be the intention in much of the movie), then such scenes should have been scrapped or modified more than they were.
The battle in the goblin city was also misjudged. It is one of those frenetic action scenes for an ADD generation, where it was virtually impossible for all to escape unscathed, but of course there was no real sense of danger just a kaleidoscope of rapidly moving images, much like 2012 in that respect.
A three star movie, which could have been far better in the hands of a better writer and different director. Two well plotted, and fast paced, Hobbit movies that used both the book and the stuff in the appendixes could have been great, but PJ was not the man to deliver this.
My concern over these films has always been that they were taking a slim children's book and making it into three 3 hour films and in part my concerns were realised. There is a very real sense that while most films are concerned with how to achieve the fastest pace possible, PJ was always thinking how can I pad this out.
Five minutes at the start with Frodo are completely unnecessary, and it has not one, but two extended flashback scenes. Meanwhile the scenes at Rivendell rather remind me of the Jedi council meetings of the first two star wars prequels.
Tonally it is all over the place as well. The childish nature of the encounter with the trolls contrasts with other scenes that are far darker. If the intention was to maintain a similar feel to the LOTR (which seems to be the intention in much of the movie), then such scenes should have been scrapped or modified more than they were.
The battle in the goblin city was also misjudged. It is one of those frenetic action scenes for an ADD generation, where it was virtually impossible for all to escape unscathed, but of course there was no real sense of danger just a kaleidoscope of rapidly moving images, much like 2012 in that respect.
A three star movie, which could have been far better in the hands of a better writer and different director. Two well plotted, and fast paced, Hobbit movies that used both the book and the stuff in the appendixes could have been great, but PJ was not the man to deliver this.
TheBear said:
The problem with a lot of people is that they read the book(s) first and then go and watch the film determined that it won't be as good as the book, determined to pick up on everything that's changed/missed out/not how they wanted it, determined to complain at every opportunity.
You can hear them in the foyer before complaining "It's not going to be as good as the book. I've heard xyz happens". You hear them in their seats whispering "That's not how it was in the book", you can then hear them in the foyer after complaining "That's not how it was in the book, why did they do this, and that". Some even produce a copy of their book to make their point.
Basically they don't go to enjoy a film, they pay their money to pick at it so they can moan.
Please note that I said a lot of people, not all as not every film is for everyone.
It has been many years since I have read the Hobbit books (The LOTR books have had the repeat readings in adulthood) so that is not the case with me. I just think the pacing was way off, it was bloated, and that many of the scenes are the usual CGI roller-coaster with no sense of peril. Add to that an overuse of the themes from the LOTR films which makes it seem like a pale echo rather than its own film.You can hear them in the foyer before complaining "It's not going to be as good as the book. I've heard xyz happens". You hear them in their seats whispering "That's not how it was in the book", you can then hear them in the foyer after complaining "That's not how it was in the book, why did they do this, and that". Some even produce a copy of their book to make their point.
Basically they don't go to enjoy a film, they pay their money to pick at it so they can moan.
Please note that I said a lot of people, not all as not every film is for everyone.
They could have missed out the troll scene and the Rivendell ones and improved the pacing.
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.
the trolls scene is required as it is the first time they have to work togethe rto get out of trouble and rivendell is thier first real safe rest and prep for the next stage of the journey.
I thought the film was really good apart from the goblin scene in the mountain which I though was rushed and too effects driven - it kinda took me out of the film a bit if I'm honest.
I disagree re pacing - too many films these days discard a bit of plot and characterisation for a money shot...let the thing breathe otherwise its not Tolkien.
I would have cut radagast out completely and the connections implied to the witch king and the 9.
the trolls scene is required as it is the first time they have to work togethe rto get out of trouble and rivendell is thier first real safe rest and prep for the next stage of the journey.
I thought the film was really good apart from the goblin scene in the mountain which I though was rushed and too effects driven - it kinda took me out of the film a bit if I'm honest.
I disagree re pacing - too many films these days discard a bit of plot and characterisation for a money shot...let the thing breathe otherwise its not Tolkien.
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff