log in or register to remove this ad

 

The new Hobbit movie

was

Explorer
I am thinking of going to see it tomorrow. Has anybody seen it yet? Without giving spoilers, can you tell me if it's worth the expense?
 

log in or register to remove this ad


I saw it Tuesday. It's entertaining. It may not stick to the book enough for some people, but as long as you're not going to let that spoil your experience, its worth the money for a couple of hours of entertainment.
 

horacethegrey

First Post
As long as the film kept focus on Bilbo and the Dwarves, it was quite good. Unfortunately Peter Jackson stuffed it full of crap that could have been easily cut out, like that overwrought Third Act that seems to go on forever. If you want my more detailed review (which is full of SPOILERS btw) you can read it in the other thread here.

It's a damn shame. I loved PJ's take on LOTR, but his Hobbit trilogy has been somewhat of a disappointment. Mind, it's not as bad as how George Lucas messed the Star Wars prequels, but it's still a letdown from what came before. Still going to make a s**t ton of money either way. :)
 


Mark CMG

Creative Mountain Games
If you liked the previous two, you'll probably like this. If you didn't like the previous two, you probably won't.


Agreed. Personally (when it comes to The Hobbit and LotR), if I need the story from the books, I re-read the books, so the adjustments to the Hobbit through the three films don't bother me in the slightest. Anyway, I went last Monday to the marathon on the IMAX at Lincolnshire, IL and saw the three films from 1 pm to 9:30 pm, with 20 minute breaks, in 70mm 3D on their 70' x 53' screen. I found it spectacular. :)
 

Kramodlog

Naked and living in a barrel
Saw it. Much better than I anticipated. Close to being a Bay film. Obviously lots of scenes were cut at the end. Like the crowning of the new king under the mountain, sharing the gold with the humans, Bilbo getting the treasure of the trolls, etc. I guess Jackson listen to critics.
 



billd91

Hobbit on Quest
I caved in and saw it. Had to ask myself if this was Tolkien or Warhammer Fantasy. Came to conclusion that, whatever it was, it had very little Tolkien it. I have not been a fan of the Hobbit trilogy. Too little butter scraped over too much bread, if you ask me. Too much filler and too much focus on all of the wrong stuff.
 

horacethegrey

First Post
I caved in and saw it. Had to ask myself if this was Tolkien or Warhammer Fantasy. Came to conclusion that, whatever it was, it had very little Tolkien it. I have not been a fan of the Hobbit trilogy. Too little butter scraped over too much bread, if you ask me. Too much filler and too much focus on all of the wrong stuff.

Completely agree with this. If PJ wasn't so intent on linking it with LOTR and just focused on Bilbo and the Dwarves, they could have easily cut this trilogy down to the original 2 film plan that they originally had.
 


Mark CMG

Creative Mountain Games
Completely agree with this. If PJ wasn't so intent on linking it with LOTR and just focused on Bilbo and the Dwarves, they could have easily cut this trilogy down to the original 2 film plan that they originally had.

Could have been done in one -

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x140e0u_the-animated-hobbit-rankin-bass-part-1-2_creation


Nevertheless, I am glad it was done as well as it was done in my own lifetime. I've waited thirty(-five for LotR) to forty (for The Hobbit) years since first reading them in the early 70s for live action versions and the tech has allowed it to happen remarkably well, IMO. I'll re-read the books all the way through someday, or likely enjoy them as audio books, and get the original version as well.
 


TrippyHippy

Adventurer
Yep - it’s a Warhammer movie rather than Tolkien in feel. If you want an artistic or classic representation of Tolkien’s greatest work, then you’ll still have the Lord of the Rings trilogy, which is obviously the superior set of movies.

The Hobbit is prequel-ish in a Star Wars sense, with lots of references and allusions to what-characters-were-doing-before-as-backstory and so on. That’s a bit irritating, along with the totally original and un-Tolkien romance between the Elf and Dwarf (!) along with other characters. It lacks the thematic depth and narrative cohesion of the Lord of the Rings trilogy, and ups the level of cartoonish action and cgi effects throughout.

But all that said, as a straight fantasy movie it’s entertaining enough. Certainly as good as a Pirates of the Carabbean, or Star Wars or Harry Potter movie. And, to be fair, that’s all a lot of us want for a Christmas movie.
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
I dunno. I think the un-Tolkien inclusion of female protagonists is a feature, not a bug. It's just a shame Tolkien didn't do it first time around.
 

TrippyHippy

Adventurer
I didn’t mind the beefing out of female characters’ roles in LotR, but the entire fabrication of additional narratives with original characters seems a bit much - especially if it involves an elf fancying a dwarf…..although I suppose it gives some of us hope…
 

billd91

Hobbit on Quest
Yep - it’s a Warhammer movie rather than Tolkien in feel. If you want an artistic or classic representation of Tolkien’s greatest work, then you’ll still have the Lord of the Rings trilogy, which is obviously the superior set of movies.

The Hobbit is prequel-ish in a Star Wars sense, with lots of references and allusions to what-characters-were-doing-before-as-backstory and so on. That’s a bit irritating, along with the totally original and un-Tolkien romance between the Elf and Dwarf (!) along with other characters. It lacks the thematic depth and narrative cohesion of the Lord of the Rings trilogy, and ups the level of cartoonish action and cgi effects throughout.

[sblock]I would agree it lacks the depth and cohesion of the original. What was that appearance of Beorn in the final? An afterthought rather than a significant point of action? Most of the dwarven company need not have shown up for all the nothing they had to do. The drama of Kili and Fili protecting their king (and uncle) with their bodies from Bolg? Pfft. A disappointing end to a disappointing set of movies.[/sblock]
 
Last edited:


billd91

Hobbit on Quest
I dunno. I think the un-Tolkien inclusion of female protagonists is a feature, not a bug. It's just a shame Tolkien didn't do it first time around.

No it isn't. Tolkien's stories are what they are. They are the stories he wanted to tell and there's no shame in that at all.

I don't have a problem with Jackson adding things for female characters to do when adapting the work for the silver screen, a medium that requires simplification from most novels. And having Arwen take Glorfindel's place saves introducing another character. I do object to excessive retreading in previous own works (Aragorn's issues are all over the Hobbit trilogy). Tauriel's presence would have been much better considered independent of a love interest with a primary male character and independent of elvish healing magic - both of which are retreads.
 

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top