The Hobbitt
- Thread starter Andyman
- Start date
steerpike2
Super Member
I'm keen to see it - BUT!
After Christmas when the cinemas are less full of children, and only if it's shown in non-stereoscopic.
After Christmas when the cinemas are less full of children, and only if it's shown in non-stereoscopic.
HankScorpio
Dude in Seattle
I'm super interested in seeing it, but I'm still not sure if it was necessary to stretch the story over 3 separate 3 hour movies. I love the Lord of the Rings movies, and that made sense, there were three books, and even at 4 hours, there were parts that needed to be left out. The Hobbit, one of my favorite books that I remember reading with my father when I was a kid (we had the hardcover one with the paintings, so good), doesn't really need that kind of treatment, in my estimation. But that's probably why I'm not getting paid millions of dollars to make movies.
bogle111
A Canadian enjoying Wales
$€£$€£ as I see it too.
P. Shivers
Necessity Conquers Fear
I saw it on Thursday. IMHO it was ok; not bad, but not that good either. The LOTR trilogy of films were so much better. The Hobbit started out slow, and sort of dragged in the beginning, but got better once the journey began. I saw it in 3D at the Cinerama theatre in Seattle, and did not much care for the look of the film. The combination of the HFR 48fps and 3D made it oddly flat and cartoon like. The only scenes where this seemed to work for me, were the scenes in the mountain, with the goblins. The interior of Bilbo's house in 3D was claustrophobic for me. It was like there was no middle ground to look at, just in your face, or off in the distance. I wish there were more scenes of Bilbo, because Martin Freeman seemed to be the only actor not hamming it up. The best part of the movie for me, were his scenes with Gollum. For a movie titled "The Hobbit," it was mainly dominated by the dwarves, and very little hobbit.
Last edited:
P. Shivers
Necessity Conquers Fear
I have not read the book, but the reviews I've read stated that is follows it pretty closely. Almost too closely for some reviewers it seems.
rnorton
Super Member
Actually, LOTR was written as a single book and the publisher broke it up into 3 to maximize profits.
cubdog
banging through drywall
ekmanning5
Time has told me...
I feel I need to qualify my review first off. I am a Tolkien nut. That being said I think they've hit a home run with this movie. It follows the book very closely, and if you were at all disappointed with a few of the glaring omissions from LOTR, you will be much happier with the Hobbit. Much of the backstory that ties the two stories together, gleaned from the appendix found at the end of the LOTR books, is presented here. The addition of poetry put to music worked for me as well. Especially the Dwarves droning lament in Bilbo's home. Riddles in the Dark sequence, spot on. Stone Giants, too cool. And the entire sequence in the Goblins kingdom was terrific. I saw the film in 3D IMAX, and it was fine. Not spectacular, but quiet good. I'll go see the 48 FPS version another time. One thing I've always liked about Jackson's treatment of Middle Earth is the enormous scale he uses to portray the various lands and kingdoms. Both the Dwarf hall under the mountain and the goblin kingdom were immense. On the downside. A bit too much Radagast the Brown for my liking, and there were a couple of other inventions that were interpreted rather too liberally (not accurate book wise) as far as I was concerned. I think if you're a casual fan this movie rates 3.5 stars out of 4. For hardcore fanatics (like myself), I'd say 4 out of an available 4.
tensleep
Addicted Member
I love Middle Earth and almost anything that has to do with it. My wife is the same way. We just got back from seeing The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. First off, I have to say that I am going to be on pins and needles for however long it takes until the next installment - We don't meet Beorn in this first movie - it ends with the companions on top of the Carrock, musing about Erebor, seen in the distance.
I truly enjoyed seeing more of Bilbo in Bag End, especially with it crammed full of dwarves and the wizard! I also enjoyed the views of Hobbiton as well.
Some parts in the book are changed, left out or embellished. Some new parts are included, but do stick to information in the appendices or the Silmarillion. I do wish that a couple of things had been left as the book was written, especially where I cannot see where the change was necessary or the original would have been any more difficult to make. I would give examples, but I don't want to leave any spoilers.
Dol Guldur looks to be terrifying - I can't wait to see that side story developed in the next film.
I grew up with these characters and have read most of the associated literature several times over. I decided when the first LOTR movies were coming out that I would be willing to have the characters of my imagination subject to the inevitable distortion of someone else's vision. I am pleased that the distortion is minimal and I do have two versions to enjoy. My wife and I recently finished reading The Hobbit before bed, and are well into The Lord of the Ring. With Tolkien's amazing writing style, I can easily slip back into my own version of Middle Earth without difficulty.
One more thing - I think that Smaug's eye will become more iconic than The Eye of Sauron.
I truly enjoyed seeing more of Bilbo in Bag End, especially with it crammed full of dwarves and the wizard! I also enjoyed the views of Hobbiton as well.
Some parts in the book are changed, left out or embellished. Some new parts are included, but do stick to information in the appendices or the Silmarillion. I do wish that a couple of things had been left as the book was written, especially where I cannot see where the change was necessary or the original would have been any more difficult to make. I would give examples, but I don't want to leave any spoilers.
Dol Guldur looks to be terrifying - I can't wait to see that side story developed in the next film.
I grew up with these characters and have read most of the associated literature several times over. I decided when the first LOTR movies were coming out that I would be willing to have the characters of my imagination subject to the inevitable distortion of someone else's vision. I am pleased that the distortion is minimal and I do have two versions to enjoy. My wife and I recently finished reading The Hobbit before bed, and are well into The Lord of the Ring. With Tolkien's amazing writing style, I can easily slip back into my own version of Middle Earth without difficulty.
One more thing - I think that Smaug's eye will become more iconic than The Eye of Sauron.
Taowolf51
Well-Known Member
They added in portions of The Silmarillion apparently, which I think makes it a bit more acceptable.
Saw it yesterday and thought it was pretty good. As others have said it was a little slow in the beginning and picked up steam for a great cliff-hanging ending. Martin Freeman does play a very good Bilbo. Council scene added some nice details to what happens in the LOTR.
