The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

[MadCardDisease]

I'm hearing three things for the most part:

1) there's no reason for this to be split up into three movies as the movie suffers from serious bloat, especially the beginning which apparently goes on forever.

2) there is A LOT to like in it for LOTR fans, just could have used a better editor.

3) 48 FPS is a bust, beautiful at times, but incredibly distracting at others, making sets REALLY look like sets and creating a weird Benny Hill effect in action scenes.

I'm definitely going to go see it, but I ain't going 48 frames and my expectations are set to medium.

Benny Hill was awesome!

When you say Benny Hill effect do you mean:

• When people smile you get a big sparkle off one of their front teeth
• or there are a lot of scantly clad women in all of the scenes (crosses fingers)
• or people move like claymation across the screen

 

[Brian in Mesa]

 

[AzStevenCal]

Okay, so I'm not old, it's just a coincidence that I remember seeing Nimoy do that on a variety style show in the 60's aimed at music fans of the day. I don't remember the name of the show but Ricky Nelson was the host and I don't even think it lasted a full season. Anyway, it was funny then and it's funny today.

Steve
-------------------------------------------------

EDIT: Okay, so maybe I am getting old. I just looked up Ricky Nelson and I can't find a show that matches the description of the one I remember.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

Okay, so I'm not old, it's just a coincidence that I remember seeing Nimoy do that on a variety style show in the 60's aimed at music fans of the day. I don't remember the name of the show but Ricky Nelson was the host and I don't even think it lasted a full season. Anyway, it was funny then and it's funny today.

Steve
-------------------------------------------------

EDIT: Okay, so maybe I am getting old. I just looked up Ricky Nelson and I can't find a show that matches the description of the one I remember.

Malibu U

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malibu_U

Malibu U is an American variety show that aired in the summer of 1967 on ABC. The series stars Ricky Nelson.

In the series, Nelson stars as the dean of a fictional college called "Malibu U," where the biggest popular music stars of the 1960s performed once a week. The show lasted for only seven episodes, going off the air on September 1, 1967. Today it is perhaps best known for airing Leonard Nimoy's performance of the novelty song "The Ballad of Bilbo Baggins."

 

[AzStevenCal]

Malibu U

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malibu_U

Malibu U is an American variety show that aired in the summer of 1967 on ABC. The series stars Ricky Nelson.

In the series, Nelson stars as the dean of a fictional college called "Malibu U," where the biggest popular music stars of the 1960s performed once a week. The show lasted for only seven episodes, going off the air on September 1, 1967. Today it is perhaps best known for airing Leonard Nimoy's performance of the novelty song "The Ballad of Bilbo Baggins."

Ahh, man, I didn't even think to go to Wiki. I just figured if IMDB didn't list it, it didn't exist. Now that I've looked a little closer though, it is out there on IMDB for Ricky but it's not given as actor credits. It shows up under "self".

Steve

 

[Mulli]

There is absolutely enough for three films. People have too short of attention spans. Without at least two films, Smaug will not get enough screen time.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Just watched it over at the Palms. It was excellent. It is a little slow in the beginning but wow does it pick up.

Oh and the film speed is a little odd for about the first 5 minutes then you adapt. It really led to some amazing detail.

 

[AsUdUdE]

Ok.. so this may be blasphemous based on some of the posts in this thread, but I have not seen the LOTR's trilogy... I did see this film today..

Overall it was ok.. at times I found myself staring at my watch waiting for SOMETHING to happen, and other times I was thoroughly entertained..

I have to agree with the overall feelings, to me it seemed like they could have easily told the first hour of the film in about 10 minutes and we would have gotten just as much out of it.. but alas, I think it is about money, and 3 movies will make a hell of a lot more than one..

I will probably see the other two, but its a hell of an investment of time into seeing it..

 

[Stout]

I just saw it tonight, and I have to say, Jackson really dropped the ball on this one. It should not have been made into three movies. When it was being what it was supposed to be--the Hobbit--it hit the ball out of the park. Sadly, that's only about 1/2 of the movie. Some of the additions, especially the ones from the source material outside of the Hobbit, were excellent. The rest? Just crap thrown in there to make it look more cool, to add needless action, and to create tension when there was already plenty of that. It had no flow at all, but was broken up by too much clunky stuff. Oh well.

 

[ajcardfan]

I read somewhere today that Jackson performed a miracle. He managed to turn future book report assignments on The Hobbit into a situation where kids will read the book rather than watch the movie because it's shorter. A true cinematic first.

 

[Cheesebeef]

got this as an Academy Screener and was really tempted to just pop it in last night, but this is a movie-theater movie if there ever was one, so I'm gonna check it out today. not really all that excited to see it, but after LOVING the LOTR series, I gotta give this first episode the benefit of the doubt, until proven otherwise.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

Went in with low expectations, and was pleasantly surprised. Compelling story and Bilbo>Frodo as a main character.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Most reviews are pretty spot on. Takes wayyyyyyyy too long to get going and once it does, it's okay, but nothing REALLY special

 

[Covert Rain]

Most reviews are pretty spot on. Takes wayyyyyyyy too long to get going and once it does, it's okay, but nothing REALLY special

Taking my son to go see on Monday but my buddy saw this today and is a huge fan of the previous movies as was I. His review pretty much matched everyone else. Said movie feels mostly like needless filler which confirms they unnecessarily are stretching this to 3 films.

 

[Chaplin]

Most reviews are pretty spot on. Takes wayyyyyyyy too long to get going and once it does, it's okay, but nothing REALLY special

Bull.

Great, great movie. Saw it in 3D and 48 frames per second. What an experience. Action sequences are the clearest I have ever seen. Just beautiful.

Problem is people are gauging this movie based on the book. I think that's a mistake. This series should be titled "JRR Tolkien's Body of Work," not the Hobbit. Hell, Bilbo was a casual observer for the middle 90 minutes. Not sure what all you people were expecting. The Hobbit was easily Tolkien's most accessible work, even bordering on a book for young children. What grand epic were you expecting? It certainly wasn't the Hobbit, because epic that book was not.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Bull.

Great, great movie. Saw it in 3D and 48 frames per second. What an experience. Action sequences are the clearest I have ever seen. Just beautiful.

Problem is people are gauging this movie based on the book. I think that's a mistake. This series should be titled "JRR Tolkien's Body of Work," not the Hobbit. Hell, Bilbo was a casual observer for the middle 90 minutes. Not sure what all you people were expecting. The Hobbit was easily Tolkien's most accessible work, even bordering on a book for young children. What grand epic were you expecting? It certainly wasn't the Hobbit, because epic that book was not.

I've never read The Hobbit, so I wasn't expecting anything but a fun romp through middle Earth. I just thought it was somewhat tedious, especially that first hour, which I fell asleep in.

 

[Gee!]

Was wondering what this was about.. Looked up some info on it.. Found this.. And after reading that description, I'm gonna stay far away from this.. WTH

Set in Middle-earth sixty years before The Lord of the Rings, the story tells of the hobbit Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman), who is hired by the wizard Gandalf (Ian McKellen) to accompany thirteen dwarves led by Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage) on a quest across Middle-earth to reclaim the Lonely Mountain from Smaug the dragon.

 

[Stout]

Bull.

Great, great movie. Saw it in 3D and 48 frames per second. What an experience. Action sequences are the clearest I have ever seen. Just beautiful.

Problem is people are gauging this movie based on the book. I think that's a mistake. This series should be titled "JRR Tolkien's Body of Work," not the Hobbit. Hell, Bilbo was a casual observer for the middle 90 minutes. Not sure what all you people were expecting. The Hobbit was easily Tolkien's most accessible work, even bordering on a book for young children. What grand epic were you expecting? It certainly wasn't the Hobbit, because epic that book was not.

The movie was awful, are you kidding me? There is NO flow at all--none. It is blocky, jerky, and takes far too many side trips in the plot.

Also, the movie isn't supposed to be an 'epic'. I certainly never expected that. It's supposed to be a cute, funny, and sometimes scary children's fantasy. This series can be called 'JRR Tolkien's Body of Work with silly additions that don't need to be made, that has awful pacing'. The movie just didn't work.

 

[Stout]

Was wondering what this was about.. Looked up some info on it.. Found this.. And after reading that description, I'm gonna stay far away from this.. WTH

Yeah, if you can't stand fantasy, why the heck would you want to even think about this movie?

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Bull.

Great, great movie. Saw it in 3D and 48 frames per second. What an experience. Action sequences are the clearest I have ever seen. Just beautiful.

Problem is people are gauging this movie based on the book. I think that's a mistake. This series should be titled "JRR Tolkien's Body of Work," not the Hobbit. Hell, Bilbo was a casual observer for the middle 90 minutes. Not sure what all you people were expecting. The Hobbit was easily Tolkien's most accessible work, even bordering on a book for young children. What grand epic were you expecting? It certainly wasn't the Hobbit, because epic that book was not.

:number1:

 

[Chaplin]

The movie was awful, are you kidding me? There is NO flow at all--none. It is blocky, jerky, and takes far too many side trips in the plot.

Also, the movie isn't supposed to be an 'epic'. I certainly never expected that. It's supposed to be a cute, funny, and sometimes scary children's fantasy. This series can be called 'JRR Tolkien's Body of Work with silly additions that don't need to be made, that has awful pacing'. The movie just didn't work.

Hmm. Obviously over the years we've had our disagreements about certain films. This is one of them. Who are you to say it's "not supposed to be epic?" It's Middle Earth and it's fantasy. Expecting something other than that is incredibly unrealistic. The simple choice is not buying a ticket, yet you still do, even after your rants about how it shouldn't be 3 movies.

If you want a cute, funny and sometimes scary children's fantasy, they've already done that with Middle Earth:

You must be registered for see images

 

[crisper57]

Because of all the critical hate of the 48 fps and the general lack of praise for the movie itself, I went in with lowered expectations. I went in thinking I would be disappointed, actually. I am so glad I did, because I loved the movie.

I love the additions/embellishments to the novel, that start tying it more directly to LOTR. Since I've read all of Tolkien's works multiple times, I found myself saying "Ah, I see what you did there" several times.

It felt like the Fellowship of the Ring to me. Long first hour in the Shire, a secret council meeting in Rivendale, then some great set pieces underground. I'm not complaining, because I think that was my favorite movie in the LOTR trilogy.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Hmm. Obviously over the years we've had our disagreements about certain films. This is one of them. Who are you to say it's "not supposed to be epic?" It's Middle Earth and it's fantasy. Expecting something other than that is incredibly unrealistic.

wha? didn't you say it wasn't supposed to be epic and what were people expecting like 5 posts ago where you said "What grand epic were you expecting? It certainly wasn't the Hobbit, because epic that book was not."

 

[Covert Rain]

What grand epic were you expecting? It certainly wasn't the Hobbit, because epic that book was not."

Now you are saying

Who are you to say it's "not supposed to be epic?" It's Middle Earth and it's fantasy.

I am confused Chap based on your comments. On one hand you saying why should fans expect a grand epic and in the next comment your saying who are you to say it shouldn't?!?!

So, I know many fans of the films and we talked about this leading up to the release. What we really expect is more of the same which is more LOTR goodness from Peter Jackson. We expect more of the same vision, style, effects and story telling from the first 3.

This really shouldn't be a debate. I think fans expectations are based on his previous body of work with the material. To say fans should not expect that is ridiculous. This is the same director. Not another director's vision.

I hope I can get to see this today with my son. Now I am really curious based on the back and forth, reviews and my friend that has already seen this.

 

[Chaplin]

Now you are saying



I am confused Chap based on your comments. On one hand you saying why should fans expect a grand epic and in the next comment your saying who are you to say it shouldn't?!?!

So, I know many fans of the films and we talked about this leading up to the release. What we really expect is more of the same which is more LOTR goodness from Peter Jackson. We expect more of the same vision, style, effects and story telling from the first 3.

This really shouldn't be a debate. I think fans expectations are based on his previous body of work with the material. To say fans should not expect that is ridiculous. This is the same director. Not another director's vision.

I hope I can get to see this today with my son. Now I am really curious based on the back and forth, reviews and my friend that has already seen this.

Yeah, that's my bad, I totally confused myself. Unfortunately, it gave cheesebeef a good reason to attack. And he ALWAYS grabs those chances.

Anyway, I think you are correct--Stout is basing the film on the simpleness of the book (which isn't "epic"), while I have based it on the previous films (which ARE epic). He added in a ton of stuff referring to LOTR and especially the inevitable coming of Sauron. Nothing wrong with wanting it simple, but there was no way it would be simple, whether it was directed by Jackson or Del Toro, and whether it was one movie or three.

Critics are saying the same thing now that they said about Fellowship--it's hard to assess it without seeing the other two movies.