|Will I enjoy this even if I haven't read the second Hobbit book?|
(ง ͠° ͟ʖ ͡°)
Pageof 52 First / Last
|Will I enjoy this even if I haven't read the second Hobbit book?|
(ง ͠° ͟ʖ ͡°)
|Saw it last night and really enjoyed it, however.|
Infinitely better than the first Hobbit film!|
... only complaint is Peter Jackson shoehorning a love story in the film, which is actually surprisingly good but has nothing to do with the book. The barrels-down-the-river sequence was a non-event (in the book) with the lids being hammered down tight before they drifted away, whereas it is an all out action scene in this film.
Sometimes you kind of wish someone would switch off the theme park rides, you know?
I gave the Hobbit a high five, low six. This one is easily a seven out of ten, me thinks.
p.s. Probably just me ... thought the overall visuals look better this time round. Not overly sure how or why I come to this conclusion, but hey-ho, it is certainly a looker either way!
Edited by CharlieStCloud at 23:38:05 13-12-2013
Yeah, I enjoyed it more than the first. Although I have never read the books so all the theme park doesn't bother me too much. I did find the ballet of Legolas a bit tedious now and again. |
Otherwise it was an enjoyable ride. The 2D was fine although there was various parts that looked obviously made for 3D.
You are a factory of sadness.
|I thought the first one was a slightly better film, this one was trying too hard with the fight scenes (every form of decapitation possible), endless forced chases and a pretty illogical romance. Overall I'd agree 7/10, but I think anyone who hasn't seen it would be better off watching it on netflix or blu-ray just prior to seeing the third film at the cinema.|
Enjoyed the 2nd film more than the 1st, that took a fucking age to get going. This had far more going on, although the action scenes still stray too far into silliness at times but are enjoyable enough nonetheless. The ending made me want to kick puppies though.|
Saw it in HFR, fucking weird to watch. Takes a while to adjust to, & while the outdoor stuff looks stunning in it, it makes the sets look a bit fake. Kinda takes away the cinematic quality, which a film like this really needs. 24fps next time i think.
Just got back from watching it. Overall, it was good. Got going a bit quicker and the plot didnt suffer. My only real gripe was the CG. Not sure if it was the 48 FPS or what, but the CG looked a bit weak in places.|
Edited by SG59 at 20:47:54 15-12-2013
I absolutely loved this film. I really, really like the first Hobbit film, despite agreeing with the many flaws that other people have mentioned. The world in these films is so grandiose and fleshed out, it would have to be a damn awful film to put me off.|
This film is infinitely better than the first. A lot less meandering around, excellent set pieces. I do have some complaints. The CGI was fine, yet some parts of it were realy quite poor, it definitely took you out of it. And once again, sequences like the barrel one, which I did enjoy, felt like they couldn't decide what the tone was. It also sometimes felt like the scenes didn't really gel together. A lot of things were happening, but it kind of felt like a COD game, moving from one set piece to another.
The thing that really took me back however, is that this film is fucking dark. There is no way that this is a kids' film. It was a better film because of it, but I can't see that appealing to a wider audience, like families and whatnot. But whatever, as a typical guy who visits gaming forums, this was the epitome of what a LOTR film can be.
I give it a 9. It's quite possibly my favourite LOTR film.
|I watched it last night. The 3D was a complete non event as usual. I hardly noticed it after about 20 minutes. The film itself was pretty much the same as the first, which is great because I loved that one. Can't wait for the last one. I noticed they have put the release back to December|
|I preferred the first to be honest but I still loved this. I'm not really a fan of battle sequences and action scenes in these films and prefer the journey and adventure. The Hobbit films look set to replace The Lord Of The Rings for my fantasy fix now.|
|Sauron was kick ass in this movie. Well done TBH. Scary, powerful and without a real body.|
I loved it too, have to say I think I preferred the first one slightly (only just) I thought that had a couple of real Hero moments which this lacked.|
Like the Boromir scene in Fellowship, you know, the one that destroys you every time. Hobbit 2 could have done with one of those.
Dizzy wrote:I agree. One of the many issues I had with the LoTR is Gandalf. He was well spoken, yet barely showed any sign of being a wizard. The Hobbit seems to be correcting that.
That image of Sauron as the the pupil of his eye was amazing. Completely loved that sequence. I don't know much about Peter Jackson (something about being around in mid 80s New Line Cinema, did a few splatter films? Not sure) but I honestly don't think that that scene would have played out the same way from any other blockbuster director. It was brilliant, yet had a kind of low budget indie feel to it. Quite strange.|
Though that reminds me, one thing I absolutely fucking hated was the use of a go pro, low resolution, completely awful camera in the barrel sequence. What the fuck was that?
SG59 wrote:Well TBH... Gandalf barely uses magic in the books He *is* quite powerful (actually about the same level as Sauron).
And yeah it is kinda cool to see him as a real wizard in The Hobbit.
Though that reminds me, one thing I absolutely fucking hated was the use of a go pro, low resolution, completely awful camera in the barrel sequence. What the fuck was that?Yeah that was pretty bad. I think they knew it as well so luckily it is only a few seconds in total.
Edited by Dizzy at 09:47:46 16-12-2013
|I was about to say I quite enjoyed the Go Pro!! That whole sequence was fucking brilliant, stupid and fun. When Bomba or whatever he's called, Gimlis dad popped his arms out the barrel and started windmilling, class and way better than any C3PO Jar jar gag.|
the_dudefather wrote:Oh I see what you did there
GuiltySpark wrote:Yeah that was really odd. It was like someone had cut in some footage from a smartphone.
OllyJ wrote:You will have to wait for the third movie for that. Plenty of dead
|I'm enjoying the Hobbit films much more than The Lord Of The Rings. Thought this second one was fantastic but slightly preferred the first. As someone who was bored by the battle sequences in The Lord Of The Rings, the more adventure focus of this series really appeals to me.|
|Enjoyed this, preferred the first overall. The barrel escape is pure joy though. The Mirkwood section aint bad either. Jackson brings so much to these films, I love how he directs them.|
|I actually cannot fathom how someone could prefer the hobbit to the LOTR films.|
Hush you ponce
|I thought the first one was better than RotK -if they get better then it could be possible, though I can't imagine it getting close to the quality of the Fellowship.|
Apart from my arse going numb I quite enjoyed that.|
I'll enjoy it more at home on a more comfy seat for sure.
Laketown really reminded me of Fable, compounded by Stephen Fry's appearance. I like the fact that they didn't do the drip feed dwarf section with the Bearman. I also love how the ring translated the spiders.
Sauron kicking Gandalf's arse bothered me a little because I thought any of the LOTR hero characters are supposed to be his match sans ring.
Although the Hobbit films are not likely to match the LOTR it is such a well realised world that it's such a joy to take it all in. Prefer Bilbo to Frodo too.
Edited by JiveHound at 11:02:56 16-12-2013
Edited by JiveHound at 11:05:02 16-12-2013
Edited by JiveHound at 11:06:12 16-12-2013
Live: Jive Hands
Deckard1 wrote:Well personally it's because I prefer fantasy adventure to fantasy war. In that regard I really enjoyed Fellowship Of The Ring, but The Two Towers and Return Of The King bored me with extensive battle sequences. Obviously there's parts in those films I really like, but I still have to sit through at least 40 minutes of people chopping up orcs.
Saurons kicks everyone's ass. Everyone on Middle-Earth, anyway. Iirc it's only a combined assault by Saurman, Gandalf, Radagast the Fucking Ruined by The Hobbit Film, that actually drive him from Mirkwood.|
Gandalf is uber powerful, but he's not as straight up kick ass as Sauron. So says I.
Silmarillion Bullshit Time!|
Galdalf, Saruman and Radagast are three of the five Aenar. Sauron is something different, a dark servant of Morgoth (I think, unless I've forgotten his name) who was royally Voldemort-fucked when his boss was, but survived. The Aenar are sort of parallel to the elven races (parallelves? SCORE!) but older, more directly powerful, and charged with keeping a lid on things.
LB, you really are a massive geek.
|I can't frickin wait! Got ticket for tomorrow night! It will be awesome of that I am certain. Interested to see where it finishes as clearly from the trailer they get into the mountain.|
Firstly, I'm actually a little surprised at all of the love for the Hobbit films, over LOTR. I genuinely thought it was a universally accepted fact that the original trilogy was revered.|
I saw the second Hobbit film on Sunday and came away a little underwhelmed. The scenes with Smaug were actually better than I had hoped for, and the barrel sequence had some very cool set pieces/funny parts.
The main problem is the annoyingly overt winks and nods to the original films. The whole plot with Kili and his Morgul wound, requiring the same lines from Fellowship (kingsfoil/weed etc) and Balin's line about the "courage of hobbits". The whole exchange between Gloin and Legolas re: Gimli really took me out of my immersion in the film.
It really seems like they're trying to hammer (no dwarf pun intended) home the point of the links between these two films, with originality being the victim.
I get that the book attached to this film is more kid-orientated, so the "hand holding" and obvious flagging seems justified, but the film was actually quite dark making is slightly unsuitable for the kiddies.
It smacks of studio intervention in my opinion.
Edited by cptjohnnycasino at 15:52:13 16-12-2013
Edited by cptjohnnycasino at 16:03:53 16-12-2013