The Hobbit Page 50

  • Page

    of 52 First / Last

  • thedaveeyres 17 Dec 2013 16:00:43 11,276 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Are we...

    ...are we...

    ...having a discussion about Tolkien's Cannon?

    D****** ******r

    XBLA: Hamster Trippin
    Steam: thedaveeyres
    PSN: HamsterTrippin

  • LeoliansBro 17 Dec 2013 17:22:07 44,512 posts
    Seen 12 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    NEIL BUCANAN!

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • Gland 17 Dec 2013 18:03:09 78,478 posts
    Seen 9 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Feanor wrote:
    Dirtbox wrote:
    So yeah, saw it, and I think only about 10% of it were scenes from the book. It was a lot better than the first film in that the embellished scenes were for the most part fairly entertaining and almost escaped the padded feel from the first. They still felt redundant though.
    More like 80% if my memory serves.

    Beorn - from the book
    Getting lost in Mirkwood - from the book
    Fight with talking spiders - from the book
    Imprisoned by elves and rescued by invisiBilbo - from the book
    Escape in barrels - from the book
    Laketown & Bard - from the book, but the details are different I think
    Getting inside the mountain - from the book
    Bilbo and Smaug - from the book

    Forge fight against Smaug - made up
    Tauriel and Kili relationship and - made up
    You seem to be conveniently forgetting that ALL the details are different and while the bare bones of the situations are in place for the most part, they play out in entirely different ways. I certainly wasn't privy to anything like THAT escape in the barrels, I expected Jack Sparrow to pop out with a jar of dirt at any moment. I'm not even going to bother going into the large portion of the film that introduced Sauron, or the general orc nonsense, or the elves getting shoehorned into Lakewood or indeed 99% of everything that happened in Lakewood.

    Edited by Dirtbox at 18:06:15 17-12-2013

    +1 / Like / Tweet this post

  • Moot_Point 17 Dec 2013 18:05:36 4,359 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    Spoilerific Dirtbox.

    Edit; And you Feanor.

    Edited by Moot_Point at 18:11:48 17-12-2013

    ================================================================================

    mowgli wrote: I thought the 1 married the .2 and founded Islam?

  • Deleted user 17 December 2013 23:09:29
    Just got back from seeing it, enjoyed the first one more. Most new characters are dull, none of the fighting has any tension as it is all Hollywood style. 80% of the smaug stuff is not in the book and not very well done, looks and sounds great but what is actually happening is stupid. I think the only made up part I liked was temerial? but most will disagree with me there. None of the actors seem to shine in the slightest except bilbo and balin.

    Still it is the hobbit and such still a good film, just disappointing.

    7.
  • ChiefGB 18 Dec 2013 15:48:41 1,004 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    Part of the problem is that the hobbit films, just will never top the lotr trilogy of films and are becomer more of a shallower retread each movie. I really am enjoying them but not as epic as the first trilogy. However all of these movies get better at home viewings, especially with the ee releases. I just hope we get much more in this next one.
  • morriss 18 Dec 2013 15:56:23 71,135 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    It's basically because LotR is a better story containing more interesting narrative than The Hobbit which is a rather shallow children's book.
  • nickthegun 18 Dec 2013 15:57:03 60,506 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Shallow is a bit harsh. Its a kids book. Its as fleshed out as it needs to be.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    My man gives real loving that's why I call him Killer
    He's not a wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am, he's a thriller

  • morriss 18 Dec 2013 15:59:50 71,135 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    I just mean there's no other levels of understanding to story than what's on the page. There's no real pathos, individual struggle or character arcs. They go to the mountain, things happen on the way, they react to what they see and do and that is pretty much it for the most part.
  • Gland 18 Dec 2013 17:23:19 78,478 posts
    Seen 9 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    And yet that would have still been preferable to 2.5 hours of solid padding for every 3.

    +1 / Like / Tweet this post

  • morriss 18 Dec 2013 20:28:52 71,135 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    I don't agree, but fair enough.
  • CharlieStCloud 18 Dec 2013 20:40:15 5,288 posts
    Seen 17 hours ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Choppi wrote:
    Just got back from seeing it, enjoyed the first one more.
    Congratulations!

    ... you are the first person I have come across, in both real life and on the web, that prefers the first one more so over the indefinitely superior second part.
  • morriss 18 Dec 2013 20:46:54 71,135 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    I prefer the first one too, I think. Dwells more in locations and you get more understanding of the chracters and their cultures. There wasn't enough time spent withthe wood-elves or the people of Lake Town in the second film. Mirkwood and Beorn felt rushed too.

    PJ clearly should have made four films.
  • CharlieStCloud 18 Dec 2013 20:52:16 5,288 posts
    Seen 17 hours ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Really?

    ... really?

    I liked the first part, but the new one trots along at a nice pace and the whole thing feels more adventurous.
  • morriss 18 Dec 2013 20:53:34 71,135 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Really.

    /folds arms
  • CharlieStCloud 18 Dec 2013 20:55:33 5,288 posts
    Seen 17 hours ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Ha ha!

    ... fair enough.

    : )
  • morriss 18 Dec 2013 20:57:22 71,135 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    I admiteedly need to see the second again, however. And will be next week.
  • Deleted user 18 December 2013 21:22:47
    No, this second film added loads of stupid stuff like the whole forge thing zzz. It could of been the same length but more time in mirkwood and at beorns.

    Most of the action was all fluffy and Hollywood. More action doesn't equal better movie.

    Fellowship of the ring was the best lotr movie and that also had the least action. I'd take the opening act in the first hobbit over made up orc fights in the second.
  • ChiefGB 18 Dec 2013 22:18:39 1,004 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    I have to say I'm a little unsure about the second being the better also, the fellowship also was my fav original it just felt the most balanced of the three. I was blown away by the pace and camerawork of the finale of auj, can't really remember being blown away by any of dos. Just didn't live up to my expectations, was still great though I hope the extended cut will fix some of my issues with it
  • JinTypeNoir 23 Dec 2013 06:23:51 4,392 posts
    Seen 2 weeks ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Feanor wrote:
    Yeah, I wasn't keen on them redoing the Athelas subplot. We already saw that done in FotR.
    I think that was in there because it's become quite clear now what Jackson is developing for the third movie: he's trying to create as many emotional connections with four of the five armies that will appear in the Battle of Five Armies in the third movie, so it isn't just a big war scene. All the stuff about what Gandalf was doing is to add a little more weight when the bad guys come rolling down, and all the additional detail at Laketown was to add more human characters beside Bard and the Master. Tauriel isn't just going to be conflicted from a few flirting scenes with Kili, it's obvious he developed her character to be somebody who cares for all life no matter what it is, so her loyalties can get tested and you can have a little bit of the Capulets and Montagues in there just like he puts bits of Lear into the Steward of Gondor in Return of the King. Without that scene, she's not just invested enough in anyone beside her own kin when it comes to loyalties in war and by doing it that way, it's basically movie shorthand for the less sophisticated audiences to understand that she's as kind as Arwen, when the whole movie had been setting up to that point that the Mirkwood Elves were big dicks compared to Elrond's and Galadriel's folk.

    You might say, well great for the battle, but what does that have to do with the hobbit who is the main character? Plenty. If you remember correctly, the whole theme of the last part of the book is how Bilbo is one of the only people who has any degree of sense in that ridiculous battle, and how he hesitates about what to do with the Arkenstone. I imagine Peej is going to play that up in a very Hamlet-y fashion by having Bilbo see all the sides. Does it he give it to the men, who need it more than the elves or dwarves ever would? Does he give to the elves who would clearly protect it more wisely and would go a long way to repairing some of their mistrust to that side of the world? Does he give to the dwarves, who are relying on him and his good friends?

    If he doesn't have somebody on each side that the audience can clearly see as a character that Bilbo would relate with, it's not going to translate into good film language. Legolas is kind of more like fan service. Clearly, Tauriel's connection with Kili is meant for more than just pleasing a wider audience.

    A lot of that was apparent watching this second movie. Like, I loved the references to the Sackville-Bagginses in the first movie, despite the cries "Make it go faster so my ADD doesn't kick in!" But now that I see the second, I can see how Jackson might just give us the scene of Bilbo coming home to his house being in dire straights like the book. And lots of other things like that.
  • TarickStonefire 23 Dec 2013 09:14:37 3,242 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    Choppi wrote:
    No, this second film added loads of stupid stuff like the whole forge thing zzz. It could of been the same length but more time in mirkwood and at beorns.

    Most of the action was all fluffy and Hollywood. More action doesn't equal better movie.

    Fellowship of the ring was the best lotr movie and that also had the least action. I'd take the opening act in the first hobbit over made up orc fights in the second.
    God hat movie was boring. Fellowship of he Ring I mean. Eurgh. When those movies appear to clog up the TV schedules with Bombastkc Boring it's bad enough but at least I can just about tolerate a few of the set pieces from the second and third. I just all out avoid the first one (and ideally the others to be honest).

    Sorry to dump all over them, I can see the attraction and by Jove they are massive endeavours and very well pulled-off, but that trio pretty much put me off fantasy games, movies and books forevermore.

    Any Netflix library in the world for a couple of quid a month? Gimme!

  • vijay_UK 23 Dec 2013 09:20:47 2,273 posts
    Seen 9 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    I fell asleep watching The Hobbit Pt 1.
  • EMarkM 23 Dec 2013 09:22:31 3,190 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    @TarickStonefire I hope you recover from that. For me, Tolkien has always been the ultimate fantasy influence, and I don't really enjoy other fantasy books, but there's plenty of good games and films out there to enjoy. I hope you manage to get over the LotR films' effect on you :(

    It's weird, I'm a massive Tolkien fan, and read The Hobbit and LotR at least once a year, and I know I'm going to be burned as a heretic for admitting this, but I actually enjoy the LotR films more than the books these days.

    The books feel, to me, just a little clumsy and old-fashioned all of a sudden.

    Which is a hell of a thing for me to own up to.
  • Load_2.0 23 Dec 2013 10:31:30 19,445 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    I enjoyed watching this but agree that there really isn't enough to warrant three movies. To spend 5 + hours on the journey to the mountain is spreading things too thin.

    I wouldn't rewatch these as I would the LOTR films.
  • SuperCoolEskimo 29 Dec 2013 00:14:19 9,941 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Watched it tonight, loved every minute. Not bothered by which is better of the two, just happy I enjoyed both very much. Can't wait for the third.
  • Deleted user 29 December 2013 00:17:47
    @JinTypeNoir i love you.
  • sega 4 Jan 2014 17:34:11 907 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Going to be controversial here and rank my enjoyment of them.

    An Unexpected Journey > The Fellowship Of The Ring > The Desolation Of Smaug > Return Of The King > The Two Towers.

    Not sure I understand the dislike for the newer films but tastes vary I guess. I'm happy to sit in my own little bubble and just go with what I enjoy.
  • Deleted user 4 January 2014 17:38:38
    Any lotr movie >>>>>>> any hobbits one. Fact. The hobbit films are still excellent but as films they have nothing on lotr. Partly to do with the book of course. The hobbit is an excellent childrens book where only one or two dwarfs are even described in detail, then this has been made into three films. The lotr is a 1000+ page adult book with depth and was made into three films.
  • Moot_Point 18 Jan 2014 00:25:14 4,359 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    morriss wrote:
    I admiteedly need to see the second again, however. And will be next week.
    Did you go for a second viewing?

    I went today, but the 3D film at the Odeon near me was corrupted on their HDD, so had to watch the 2D version. However I got a free ticket to use on any movie, so I will use that to watch the Hobbit 3 in 3D in a premium seat. \o/

    ================================================================================

    mowgli wrote: I thought the 1 married the .2 and founded Islam?

  • Page

    of 52 First / Last

Log in or register to reply