The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey - Review Thread (Spoilers)

[Mahatma]

Originally Posted by Jack Burton

Really enjoyed it but it had it problems. Got say though Martin Freemen could not keep up with the performances of Ian Mckellen and Richard Armitage. Especially Richard Armitage who was just amazing, his emotions in his eyes and voice was just breathtaking.

[Show spoiler]Just looking at him when we were told they had no home to go to brought a tear to my eye.

. Looking forward to him and his story in number two more than Bilbo's in all honesty.

Ed.Wood greatest scene :) - YouTube

Couldn't resist

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by Snicket

Did anybody see a PJ cameo?

Here it is-


Peter Jackson On His Hobbit Cameo Did you spot him first time around...?

.

[MCT]

Originally Posted by Snicket

As a preface I hold the LOTR trilogy in VERY high regards.

Now about The Hobbit...Some non-spoilerish impressions.

Hobbit tries oh so hard to hit the same pitches that the previous films hit, even going as far as copying the score from FOTR in order to replicate similar emotional moments, the scene with Gandalf and Galadriel is the prime example.

As much as Hobbit wants to fit in it doesn't quite make it. There is something not quite right about it. Some things I found that hurt the film:

1. Shlock. Your eyebrows will rise up when you are watching three giant trolls on screen engaging in 3 stooges shlock, but I guess it's a kids movie - BUT WAIT! Now we are watching brutal decapitations and LOTR standard violence...I guess it's not a kids movie at all.

When Hobbit tries to be goofy, it gets bad...very bad. What's worse is that the tone of the film is so divisive, its campy cartoon shlock followed immediately by mature violence. If you are going to be a kids movie that's ok, just be a kids movie but you can't be both, embrace a single tone or you end up not pleasing anybody.

2. CGI fever! My main complaint here is Azog. Why is this character all CGI? He looks incredibly fake. One of the things to admire about the original trilogy was the use of practical costumes, effects and extras in real costumes that were meticulously put together. Because of that effort, those films hold up incredibly well. The Hobbit has a bad case of CGI fever. I understand the goblins needing CGI but there is no reason for the CGI for the other characters.

3. Story? There is really no reason for these films to be three films. It's pretty obvious the film was recut to stretch character arcs and plot into 3 films but it comes off as trying to jam a square peg into a circle hole.

The Good:

Now with all that in mind there is a lot to like about The Hobbit, its a fun movie. The set pieces are quite something to see and it's fun to see how PJ has grown as a director. He really likes using a wide shot during action scenes, the goblin caves and Moria scenes stand out in particular.

agreed on all counts.

the Goblin King looked appropriately disgusting....but my god the CGI was terrible! They should have used practical effects for both he AND the Defiler (who looked even worse).

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by Mahatma

Ed.Wood greatest scene - YouTube

Couldn't resist

"Could I have your autograph please?"

.

[poke smot]

Wow I haven't seen this yet. I better stop reading. Sucks this is getting such mixed reviews.

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

"I felt the Great Goblins severely missed the mark."

As usual, and as they themselves admitted adapting LOTR, when they deviate from Tolkien, they get themselves into trouble. The Great Goblin re-thought as a snide comic character - who even cracks a joke at the most unbelievable time - is this film's "dwarf-tossing" moment, only it doesn't stop with one line. It IS severely misjudged. As I said, I felt like I was watching a foreign comedy, and the jokes don't work in my culture but they go over like gangbusters somewhere else.

When the film is standing on Tolkien's shoulders, it's a winning and even beautiful thing. When the film is relying on invented dialog for invented scenes, it's problematic.

[Show spoiler]The Dwarfs abandon Gandalf? Really?

[Show spoiler]
You know...I don't really disagree with you per say. As I myself am a 'hard core' Tolkien fan, and I venomously despise some of the stuff that he added/changed in the LotR films(I am finding VERY difficult to be able to watch TTT in it's entirety now). But...for some weird reason it did not really bother me this time. Maybe it's because that Jackson immediately sets the tone of the film as a bit silly so I was able to accept all the the other goofy stuff that he adds in later. It's really kind of hard for me to explain, but...it was like I went into the movie expecting a TV sitcom mixed with awesome action of course. And when some of the over the top scenes came up such as Radagast's 'Benny Hill' sleigh ride, the absolutely ridiculous stone giant fight, and the comic Goblin King, plus whatever else there was, I was able to accept it with a BIG smile and laugh. I don't know...maybe I just excepted that I was watching a very funny children's story with some blockbuster action thrown in for the older crowd.

As downright awful as it was, I am really looking forward to seeing Radagast's sled orc chase scene again on Blu-ray, as I do LOVE Benny Hill.

Right now recalling from my memory the couple of things that really bothered me was outright plot deviations, such as the dwarves abandoning Gandalf in Rivendale, Bilbo jumping into a battle to save Thorin's life, and the Misty Mountains being only an impediment to the very main characters(Radagast and the Azog sure had no problems with it)

.

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by poke smot

Wow I haven't seen this yet. I better stop reading. Sucks this is getting such mixed reviews.

You mean like this?-

[Show spoiler]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpYEJx7PkWE

.

[bearscubsfan87]

I saw this last night. My impressions after the first viewing were that it was a decent film, but not as good as any film from the LOTR trilogy. I have an incling the second film will be even better because a lot of the major "exposition" segments are out of the way.

[chris_sc77]

Originally Posted by MCT

the Goblin King looked appropriately disgusting....but my god the CGI was terrible! They should have used practical effects for both he AND the Defiler (who looked even worse).

I still wish they used practical effects for Gollum. There is a brief scene/shot IN Return of the King (where he opens/ closes is eyes under the mountains) with what I believe is a practical Gollum that I feel is perfect. Always though they overdid Gollum's eyes to an extent that he looks fake because of them.

[Mahatma]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

You mean like this?-

[Show spoiler]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpYEJx7PkWE

.

Thats a classic!

[HarcourtMudd]

OK, I just got back from seeing it, and I thought it a very good companion to the LotR trilogy. I do have a question for the Tolkien experts in here (I'm surprised no one has brought it up, or at least my searches did not yield any hits).

[Show spoiler]Will someone explain to me why the orcs were able to hunt in broad daylight? It is to my understanding that the Uruk Hai did not come into being until The Two Towers. To the best I can remember, that term was never invoked in the Hobbit, and these were just plain, garden variety, orcs.

What am I missing (be gentle, while I have read the Hobbit long ago, I have not read the LotR)? Thanks!

[Mahatma]

Originally Posted by Snicket

As a preface I hold the LOTR trilogy in VERY high regards.

Now about The Hobbit...Some non-spoilerish impressions.

Hobbit tries oh so hard to hit the same pitches that the previous films hit, even going as far as copying the score from FOTR in order to replicate similar emotional moments, the scene with Gandalf and Galadriel is the prime example.

As much as Hobbit wants to fit in it doesn't quite make it. There is something not quite right about it. Some things I found that hurt the film:

1. Shlock. Your eyebrows will rise up when you are watching three giant trolls on screen engaging in 3 stooges shlock, but I guess it's a kids movie - BUT WAIT! Now we are watching brutal decapitations and LOTR standard violence...I guess it's not a kids movie at all.

When Hobbit tries to be goofy, it gets bad...very bad. What's worse is that the tone of the film is so divisive, its campy cartoon shlock followed immediately by mature violence. If you are going to be a kids movie that's ok, just be a kids movie but you can't be both, embrace a single tone or you end up not pleasing anybody.

2. CGI fever! My main complaint here is Azog. Why is this character all CGI? He looks incredibly fake. One of the things to admire about the original trilogy was the use of practical costumes, effects and extras in real costumes that were meticulously put together. Because of that effort, those films hold up incredibly well. The Hobbit has a bad case of CGI fever. I understand the goblins needing CGI but there is no reason for the CGI for the other characters.

3. Story? There is really no reason for these films to be three films. It's pretty obvious the film was recut to stretch character arcs and plot into 3 films but it comes off as trying to jam a square peg into a circle hole.

The Good:

Now with all that in mind there is a lot to like about The Hobbit, its a fun movie. The set pieces are quite something to see and it's fun to see how PJ has grown as a director. He really likes using a wide shot during action scenes, the goblin caves and Moria scenes stand out in particular.

Also as a fan I'm glad they dove into the larger Mythos of what was going on in the world the same time The Hobbit was happening, such as the goings on in Mirkwood. It does not really add all that much to the main story and could have easily been extended edition material. In face I strongly suspect it was.

So in a direct comparison to LOTR, Hobbit comes off the weird cousin you see at the family Christmas party that you see but don't really talk about. On it's own two feet it has some flaws, and there is a great film in there somewhere.

So in summary: If you are looking for Lord of the Rings part 4, The Hobbit is not that film. But on it's own its fun and enjoyable for what it is.

Tech note: I saw it in IMAX 3D. I will go check out HFR but did not want it to get in the way of the story (as I had been warned about HFR).

You lost us right there pal

The hobbit movie is LotR weird cousin...If one let ones imagination run,it makes for a very bleak impression.As for the score:Have said this before,but listen to Dvoraks 9th symphony.As for the schlock:That is worrying.

[Mahatma]

Originally Posted by HarcourtMudd

OK, I just got back from seeing it, and I thought it a very good companion to the LotR trilogy. I do have a question for the Tolkien experts in here (I'm surprised no one has brought it up, or at least my searches did not yield any hits).

[Show spoiler]Will someone explain to me why the orcs were able to hunt in broad daylight? It is to my understanding that the Uruk Hai did not come into being until The Two Towers. To the best I can remember, that term was never invoked in the Hobbit, and these were just plain, garden variety, orcs.

What am I missing (be gentle, while I have read the Hobbit long ago, I have not read the LotR)? Thanks!

What you're missing,is PJ's dissregard for logic

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by HarcourtMudd

OK, I just got back from seeing it, and I thought it a very good companion to the LotR trilogy. I do have a question for the Tolkien experts in here (I'm surprised no one has brought it up, or at least my searches did not yield any hits).

[Show spoiler]Will someone explain to me why the orcs were able to hunt in broad daylight? It is to my understanding that the Uruk Hai did not come into being until The Two Towers. To the best I can remember, that term was never invoked in the Hobbit, and these were just plain, garden variety, orcs.

What am I missing (be gentle, while I have read the Hobbit long ago, I have not read the LotR)? Thanks!

Originally Posted by Mahatma

What you're missing,is PJ's dissregard for logic

Exactly!

With Jackson's versions you just have to view them as alternate universe versions.

.

[Mahatma]

Originally Posted by poke smot

Wow I haven't seen this yet. I better stop reading. Sucks this is getting such mixed reviews.

Do like all other rational beings:Make up your own mind when viewing this.

[HarcourtMudd]

Originally Posted by Mahatma

What you're missing,is PJ's dissregard for logic

Originally Posted by Duffy12

Exactly!

With Jackson's versions you just have to view them as alternate universe versions.

.

Thanks, guys. I figured as much, but I was hopeful it was explained in the books.... yet another plot hole to be disregarded...

EDIT: Now that I think about it, PJ suffered the same "lapse" in continuity in The Two Towers, when the warg riders attacked the refugees from Ederas (sp?) on their way to Helm's Deep...

[Beast]

I just remembered something that kinda bugged me about the film.

The show the Title pretty much at the start of the film. "The Hobbit".

But it's gotta be 15-20 minutes until they actually show "An Unexpected Journey". Maybe it just seemed that long in the theater. But I seem to recall starting to wonder if each movie's title in film was just going to be "The Hobbit", with only the marketing and packaging distinguishing them.

I don't recall them dragging out the titles of the LotR films like that. It just seemed kinda odd to not show the chapter title for that long.

[PUsokrJosh305]

I absolutely loved the film! It was great to welcome the LOTR feel back to the theaters! The Hobbit is a children's book, and the movie should be looked at as such. The humor was great, I laughed a lot! I also loved the prologue of the movie,

[Show spoiler]connecting the Hobbit with The Fellowship of the Ring

. It's not the best film of all time, but I thought it was the best all year, even if I loved The Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises, this brought me back to when I first watched the LOTR trilogy! Overall, fantastic movie, go see it, and celebrate the return of the LOTR universe in theaters!

[Brightstar]

why does everyone compare LOTR to the Hobbit ?? Its a different book and less darker then lord of the rings

[bunkz323]

I have a question,

Can you combine the movie cash for 1 ticket??

i have 3, me and wife are going so that's 10 bucks off already just wondering if i could use that 3rd movie ticket money to add it up to 15 off on both tickets??

tickets are 10 for the 48fps so it's 20 total but wondering if i could combine all three and just pay 5