The Hobbit Trilogy 4K UHD Extended & Theatrical (2012-2014)

[JAWS]

Originally Posted by captveg

I just find Ellis' thesis to be unfounded. She essentially believes Jackson hates the Hobbit films and that he was being tortured by WB and enslaved to make them. It's absurd.

To me, the fundamental problem with the Hobbit is that it is called the Hobbit. It implies that is the lone source being adapted, when that is not the case. It invites that criticism. If it had been called "The Hobbit and Several Middle Earth Appendices" people would judge it for being an adaption of several sources. But that's a terrible title.

I find the Hobbit films entertaining enough.. My biggest issues was the overuse of CGI, the overuse of Legolas (and his CGI counterpart), and much of the unneeded Appendices. 2 films would have worked better.

The Appendices end up making it an unneeded trilogy and they end up making Gandalf look like an idiot when it comes to Bilbo's Ring not giving him reason for concern.

[Fjodor2000]

If PJ’s intent was to make the 4K BDs look similar for LOTR and Hobbit trilogy, do you think he has succeeded? And if so, is that a good thing?

[Mierzwiak]

Originally Posted by James Freeman

In my opinion the trilogy should have been two movies.

I think it should have been one 3-hours long movie with maybe 30-40 minutes longer extended cut on Blu-ray.

[captveg]

Originally Posted by mlabonte21

You should contact their webzone and let them know.

They're gonna make the videos they make. I either like them or not. I have far bigger concerns than a video series I don't care for. Now, when they make a Best of the Worst episode, or even a Re:View about something I also find interesting, I'll check it out.

It's really that simple.

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by Mierzwiak

I think it should have been one 3-hours long movie with maybe 30-40 minutes longer extended cut on Blu-ray.

A single three-hour movie of The Hobbit would've been just as trite as the novel. Thankfully they fleshed it out and made it better.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by 1924

Hard to see how she does if it’s based on that unprovable claim about Jackson

It isn't based on that. It's a detailed breakdown on the production, from inception to release, and the enormous financial, legal, logistical, political, creative and production hurdles the project had to overcome. Ms. Ellis' doubts about the official line given for Del Toro's departure take up maybe five minutes.

[crackedknee]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

A single three-hour movie of The Hobbit would've been just as trite as the novel. Thankfully they fleshed it out and made it better.

I agree about the "just as trite" bit (it's easy to read that book in a single day), though I think the fleshing out was just too much (for this material).

That said, I think there was some unnecessary excess, but despite that I enjoy the extended version of Unexpected Journey for some reason.
Desloation of Smaug I prefer the extended.
Five Armies, found it hard (often tedious) to watch the extended, I think this one is best in the shorter version.

[Mierzwiak]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

A single three-hour movie of The Hobbit would've been just as trite as the novel. Thankfully they fleshed it out and made it better.

That's what extended cuts are for, to flesh some things out. Most of that trilogy is useless and stretched to the point of being exhausting.
No matter how pretty UHDs of those films can be, I can't imagine forcing myself to watch them again, even the first one which I genuinely like.

[slumcat]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Lindsay Ellis received a Hugo nomination for her three-part video essay on The Hobbit trilogy (you should check it out on YouTube, it's well-researched and personal, if a bit sad). She's dubious about the official story regarding GDToro's departure from the film, as in, she doesn't outright say it's b.s., but she very clearly believes it's b.s.

Ain't gonna watch it. What's her GDT theory? That he was fired?

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by crackedknee

I agree about the "just as trite" bit (it's easy to read that book in a single day), though I think the fleshing out was just too much (for this material).

That said, I think there was some unnecessary excess, but despite that I enjoy the extended version of Unexpected Journey for some reason.
Desloation of Smaug I prefer the extended.
Five Armies, found it hard (often tedious) to watch the extended, I think this one is best in the shorter version.

Ah I disagree, I think Five Armies is the only one (of all six) where the extended cut is definitive.

Originally Posted by Mierzwiak

That's what extended cuts are for, to flesh some things out. Most of that trilogy is useless and stretched to the point of being exhausting.

A single Hobbit movie would've been (rightly, I think) criticized for being rushed and pointless. I think the material from the Appendices adds a lot to what's otherwise an overly simplistic Hobbit plot. These were never supposed to be just "The Hobbit," they're really a larger Middle-Earth/LOTR prequel, but the naming convention set an expectation that the movies never intended to meet.

[captveg]

Originally Posted by crackedknee

Five Armies, found it hard (often tedious) to watch the extended, I think this one is best in the shorter version.

Couldn't disagree more. While still the weakest of the six films, the extra moments for the secondary dwarves, as well as the solemn funeral for Thorin/Kili/Fili improves the film too much for me to go back to the theatrical for BotFA.

[motorheadache95]

Originally Posted by mlabonte21

You should contact their webzone and let them know.

Can you believe that I’m still waiting for my pizza rolls?

[crackedknee]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

Ah I disagree, I think Five Armies is the only one (of all six) where the extended cut is definitive.

yeah, it's weird, I just sort of got battle fatigue maybe when watching it. But one of these days I'll buy the Hobbit set and I will probably watch the extended version of Five Armies rather than the normal version. Maybe I'll change my mind (and granted, when I watched the extended versions, I watched one per day over a 3 day period, so even with a day apart, maybe I just got tired of Hobbitses by the third day).

[Snicket]

Originally Posted by slumcat

Ain't gonna watch it. What's her GDT theory? That he was fired?

On this week’s episode of “people demand information from strangers because they are too unmotivated to learn for themselves”.

[crackedknee]

Originally Posted by captveg

Couldn't disagree more. While still the weakest of the six films, the extra moments for the secondary dwarves, as well as the solemn funeral for Thorin/Kili/Fili improves the film too much for me to go back to the theatrical for BotFA.

Yes, I suppose that might be true, if you're meaning material beyond the original book (which overall I didn't care as much about). But then again, it was the extra dwarves material that made me like the extended version of An Unexpected Journey.

[captveg]

Originally Posted by crackedknee

Yes, I suppose that might be true, if you're meaning material beyond the original book (which overall I didn't care as much about). But then again, it was the extra dwarves material that made me like the extended version of An Unexpected Journey.

My appreciation of the extra dwarves material in BOTFA EE is entirely based on cinematic narrative expectations. They are introduced in either version of AUJ. They are all given moments in either version of DOS. Only the TH of BOTFA declines to pay off this setup. If one is to bother giving personalities and traits to all 13 dwarves, then I expect resolution (relative to their overall screen time/involvement in the series) for that setup. Otherwise just leave the lower 3rd tier of them nameless and in the background the entire time.

[crackedknee]

Originally Posted by captveg

My appreciation of the extra dwarves material in BOTFA EE is entirely based on cinematic narrative expectations. They are introduced in either version of AUJ. They are all given moments in either version of DOS. Only the TH of BOTFA declines to pay off this setup. If one is to bother giving personalities and traits to all 13 dwarves, then I expect resolution (relative to their overall screen time/involvement in the series) for that setup. Otherwise just leave the lower 3rd tier of them nameless and in the background the entire time.

Makes perfect sense, yes. Again, once I get a set, I'll watch the extended versions, but maybe will give it 2 or 3 days between each film for a breather. But short enough to keep track of the narrative of those expanded characters.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by slumcat

Ain't gonna watch it. What's her GDT theory? That he was fired?

She doesn't offer a theory...hints that the official line doesn't make sense.

She says in the essay that Jackson was between a rock and a hard place because the parties involved were threatening to simply move the shoot out of New Zealand and save money, so he was trying to keep the project alive in New Zealand with Wingnut and WETA, meanwhile there were Guild disputes, legal fights, everybody coming at the project on all sides. The production of The Lord of the Rings was far more innocent in that regard, which is a recurring theme in her essay -- the loss of innocence once Big Money got involved.

[philthehip]

Originally Posted by Mierzwiak

I think it should have been one 3-hours long movie with maybe 30-40 minutes longer extended cut on Blu-ray.

I could have had a race with the book. A live read/watch off would have been fun.

[Vader815]

Originally Posted by Fjodor2000

If PJ’s intent was to make the 4K BDs look similar for LOTR and Hobbit trilogy, do you think he has succeeded? And if so, is that a good thing?

I think Peter Jackson has somewhat overstated this. I'm sure others may correct me, but to my eyes it seems The Lord of the Rings UHDs largely (but not entirely) resembles the original grading with relatively modest occasional changes in color temperature and grade scene to scene. Certainly, this discs are the closest LOTR has looked to the theatrical versions at home I think, with the exception of the removal of various strong color filter looks (Rivendell for example). Lesnie's original cinematography had a fairly "naturalistic" appearance, and with the exception of some crummy DNR and EE (especially in Two Towers) that is restored.

I haven't sampled The Hobbit nearly as much yet, but it looks like the intense stylization of all three Hobbit movies has been significantly dialed back to more closely resemble The Lord of the Rings rather than the other way around. They still have a hyper-saturated and almost cartoonish look at times, mileage varies for taste there, but to me the grades are far more pleasing and beautiful than the look they had in theaters.

Overall, I think both releases are a revelation. Perfect? No. Sometimes far from it. But these are discs I'll cherish for years.