JoBlo

Bourne101 · #1 12-07-2012, 12:42 PM

Directed by Peter Jackson

Written by Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, Peter Jackson, Guillermo del Toro

Genre: Fantasy/Adventure

Plot Outline: A curious Hobbit, Bilbo Baggins, journeys to the Lonely Mountain with a vigorous group of Dwarves to reclaim a treasure stolen from them by the dragon Smaug.

Starring: Ian McKellen, Martin Freeman, Richard Armitage, Andy Serkis

Rated PG-13 for extended sequences of intense fantasy action violence, and frightening images.

Runtime: 166 minutes

Although it doesn't sound like it's as good as the films in the LOTR trilogy, I'm still excited to return to this world. I'll be there opening weekend.

ScaryFreak1827 · #2 12-08-2012, 12:43 AM

Already got my tickets for midnight

I am a humongous LOTR fan and am so stoked for this. I have faith that Peter Jackson will faithfully bring the classic story to life and there will strike a perfect balance between humor, action, and adventure. This being the first installment of a stretched out story, I expect this one to be a little slower going in than perhaps the later installments, but I'm still excited to see how it shapes up.

adwardhil · #3 12-08-2012, 04:39 AM

Is this movie is related with Lord of Rings Movies?

creekin111 · #4 12-08-2012, 04:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adwardhil

Is this movie is related with Lord of Rings Movies?

*not sure if serious joker pic*

Early reviews seem to indicate this could have the potential to be a bigger disappointment than Prometheus.

Badbird · #5 12-08-2012, 10:57 AM

The LOTR movies are kind of a big deal around here, but I couldn't stand them, and this looks like more of the same - if anything it looks worse to me. Why? Because Bilbo fucking Baggins.

The "reluctant hero" is a common storytelling trope, but Bilbo takes it to the extreme. They guy is such an annoying, whiny pussy that just watching brief clips of him drive me crazy. The idea of spending another three three-hour movies with that asshole sounds like the worst thing in the world.

Speaking of which, now that we're in the official thread for the movie, how in the fuck do you take a single 300 page book and turn it into three three-hour movies? Especially considering it was already made into an already very faithful adaptation in the form of a 90 minute animated movie?

Fuck this shit.

Bourne101 · #6 12-08-2012, 11:03 AM

jolanar · #7 12-08-2012, 11:07 AM

I have zero interest in this movie. Lord of the Rings was fun at the time, but looking back they were extremely flawed and just generally mediocre movies.

Not to mention The Hobbit as a book is just effing awful.

gyro_44 · #8 12-08-2012, 11:22 AM

I'm a huge Lord of the Rings fan. Loved the films to death at the time. Now, I am older, and able to look at them with a far more objective eye. They are certainly flawed (particuarly 2 and 3, for me), but they are still amazing, wonderful films made with true passion and imagination. I think they are probably the best fantasy films ever made, and certainly no other movie(s) since has matched the texture and believability of the giant-scale world they created (save for maybe Avatar, and on a world-building level and not a storytelling one).

I'm definitely looking forward to The Hobbit. I haven't been exactly chomping at the bit, for a few reasons - the story of the Hobbit is just smaller-scale in the writing, and also turning it into three movies has left me feeling a little anxious. But I'm still feeling pretty happy to return to Jackson's Middle Earth, and hoping to enjoy the movie.

creekin111 · #9 12-08-2012, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Badbird

how in the fuck do you take a single 300 page book and turn it into three three-hour movies? Especially considering it was already made into an already very faithful adaptation in the form of a 90 minute animated movie?

Fuck this shit.

There have been plenty of short stories made into great feature length films. The length of the source material is not always indicative of how long the film should be.

Erroneous · #10 12-08-2012, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by creekin111

*not sure if serious joker pic*

Early reviews seem to indicate this could have the potential to be a bigger disappointment than Prometheus.

Geez I hope not. Prometheus really sucked ass and I am depending on this movie and Django to save 2012 for me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Badbird

The LOTR movies are kind of a big deal around here, but I couldn't stand them, and this looks like more of the same - if anything it looks worse to me. Why? Because Bilbo fucking Baggins.

The "reluctant hero" is a common storytelling trope, but Bilbo takes it to the extreme. They guy is such an annoying, whiny pussy that just watching brief clips of him drive me crazy. The idea of spending another three three-hour movies with that asshole sounds like the worst thing in the world.

Speaking of which, now that we're in the official thread for the movie, how in the fuck do you take a single 300 page book and turn it into three three-hour movies? Especially considering it was already made into an already very faithful adaptation in the form of a 90 minute animated movie?

Fuck this shit.

Really angry today. No morning coffee? There is a decent article in Entertainment Weekly that would answer your last question.

I am not a LOTR geek. I did not have time to read the books. I just think they are good fun and fantasy films. The first three were really done well. Hero movies are fun.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jolanar

I have zero interest in this movie. Lord of the Rings was fun at the time, but looking back they were extremely flawed and just generally mediocre movies.

Not to mention The Hobbit as a book is just effing awful.

WOW! The Hobbit book is a time tested classic of imagination and fantasy. I believe there were many movies created based on what was in the books. Star Wars for one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gyro_44

I'm a huge Lord of the Rings fan. Loved the films to death at the time. Now, I am older, and able to look at them with a far more objective eye. They are certainly flawed (particuarly 2 and 3, for me), but they are still amazing, wonderful films made with true passion and imagination. I think they are probably the best fantasy films ever made, and certainly no other movie(s) since has matched the texture and believability of the giant-scale world they created (save for maybe Avatar, and on a world-building level and not a storytelling one).

I'm definitely looking forward to The Hobbit. I haven't been exactly chomping at the bit, for a few reasons - the story of the Hobbit is just smaller-scale in the writing, and also turning it into three movies has left me feeling a little anxious. But I'm still feeling pretty happy to return to Jackson's Middle Earth, and hoping to enjoy the movie.

I did not read the books. I am wondering what you mean by flawed. Please explain.

Erroneous · #11 12-08-2012, 07:09 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKbyWSwd7hk

Required viewing

creekin111 · #12 12-08-2012, 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erroneous

Geez I hope not. Prometheus really sucked ass and I am depending on this movie and Django to save 2012 for me.

Already 31 reviews and only a 74% & average rating of 7/10 on RT. Even a lot of the positive reviews aren't enthusiastic. The overall numbers also tend to go down as time goes by.

Badbird · #13 12-08-2012, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by creekin111

There have been plenty of short stories made into great feature length films. The length of the source material is not always indicative of how long the film should be.

Expanding a short story is one thing, taking a single, relatively short book and splitting it into multiple movies is another. I think the final Harry Potter book was justifiably split, but doing the same with Twilight, Hunger Games (possibly), and now The Hobbit is just overkill.

If the previous trilogy could handle the one book/one movie ratio, then surely this one could have as well.

Bourne101 · #14 12-08-2012, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erroneous

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKbyWSwd7hk

Required viewing

Love that scene, even if I'd take LOTR over Star Wars any day of the week.

gyro_44 · #15 12-08-2012, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erroneous

I did not read the books. I am wondering what you mean by flawed. Please explain.

Well, I find the pacing of The Two Towers suffers a bit toward the end of the second act, with Aragorn's fake death scene, and I think it has a few too many secondary characters that don't make a full impact. And Return of the King I also find reaches its true climax a bit early at the end of the Pelennor Fields' battle, and it does go on a bit much at the end, and has some cheesier moments, like that horrific bedroom reunion/pillow fight scene.

I still love both of them though.

JCR · #16 12-08-2012, 10:11 PM

If there is any criticism of Sylvester McCoy in this thread, by the way, I'm gonna have a proper fucking temper tantrum, because he's ace.

And no, I haven't seen The Hobbit, and yes, this is because of episodes of Doctor Who I loved when I was 8.

Erroneous · #17 12-08-2012, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by creekin111

Already 31 reviews and only a 74% & average rating of 7/10 on RT. Even a lot of the positive reviews aren't enthusiastic. The overall numbers also tend to go down as time goes by.

I have never been on RT. Who are the reviewers? Are they people who enjoy movies? Are they real people at all? lol I have little respect for most professional reviewers who seem to hate everything.

7/10 is not all that bad in my way of grading. Might have lost points for an odd scene or weak story, but great other things. Since this is the first of three, I expect this one to set the table and be a bit boring. lol

Erroneous · #18 12-08-2012, 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gyro_44

Well, I find the pacing of The Two Towers suffers a bit toward the end of the second act, with Aragorn's fake death scene, and I think it has a few too many secondary characters that don't make a full impact. And Return of the King I also find reaches its true climax a bit early at the end of the Pelennor Fields' battle, and it does go on a bit much at the end, and has some cheesier moments, like that horrific bedroom reunion/pillow fight scene.

I still love both of them though.

Please remind me Pelennor fields? I do not know the names all that well. Is that the White City? Do you mean when the ghosts kill everything? If so, I thought so too, but I was willing to over look it.

creekin111 · #19 12-08-2012, 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erroneous

I have never been on RT. Who are the reviewers? Are they people who enjoy movies? Are they real people at all? lol I have little respect for most professional reviewers who seem to hate everything.

7/10 is not all that bad in my way of grading. Might have lost points for an odd scene or weak story, but great other things. Since this is the first of three, I expect this one to set the table and be a bit boring. lol

Well they loved the original trilogy (8.1, 8.4 & 8.6). If you like IMDB voters more its a 9.1 on there so far. So this could be another one of those big critical/audience consensus split on the internet. But again its early.

Erroneous · #20 12-09-2012, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by creekin111

Well they loved the original trilogy (8.1, 8.4 & 8.6). If you like IMDB voters more its a 9.1 on there so far. So this could be another one of those big critical/audience consensus split on the internet. But again its early.

I don't look at imdb rating or boards either.

Hucksta G · #21 12-09-2012, 02:38 PM

Not sure how 74% on Rotten toamtoes means this is going to be a disappointment?
Most of the reviews I have read have been positive. Anyway, I'll know my opinion on Wednesday.

creekin111 · #22 12-09-2012, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hucksta G

Not sure how 74% on Rotten toamtoes means this is going to be a disappointment?
Most of the reviews I have read have been positive. Anyway, I'll know my opinion on Wednesday.

Well there's a difference between being positive and enthusiastic. So far with the early results the enthusiasm is significantly lower than it was with the original trilogy. Even so and of course it goes without saying take it RT with a grain of salt. The general critical consensus is what it is and take if for what its worth even if you or whoever feels its worthless.

Lazy Boy · #23 12-09-2012, 05:31 PM

It feels like something I'm obligated to see rather than having a desire to see.

The reviews aren't helping. RT aside, I'm reading more and more blah reactions through Twitter links, and not all of them have to do with the 48fps.

JCR · #24 12-09-2012, 08:57 PM

Got a real kicking from the UK paper the telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/f...ie-review.html

Quote:

The work of the sombre Hungarian auteur Béla Tarr, whose grinding tale of apocalyptic poverty The Turin Horse ran to a mere 155 minutes, feels nippy by comparison.

Ouch.

I'm looking forward to it, but expect it to be overblown as all hell. Warner Bros should get Roger Corman to explain to PJ that films are better if they're 89 minutes long.

ilovemovies · #25 12-09-2012, 09:50 PM

The Lord of the Rings trilogy is my favorite trilogy of all time and all three movie are masterpieces and among my all time favorites. So naturally, I can't wait to see Peter Jackson's return to Middle Earth.

Darth Shape · #26 12-09-2012, 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lazy Boy

It feels like something I'm obligated to see rather than having a desire to see.

I agree...I liked LOTR due to the characters. I was never a big fan of The Hobbit, as a book or cartoon, but it IS part of the series, and I feel obligated to give it try. Who knows, it could just as good (if not better) as the others.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ilovemovies

The Lord of the Rings trilogy is my favorite trilogy of all time and all three movie are masterpieces

They're great to look at and all, but I wouldn't go as far as calling them "masterpieces". They're overly flawed, which masterpieces, are not. However, The Return of the King is a wonderful film, but there are too many unanswered questions.

rustysyringe · #27 12-10-2012, 07:43 AM

Well, while I certainly don't understand the negativity posted above I myself will not be going to the theater for this. To me, it just seems overdone and a bit of a money grab at this point.

I grew up reading the books. Among my favorite reads as a kid. I thought Peter Jackson captured the books perfectly in LOTR. I still remember going to the theater for the first one, my jaw is still on the floor. It was perfect, just like I imagined it as I read it, right there on the big screen. Personally, I have never seen a director do such a good job of capturing a book like that. Like I said, to me, every scene in LOTR was just like I pictured it. I went to the next two and liked them, just as perfect as the first one, but the magic wasn't there like the first. I own the boxed set but hardly ever watch them. It is just too much movie, it feels like work sitting down to watch them all, and that magical feeling I got from the first viewing will never come back.

So now I find myself with The Hobbit thinking do I really want to sit through 9+ more hours of movie for this? Sure, Jackson is awesome, what he did can not be over stated. It was pure perfection. But at this point, it is enough IMHO. I will give these a watch on the inevitable directors cut blue ray, but I have no motivation to go to the theatre or buy and own them. JMTC

echo_bravo · #28 12-11-2012, 03:28 PM

I'm actually skipping this. Just can't get up for it.

SS-Block · #29 12-11-2012, 04:13 PM

The trailer suggests the film's quality is more Narnia and less original LotR trilogy.

I'm unsure, but I might give it a miss until the whole trilogy, if that's what they're planning, is complete and out on dvd/bluray.

DaveyJoeG · #30 12-11-2012, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by echo_bravo

I'm actually skipping this. Just can't get up for it.

Agreed. I lost interested when Guillermo Del Toro left the project. Peter Jackson has no self-restraint at all.

maude · #31 12-11-2012, 05:55 PM

I'm definitely gonna go see it. I have my own imagined version of Middle Earth that won't be ruined if the movie doesn't measure up. Jackson's vision in LOTR was so close to my own, it surprised me. I have to give THE HOBBIT a chance.

If it is done well, I don't see a problem stretching it to two movies. There is a lot of detail in THE HOBBIT, just not as much large-scale violent action. Maybe that makes it less of a big crowd pleaser... but if it's well done, it will live on for years among Tolkein fans.

DaMovieMan · #32 12-11-2012, 09:22 PM

Getting pretty bad reviews this one. People love to hate it. 48FPS isn't doing it any favors. As a fan of Tolkien, Middle Earth and the LOTR films, I'm seeing it in IMAX. But my hopes are down here somewhere _

gyro_44 · #33 12-12-2012, 07:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaMovieMan

Getting pretty bad reviews this one. People love to hate it. 48FPS isn't doing it any favors. As a fan of Tolkien, Middle Earth and the LOTR films, I'm seeing it in IMAX. But my hopes are down here somewhere _

Sorry, but that's a bit misleading. The reviews are definitely mixed, no question, but they are leaning toward positive in most cases. "People love to hate it" - I don't think so. 75% on Rotten Tomatoes is not an idication of "hate".

My expectations are definitely tempered. They were not getting blown out of proportion to begin with, because I don't think I ever expected this to match LOTR. And while some reviews have been disappointing, I'm still hoping to enjoy the film on its own merits, even with Jackson's indulgences. I'm happy to return to Middle Earth regardless. We'll see how it goes over with me.

Hucksta G · #34 12-12-2012, 01:31 PM

Saw it yesterday, and really liked it, it started off a bit slow with some goofy bits but after the first hour it really came in to its own. Martin Freeman was great and while the 48ps initilly took me off guard, I got used to it pretty fast. Not as good as LOTR trilogy, but I don't think that can be expected, a welcome return to the world, Phantom Menace this is not and I look forward to the next one.

(8/10)

Mr. Guiltless · #35 12-12-2012, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hucksta G

Saw it yesterday, and really liked it, it started off a bit slow with some goofy bits but after the first hour it really came in to its own. Martin Freeman was great and while the 48ps initilly took me off guard, I got used to it pretty fast. Not as good as LOTR trilogy, but I don't think that can be expected, a welcome return to the world, Phantom Menace this is not and I look forward to the next one.

(8/10)

That's all I needed to hear. Fuck the hype. Will have my popcorn as a hobbit would with shitloads of butter and salt. I'm eager to reenter this world again.

denius88 · #36 12-13-2012, 01:55 AM

I think it's nice movie not compare with lords of ring but i like this.

Mr. Guiltless · #37 12-13-2012, 02:07 AM

Well yeah. One's an epic and one's a fucking bedtime story.

drexxell · #38 12-13-2012, 06:44 AM

As a PJ follower in Facebook, I was kind of troubled that the ONLY review he's posted of The Hobbit was some amateur contributor from Forbes...a guy who can't even spell correctly.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markhugh...-is-a-triumph/

Kind of sad that PJ can't find someone better...and since he's posting things regularly, I assume he's LOOKING for a good review to post, but can't find one.