As someone who loves the story, this is not "The Hobbit."
It has hobbits, yes. And dwarves. And Gandalf. And a dragon. But this isn't "The Hobbit."
It has hobbits, yes. And dwarves. And Gandalf. And a dragon. But this isn't "The Hobbit."
The Hobbit
- Thread starter Feien
- Start date
They tried too hard to make this the prequel to Lord of the Rings. While technically it is, it really is supposed to be its own story and it always had a much different tone than the trilogy. "The Hobbit" is and was supposed to be much lighter in content. They didn't seem to understand that and failed quite hard.
Sterling
El Presidente
- 12,995
- 7,898
Dacianprick King In The North
Trakanon Raider
- 546
- 836
I do like that rendition of Over the Misty Mountains Cold, but I always come back to this version from my childhood.
xKALECx
Golden Knight of the Realm
- 257
- 126
This. I thought the movie was fantastic, and will anxiously await part 2. That being said, I think Jackson is definitely taking his liberty at making this a true "prequel" than it's own story. I'm happy either way, but can definitely see your point.
Eomer
Trakanon Raider
- 5,472
- 272
I agree that Tolkien wrote it in a much lighter tone than the later did with LOTR. But that's the thing really, Tolkien was always far more interested in the world and mythology of Middle Earth than he was in publishing stories from it. The Hobbit happened to be a much lighter mood because it was written as a children's book long before he had laid out LOTR and how the Third Age would come to an end. When he wrote The Hobbit he didn't even know or intend for Gollum's ring to be The One. It was only in hindsight when writing LOTR that he basically ret-conned that.
Given that the viewing public knows the LOTR story far better, and the movie The Hobbit IS a prequel to LOTR, I don't see why anyone would be surprised that it takes on a lot more of the tone of LOTR. Hell, The Hobbit as a book was itself almost two separate parts. The first half was a lighter children's fantasy adventure story, the second half was much, much darker with the Battle of the Five armies and thousands of beings getting killed.
I saw it twice. Once at the home town theater and the second time drove 3 hours to see it in IMAX 3D HFR. I loved it.
The greatest charm of The Hobbit has, to me, always been that it was a children's story. But one that adults could enjoy, too. And that was kind of ruined by turning it into an action-movie prequel.
Eomer
Trakanon Raider
- 5,472
- 272
I understand your criticism, I guess I just don't understand why you expected the movie to be anything different from what it is.
Furious
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 2,923
- 4,994
Awsome. I haven't seen the movie yet and reading all the negative reviews my expectations are way down. This is the way I like to see a movie.
Now for those who have seen in in 3d and regular, which should I go see? (Ive never seen a 3d before)
I don't usually go to theaters because a) Im cheap and b) the no booze rule.
Now for those who have seen in in 3d and regular, which should I go see? (Ive never seen a 3d before)
I don't usually go to theaters because a) Im cheap and b) the no booze rule.
Brahma
Obi-Bro Kenobi-X
- 12,064
- 42,998
The 3D was pretty well done. It wasn't corny. Like throwing shit at the screen. The HFR to me made it look like a stage show or something, a play maybe. It was ok. Would like to see more HFR films.
It was definitely well done, but there were at least 3 corny "throwing shit at the audience" events. If I recall it was a spear, an arrow, and a flaming pine cone.
I saw it tonight (2D, 24 fps) and enjoyed it but wasn't blown away. 3 stars, 6 out of 10, that sort of thing.
The bad: It was too long and I found myself growing bored at times. The first 1/3 of the movie could have been cut heavily. It ran a problem with repetitiveness, where the group would find itself in danger only to be saved at the last minute and then do it again. Overall, it felt like the DVD extended version. I also thought that Jackson didn't quite nail the tone, which was uneven.
The good:Aside from my issues above, it was a big budget fantasy movie with good acting, much like LOTR. I loved the Riddle scene and Golum in particular. Gandalf, Bilbo and Thorin were all great. The swords were cool, seeing old faces was cool, a scene with fire near the end was cool, etc.
I'll certainly see the next installment but I doubt I'll go out of my way to see this one again.
The bad: It was too long and I found myself growing bored at times. The first 1/3 of the movie could have been cut heavily. It ran a problem with repetitiveness, where the group would find itself in danger only to be saved at the last minute and then do it again. Overall, it felt like the DVD extended version. I also thought that Jackson didn't quite nail the tone, which was uneven.
The good:Aside from my issues above, it was a big budget fantasy movie with good acting, much like LOTR. I loved the Riddle scene and Golum in particular. Gandalf, Bilbo and Thorin were all great. The swords were cool, seeing old faces was cool, a scene with fire near the end was cool, etc.
I'll certainly see the next installment but I doubt I'll go out of my way to see this one again.
