The Hobbit

etchazz_sl said:

i really think the only big negative to the movie was the light hearted comedy that was haphazardly thrown into the film for some unknown reason. i really don't see why it was put in there

Click to expand...

Answer:

Xalara_sl said:

Yes, but that was after filming was in progress. It was a combination of:

1) Oh crap we've shot way more film than we can actually put on screen for two movies.
2) $$$

Click to expand...

I'm thinking it was just #2 all by itself. They'd have had a good idea just from storyboarding how long it was going to take with all the extra material added in. They'd have at least known they had more than they could fit into 4-5 hours at that point.

EAGLES SOAR ABOVE THE SKY
UP ABOVE YON WINDOW SKY
TAKE FLIGHT NOW, FOR WE SHALL!

It was deus ex machina when they happened to arrive on the other side of Middle Earth 'just' as Frodo & Sam emerged from the mountain, but having them rock up 10 minutes down the road from their own place when Gandalf calls for them? Not so much.

Okay time for my 2cents worth.

For starters I'd made sure not to enter into this thread until after seeing the movie, and am now doing a methodical read-thru of the discussion thus far, quite informed and interesting. Gotten to pg6 but felt the need to jump here and post my thoughts.

Overall I did like the movie, but it didn't do the same thing for me that the LOTR movies did. But in it's role as the first of 3 films it did very well.

Cons:
- The uneven tone, I understand that the book is more of a children's book than the ring series. But the Hobbit film would have cutesy and cartoonish feeling things, closely mixed with some harder and more menacing things. With the Ring movies there was a more harder tone that was quite well held throughout, a lot of this was due to good vetting of the book contents, always the main challenge when doing a film version of a book.
- Making "enemies" such as the Goblin King and the Trolls into comedy characters. When these guys are in close up and their faces are highly articulate and cartoonish and they have their comedic dialogue, what this does is it removes the menace that these characters should have. What I mean is: think of LOTR fellowship and the Nazgul gathering at (what they think is) the Hobbit's beds to mercilessly slaughter them, no faces, no banter, just a slow menacing stride and intent = menace
- The Goblin town escape, again too cartoonish. Swinging rope platforms, and the final surfing/sliding down a huge slope. None of which felt real.

Pros:
- Liked the BagEnd start, quite a good choice to have both trilogies begin from the same moment in time.
- Just great to being seeing more of Peter Jackson's Middle Earth. Including the score elements.
- Seeing the familiar faces again. + more Figwit.
- Improved Orcs plus the Wargs looked much better this time around (IMHO the look of the wargs was the weakest element in the LOTR trilogy ).
- Put a lot of the pieces together for the next 2 films.
- the last 30 seconds makes me itching to see the next movie.

Araysar_sl said:

does the 2nd and 3rd movie also end with the eagles?

Click to expand...

They're one of the Five Armies so they'll be in at least the third film. Jackson might work 'em for the second as well though for some reason.

My review :

For around 2 hours 30 mins, Jackson made me feel like i was 12 years old again, the first time i read the book being 14 years ago. He not only gave me an epic fantasy adventure, he gave me time travel. Thanks Peter.

Araysar_sl said:

i was being sarcastic but this is just awful.

Click to expand...

Depending on how Jackson handles Beorn, it could be even more dues ex machina when he makes the scene at the battle than when the eagles do.

I liked it. It did feel a little long at times but as a whole I'd put it up there with Fellowship. The 'birds saving the day' is probably my main gripe. I'm sure there is some lore explanation as to why they show up at the most opportune time but as others said, it mostly feels as a 'get out of death' free card that Gandalf can call at any time.

Surprised it's being stretched to three films though. 2 would of been plenty.

I'm really,reallyhoping that the battle of the five armies takes up a significant portion of the 3rd movie. That has the potential to be insanely epic, even moreso than any of the battles in LOTR, so I'd hate to see it not given proper treatment. Anyway, it's been a long time since I read The Hobbit, but there is still a ton of stuff left isn't there?:

- Beorn's stuff
- Mirkwood/getting lost/spiders
- Wood Elves/Escape
- Laketown
- Searching for the door/Bilbo's Smog encounter (which should be another awesome and quite long scene)
- Bard/Death of Smog
- Lead-up to the battle of the five armies
- Battle of the 5 armies
- Journey home/Grabbing the troll gold

And that's not even counting the appedix scenes dealing with Gandalf and Sauron that are being put in. After thinking about it, I'm feeling quite good about having it as 3 movies.

etchazz_sl said:

i really think the only big negative to the movie was the light hearted comedy that was haphazardly thrown into the film for some unknown reason. i really don't see why it was put in there, as it definitely detracted from the movie at several points, the biggest being when they are captured by the goblin king, and the scene with the trolls.

Click to expand...

It's a kids book - pretty much all the "humor" was direct from the source material, the darker tone was mostly in bits they added for the movie. You can at least be relieved that they didn't include *all* of the singing.

Gamma Rays_sl said:

Cons:
- The uneven tone, I understand that the book is more of a children's book than the ring series. But the Hobbit film would have cutesy and cartoonish feeling things, closely mixed with some harder and more menacing things. With the Ring movies there was a more harder tone that was quite well held throughout, a lot of this was due to good vetting of the book contents, always the main challenge when doing a film version of a book.
- Making "enemies" such as the Goblin King and the Trolls into comedy characters. When these guys are in close up and their faces are highly articulate and cartoonish and they have their comedic dialogue, what this does is it removes the menace that these characters should have. What I mean is: think of LOTR fellowship and the Nazgul gathering at (what they think is) the Hobbit's beds to mercilessly slaughter them, no faces, no banter, just a slow menacing stride and intent = menace
- The Goblin town escape, again too cartoonish. Swinging rope platforms, and the final surfing/sliding down a huge slope. None of which felt real.

Click to expand...

I'd have to agree with all of this. Think they went a bit too far with the comedic characters as well. I never really felt any of the group were in real danger because the action scenes were quite ridiculous. It really was like a Disney production at times. Take a look at the cave troll scene from LotR again to compare. That was a scary ass troll to be feared. There are many other moments in LotR where you thought, "oh shit, this person actually might die here". Not so much in The Hobbit. Also, I personally felt no attachment to any of the characters except for the main dwarf. In the end, the over-arching quest began in The Fellowship is just grander and more exciting.

That being said, I still liked it. Just hoping the next 2 movies carry a darker, more serious tone.

velk_sl said:

It's a kids book - pretty much all the "humor" was direct from the source material, the darker tone was mostly in bits they added for the movie. You can at least be relieved that they didn't include *all* of the singing.

Click to expand...

there was no humor in the hobbit at all, not at any point when they were in actual danger. there was singing, but that didn't make it humorous. the fact is, when i read the hobbit, i felt true fear for all the characters involved every time they got into a jam. the meeting with the trolls or the goblin king in the novel wasn't comical whatsoever. they were afraid for their lives at every turn and either ghandalf or bilbo got them out of trouble. they added the humor into the movie and in doing so, removed the fear that you're supposed to feel when they're all in danger. that was the biggest difference between the hobbit and the LOTR movies.

Saw it and enjoyed it. Only real problem I have with the movie is the same problem I had with the LOTR trilogy. Could save alot of trouble if gandalf would just use the big fucking eagles from the start.

etchazz_sl said:

the fact is, when i read the hobbit, i felt true fear for all the characters involved every time they got into a jam.

Click to expand...

And how old were you when you read The Hobbit?