Seen The Hobbit yet? *risk of spoilers*

Only a third of the book. Well, there will be three movies. How they divide it will be up to them.

I liked it for the most part. I loved that they retained some of the songs of the book. I was afraid they would all get cut. I think Martin Freeman makes a wonderful hobbit. And in the main, I think they were more faithful to the plot than they were at the beginning of the LOTR trilogy. I liked beginning the movie with a flashback to Erebor - I had a hard time visualizing what to expect inside a mountain.

I was annoyed at Peter Jackson's need to have an arch-bad guy besides Sauron in each episode. I also didn't like the playing up of tension between Bilbo and Thorin - I don't remember getting that vibe from the book at all. I also didn't think the music was a good as in the LOTR trilogy.

*SPOILERS*



Apparently it was filmed in 48 rather than the usual 24 (like I have any idea what that even means ), and I found that with 3D as well, the whole thing took on a kind of video game feel, especially in the really fast scenes and battles.

And talking of which, I thought there was far too much reliance on battle scenes (it's been years since I read the book but I don't remember that many) and some frankly ridiculous Indiana Jones style escaping-unhurt-on-collapsing-structures to have any credibility.

Still, there were some great scenes. The highlight for me was Bilbo and Gollum in the cave, and this line from Gandalf, which I don't even think is in the book:

'Saruman believes that it is only great power that can hold evil in check. That is not what I’ve found. I found it is the small things, everyday deeds of ordinary folk, that keeps the darkness at bay. Simple acts of kindness and love.'

Awwww.

48 frames per second? 24 is the least number of frames per second needed for a video to seem "flowing" as if it's a real life scene I think..

Hm, I don't think so, 24 frames per second is not very good.

Call me old fashioned but I thought the combination of the 48 speed and the 3D was too much. I'm not a huge fan of 3D anyway, and the whole thing had a sort of hyper-real intensity which I didn't find all that pleasant.

I'll only see it for free as I don't want to give Peter Jackson any more money. But after reading some reviews and considering what he did with LOTR I'm not sure I want to see it at all. It sounds like he's really taken out the lovely childish parts of the story and made it all action and more for adults than for kids. Miisa maybe you might want to reconsider letting your kids watch it from what I've heard.
As for the 48 frams thing, a friend of mine saw it and she didn't know about the 48 frames instead of 24 but she was complaining that the visuals were too real to the point where you could see it was actors on a stage with costumes. It made it difficult for her to immerse herself in the world. And she said it was too stretched. She also thought that Bilbo was too modernised which she didn't like.
I personally can't stomach the idea of watching 3 films to see the Hobbit and seeing all sorts of added scenes when they could have made a lovely film and done it in one go.

I saw it in 3-d today, and it was too much - too distracting from the story. I wish I'd saved a couple of bucks and seen the regular version. I also didn't know I was only going to see 1/3 of the story, so I was a bit shocked when it ended abruptly.

As I am a jolly decent sort, I led a contingent to of the young parishioners to the local multiplex to view the Hobbit. I thought that the opening sequence of Erebor was stunning. I did find the 3D a bit challenging and for some bits stopped wearing the specs - long shots of the car chase for instance don't really need it. Speaking of the car chase - why does Sir Peter feel the need for these - whoever animated the rabbits really knew their stuff: they were delightful, including the largest of them beating his back paw on the ground as an alarm when some Orcs arrived.

I was greatly pleased that some sections of the dialogue were in Old Orcish but I wonder why they thought we would need sub-titles?

One scene though made the 3D worthwhile: Galadriel framed in an archway against a deep, deep sky in Rivendell. Apparently, as it flicked up I said 'wow' too loudly ... and made people around me giggle ... especially the young parishioners.

I really enjoyed the early sequence in Bag End with Old Bilbo and Frodo, it was very cleverly stitched to the beginning of LOTR(F) and wonderful to have much more sense of exploring Bag End. The eagles were fabulous. I endorse the escape sequence comments above although I thought that the conception of the Orc caves was very good - and how nice to see Sir Les Patterson's cameo as the Goblin King.

Not at all, if you can adjust your mindset and enjoy it for what it is then why not?

*kinds

I have Netflicks and that is brilliant for watching movies and Tv shows, but it only has stuff that is a little older. I will probably end up buying the set of three DVDs when they come out.

Always go with your instinctive reaction ...

I once went to the cinema with a friend who offered to pay for some pick'n'mix. I was staggered by the cost of what I had got and, in spite of me offering to pay some, to his credit, he insisted on paying the lot. I've never bought any at a cinema since!

I always take a set of the 2D glasses I made when I go to see 3D films. Can't sit through a whole one without getting a headache coming on.