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.
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.'
Sounds like the latest in the line of "we've made everything good enough, so we have to make some of the numbers bigger so people think the new stuff is better when it's really hardly even perceptible and we have a product to sell!"
Ever since the newer TVs and monitors came out (LCD and up), there is no refresh blank anyway so the flicker is almost non-existent anyway as the image on screen is constantly maintained and changed and not repeatedly drawn as with the old CRT devices. Digital projectors also do not flash images on the screen in the old manner either. 24 can be improved upon, but 48 is probably overkill, but is an easier lazy upgrade! NTSC uses 30 frames a second. Digital technology is making a lot of this moot anyway as huge chunks of the screen can go for many frames with no updates anyway. I have recently used an HD TV and was very disappointed with the picture quality as too many compromises have been made to cram more channels into the available bandwidth.
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.
Post by raspberrybullets on Dec 22, 2012 11:10:30 GMT
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.
The sight filled the northern sky; the imensity of it was scarcely conceivable. As if from Heaven itself, great curtains of delicate light hung and trembled. Pale green and rose-pink, and as transparent as the most fragile fabric, and at the bottom edge a profound fiery crimson like the fires of Hell, they swung and shimmered loosely with more grace than the most skillful dancer. ~ Northern Lights
I think what upsets me the most about it is Hollywood's(or even Mr. Jackson's vision) insistence of creating some specific, universal foe, or villain. It is trying to make this Necromancer, which was only mentioned in passing in the Hobbit, as this. Furthermore, the book, and even the cartoon which successfully realized this, had several foes, or groups of foes, that did not have some universal plan, but whose chief goal was to kill or detain the adventurers on the basis of greed or hatred of race or revenge.
He who is satisfied with pure experience and acts in accordance with it, has sufficient truth. The growing child is wise in this sense.
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.
Retired priest in the Diocese of Baradurbury, Anglican Church of Mordor.
I hope nobody will hate me for saying this, but Frank and I watched the 3-D-version in England and we both loved it. We knew it wasn't going to be like the book so we were prepared for it being different and we really enjoyed it. Sorry to say that. Does that make us ignorant and stupid? *looks sheepish*
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!
When we watched "Dredd" in the cinema a few weeks ago, we bought snacks there and decided to indulge a little. I almost got a heart attack when I heard what we had to pay for two "small" cokes (0.5l), a small bag of popcorn and a bag of sweeties: 18 € and a few cents! The sweeties did last for a week, but when we went in Birmingham, we bought the snacks elsewhere and took them into the cinema.