It was alright, but it still does the same mistakes as the other movies without any noticeable improvement. Same plot that involves walking, same soundtrack and the same bullshit involving eagles.
The Hobbit: SPOILERS
- Thread starter Soviet Heavy
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'll start out by saying I've been a Tolkien nut from before any of the movies. Hipster, I guess. Anyways, I loved the original trilogy and can quote them (I have a sad life apparently). I was very excited to see the new movie but went in knowing it wouldn't be LOTR. I've read The Hobbit a few times and it didn't enthrall me but the movie made me sad. I liked Thorin and Bilbo but the other Dwarves seemed to just be a comic relief. The fight scenes (other than the battles in Moria/Erebor) were lackluster. The movie was incredibly pretty but I hated the look of the "goblins". Azog looked decent but I think I preferred the "guys in suits". I *really* cringed with the Goblin King part and the constant comic relief was just silly. I wasn't looking for a super serious movie but it just didn't feel right to me. There were a few great sequences but overall I was seriously disappointed.
The amount of blood/gore seemed fine to me and the acting was mostly very good. I sat down with a bunch of friends and we talked the movie over - we came to the conclusion that it was a decent movie for what the source material was. I know people who just adored the movie and loved the book but to me it just didn't feel right. I'll still happily go see the others (after all, Return of the King was my favorite LOTR - heresy I know) and hope it improves.
The amount of blood/gore seemed fine to me and the acting was mostly very good. I sat down with a bunch of friends and we talked the movie over - we came to the conclusion that it was a decent movie for what the source material was. I know people who just adored the movie and loved the book but to me it just didn't feel right. I'll still happily go see the others (after all, Return of the King was my favorite LOTR - heresy I know) and hope it improves.
I absolutely loved it, and disagree with pretty much every criticsm I've heard of it yet, although plenty of it I understand where they are coming from. But personally, I thought it was visually gorgeous, well acted and written, I loved the extra exposition and scenes from other Tolkien works, and overall thought it was actually quite true to the source. I'm honestly a little surprised about how much I loved it.
I'm also a little puzzled by the complaints about the CGI. I mean, I already know the monsters are fake... is suspension of disbelief really that hard? Even amongst a community of gamers...?
Besides, most of the CGI brought out qualities that couldn't be done with prosthetics. The Uruk-hai are of a similar stature, and move quite like humans, so prosthetics worked there. But the CGI allowed for the monsters in The Hobbit to act in ways that prosthetics simply couldn't have done. Think about those trolls, The Goblin King, the way the smaller goblins scrambled over each other... imo it was perfect.
Not to mention that for every shot filled with CGI there was plenty of delicious real-world landscapes etc. to balance it out. Plus it was all still well grounded by brilliant acting and writing, unlike certain other films that rely heavily on visuals and only visuals (I'm looking at you, AVATAR).
I'm also a little puzzled by the complaints about the CGI. I mean, I already know the monsters are fake... is suspension of disbelief really that hard? Even amongst a community of gamers...?
Besides, most of the CGI brought out qualities that couldn't be done with prosthetics. The Uruk-hai are of a similar stature, and move quite like humans, so prosthetics worked there. But the CGI allowed for the monsters in The Hobbit to act in ways that prosthetics simply couldn't have done. Think about those trolls, The Goblin King, the way the smaller goblins scrambled over each other... imo it was perfect.
Not to mention that for every shot filled with CGI there was plenty of delicious real-world landscapes etc. to balance it out. Plus it was all still well grounded by brilliant acting and writing, unlike certain other films that rely heavily on visuals and only visuals (I'm looking at you, AVATAR).
i wan't impressed by this movie... sure... the battle was stunning, but the troll scene was, imo, dreadful, and the gollum scene stretched out to uncomfortable lengths
Also, interestingly enough, I find the majority of complaints can fit into one of two boxes. Either, "It's not enough like The Hobbit book" (i.e. too long, too dark, unnecessary extra subplots, cash grab etc.) or "It's not enough like The Lord of the Rings films" (i.e. Too lighthearted, not deep enough, not epic enough, not dark enough)
Which 'thing' with the contract? The golf reference is a direct quote from the book, and absolutely belongs there.Hammeroj said:
Totally don't get the "swinging at nothing" complaint here. Seems to me like these people must have been specifically looking out for that, because I thought the CGI was very convincing and the battles felt perfectly real.
I liked how one of the Dwarves was basically just a walking fat joke. Appealed to my immaturity.
Music wasn't as good as in the previous trilogy, but was still pretty awesome (admittedly best when it riffed off the old film's melodies - but then, how do you top the greatest film score of all time?).
Galadriel is awe-inspiringly beautiful.
I liked how one of the Dwarves was basically just a walking fat joke. Appealed to my immaturity.
Music wasn't as good as in the previous trilogy, but was still pretty awesome (admittedly best when it riffed off the old film's melodies - but then, how do you top the greatest film score of all time?).
Galadriel is awe-inspiringly beautiful.
Well, coming into it as a non-LOTR fan who only ever read, like, half of the first LOTR book and found it to be one of the most boring and badly-paced books I'd ever read, The Hobbit was surprisingly good. Not great, but good.
I liked Bilbo Baggins and Gollum (although they were the only two characters I actually cared about; I genuinely felt sorry for Gollum when Bilbo stole his ring and that part where Bilbo was about to kill him, but stopped when he saw the tears in his eyes). The music was decent, and it was overall entertaining. Some of the CGI was a little rough around the edges, but meh. I can at least say that it was all right, and not as poorly paced as I thought it would've been.
I liked Bilbo Baggins and Gollum (although they were the only two characters I actually cared about; I genuinely felt sorry for Gollum when Bilbo stole his ring and that part where Bilbo was about to kill him, but stopped when he saw the tears in his eyes). The music was decent, and it was overall entertaining. Some of the CGI was a little rough around the edges, but meh. I can at least say that it was all right, and not as poorly paced as I thought it would've been.
I have to agree, and I think it's something on the part of the director. I mean, look at how he portrayed Gimli in the original trilogy. Gone is the stoic and resourceful Gimli Elf-friend, and in his place a brash, bumbling, only sometimes good in a fight Gimli the Comic-relief. It seems to me that, due to their stature and accents, Mr. Jackson seems to think that dwarves are good for little more than comic fodder. Compare that to his portrayal of elves (which isn't really his fault because Tolkien was far too kind to the Quenya himself), and you have a jarringly unfair juxtaposition. I already knew that a party full of dwarves would result in a bit too much "zany antics" for my liking, which is why I think it didn't bother me as much as it should have.TheOtter said:
Going to have to ditto what most people here are saying.
Damn good film, I had a great time and wanted more at the end.
The best part of the movie was probably the actors themselves and the sets/locations.
The worst part was the overuse and quality of the CGI. Gollum was better then ever, but the Pale Orc looked like a cartoon (even though the character worked otherwise).
It was obvious when the actors were swinging at nothing when you watch LOTR and the Hobbit back to back.
Kinda makes me sad, I thought Jackson was very much against all that.
Still, loved it overall anyway, the good outweighed any bad.
Damn good film, I had a great time and wanted more at the end.
The best part of the movie was probably the actors themselves and the sets/locations.
The worst part was the overuse and quality of the CGI. Gollum was better then ever, but the Pale Orc looked like a cartoon (even though the character worked otherwise).
It was obvious when the actors were swinging at nothing when you watch LOTR and the Hobbit back to back.
Kinda makes me sad, I thought Jackson was very much against all that.
Still, loved it overall anyway, the good outweighed any bad.
I was at a midnight showing, and I am glad I went when I did. It was just about everything I hoped it would be. A return to Middle-Earth in the Peter Jackson style is all I wanted, and it's what I got. Can't wait for the next 2 movies.
One thing I'm starting to wonder though is if all the complaints I hear about bad CGI and how "obvious" or "rough" it looks are just snobby poser comments made by people who want to pretend that a computer can't fool them. I mean, sure, you know that Gollum is CGI and the trolls and most of the orcs, simply because they are proportioned in a way no human could be. But that is not a legitimate reason to call bad CGI. This is about as good as CGI has ever been.
To me, as long as it looks like these unreal creatures are actually interacting with the world of the actors, it is good CGI, and I was impressed with how real it all looked. I guess the only complaint about it I might make is during the escape from the goblin lair, that was pretty clearly CGI all the way through, but it was obviously intended to be a light-hearted action adventure sequence. I have no real problem with it.
One thing I'm starting to wonder though is if all the complaints I hear about bad CGI and how "obvious" or "rough" it looks are just snobby poser comments made by people who want to pretend that a computer can't fool them. I mean, sure, you know that Gollum is CGI and the trolls and most of the orcs, simply because they are proportioned in a way no human could be. But that is not a legitimate reason to call bad CGI. This is about as good as CGI has ever been.
To me, as long as it looks like these unreal creatures are actually interacting with the world of the actors, it is good CGI, and I was impressed with how real it all looked. I guess the only complaint about it I might make is during the escape from the goblin lair, that was pretty clearly CGI all the way through, but it was obviously intended to be a light-hearted action adventure sequence. I have no real problem with it.