Just got back from watching this puppy. Spoilers in my post so don't read if you don't want key things ruined. In previous posts, I think I made it clear that LOTRs is in general, not my cup of tea. Thought I'd preface my review with that comment, but to be gentle I guess I'll throw in some good, because I didn't think it was just 100% bad.
We'll start with the good:
- the acting was great, and the characters well cast
- the story was solid, in spite of the random useless subplots
- the visuals of the country side and world in general are amazing, obviously. Truly beautiful scenes and sights in general.
- the 3D was actually not as distracting as everybody here is making it out to be. To me the 3D really is just a non-factor, if you will, it's irrelevant.
The bad:
- The 48fps makes it look like fast forward at first, as others have mentioned. I understand it's because my "brain isn't conditioned for it" as photon wrote, but I'm not sure what the need was to film the movie like this? Why take this risk that might turn off a few movie go'ers? It definitely isn't going to win over teh army of fans you've already got from the LOTR franchise... so just an odd decision to me, and yes distracting, terrible looking, cheesy, etc. etc.
- Specifically, as to the above, the scene with the unnecessary brown wizard rolling along the countryside with teh rabbits... (massive eyerolling on the horribleness of this scene) looked like one of the worst scenes visually that I have seen, literally, in my life. And that is saying something, considering I own the movie Ninja Terminator. To the point that I do wonder if they even watched this movie after filming, or just went straight from filming to distribution to the cinemas and sans any editing whatsoever. It was just astonishingly bad, that scene.
- the little rock giant fight that came without warning, reason, sense, or explanation. Nope, just a random fataing rock giant fight. Why are they fighting? Nobody knows, what are they? Nobody knows, nope. Just mountains getting up and fighting. Scene end. WTF?
- the beginning in the shire. It lasted like 45 minutes. You could literally cut the first... hmm... 40 minutes of this movie right out and it would be the exact same thing. The dancing dishes scene also was blood boilingly unnecessary and ridiculous. Jazz hands dwarves need to go.
- the jeopardy scene in the cave with Golum. Kind of cool, yeah yeah, I get it. Riddle this, riddle that..... riddle again... okay... riddle.... riddle.............riddle...................riddle .............. looking at the watch... riddle....... holy fata when does this #### end? Riddle... ? Riddle? ring? Golum rage, and we're back in business. Again, a scene that can be cut by about... ohhhh 15-20 minutes or so.
- Why is the hobbit such a dumbass? Many poor decisions, you have a sword man. It's glowing blue. Remember what that means? No? Probably something you should remember. Also all these sleeping dwarves are now screwed by the few seconds you could have warned them but instead sat there staring at your sword with that ridiculous Frodo scared look on your face. And why did the ground give out there?
- the eagles... this has been beaten to death but again, insert eagles page 1 on script and call it a day. I was hoping the eagles were bringing there guys back to their young but instead they just dropped them off on a massive precipice that they are now trapped on. Meanwhile the tiny bird flies all the way to Lonely Mtn... ??! Hey Eagles, get the fata back here and take us the whole way?? No short cuts dude and we'll give you some gold. The paper tiger explanations as to why the eagles couldn't fly them all the way are so weak it is laughable.
-"We have to go outside, there are too many goblins and they don't like daylight!" Meanwhile the orcs are outside, in the daylight. I suppose these are different creatures but... anyway ok fine I'll go with it. Wait a tick, it's nightime over the course of like what, 30 seconds here? wtf?
-then you're thinking, holy christ this thing is long and boring. They are making THREE movies from this thing?! How??? Good lord, this could be one amazing movie, instead, it is 3 insultingly drawn out eye rapings.
Meh, I could go on. Average at best, action scenes are neat, but these movies are obviously just not for me.
Couldn't disagree more. I was annoyed they didn't discuss Bilbo's "Tookishness" in Shire. It's the whole damn reason he leaves on the journey.
As for the "broken dishes, and broken plates, that's what Bilbo Baggins hates" I remember it being one of the early highlight of the novel.
You hated Riddles in the Dark? That is maybe the best episode of the entire novel. Give your head a shake.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locke
Thats why Flames fans make ideal Star Trek fans. We've really been taught to embrace the self-loathing and extreme criticism.
for those who have watched the Hobbit and/or the earlier trilogy, I don't know if this has been brought up yet, but don't you think all the quests would have been way easier if the eagles just flew them from the Shire straight to the final goal? just thinking out loud.
The eagles used to be allied with the good guys (elves, dwarves, humans, etc.) and used to fight in their wars against evil (the armies of Morgoth). The eagles motivation for getting involved was that Morgoth had a pile of dragons which could destroy the eagle's nesting areas, and dwarves and elves were pretty good at killing dragons.
Sauron only has a handful of drakes, which aren't enough to pose a real threat to the eagle's nests and the eagles don't see the point in dying for someone else's cause. Due to their ancient relationship with Gandalf, they were willing to help him out, but only when he faced certain death. They did save Frodo at the end, but that was only when Mordor had been emptied of it's armies and Sauron utterly defeated.
Asking the eagles to fly the ring across a continent, at the same time Sauron was using the bulk of his might to find the ring, would have been a very tall order and very risky. It's unlikely that they could avoid the gaze of Sauron or his agents for the whole trip, at which point Sauron could intercept them and/or fortify mount doom, and end up with the ring.
sorry guys, I guess I should have green texted. the eagle thing was explained quite thoroughly a few pages back, and then it was brought up again, so I tried to make a funny, like Splinter in the TMNT movies. it was just about as successful.
The eagles used to be allied with the good guys (elves, dwarves, humans, etc.) and used to fight in their wars against evil (the armies of Morgoth). The eagles motivation for getting involved was that Morgoth had a pile of dragons which could destroy the eagle's nesting areas, and dwarves and elves were pretty good at killing dragons.
Sauron only has a handful of drakes, which aren't enough to pose a real threat to the eagle's nests and the eagles don't see the point in dying for someone else's cause. Due to their ancient relationship with Gandalf, they were willing to help him out, but only when he faced certain death. They did save Frodo at the end, but that was only when Mordor had been emptied of it's armies and Sauron utterly defeated.
Asking the eagles to fly the ring across a continent, at the same time Sauron was using the bulk of his might to find the ring, would have been a very tall order and very risky. It's unlikely that they could avoid the gaze of Sauron or his agents for the whole trip, at which point Sauron could intercept them and/or fortify mount doom, and end up with the ring.
My brief thoughts on the film, after seeing it in 2D 24FPS:
Spoiler!
The Good:
- The acting was excellent, as I've come to expect from Jackson's interpretations of Tolkien's works. Martin Freeman was awesome as Bilbo. He really nails the squirelly "Baggins" side of Bilbo, while planting the seeds for his eventual transformation into the brave, outgoing, and rogueish "Took" side of the character. Richard Armitage also was a great choice for Thorin. I liked how Jackson made him reminiscient of Aragorn, as it helps draw fans of the LotR series into the new cast. Gandalf, Elrond, Saruman, and Galadriel delivered fine follow-up performances.
- The world of middle earth looked great again, as we've come to expect. There were a few of Jackson's usual panoramic shots that seemed forced into the film to show off for 3D, but this is a minor gripe, as the world once again looked marvellous.
- The riddles in the dark scene was well executed, and blended Bilbo's nervous attempts at levity seamlessly into a scene that was actually quite tense and dark. You can really feel how important the scene is, without it being totally thrown in your face.
- With a couple exceptions I'll outline below, the chase through the goblin city was tons of fun to watch. I enjoyed it much more than the chase through Moria in the Fellowship of the Ring.
- Enjoyed the Trolls scene. Gandalf breaking the rock to expose them to the sun looked awesome.
The Bad:
- The stone giant fight felt like it was obviously included to show off the technology changes. It felt forced into the film, and seemed to serve no real purpose, other than to make the pass through the misty mountains more dangerous. I think Jackson would have been better off leaving out this scene in the theatrical cut, saving time and perhaps alleviate some of the pacing issues.
- The demise of the Goblin King was the cheesiest thing I've ever seen. A two second fight, and a lame set of final words.
- I forget which Dwarf it was, but whoever blocked the arrows Jedi-like with a sword and ladder was totally unneccesary. Reminded me of Legolas riding the shield, which was stupid as hell.
- I didn;t like the hacky-sack dishes bit. I can understand why it was included, but thought that that time could have been better used in some other way. I really have no solid argument, but I feel this way regardless.
Overall I really enjoyed the film. It did what was required to set the stage for the next two films, without being a total drag fest. It looked great in standard 2D, sounded great, and was generally 3 hours well spent. It remains to be seen if I like this trilogy as much as LotR, but The Hobbit is certainly a worthy adaptation of a book I love.
Couldn't disagree more. I was annoyed they didn't discuss Bilbo's "Tookishness" in Shire. It's the whole damn reason he leaves on the journey.
As for the "broken dishes, and broken plates, that's what Bilbo Baggins hates" I remember it being one of the early highlight of the novel.
You hated Riddles in the Dark? That is maybe the best episode of the entire novel. Give your head a shake.
I already stated very clearly that the movie is obviously not for me. I thought it was average. A generous average and I mostly am writing that so all the hipster nerds don't go ape-#### on me.
But basically I don't understand why everybody has such a hard-on for riddles in the dark. What was it that was so dramatically superior? You can barely understand wtf Gollum even says half the time, and it ran, as is typical with these long-winded largely unexplained odysseys, way too long. Like I said at first, cool idea, and then they take that cool idea, and beat the crap out of it. Just my opinion, and realizing I'm in the minority.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matata
The eagles used to be allied with the good guys (elves, dwarves, humans, etc.) and used to fight in their wars against evil (the armies of Morgoth). The eagles motivation for getting involved was that Morgoth had a pile of dragons which could destroy the eagle's nesting areas, and dwarves and elves were pretty good at killing dragons.
Sauron only has a handful of drakes, which aren't enough to pose a real threat to the eagle's nests and the eagles don't see the point in dying for someone else's cause. Due to their ancient relationship with Gandalf, they were willing to help him out, but only when he faced certain death. They did save Frodo at the end, but that was only when Mordor had been emptied of it's armies and Sauron utterly defeated.
Asking the eagles to fly the ring across a continent, at the same time Sauron was using the bulk of his might to find the ring, would have been a very tall order and very risky. It's unlikely that they could avoid the gaze of Sauron or his agents for the whole trip, at which point Sauron could intercept them and/or fortify mount doom, and end up with the ring.
So when did they explain anything about the eagles, at all, in Hobbit (or LOTRs for that matter)? Hell you're not even referring to the right movie here. In Hobbit, Jackson was running long because he simply wasted so much fataing time earlier. So in order to cut to the chase he has giant eagles fly in, grab everybody, beat up some wolves, and then fly away. I presume you're just repeating stuff that's in the book that may or may not explain an incredibly important plot point. Sometimes movies can get away without explaining things in the book, however, random hero saving birds that are the sole reason for the protagonist's survival, well, maybe we could explain that a bit more and have less of the time-filler dwarf dishes slumber party.
Above, the unexplained, is typical of a Peter Jackson film. If you haven't read the books, bend over. Also good luck trying to remember/ follow the names when the characters start to go on and refer to characters that haven't been introduced yet, and what relevance any of these characters have to the story (this is usually unexplained too actually). It usually goes something like this:
Gandalf- "It is I, Gandalf the Grey"
elf person or something like that- "Gandalf, we have been waiting for you and were out beating up some orcs"
Gandalf- "good to see you friend, this is my angry dwarf friend, Azgarothianiquay of Glubinsunaladayau, deep within the Reliftinquajaush forests. He holds resentment for you because of something another different elf did a long time ago, not you guys but presumably your relations of some sort."
elf- "nice to meet you Azgarothianiquay, I am Wer####ajnsuhsajal, and this is Polisutehsankslki and her husband Tuayaatananauu of the desert elf race the Boroboro tribes, descendants of the Ugtahana..."
you get the drift.
It is just sort of shocking that for having 5,000 hours of movie, so much gets left unexplained.
Giant rock fight. WHY?
Last edited by Mr.Coffee; 12-31-2012 at 02:29 AM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Mr.Coffee For This Useful Post:
I already stated very clearly that the movie is obviously not for me. I thought it was average. A generous average and I mostly am writing that so all the hipster nerds don't go ape-#### on me.
Hipster and nerds are different things. I thought it was meh and I am a Tolkein nerd.
Quote:
But basically I don't understand why everybody has such a hard-on for riddles in the dark. What was it that was so dramatically superior?
Well to those of us who are nerds, that is the quintessential scene in all of Tolkein and they executed it pretty much exactly the way I imagined it. Add to that that it was possibly the strongest scene Martin Freeman had and he was one of the bright spots in the movie, and the fact that Andy Serkis is just generally awesome, and everyone's all about it. I thought that scene was fantastic.
Quote:
So when did they explain anything about the eagles, at all, in Hobbit (or LOTRs for that matter)?
Some of it is common sense. I.e. if you send winged creatures into Mordor bearing the ring they're going to get it handed to them by the ringwraiths. Then it's the apocalypse and everyone's all, "Oh good plan dudes. Way to destroy middle earth. Top notch job you did on that one, kudos."
Quote:
In Hobbit, Jackson was running long because he simply wasted so much fataing time earlier. So in order to cut to the chase he has giant eagles fly in, grab everybody, beat up some wolves, and then fly away.
Yup, this is about right. He was running long, so to save time, he created a time machine and went back to the 1930's and convinced Tolkein to re-write that scene so that the eagles would save Thorin's group from the orcs. You're dead on. What?
Quote:
well, maybe we could explain that a bit more and have less of the time-filler dwarf dishes slumber party.
Yup, that's fair, about 10 minutes of that could've hit the editing room floor.
Quote:
It usually goes something like this:
Gandalf- "It is I, Gandalf the Grey"
elf person or something like that- "Gandalf, we have been waiting for you and were out beating up some orcs"
Gandalf- "good to see you friend, this is my angry dwarf friend, Azgarothianiquay of Glubinsunaladayau, deep within the Reliftinquajaush forests. He holds resentment for you because of something another different elf did a long time ago, not you guys but presumably your relations of some sort."
elf- "nice to meet you Azgarothianiquay, I am Wer####ajnsuhsajal, and this is Polisutehsankslki and her husband Tuayaatananauu of the desert elf race the Boroboro tribes, descendants of the Ugtahana..."
Yeah these movies are really not for you.
Quote:
Giant rock fight. WHY?
I'm pretty sure that was just there because it looked snazzy on the big screen.
Yup, this is about right. He was running long, so to save time, he created a time machine and went back to the 1930's and convinced Tolkein to re-write that scene so that the eagles would save Thorin's group from the orcs. You're dead on. What?
i think Mr.Coffee's point was that if you haven't read the books, things in the movies are explained very poorly or not at all. i hated the LOTR trilogy because of this, and will avoid The Hobbit now too after reading that it's pretty much the same thing
i think Mr.Coffee's point was that if you haven't read the books, things in the movies are explained very poorly or not at all. i hated the LOTR trilogy because of this, and will avoid The Hobbit now too after reading that it's pretty much the same thing
You don't need to read the book because the point was that the Eagles saved them in both. You may need to read the books to understand why the eagles didn't fly them all over the place as their personal chauffeurs but that's only to satisfy Mr. Coffee's gripe about them, not fill a plot hole. Plus it wouldn't really answer that anyways.
The only annoying thing i have always thought it the elfen gravity of everything they say. That would sure get annoying if you were friends. Take the sticks out of your asses, elfs.
In the book, the elves were portrayed as being very merry. Singing songs, and drinking lots of wine.
The Following User Says Thank You to troutman For This Useful Post:
There are a lot of things that require more explanation than you have time for in a movie. There were plenty of different ideas about how to deal with the ring that got shot down in Rivendell before they settled on Frodo taking it. My favourite was someone suggesting they just give it to Tom Bombadil, before someone points out that he wouldn't understand what it was for and would probably just lose it.
The issues with the eagles seems kind of trivial to all of the movies overall and weren't even integral to anything except rescuing the Dwarves from the Orcs and rescuing Frodo and Sam from being killed by the erupting Mt. Doom.
Yes, maybe it would have been helpful if Jackson briefly explained the connection between the eagles ans Gandalf instead of just whispering to a butterfly.
If there is anything to complain about the eagles it should be how slow they moved and how wide of a turning radius they must have had, and yet were perfectly timed to be under the characters as they plummeted off the tree.
Still, I don't see how the eagles make or break either The Hobbit or ROTK in how they were employed.
You don't need to read the book because the point was that the Eagles saved them in both. You may need to read the books to understand why the eagles didn't fly them all over the place as their personal chauffeurs but that's only to satisfy Mr. Coffee's gripe about them, not fill a plot hole. Plus it wouldn't really answer that anyways.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AR_Six
There are a lot of things that require more explanation than you have time for in a movie. There were plenty of different ideas about how to deal with the ring that got shot down in Rivendell before they settled on Frodo taking it. My favourite was someone suggesting they just give it to Tom Bombadil, before someone points out that he wouldn't understand what it was for and would probably just lose it.
Alright (second, apparently) last post, because I know it's pretty annoying when you like a movie and somebody goes and trashes the crap out of it, but I can't let this go.
But obviously the eagles (the real heroes) were a vital plot hole, because it's been brought up several times by a majority of posters on this site, not to mention a parody trailer and / or article or three all over the internet. Fact of the matter is that when your protagonist is saved through flight, after hiking for 15 hours of film, people are going to ask the simple questions. I don't think it would take Nostradamus foresight to determine that viewers may wonder this point. The eagles thing, largely explained on here that the reason they don't just finish the adventure quite easily is some kind of unexplained arrangement or "logic" (if the eye can't see Frodo, why would it see the birds and furthermore, if the eye doesn't assume the birds are working against it, why would it know they have the ring but whatever).
Basically, bottom line is that when something as obvious as the eagles flying in and saving the hero is left unexplained as to the ultimate goal of the adventure, the normal reaction of the viewer is to question "well, but why?", and Jackson does himself no favours by fortifying the viewers confusion by subsequently having a little bird fly to the mountain at the end.
Finally, the argument that there is only so much time to tell a story, that's BS too because a) somehow other movies explain stories and b) why waste so much useless screen time on random unexplained scenes when you have a story to tell.
AR, I tend to generally agree with you on the riddles in the dark scene, I agree the acting was great. My only complaint was like I said, it dragged on and on and on and on.
The issues with the eagles seems kind of trivial to all of the movies overall and weren't even integral to anything except rescuing the Dwarves from the Orcs and rescuing Frodo and Sam from being killed by the erupting Mt. Doom.
Yes, maybe it would have been helpful if Jackson briefly explained the connection between the eagles ans Gandalf instead of just whispering to a butterfly.
If there is anything to complain about the eagles it should be how slow they moved and how wide of a turning radius they must have had, and yet were perfectly timed to be under the characters as they plummeted off the tree.
Still, I don't see how the eagles make or break either The Hobbit or ROTK in how they were employed.
LOL what?! How is it minor?!? They saved the day!
They were the only legit hero outside of Gandalf in the whole movie!
The thing with the eagles is that they're a sloppily-written deus ex machina in the books that were given an after-the-fact explanation to justify why they didn't just help the heroes from the start, negating most of their quests' hardships. The movies don't even give that explanation, so people who are unfamiliar with the books are quite justified to nitpick those scenes in both ROTK and The Hobbit. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, there's nothing in Jackson's films to show that the eagles are anything more than Gandalf's faithful animal servants who show up to do his bidding whenever he whispers a command to a passing moth.
That didn't detract from my enjoyment of the films (knowing it was coming from the books prepared me for it), but I still recognize it for what it is: Tolkien wrote himself into a corner and took a lazy way out.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to MarchHare For This Useful Post:
