"The Hobbit"

[trackercowe]

It's actually at 65% right now (unless you are looking at Top Critics only), and I feel 65% is actually a pretty fair rating. I would give it 3.5 out of 5, while I would give all the LotR movies 4.5 or higher.

It would probably make my top 10 movies of the year, but somewhere on the lower half. It was a mild disappointment for me, sort of in the Prometheus range.

Much of The Hobbit reminded me of the last hour of Return of the King, drawn out scenes which kept going on for way too long. I know Jackson likes to make lengthy movies, but I feel this movie would have been better served if he had cut out at least 30 minutes. With all the content the LotR books have longer movies work (which is why the Extended versions are considered the definitive versions), but The Hobbit could have been better with a shorter run time.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

I think that fans of previous Jackson movies are giving this one a lot of leeway, simply because it's from the same director, realm, stories. But if you actually sit back objectively, this movie was not as good as any of the LOTRs. Admittedly, I'm not a fan of any of them really...

But, it probably should be better than 48%, it really wasn't THAT bad. But it certainly wasn't spectacular, that's for damn sure.

I still don't get the 48 fps, an unnecessary risk by the director.

Yeah, fans are typically more forgiving. If someone has an appreciation for something, then they will overlook the bad thing whether subconsciously or not. I remember trying to convince myself for a long time that Aeon Flux was a good movie because I was a fan of the animated series.

If I am a fan, then I am looking at the audience ratings. Those are the people who are judging it on the same things since the vast majority of the people in the audience, espeically in the first few weeks, are already going in with a positive default position.

[Yeah_Baby]

I don't know guys. A lot of the Fans I know enjoyed it, but were giving it around the 70% area. Most had issues with warring tones of the film.

[GreenLantern]

Happy Birthday Tolkien!



better late than never?

[Azure]

I'm a fan and I had issues with it. But considering how complicated the whole story is, and how hard it can be to bring scenes from the book into the movie, I say he did a rather good job of it.

Jackson also changed or left stuff out of LOTR. Didn't make the movies any worse.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Yeah, fans are typically more forgiving. If someone has an appreciation for something, then they will overlook the bad thing whether subconsciously or not.

Well duh. How else do you explain so many here loving the Avengers wich is a good but not great movie that is awful if you really want to critique and break it down.

[Nyah]

I'm going to see it this weekend and I'm now debating whether or not to see it in 3D. I've heard some people rave about it and I've heard others say it looks animated.

[Dentoman]

My wife normally hates 3D .... saw Hobbit at Cross Iron in 3D and she had no complaints.
I gotta say I really liked the movie. I was prepared to be disappointed, but I was not.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Nyah

I'm going to see it this weekend and I'm now debating whether or not to see it in 3D. I've heard some people rave about it and I've heard others say it looks animated.

What's your feeling on 3D in general? Do you get motion sickness easily? If so maybe go to regular but if it doesn't bother you in other movies it wont bother you in the Hobbit. I'm not a big fan of 3D myself but I didn't have an issue with it at all and personally loved 48 fps as it makes it feel more real and certainly not animated. As far as the 3D goes as with most movies you notice the effects for the first 10 or 15 minutes then you tend to kind of forget about it as you get engrossed with the story.

[To Be Quite Honest]

I had the chance to see The Hobbit last night.

As usual the shots were beautiful. I was amazed by the stunning visual display.

The story, I found the Hobbit book boring. In fact I don't know if I finished it as I read it over 10 years ago. I read the Hobbit after reading a giant war gore fantasy novel so the Hobbit was a bit of a let down. As far as the story goes I had no issues with the main characters or returnees.

What I couldn't stand was the humor switch. It felt like George Lucas was asked to write some of the humor (enter Jar Jar and war droid witty quips) and it felt out of place and awkward compared to the rest of the movie. It was this that destroyed the movie for me.

[To Be Quite Honest]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

What's your feeling on 3D in general? Do you get motion sickness easily? If so maybe go to regular but if it doesn't bother you in other movies it wont bother you in the Hobbit. I'm not a big fan of 3D myself but I didn't have an issue with it at all and personally loved 48 fps as it makes it feel more real and certainly not animated. As far as the 3D goes as with most movies you notice the effects for the first 10 or 15 minutes then you tend to kind of forget about it as you get engrossed with the story.

It was also the depth and colour of the shots that blew me away. Great camera work!

[Nyah]

I haven't seen any 3D films besides Avatar. I don't go to the movies often, but Avatar didn't bother me at all...in fact, it blew me away. Did it seem animated to you (besides the CG)?

[HPLovecraft]

Does the movie begin in media res?

[AR_Six]

Originally Posted by Azure

I'm a fan and I had issues with it. But considering how complicated the whole story is, and how hard it can be to bring scenes from the book into the movie, I say he did a rather good job of it.

Jackson also changed or left stuff out of LOTR. Didn't make the movies any worse.

Yes it did. All of the changes were for the worse. Changing fellowship to give Liv Tyler extra screen time was just awful. I wanted to throw my oversized movie theatre pop at the screen when it went in for the close up and she goes "If you want him... come and claim him!" Shut up, bitch, ya'll ain't no Glorfindel.

And Two Towers was a mess. Not just random #### like Aragorn being fake-dead to add suspense, but the negative impact of so many little things that were screwed with. I mean how do you screw with Helm's Deep? Yeah right like Celeborn is going to get killed by some orc he happened to not see after several thousand years of being all-powerful. The elves were ENTIRELY unnecessary. Legolas skateboarding down the stairs? Dwarf tossing for comic relief? GTFO.

Everything he changed cheapened and worsened the stories and he should've left well enough alone. I understand some things being necessary but a lot of the changes served NO purpose whatsoever.

[Violator]

Its kinda cool how Jackson blends some of the stuff from the hobbit into The Fellowship of the ring
like

The trools
The party for bilbo

[Yeah_Baby]

nm

[photon]

Finally got to see it, didn't want to see it in 3D but didn't see anywhere that was still playing it in HFR without 3D so went for the 3D.

For the HFR part, I both loved it for how much clearer things looked, and I had the same problem as others in that it made entering into "movie" mode in my brain difficult; everything was so real looking it looked like I was watching the set while they were filming rather than watching the movie.

So I don't know, I'd think if they just keep doing it eventually our brains will adjust, but maybe only for young people lol. It was nice to be able to follow action sequences without them being a blurry mess.

For the movie itself, 6 / 10, enjoyable, but seems like it was trying too hard in parts to be a spectacle or pander to 3D, and I think Jackson falls into the same trap that anyone when they have too much ability to create from pure imagination will fall into, just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done, and not everything from a book translates to visual medium.

Since I'd started to get my hopes up after reading this thread I'm a little disappointed (still enjoyed myself), but I should watch it in non-HFR to see if maybe the difficulty into getting into the feel of it being a movie was a factor.

EDIT: First time seeing a movie in UltraAVX (digital projection) as well, and that I am truly impressed with how clear everything was.

[octothorp]

I wonder if in the future we'll see movies that use a combination of frame rates... or not exactly a combination, but sort of an emulated lower frame rate for some parts of a film, and then shift up to a higher frame-rate during action sequences. Would that give you the best of both worlds, or would it just be jarring every time it switched?

[MrMastodonFarm]

I give it a 6 or a solid 7.

My main annoyance with it was there was far too many "in the nick of time" moments. Almost all of the fight scenes ended in Gandalf just saving the day in the nick of time. It was annoying by the end. The Hobbit isn't as good as Lord of the Rings to start so it's hard to compare but I'm still excited for the 2nd movie.

[drhu22]

[QUOTE=MrMastodonFarm;3995470]I give it a 6 or a solid 7.

My main annoyance with it was there was far too many "in the nick of time" moments. Almost all of the fight scenes ended in Gandalf just saving the day in the nick of time.

Thats why i put down LOTR...there were too many of those moments...the last straw was when they were trapped on a ledge (getting close to mordor i think) and some magic rope appeared...anyone remember that?

For me, it is still a fun movie to watch in some ways.
I liked Bilbos character, and in general the way the characters are drawn. Im not sure about Gandalph... over all it is pretty cool movie to couch wrestle to, and eat popcorn.