The Hobbit - starts filming March 21

I've seen the film twice now, both times in 3DHFR. I don't know what everyone's complaining about as it looked great - seeing so much detail and the action didn't seem sped up or anything like that!

Azog would have looked much better as an actor in prosthetics. Even in RotK - Gothmog the potato orc had some feeling of presence and power.

The Witch-King coming out of the statue looked a bit cartoonish to me, I must admit though a great scene all the same.

My one gripe is the scene which should have been "Brass Buttons". The satisfaction of reading Bilbo sneak back to the dwarves camp in the book was amazing. But in the film they'd gone ahead and spliced the escape from Gollum together with the brass buttons part. It just ruined the feeling I got from reading the book!

Apart from that it was a great film, not as good as Rings was, but still great and entertaining!
 
Bigdaddy said:
Unfortunatley PJ has decided to make the Hobbit into an "epic tale" like LOTR, the problem is, it never was an "epic". Its a cool fun short book that the lays the background for the real epic. So now he has to add BIG action to each of 3 films, it's going to be tiresome by the time we meet smog.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is the problem. And to make it "epic" he has to add the silly orch section, all the action and flashy battles. And loses the soul of the Tolkien story. It should not feel like POTC.

Im off to watch Willow. :)
 
Not even remotely close to Jar Jar. Nothing could even come close to touching that abomination. Well, maybe Ewoks, but Ewoks were not so horrible I considered walking out of the theater.
 
I too think Azog would have worked much better as a real actor, look at Lurtz in Fellowship, that dude is menacing! The (short) fight between him and Aragorn is still one of the best bits of the LOTR movie trilogy for me
 
I think that Radagast needed to be a person that could easily be ridiculed, to better explain why Saruman shows him so much contempt.
By the way, Radagast is also in the Fellowship of the Ring book where he is asked by Saruman to ask Gandalf to come to him.
 
I thought Gollum looked pretty good, but Azog and the wargs looked a little video gamey to me. As an aside, during the film I noticed a huge red scratch on the back of Gollum's head, behind his right ear. Sure enough, it's in the LOTR trilogy as well. Either he has a funky birthmark or the ring causes him not to heal worth a damn.
 
My girlfriend raised a question after seeing the film over Christmas, she said when Gollum loses the ring, why doesn't he die or age considerably in the 60 years he is without it, considering how Bilbo is practically just skin and bones when the hobbits and Gandalf leave Rivendell at the end of Return Of The King
 
Gollum had the ring for 500 years. Bilbo had it for 50. The ring didn't have enough time with Bilbo to alter him that significantly, so when he let it go, he aged faster than the creature it spent half a millennium with.
 
VortexRunner said:
I've seen the film twice now, both times in 3DHFR. I don't know what everyone's complaining about as it looked great - seeing so much detail and the action didn't seem sped up or anything like that!
Click to expand...

Something I've been wondering for a while when people make this same remark - are you saying the video look didn't bother you, or you couldn't actually detect it?
 
JBReplicas said:
My girlfriend raised a question after seeing the film over Christmas, she said when Gollum loses the ring, why doesn't he die or age considerably in the 60 years he is without it, considering how Bilbo is practically just skin and bones when the hobbits and Gandalf leave Rivendell at the end of Return Of The King
Click to expand...

Bilbo did not begin to age until after the Ring was destroyed. Had the Ring not been destroyed, he would probably have 'continued' for a long while, as Gandalf put it. Arwen makes note of it in LOTR.

"'It is true that I wish to go back to the Shire,' said Frodo. 'But first I must go to Rivendell. For if there could be anything wanting in a time so blessed, I missed Bilbo; and I was grieved when among all the household of Elrond I saw that he was not come.'

'Do you wonder at that, Ring-bearer?' said Arwen. 'For you know the power of that thing which is now destroyed; and all that was done by that power is now passing away. But your kinsman possessed this thing longer than you. He is ancient in years now, according to his kind; and he
awaits you, for he will not again make any long journey save one.'
 
Nwerke said:
Something I've been wondering for a while when people make this same remark - are you saying the video look didn't bother you, or you couldn't actually detect it?
Click to expand...

Only a handful of times was the video-look distinct amongst the 3-D. For most of the film it went straight over my head as I was focused on the story and how the film would play out. No other person I know who had seen the film in HFR 3-D had commented on the video-look or felt distracted by it.

I must say that I was initially sceptical of the HFR thinking films needed that slower look/ blurred actions. The Hobbit may be the one exception until I actually see another film in HFR mode...
 
Thanks. I found there were shots and even whole scenes where it was absent, but it would always make a return. In some shots it didn't bother me, it didn't spoil the movie, that's for sure...I didn't exactly love it though.

Darth Lars - yeah, and he has a proper name now, too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Anduril
Merry and Pippin: Post Firework Explosion.
Replies
2
Views
5,353
TheLonelyDwarf
TheLonelyDwarf
BIKERFETT
The hobbit cast!
2 3 4
Replies
67
Views
8,892
TheMechanic
TheMechanic
Back
Top