Pierre Kirby Approved.
 
HomeCalendarFAQSearchMemberlistUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 My Review of "The Hobbit"

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
Otaku4Life

avatar

Posts : 1032
Join date : 2011-02-25
Age : 33
Location : New Jersey

PostSubject: My Review of "The Hobbit"   Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:41 am

I just came back from my special invitation screening to Peter Jackson's newest movie "The Hobbit" in NYC tonight.
I got the invitation from GoFoBo, a website I'm a member of who give out free screenings before they hit theaters.
http://www.gofobo.com/
I waited in line since 2:00 PM & was in the audience along with fellow movie critics & news press.
The movie was shown in HD3D.
I don't want to give away too many spoilers, but the film was half action/fantasy & half slapstick comedy.
The character who totally stole the whole movie was Gollum.
Overall, it was a really fun movie-going experience.
I can't wait to see Brad's review this week once he goes see it for himself.
Final word of advice, just do not pay attention to the recent bullshit being told by PeTA against the movie.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Frank Rizzo

avatar

Posts : 1456
Join date : 2011-02-02
Age : 32

PostSubject: Re: My Review of "The Hobbit"   Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:42 pm

Otaku4Life wrote:
I just came back from my special invitation screening to Peter Jackson's newest movie "The Hobbit" in NYC tonight.
I got the invitation from GoFoBo, a website I'm a member of who give out free screenings before they hit theaters.
http://www.gofobo.com/
I waited in line since 2:00 PM & was in the audience along with fellow movie critics & news press.
The movie was shown in HD3D.
I don't want to give away too many spoilers, but the film was half action/fantasy & half slapstick comedy.
The character who totally stole the whole movie was Gollum.
Overall, it was a really fun movie-going experience.
I can't wait to see Brad's review this week once he goes see it for himself.
Final word of advice, just do not pay attention to the recent bullshit being told by PeTA against the movie.

I've been looking forward to The Hobbit for months now, can't wait to see it in theaters.

BTW: Nice way to subtlely plug that website you're a member of, lol.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
polygonalchemist



Posts : 72
Join date : 2011-01-31
Location : Orlando, FL

PostSubject: Re: My Review of "The Hobbit"   Sat Dec 08, 2012 10:12 am

So was it shown in the 48 FPS that the movie was shot in? I've heard people have had mixed reactions to that, so I was wondering if the movie will actually be projected at 48FPS. I don't think it'd throw me off that much and attribute most of the complaining to "It's not what I'm used to, argh!"

I kinda expect it to be a bit sillier too, since that's how the book was, it wasn't as serious as LOTR was. I'm just more concerned with a lot of filler from splitting the book into 3 movies. I'm not doubting that Jackson could pull it off, just being cautious.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Subterfuge

avatar

Posts : 136
Join date : 2012-09-22

PostSubject: Re: My Review of "The Hobbit"   Sun Dec 09, 2012 1:01 am


Well, the problem here, in regards to enough filling to make three films out of a single book is that Jackson didn't have the rights to the books, besides The Hobbit, which go in greater detail about the events which do not feature in the original story; events which Jackson took upon himself to insert into his theatrical interpretation of The Hobbit. The Tolkien estate dislike what Jackson has done with The Lord of the Rings and do not want to sell the rights to any other books by Tolkien to him so Jackson had to make up the stuff to fill up three movies, stuff that is only hinted at in the original Hobbit book and which is described in greater lenght in other books which Jackson doesn't have the rights to.

In other words, all the filling he's put into the movie that's about to come out, was made up from scratch. If he had'nt, he'd risk getting sued by Tolkien's heirs. So that begs the question: why did he bother? Why did he go through all the trouble of making up shit that wasn't in the book in the first place since he didn't have the rights to dig into the other books that explain the backstory he's planning to fill his movie with?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Otaku4Life

avatar

Posts : 1032
Join date : 2011-02-25
Age : 33
Location : New Jersey

PostSubject: Re: My Review of "The Hobbit"   Sun Dec 09, 2012 8:38 am

polygonalchemist wrote:
So was it shown in the 48 FPS that the movie was shot in? I've heard people have had mixed reactions to that, so I was wondering if the movie will actually be projected at 48FPS. I don't think it'd throw me off that much and attribute most of the complaining to "It's not what I'm used to, argh!"
Seeing "The Hobbit" shot in 48 frames-per-second was a theatrical first experience for me.
It kind of gives the film a more realistic look to it.
However, there are some shots that kind of look like someone hit the fast-forward button on my DVD remote.
When there was a shift in camera movement, it looked a bit blurry.
It did take a while for eyes to adjust to what's going on.
It makes me wonder if James Cameron will use this 48 FPS technique in his "Avatar" sequels?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
polygonalchemist



Posts : 72
Join date : 2011-01-31
Location : Orlando, FL

PostSubject: Re: My Review of "The Hobbit"   Mon Dec 10, 2012 11:32 am

Subterfuge wrote:

Well, the problem here, in regards to enough filling to make three films out of a single book is that Jackson didn't have the rights to the books, besides The Hobbit, which go in greater detail about the events which do not feature in the original story; events which Jackson took upon himself to insert into his theatrical interpretation of The Hobbit. The Tolkien estate dislike what Jackson has done with The Lord of the Rings and do not want to sell the rights to any other books by Tolkien to him so Jackson had to make up the stuff to fill up three movies, stuff that is only hinted at in the original Hobbit book and which is described in greater lenght in other books which Jackson doesn't have the rights to.

In other words, all the filling he's put into the movie that's about to come out, was made up from scratch. If he had'nt, he'd risk getting sued by Tolkien's heirs. So that begs the question: why did he bother? Why did he go through all the trouble of making up shit that wasn't in the book in the first place since he didn't have the rights to dig into the other books that explain the backstory he's planning to fill his movie with?

My understanding was that they still have the rights to everything in LOTR, including the appendices. All the "new" stuff that wasn't in The Hobbit comes from either dialog in LOTR or the appendices. Sure, they still have to completely write new dialog in scenes based on that, but it gives them a framework. As for not having the other books, I can't remember if anything was mentioned in The Silmarillion or Unfinished Tales that pertained to that time (most of it was thousands of years in the past).

Back to top Go down
View user profile
Subterfuge

avatar

Posts : 136
Join date : 2012-09-22

PostSubject: Re: My Review of "The Hobbit"   Mon Dec 10, 2012 8:41 pm

polygonalchemist wrote:
Subterfuge wrote:

Well, the problem here, in regards to enough filling to make three films out of a single book is that Jackson didn't have the rights to the books, besides The Hobbit, which go in greater detail about the events which do not feature in the original story; events which Jackson took upon himself to insert into his theatrical interpretation of The Hobbit. The Tolkien estate dislike what Jackson has done with The Lord of the Rings and do not want to sell the rights to any other books by Tolkien to him so Jackson had to make up the stuff to fill up three movies, stuff that is only hinted at in the original Hobbit book and which is described in greater lenght in other books which Jackson doesn't have the rights to.

In other words, all the filling he's put into the movie that's about to come out, was made up from scratch. If he had'nt, he'd risk getting sued by Tolkien's heirs. So that begs the question: why did he bother? Why did he go through all the trouble of making up shit that wasn't in the book in the first place since he didn't have the rights to dig into the other books that explain the backstory he's planning to fill his movie with?

My understanding was that they still have the rights to everything in LOTR, including the appendices. All the "new" stuff that wasn't in The Hobbit comes from either dialog in LOTR or the appendices. Sure, they still have to completely write new dialog in scenes based on that, but it gives them a framework. As for not having the other books, I can't remember if anything was mentioned in The Silmarillion or Unfinished Tales that pertained to that time (most of it was thousands of years in the past).


There is a story from Unfinished Tales about how Gandalf met Thorin's grandfather and how the whole expedition with the dwarves came to be; why he chose Bilbo to accompany them etc. I think there are a couple of other sources from which Jackson simply cannot draw. I've heard of many dreadful things ( rumours I hope ): the nazg├╗ls being freed from tombs in which they had been trapped by the Dunedains ( remember that the nazg├╗ls, the black riders from LOTR aren't dead, they were corrupted while still alive and turned into wraiths. Also, undead armies of goblins resurrected by Sauron to fight at the Battle of the Five Armies and the whole White Council thing which was only mentionned in The Hobbit but is still supposed to be presented at lenght in the movie as well as the fight that they have with the Necromancer ( which is not yet known to be Sauron ) at Dol Guldur.

Too many things could go wrong with all of these subplots being made up by Jackson because he cannot actually use the material or because the material simply doesn't exist, as is the case with the White Council versus Necromancer arc. Many people are guessing that Jackson intends to tie in The Hobbit with his Rings trilogy and putting too much emphasis on the ring itself.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Otaku4Life

avatar

Posts : 1032
Join date : 2011-02-25
Age : 33
Location : New Jersey

PostSubject: Re: My Review of "The Hobbit"   Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:50 pm

This may be a minor spoiler, but "The Hobbit" also contains some silly musical numbers as well.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
polygonalchemist



Posts : 72
Join date : 2011-01-31
Location : Orlando, FL

PostSubject: Re: My Review of "The Hobbit"   Sat Dec 22, 2012 3:04 pm

After seeing it (In Imax 3D, but not 48fps) I think Spoony's review pretty much summed up how I felt about it. I personally loved every minute spent in Middle Earth and didn't think it dragged at all, but I can see and agree with a lot of other people's criticisms.

The story really doesn't need to be 3 3-hour movies. I think the original 2 movie plan would have struck the right balance of making room for everything without stretching it out too much. Maybe they'll pay off in one of the later movies, but so far none of the added material really felt like it added anything other than runtime and cameos. Sylvester McCoy was cool, and I'm always glad to see Sir. Christopher Lee in pretty much anything, but what's the point exactly of setting the framing narration right before "Fellowship of the Ring"? Well, we got 2 movies to go, so I shall reserve judgement on that until those are out.

The 3D was on and off. When they made use of it, I think they did so pretty well. I don't know if seeing it in IMAX was really worth it, though, I don't think it was really filmed to take advantage of it. I still want to see 48fps for myself sometime, It seems to be really dividing people. It's interesting how we've been conditioned to associate a framerate with "cheapness".
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: My Review of "The Hobbit"   

Back to top Go down
 
My Review of "The Hobbit"
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Market review and outlook for 2012
» A review of Prathilaba: SEC TV show on investing in the stock market
» Budget Review - 2012
» ECONOMIC REVIEW
» 2016 budget review

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
The Cinema Snob :: Other Stuff :: Theater of Blood-
Jump to: