The Hobbit

A place for us all come together to discuss general topics of interest. Want to chat about music, movies, news, real life, or a game that we don't have a group for? This is the place.

Moderators: General Forum Moderators, Global Moderators

The Hobbit

PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 10:20 pm

User avatar
Kon
Posts: 1525
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 8:56 pm
Location: USA
Contact:
There's no <censored> thread for this? <censored> you guys. I saw it in 3D at the <censored> IMAX here. On opening night, hours before the costumed nerds in LA even had the chance. $17 well-spent, thank you. Unfortunately the IMAX showing was at the traditional 24 frames per second. I'm planning to see it again this week at one of the two theaters here showing it in 48 fps. And maybe then a third time in 2D, just to take it in again.
"We are the facilitators of our own creative evolution."

Re: The Hobbit

PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 3:04 am

User avatar
Ozone
Posts: 850
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 5:52 pm
Location: 93m miles from Sol.
Did you like it?
"Rarely is the questioned asked: Is our children learning?" George Bush, Jan. 11, 2000

Re: The Hobbit

PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 3:10 pm

User avatar
SL33PY
Posts: 980
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2004 7:25 pm
Ozone wrote:Did you like it?
:weird:

Lol? I guess he did since he wants to see it another 3 times

Re: The Hobbit

PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 4:33 pm

User avatar
M.Steiner
Posts: 6114
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 5:57 pm
Location: UK
Contact:
lol
I'll be waiting for this to come out on blu-ray like I am doing for Skyfall. I am looking forward to seeing it but I'm not in any great rush or anything plus I'm not much of a cinema-goer anymore. I was when I was a kid/teen and prices were actually reasonable. They (prices) are <censored> ridiculous compared to what they used to be like tbh. Personally I don't agree with paying 10 quid to see a movie 1 single time which I'd then have to pay the same again & again if I wanted to see it twice or more and also get ripped off on drinks or whatever whilst I was there too. I'd rather just wait & buy it on blu-ray when it releases, own the disc, and be able to watch it as many times as I want. - New releases are not very expensive these days. For example you can grab a new release like TDKR on Blu for 12.99 which is just a few quid more than what I'd spend seeing The Hobbit at the cinema one single time or cheaper if you account for silly priced drinks & snacks lol. <censored> rip off if you ask me but as I say, I'm in no great rush to see it immediately. Can wait for blu :)

Glad you enjoyed it though, Kahn. Hopefully I will too when I get to seeing it. I think I'll probably have a weekend rewatch of the trilogy before hand too heh.
Btw, can you still see much of Del Toro's stamp on the movie even though he left the project? Assuming you are familiar with some of his other work.
"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

Re: The Hobbit

PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 6:50 pm

User avatar
Anubis
Site Admin
Posts: 4291
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 10:13 pm
Location: The Unholy Realm
Contact:
I'm going to see it some time tomorrow, and I was going to start a thread after that ;)

Glad to hear you enjoyed it! Hopefully it won't deviate too much from the book, so I will too!
"Perhaps this is what I have always wished for since that day. The loss and destruction of all. That's right, one must destroy before creating. In that case, if my conscience becomes a hindrance to me, then I will simply erase it. I have no other choice but to move forward....therefore!" - Lelouch vi Britannia/Zero, Code Geass: Hangyaku no Lelouch

Forever an eXile and proud of it!

Re: The Hobbit

PostPosted: Wed Dec 19, 2012 11:48 pm

User avatar
Isileth
Posts: 1011
Joined: Wed May 25, 2005 4:45 pm
Location: UK
Must admit MS going to see Skyfall really reinforced my dislike of the cinema experience.

Its far to expensive, you have to sit through loads of ads, the worst being the stupid trailers that give away the whole plots of any film coming out in the next year, the even worse being a trailer for the film your actually sitting there waiting to watch (Yeah that happened, thanks Vue).

And the people....my god the people, they can go to hell. Every single one of them is part of a great conspiracy to stop you enjoying the movie, the ones infront are constantly reaching across each other, passing food around and generally doing everything they can to move about and catch your eye.
The ones to the side are making horse noises (Again this happened) and after every single trailer voicing their opinion to the whole audience and the people still queuing outside. And naturally their opinions show them to be a total idiot, some crappy action/comedy trailer with lots of farting and poop jokes "That looks well <censored> good dunnit", the trailer for Les Miserable comes on "What the <censored> that crap, I know what I wont be <censored> watching, looks shit dunnit".
The ones behind and glued to their phone loudly updating the whole audience on the latest score of the football match you have set to record and were going to watch when you got back home.

Anyways.....

Whats people opinion on 3D? Not been and seen one yet because I'm really not sold on the idea at all.

Re: The Hobbit

PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:30 am

User avatar
Futile Resistance
Posts: 1454
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2004 10:44 pm
Location: FL
In my experience 3D works well for animation. I enjoy watching any Disney movie in 3D and recent movies like Life of Pi used it effectively. Unfortunately you've got the 3D fad going on so alot of post-filming touch up 3D is just an excuse for you to waste money.

Re: The Hobbit

PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 1:52 am

User avatar
M.Steiner
Posts: 6114
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 5:57 pm
Location: UK
Contact:
Agree with everything you've said there pretty much, Isi.

Extortionate ticket prices for what you get for your money. Tickets for 3D screenings are also more expensive than 2D so just another excuse to charge more.
Rip off prices on the drinks & snacks they provide.
No food or drink of your own allowed inside so you either have to go without or pay their stupid prices as above.
Ridiculous length of ads & trailers for stuff before the movie even begins. Even for the movie you're sat there waiting to come on.
People moving about going for toilet breaks or to get food.
Inconsiderate bastards sat around you crunching on popcorn, rustling bags, making stupid noises, talking to each other and on their goddamn phones, idiots spoiling the film who have already been to see it before etc etc..

Doesn't appeal to me in the slightest personally and to pay their rip off prices to sit through a movie like The Hobbit which runs for nearly 3 hours just to see it a little bit earlier and on a bigger screen?. <censored> that. Alfred Hitchcock himself would have to rise up from his grave and direct a new movie or something to make me that desperate. Then I might lol.
I'd rather wait a few months until I can buy it on disc so I can watch it here in complete silence with no interruptions, no idiots sat around me doing shit, no adverts I have to sit through and listen to audience commentary.. Fancy a drink? I'll go grab a free one from downstairs. Need a pee? Hang on, I'll just press pause. Want to watch the movie a second time for free? Sure, hell, lets make it 3!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anaG2qL6 ... be&t=25m6s


3D? I'll be honest, I haven't seen anything in 3D yet.
Seems like just a gimmick to me tbh. Don't fancy having to wear a pair goggles to watch something in 3D either and I understand they can make some people feel dizzy too?
Maybe I'd feel differently if I saw something in 3D which I later felt improved a film, I dunno.. Just don't have much interest for it really :)


Enough of that anyway heh. The prices and rest of the stuff above obviously isn't much of an issue for all of us heh.
Interested in hearing your thoughts once you've seen it too, Anny :thumb:
"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

Re: The Hobbit

PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 2:36 am

User avatar
Isileth
Posts: 1011
Joined: Wed May 25, 2005 4:45 pm
Location: UK
Supposedly 48fps is meant to reduce the headaches/dizziness that some people get, certainly thats what ive seen Peter Jackson say when asked why he was using it. I honestly have no idea where any 3D cinemas are around here let alone ones that will show it at 48fps.

Re: The Hobbit

PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 9:24 am

User avatar
M.Steiner
Posts: 6114
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 5:57 pm
Location: UK
Contact:
Just been reading: http://www.vulture.com/2012/12/critics- ... -rate.html
Doesn't sound all that great to me tbh. Had already read a few reviews from people saying how the 48fps brings out the fakeness of movie props & some of the sets. I imagine that would spoil the experience for me somewhat as I'd be constantly looking out for stuff like that...
If you didn't have to pay silly prices each time for multiple viewings & put up with the bullshit above too, if I was going to go and see it at a cinema myself it'd have to be at the traditional 24fps 2D for first time viewing. Then go back and see it a second time at 48 just to see how it compared and whether it benefitted from it or not.

Don't know how accurate this is but there's actually a link in there near the top which supposedly lists all the cinemas showing it in 3D 48fps: http://www.48fpsmovies.com/48-fps-theater-list/ :)
"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

Re: The Hobbit

PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 9:56 am

User avatar
Isileth
Posts: 1011
Joined: Wed May 25, 2005 4:45 pm
Location: UK
Looks like my closest one doesnt but the one in town does, bit of a pain to get to and much busier to boot. But by the sound of the reviews on 48fps I dont think I will push myself to go. However how many times in the past have people complained massively about the newest technology only to have it become the perfectly accepted norm.

Be very interested to hear if anyone here sees it, even better if you can watch it in both formats.

Re: The Hobbit

PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 1:24 pm

User avatar
Ash
Posts: 554
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 1:15 pm
Location: Manchester, UK
Being an old fuddy duddy I went and saw it in 2D, it was fine, if you liked LoTR then you will like the Hobbit.

:thumb:
Ash
The quiet one in the corner

Re: The Hobbit

PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 2:17 pm

User avatar
Ozone
Posts: 850
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 5:52 pm
Location: 93m miles from Sol.
SL33PY wrote:Lol?
;)

Saw an interesting interview with Jackson where he was discussing Tolkien's writings. Seems that JRR was in the mindset of trying to combine the Hobbit, which was a children's tale, with TLoTR, an adult tale. Then he croaked.

Jackson took whatever other Middle Earth writings JRR left behind and expanded them. He fleshed out the Hobbit with the idea that, in Middle Earth, the Hobbit was a fairy tale told to children which was based on actual, and darker, events. He set out to flesh out these events as they actually 'happened'.

Thought it was an interesting concept and it puts a trilogy a bit more in perspective for me.

Hoping to see it this holiday, when we can pawn off the Sprog on my folks for a few hours.
"Rarely is the questioned asked: Is our children learning?" George Bush, Jan. 11, 2000

Re: The Hobbit

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 12:32 am

User avatar
Anubis
Site Admin
Posts: 4291
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 10:13 pm
Location: The Unholy Realm
Contact:
Ok, I've now seen it :)

Good film, but it takes a lot more liberties with the source matierial than LOTR did. The broad plot points (e.g. "they meet trolls") are the same, but nothing around those plot points is.
For example, they were not hunted by orcs across their journey in the way shown. Similarly, there was no council of the wise at Rivendell - and the book actually states it was a council of the wizards, not the wise, that decided what was to be done re: the Necromancer.

Some of those differences feel more out of line than others too. Personally, I was not really fond of the whole involvement of Radagast - not only was the character fairly ridiculous compared to how he was portrayed in LOTR (since he isn't meant to be in The Hobbit that can't be used as references), but it also trivialised the Necromancer from my point of view.
I also felt that in some ways they had made the film darker than LOTR was, which I found strange. The portrayal of Gandalf, for instance, seemed somewhat darker than he was later on. That doesn't really make much sense from a story point of view though, as The Hobbit was deliberately the lighter toned book, set in an age of relative peace. I just...question whether it was an intentional thing, and if so why.

I don't want to be too critical though, as I did enjoy it and think it was a good film, but in a lot of ways I have to admit it didn't really feel like the Hobbit to me (having recently re-read the book in preparation for the movie). A bit of a shame really, but I will obviously reserve full judgement until I've seen both of the following two films.
"Perhaps this is what I have always wished for since that day. The loss and destruction of all. That's right, one must destroy before creating. In that case, if my conscience becomes a hindrance to me, then I will simply erase it. I have no other choice but to move forward....therefore!" - Lelouch vi Britannia/Zero, Code Geass: Hangyaku no Lelouch

Forever an eXile and proud of it!

Re: The Hobbit

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 1:23 am

User avatar
M.Steiner
Posts: 6114
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 5:57 pm
Location: UK
Contact:
Anubis wrote:I also felt that in some ways they had made the film darker than LOTR was, which I found strange. The portrayal of Gandalf, for instance, seemed somewhat darker than he was later on. That doesn't really make much sense from a story point of view though, as The Hobbit was deliberately the lighter toned book, set in an age of relative peace. I just...question whether it was an intentional thing, and if so why.
Maybe intentional reading Oz's post above?:
Ozone wrote:Saw an interesting interview with Jackson where he was discussing Tolkien's writings. Seems that JRR was in the mindset of trying to combine the Hobbit, which was a children's tale, with TLoTR, an adult tale. Then he croaked.

Jackson took whatever other Middle Earth writings JRR left behind and expanded them. He fleshed out the Hobbit with the idea that, in Middle Earth, the Hobbit was a fairy tale told to children which was based on actual, and darker, events. He set out to flesh out these events as they actually 'happened'.

Also nobody answered my question yet, and on IRC too damnit lol :p
Does the film still feel very much like Peter Jackson's work even if it has much darker tones than his adaption of the LOTR trilogy had & The Hobbit book itself? (Which was basically a children's novel anyway). Can you still see much of Guillermo del Toro's influence in the film anywhere or does it feel like he was never part of the project? Just interested in hearing how much of "him" was ultimately left in if you get me :)
And I suppose this would link in with the first part; Does the first Hobbit film still sit well side by side with the trilogy films? Both in terms of quality and feeling part of the same world/larger story if you were to watch them all back to back for example. If that makes sense ^^
"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

Re: The Hobbit

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 6:56 pm

User avatar
Anubis
Site Admin
Posts: 4291
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 10:13 pm
Location: The Unholy Realm
Contact:
M.Steiner wrote:
Anubis wrote:I also felt that in some ways they had made the film darker than LOTR was, which I found strange. The portrayal of Gandalf, for instance, seemed somewhat darker than he was later on. That doesn't really make much sense from a story point of view though, as The Hobbit was deliberately the lighter toned book, set in an age of relative peace. I just...question whether it was an intentional thing, and if so why.
Maybe intentional reading Oz's post above?:
Ozone wrote:Saw an interesting interview with Jackson where he was discussing Tolkien's writings. Seems that JRR was in the mindset of trying to combine the Hobbit, which was a children's tale, with TLoTR, an adult tale. Then he croaked.

Jackson took whatever other Middle Earth writings JRR left behind and expanded them. He fleshed out the Hobbit with the idea that, in Middle Earth, the Hobbit was a fairy tale told to children which was based on actual, and darker, events. He set out to flesh out these events as they actually 'happened'.

Also nobody answered my question yet, and on IRC too damnit lol :p
Does the film still feel very much like Peter Jackson's work even if it has much darker tones than his adaption of the LOTR trilogy had & The Hobbit book itself? (Which was basically a children's novel anyway). Can you still see much of Guillermo del Toro's influence in the film anywhere or does it feel like he was never part of the project? Just interested in hearing how much of "him" was ultimately left in if you get me :)
And I suppose this would link in with the first part; Does the first Hobbit film still sit well side by side with the trilogy films? Both in terms of quality and feeling part of the same world/larger story if you were to watch them all back to back for example. If that makes sense ^^
Yeah, I don't really like what Jackson said there if I'm honest. He should have stuck to what was there, rather than trying to work with something half finished and expanding upon it. If he didn't want to tell the tale as it was he really shouldn't have made the movie...

As for your question, I deliberately avoided it as I have no idea who del Toro is and have only watched LOTR from Peter Jackson aside from this lol.

Suffice to say it felt like it continued on from the films well, because they put a lot of effort into establishing continuity and familiarity, particularly in certain scenes and characters. Odds are if you enjoyed the LOTR trilogy, you'll like it - provided you aren't one to get hung up on how true to the source material it is.
"Perhaps this is what I have always wished for since that day. The loss and destruction of all. That's right, one must destroy before creating. In that case, if my conscience becomes a hindrance to me, then I will simply erase it. I have no other choice but to move forward....therefore!" - Lelouch vi Britannia/Zero, Code Geass: Hangyaku no Lelouch

Forever an eXile and proud of it!

Re: The Hobbit

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 9:01 pm

User avatar
M.Steiner
Posts: 6114
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 5:57 pm
Location: UK
Contact:
I get ya, ta for answering :thumb:
I guess I'll have to wait and see how I feel about it when I eventually get to see it ^^

Also do you remember this mate? It will have been several years ago now when you watched it but it had some very unique & memorable imagery. Perhaps this will jog your memory:
That was del Toro ;)

I wonder if some of these dark themes in the Hobbit were partly due to him as well and not just Jackson (like from Oz's post). His forte being that of dark fantasy and horror. He has an awesome vision for fantasy so have been hoping, whilst I loved the other trilogy movies from PJ, that some of del Toro would still be in there somewhere :)
"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

Re: The Hobbit

PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 8:12 pm

User avatar
Kon
Posts: 1525
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 8:56 pm
Location: USA
Contact:
Commented on this thread in IRC as I was reading it:

I usually wait until the Blu-ray hits as well, but The Hobbit is really a whole different experience if you see it in 3D - especially at 48 fps.

And yes I hate 3D as much as the rest of you (the only time I paid to see a film in 3D was Up, because it was completely animated), but The Hobbit was natively filmed in 3D and looks quite good.
It's less gimmicky. As I said there are only 1 or 2 "pop out" cheap effect moments. Most of the time it's just used to add depth to the shot. You get a real sense of perspective.
Subtle, but great.

I'm not a huge del Toro fan so I'm not so attuned to the finer points of his style, but one thing I definitely noticed was the whole part with the Goblin King felt a lot more fantastical and less realistic than in LOTR. It did remind me more of Pan's Labyrinth's art direction. Not sure if he actually had anything to do with it though.
"We are the facilitators of our own creative evolution."

Re: The Hobbit

PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:24 am

User avatar
Kon
Posts: 1525
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 8:56 pm
Location: USA
Contact:
Isileth wrote:the trailer for Les Miserable comes on "What the <censored> that crap, I know what I wont be <censored> watching, looks shit dunnit".
Just to note that I saw this at midnight on opening night to a half-empty theatre. It absolutely blows The Hobbit out of the water. I was highly skeptical about some of the casting, especially Anne Hathaway, but everyone pretty much nailed it. Best version of Les Mis that I've seen. Also ranks highly among musical film adaptations.

That's not to say I still don't want to see The Hobbit in 48 fps. Will report back when I have accomplished this task.
"We are the facilitators of our own creative evolution."

Return to “General Discussions”