Bubble Witch Saga 3 Industrial Deals Little FIres Everywhere Shop new men's suiting nav_sap_hiltonhonors_launch Learn more about Amazon Music Unlimited GNO for iPhone 8 Starting at $39.99 Grocery Handmade Tote Bags Book a house cleaner for 2 or more hours on Amazon Spider-Man: Homecoming available to buy Spider-Man: Homecoming available to buy Spider-Man: Homecoming available to buy  Introducing Echo Show Introducing All-New Fire HD 10 with Alexa hands-free $149.99 Kindle Oasis, unlike any Kindle you've ever held AutoRip in CDs & Vinyl Shop Now PSFF17_gno

Any posters on this forum catch The Hobbit this past weekend?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-10 of 10 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Dec 18, 2012, 7:46:30 AM PST
M. Stifler says:
If you did, what were your thoughts?

I'll start right off with the movie itself. From looking at what the critics were saying, I went into this expecting a lesser product than what we got with the LOTR films. I also heard that the movie was drawn out and went slowly.

In my experience, not only was this movie about on par with the previous trilogy, it did not seem long whatsoever. The almost 3 hours flew by before I knew what happened. I wasn't optimistic about turning this one book into a long trilogy, but if the next two sequels flow as well as this movie, I'll be just fine with it. It seems like they've added every detail that was in the book, as well as expanded upon what was in the Appendices to the LOTR. 9/10 from me.

Now the negative. This may just have been the IMAX theater I went to, but the 3D was absolutely horrible. It felt like I was watching the movie without glasses the whole time. I could consistently see 2 images throughout the movie. I will be going to another IMAX close to me next weekend to compare, and I would also like to catch it in the HFR format in that same theater at some point. Just need to find someone else willing to go with.

Posted on Dec 19, 2012, 2:25:42 AM PST
N. R. Briggs says:
I did see it. I liked the beginning more than anything. A really great movie visually, great dialogue and actors, and it was good to see Smeagle in his prime.

An A+ from me.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 19, 2012, 5:25:01 AM PST
M. Stifler says:
Smeagle was the highlight. Somebody should give Andy Serkis an award.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 21, 2012, 1:09:28 PM PST
BostonBoy says:
I hope its gonna be good, I'm going to see it this afternoon in HFR 3D, not iMax thgough. I do find the iMax 3D experience not very good (kinda had the same expirience stiffler did with some movies... its headache inducing...

Posted on Dec 22, 2012, 6:16:25 AM PST
NLM4501 says:
My son and I saw it this week - a must in 3D - like Stifler I wasn't expecting much based on reviews - but we really enjoyed it (has several humerous moments too) - just wish we didn't have to wait so long for the next installments (kind of like GURM ha). I did think several of the dwarves looked like Klingons though :-)

Posted on Dec 22, 2012, 6:54:07 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 22, 2012, 6:55:58 AM PST
BostonBoy says:
I saw it and I really liked it and I'm a big Tolkien buff, I didn't care much for LOTR movies, mainly because they made up new material and omitted existing one. While a little adding happened here as well in general the movie had a better flow mainly because the Hobbit as a book was a lot less detailed and mixing in the LOTR annals was a genius idea giving the way more lighthearted book a more solid feel. I found the pace just right and the 3hrs just flew by.

Ending after the eagles dropped them off at the Carrock was a good choice too, hopefully they continue with them meeting Beorn at the beginning of the next movie and not make the mistake of omitting him because other than resupply them with Ponies he doesn't much else to advance the overall story but it would be a shame if he went the way of Tom Bombadil in the movies.

I saw it in HFR 3D and that was amazing too, the clarity was amazing, you could see the pimples on gollums forehead, the picture was crystal clear and normally 3D leaves me with a slight headache and a sense of dislocation afterwards, which wasn't the case here.

A solid 5 star experience which I'll probably repeat in a little while...

Posted on Jan 2, 2013, 12:38:01 PM PST
Cato says:
I saw the Hobbit in "RealD 3d" yesterday. Although I will likely see it again, I did not care for this movie. First, I fully understand Hobbit is a children's book and I wasn't expecting something on par with LOTR. However, with that said, I have the following criticisms.

RealD 3d sucks. Everything except still shots were blurry. The 3d worked on the scenic slow pans and Rivendale sequences, but was distracting everywhere else.

The movie itself s horribly, horribly bloated. I understand (and agree) with the decision to include information from the appendices ..... however, the way in which it was done demolishes the story. I large part of the suspension/fear in reading The Hobbit was not knowing what Gandalf was up to when he disappeared. They could have saved the Rivendale council scene for the next movie. Also, the Raddagast scenes were unnecessary and/or overly prolonged, unless you think watching a wizard revive a pet hedgehog exciting. I though the intro could have been cut down as well. It seems like an hour passed before the "journey" started. The "battle of the mountains" was pointless.

Visually, aside from the bad 3d effects, I thought the special effects here were silly. Reminded me of the Star Wars prequels with actors swinging fake swords and nonexistent enemies. With all the goblins and orcs being CGI, it doesn't look like they are actually fighting anything/looks like a videogame. No sense that any of the characters are in any real danger. Also the sheer number of goblins and orcs i

The film itself is "overproduced"/over-saturated. The weapons and armor look like the polypropylene props they are, rather than real physical objects. When they cut to the first shot of Rivendale, my first thought was "its only a model."

I will watch it again in 2d and will likely see the other two, but I am disappointed.

Posted on Jan 2, 2013, 1:36:22 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 2, 2013, 1:58:34 PM PST
T. Delaveaux says:
Saw the 2D version last weekend. Attention to visual detail was wonderful, some of the add-ons (like the introduction with the history of the Lonely Mountain) were welcome. But the entire second half of the movie was wasted by Jackson's stupid brawling fetish. An hour and a half of forgettable cartoonish violence, followed by a flight, followed by maybe 5 seconds of "poignant" dialog to shift the plot forward, repeat.

I'm not against violence in a movie at all (Jackson's treatment of Helm's Deep in LOTR was great), but none of this stuff stuck with me. It's so generic and tedious. It's not worth a damn, and it sucks all the screentime and pacing into a black hole of mediocrity. And constant violence makes the plot armor around the characters so clear that the adventure feels LESS dangerous.

Jackson I think is falling into the same mental problems as GRRM; as they get older they fall into self-indulgent "ruts" and their titanic reputation makes it unlikely that editors will find the balls to do their job.

Posted on Jan 2, 2013, 7:42:31 PM PST
But the movie had a HEDGEHOG in it. I'm a big fan of hedgehogs.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 2, 2013, 8:10:49 PM PST
Derek says:
But do you remember the most famous hedgehog of them all?
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Participants:  8
Total posts:  10
Initial post:  Dec 18, 2012
Latest post:  Jan 2, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.

This discussion is about
A Dance with Dragons
A Dance with Dragons by George R. R. Martin (Hardcover - 2011)
4.3 out of 5 stars (9,666)