The Hobbit

[Kaos Arcanna]

I was dreading the arrival of 11/30, but now that the worst has hit us I'm looking forward to seeing The Hobbit.

Anyone else looking forward to it?

[FatherXmas]

Yes but still probably not going to see it in 3D or IMax or Imax 3D or any other way they can stick a surcharge on top of the high cost of tickets already. 

I'm betting a good number of 3D systems in theaters don't quite work right with the new 48FPS 3D recording.

[JWBullfrog]

A long time ago, my single most persistant hobby began with the words...
 
In a hole in the ground, lived a Hobbit...
 
I probably won't pay out the ludicrous sums of money for 3D or any of that nonsense but I do have every intention of seeing this film.

[Tenzhi]

I'm looking forward to this movie, but I find it strange that they made one movie per book for The Lord of the Rings and yet they're dividing The Hobbit - which is shorter on its own than any one of the Lord of the Rings books - into three separate movies.  Even with adding in the stuff with the Necromancer that seems crazy to me.

There's been a fair amount of speculation between me and my friends about where they'll be dividing the movies.  I'm personally hoping the first one ends with the eagles, with the second one opening with the recap to Beorn.  The second movie, then, might end at the fall of Smaug.

[Kaos Arcanna]

My guess is the first movie will end with them arriving at Laketown. The second one will be about Gandalf fighting the Necromancer. The third will deal with Smaug.

[pewlagon]

The third will deal with Thorin's greed and the battle at the Lonely mountain. Thanks to Rankin a lot of people forget that after Smaug is actually fairly detailed and leads to a rather epic fight. Thank goodness Mr. Jackson wanted to see Beorn wae into that battle as much as the rest of us else he might have been written out of the movie like he was the cartoon.

[Mental Maden]

3D makes me feel like I have a red hot ice pick inserted into an eyeball and sticking out the back of my head.

Really looking forward to this though.

[Portland Underground]

I am so looking forward to it!  Doing the midnight showing.  I'm also hoping for either a Star Trek or new Iron Man trailer.  Oh...and a Man of Steel!

Ahhhhhh, holiday nerdtastic nerdawesomeness.   

[FatherXmas]

This article highlights the perceived problems with the new 48fps version.

Have we've been conditioned on a subconscious level to separate "quality" by frame rate?  Most of the negative comments deal with how it 48fps makes it look like a hidef TV program or home video.  It makes the film look too real so the viewer can't escape into the fantasy where the slower 24fps allows the viewer to suspend disbelief easier.  Or it's just the bunch of movie snobs who feel this way and the masses won't even notice?  We'll see.

[fdbryant3]

I'm betting that the first film will end shortly after Bilbo's encounter with Gollum.  The second film will end after the defeat of Smaug and the siege of the Lonely Mountain.  The third film will cover the Battle of the Five Armies plus whatever bridge they will be building to the Lord of the Ring.

[Vasarto]

I am really looking forward to watching this in theaters. Dunno when I am gonna go see it though.

[Maressa]

So....


I just saw the movie. I promise, I won't spoil anything for a few days at least. I'm not a fan of 3d in movies but I have to say it was really well done. No cheesy gimmicks of things popping out of the screen. Instead it gave the movie a depth. It made it feel more like you were actually there in New Zealand...I mean Middle Earth. I did get a small headache, especially during fighting scenes. But it wasn't all that bad really.

I will say, that I didn't enjoy it. I walked out feeling the most disappointed in seeing a movie that I ever have. I'm not a fan of the books, I've not read any of the Lord of the Rings books. I did enjoy the movies. But this movie to me had a lot of problems.  As promised I won't give away plot or even talk about my issues with the movie in relation to anything but the cinematography.

90% of the time it felt like I was watching a cheap, poorly done documentary that insisted on being "edgy and cool" by having 3d CG. It's really the only way I can think of to describe it. 48fps was the wrong way to go.

Other than that though, I can't wait to see what other people think of the movie. But if the theater attendant was anything to go off...I don't think it will get many favorable reviews.

 

[Tenzhi]

I don't think you need to worry too much about spoilers.  This is a 70+ year old, widely read story.

[FatherXmas]

Just got back from my midnight showing.  Simple 2D.  It seems that if you went all out with the IMAX 3D or HFR 3D, you got a nifty poster at the door.

On one level, it feels like (and I'll going to get flack about this description) Peter Jackson's Phantom Menace.  Yes The Hobbit is a children's story so I can see why a times it went for the cheap tween/pre-tween gag.  On another level it feels like a reunion show (Return to Middle Earth).  Look it's old Bilbo and Frodo.  Look it Elron, Galadriel and Saruman.  Then there's the sight seeing tour of some of the old haunts (look it's Rivendell ... shh, it's only a model).  Toss in twenty minutes of far shots of real people walking on real landscapes and CGI people walking on CGI landscapes another twenty minutes of history lessons, the addition of The Doctor # 7 ... OK Radagast the Brown sequence with a hedgehog, well the movie drags at places.  However the last half an hour or so is very exciting and somewhat intense for young ones.

Then you have the cast of Dwarves.  Sorry as hard as I try it's to easy to remember some of them by only their signature characteristic.  The Leader Thorin, the youngest one, the one with the fluffy white beard, the deaf one, the bowman, the bald one, the fat one , etc.  Too many names, too much alike.  At least with the 9 in LotR there was enough uniqueness to remember everyone, plus they were introduced at a much slower pace.

The movie ends BTW just after the eagles rescues everyone from the orcs.

Overall it was an OK film.  Even though some of the humor I feel is directed at tweens and pre-tweens, the orc sequences are vary violent and potentially very scary for the young.  That and the run time of 2 hours 40 minutes excluding the end credits isn't for the young set either.

[Tenzhi]

Then you have the cast of Dwarves.  Sorry as hard as I try it's to easy to remember some of them by only their signature characteristic.  The Leader Thorin, the youngest one, the one with the fluffy white beard, the deaf one, the bowman, the bald one, the fat one , etc.  Too many names, too much alike.  At least with the 9 in LotR there was enough uniqueness to remember everyone, plus they were introduced at a much slower pace.

This makes me wonder if you've read the book, as the dwarves are distinguishable in much the same manner therein, with perhaps the addition of variously coloured hoods to help out. 

Off the top of my head, the names I can remember are: Thorin, Oin, Gloin, Bifur, Bofur, Bombur, Balin, Dwalin, Fili, and Kili...  which leaves me three dwarves shy.  I suppose that's not bad for having not read the book in roughly 10 years (alas, I fell out of the habit of reading the Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings at least once a year).

[Hyperstrike]

Okay.  Went and saw it this morning in the high framerate 3D.

The HF version DOES have a different visual quality to it.  Until I see it again in its regular format, I won't really be able to draw a comparison.

I will say, the 3D in the HF version was VERY unobtrusive  No "and now THREE DEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!" moments that break up the flow of the film.  This is the first 3D show I've ever walked out of without a headache.

There's some expansion (and incorporation of ancillary material) to stretch the film.  And doing so does remove some of the mystery of just who some of these people are.  However, it does help people who aren't necessarily steeped in the lore of Middle Earth.  That and a straight retelling of the story would have resulted in a single movie.  Which probably wouldn't have had the leisure of time to do the story justice.

Spoiler for Hidden:

While the appearance of Radagast was somewhat superfluous, and a bit ridiculous, it's good to see Sylvester McCoy on a screen again.
The actual telling of the story of "Oakensheild" was well done.  I'm just disappointed that they stepped back from showing the fact that it was actually a glimpse of the Balrog that convinced them to retreat.
The grotesque orc king was a bit out of place.  But funny!
The fact that much of the audience is informed about "The One Ring" definitely changes the pitch of Bilbo's appearance after escaping Gollum.

[FatherXmas]

1) It's been a long, long time since I read the book.

B) A movie goer shouldn't have too.

III) The movie at times makes it seem that Gandalf has a problem putting their names to their faces.

Plus you are talking to the guy who remembers the primary cast names on Revolution as Uncle Scrapper, Katniss Clone, Google and (the somewhat lengthy) "we couldn't get Michelle Rodriguez for this part".  :p

[Tenzhi]

1) It's been a long, long time since I read the book.

B) A movie goer shouldn't have too.

Reading the book wouldn't necessarily help one keep them sorted any better, I was saying that they're equally confussable in the book.  And that the book thus makes ample use of those traits you mention to help tell them apart.  If that's how you're keeping up with them in the movie it is a positive trait.

[FatherXmas]

Ah, my bad.

[Vasarto]

I kinda want to go see it but I do not have the money for it right now.