Author |
Message |
Drew Linky
Wizard
Joined: Jun 12 2009
Posts: 4209
|
I once wondered what it would have been like if Sauron chose something other than a ring to manifest his power in. Like, say, a scarf.
I would be all over that shit.
|
https://discord.gg/homestuck is where you can find me literally 99% of the time. Stop on by if you feel like it, we're a nice crowd. |
|
|
|
JoshWoodzy
Joined: May 22 2008
Location: Goshen, VA
Posts: 6544
|
|
|
|
i'll_bite_your_ear
Title: Distillatoria
Joined: Jun 09 2010
Location: van down by the river
Posts: 3707
|
Drew Linky wrote: |
I once wondered what it would have been like if Sauron chose something other than a ring to manifest his power in. Like, say, a scarf.
I would be all over that shit. |
Uhm, Lord of the Scarfs? That sounds like the gayest movie ever.
|
it was the best of times
it was the blurst of times |
|
|
|
LeshLush
Joined: Oct 19 2009
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 1479
|
Went to midnight showing with friends. Walked out half-way through. First time I've ever walked out of a film before. This was absolutely terrible.
|
|
|
|
|
JoshWoodzy
Joined: May 22 2008
Location: Goshen, VA
Posts: 6544
|
LeshLush wrote: |
Went to midnight showing with friends. Walked out half-way through. First time I've ever walked out of a film before. This was absolutely terrible. |
I've had multiple friends separately compare it to "The Phantom Menace" of the franchise. They said it just wasn't very good, especially when compared to the other three movies.
|
|
|
|
|
username
Title: owner of a lonely heart
Joined: Jul 06 2007
Location: phoenix, az usa
Posts: 16125
|
that bad, huh? that sucks. i was going to take my niece to that later on today
|
Klimbatize wrote: |
I'll eat a turkey sandwich while blowing my load |
|
|
|
|
SoldierHawk
Moderator
Title: Warrior-Poet
Joined: Jan 15 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 6085
|
JoshWoodzy wrote: |
LeshLush wrote: |
Went to midnight showing with friends. Walked out half-way through. First time I've ever walked out of a film before. This was absolutely terrible. |
I've had multiple friends separately compare it to "The Phantom Menace" of the franchise. They said it just wasn't very good, especially when compared to the other three movies. |
Awww really? REALLY? Granted it isn't, and was never going to be, the second coming of LOtR, and granted it had some unnecessary (and unnecessarily extended) action sequences (really, the dwarves charging into battle three times in three hours is about my limit, and it was handily violated here), but it was still beautiful, a great story, good dialog, and Martin Freeman owned the everloving SHIT out of playing Bilbo. I enjoyed myself quite a bit, and have no problem seeing it another time or two this weekend. For Freeman and Ian McKellen if nothing else.
I do miss having partly real orcs though, I have to say. Full CGI on those guys really loses something.
|
William Shakespeare wrote: |
Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none. |
|
|
|
|
sidewaydriver
2010 SLF Tag Champ
Title: ( ͡� 
Joined: May 11 2008
Posts: 6160
|
The movie was awful. There were extremely huge continuity errors. For instance, since this is Lord of the Rings part 4, they had that Gollum guy and the ring in the movie. But they fell into the volcano at the end of the last movie. How stupid do the filmmakers have to be to forget that? The movie didn't make any sense.
|
Shake it, Quake it, Space Kaboom. |
|
|
|
slapolakinkaido
Title: Illegitimate Son of God
Joined: Jul 14 2009
Posts: 1565
|
I can't wait to buy the DVD release with 15 hours of extra footage!
|
|
|
|
|
username
Title: owner of a lonely heart
Joined: Jul 06 2007
Location: phoenix, az usa
Posts: 16125
|
SoldierHawk wrote: |
JoshWoodzy wrote: |
LeshLush wrote: |
Went to midnight showing with friends. Walked out half-way through. First time I've ever walked out of a film before. This was absolutely terrible. |
I've had multiple friends separately compare it to "The Phantom Menace" of the franchise. They said it just wasn't very good, especially when compared to the other three movies. |
Awww really? REALLY? Granted it isn't, and was never going to be, the second coming of LOtR, and granted it had some unnecessary (and unnecessarily extended) action sequences (really, the dwarves charging into battle three times in three hours is about my limit, and it was handily violated here), but it was still beautiful, a great story, good dialog, and Martin Freeman owned the everloving SHIT out of playing Bilbo. I enjoyed myself quite a bit, and have no problem seeing it another time or two this weekend. For Freeman and Ian McKellen if nothing else.
I do miss having partly real orcs though, I have to say. Full CGI on those guys really loses something. |
im with you SH. i enjoyed this movie. granted, there were a few instances were it was beyond silly & clearly aimed at kids, but otherwise nothing as bad as phantom menace. no jar jar (thank god) or annoying kids running around.
great scenery, cinematography, music. its still the weakest of the 4 movies so far, but nothing as bad as you guys make it seem.
my niece kept falling asleep thru out the movie though lol
|
Klimbatize wrote: |
I'll eat a turkey sandwich while blowing my load |
|
|
|
|
Drew Linky
Wizard
Joined: Jun 12 2009
Posts: 4209
|
username wrote: |
SoldierHawk wrote: |
JoshWoodzy wrote: |
LeshLush wrote: |
Went to midnight showing with friends. Walked out half-way through. First time I've ever walked out of a film before. This was absolutely terrible. |
I've had multiple friends separately compare it to "The Phantom Menace" of the franchise. They said it just wasn't very good, especially when compared to the other three movies. |
Awww really? REALLY? Granted it isn't, and was never going to be, the second coming of LOtR, and granted it had some unnecessary (and unnecessarily extended) action sequences (really, the dwarves charging into battle three times in three hours is about my limit, and it was handily violated here), but it was still beautiful, a great story, good dialog, and Martin Freeman owned the everloving SHIT out of playing Bilbo. I enjoyed myself quite a bit, and have no problem seeing it another time or two this weekend. For Freeman and Ian McKellen if nothing else.
I do miss having partly real orcs though, I have to say. Full CGI on those guys really loses something. |
im with you SH. i enjoyed this movie. granted, there were a few instances were it was beyond silly & clearly aimed at kids, but otherwise nothing as bad as phantom menace. no jar jar (thank god) or annoying kids running around.
great scenery, cinematography, music. its still the weakest of the 4 movies so far, but nothing as bad as you guys make it seem.
my niece kept falling asleep thru out the movie though lol |
I have to agree that it's comparable to the Phantom Menace of the series, but not on such a severe level. It's not as good as the others, but to be perfectly honest it's a pretty huge seat to fill. Some of it seemed unnecessary, and there are way too many close shaves, it sort of dispelled the suspension of disbelief.
That having been said, it's still incredibly enjoyable. You just have to keep yourself from raising your expectations too incredibly high.
|
https://discord.gg/homestuck is where you can find me literally 99% of the time. Stop on by if you feel like it, we're a nice crowd. |
|
|
|
ProtoScott
Title: New Robot Prototype
Joined: Jul 19 2010
Location: Ft. Wayne, IN
Posts: 213
|
I really enjoyed the movie. It was such a different style from LotR that I didn't even really think about the other films while I was watching it, and just enjoyed it as its own more kiddy fantasy movie.
|
Where's Doctor Wiley... Oh no, too late.
My band's music can be heard here ---->http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/pages/FELD/365363305503
http://useblogswisely.blogspot.com/ <------READ MY WRITINGS HERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (or not. I don't care.) |
|
|
|
username
Title: owner of a lonely heart
Joined: Jul 06 2007
Location: phoenix, az usa
Posts: 16125
|
ProtoScott wrote: |
I really enjoyed the movie. It was such a different style from LotR that I didn't even really think about the other films while I was watching it, and just enjoyed it as its own more kiddy fantasy movie. |
thats exactly what it is.
definitely more light hearted and silly than the LotR trilogy... so comparing the 2 isnt fair. its 2 different types of movies set in the same universe.
|
Klimbatize wrote: |
I'll eat a turkey sandwich while blowing my load |
|
|
|
|
LeshLush
Joined: Oct 19 2009
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 1479
|
EDIT: WALL OF TEXT ALERT!
In my opinion, there was absolutely no sense of narrative or pace. It felt like Peter Jackson was far more interested in telling the extraneous aspects things than the actual story. It took an entire hour to leave the Shire. An hour! Why in the world would you take a full sixty minutes just to leave the Shire?
Every time we flashed back to dwarven stuff or stopped to look at Radagast being silly or had a council of the white, the whole movie ground to a halt. I thought that the diversions also weakened the main story, particularly the intro at The Lonely Mountain (also, why are we exclusively referring to The Lonely Mountain as Erebor? I thought this was The Hobbit Part 1, not The Appendices: The Movie). Part of what makes The Hobbit such a strong novel is the way it begins. Bilbo is enjoying a pipe, a wizard tells him that he's going to go on an adventure, a bunch of dwarves invite themselves into his home and his larder, and then they're off. We get to experience the world as he does. Giving us a big wide angle look at the world from the very beginning, and then again every fifteen minutes, divorces us from Bilbo as a character.
Almost all of the best science fiction and fantasy literature starts by looking up close at one small area that the main characters know well, and then slowly expanding outward. In addition to The Hobbit and LOTR, which both do this with the Shire, Lewis does it with Professor Kirk's house in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, George R. R. Martin with Winterfell in A Game of Thrones, Herbert with Caladan in Dune. I could go on forever. It's how authors anchor readers from our world into the world of their creation, making it feel like a real place instead of just a map on the inside cover.
There was also tone whiplash all over the place. One moment Radagast is acting like somebody out of a Hannah Barbera cartoon, the next, Azog is brutally ripping off Thror's head and throwing it across a battlefield. If you're gonna make a kid's movie, make a kid's movie. If you're gonna make I Can't Believe It's Not LOTR, do that. But you can't do both.
The other thing that got on my nerves was the huge disparity between tone of dialogue/narration that was lifted straight from Tolkien, and that was written for the film. All of a sudden I would think to myself, "Where did those three sentences of glorious prose spring up from all of a sudden?" But then we'd be right back to Thorin asking Bilbo "Sword or axe, what is your personal combat weapon of choice?" or old Bilbo telling Frodo "Where sickness grows, bad things follow."
Lastly, I hated what to me seemed a quest to provide fanservice at the expense of making a good movie. So many times they tried to recreate shots from the old films that didn't really fit in this one, and drew me out of the movie because it felt so blatant. Gandalf standing up at the table to tear down Thorin was shot exactly like Gandalf speaking the Black Speech in Rivendell. Panning helicopter shots of a line of people walking across a hill. Reuse of the old score to force familiar emotional reactions at every turn. Etc.
Those are my criticisms of the film in and of itself. I could also nerd out and criticize things that were changed from the book and why I think the book's idea of things was superior, but 1.) that would take forever, 2.) I doubt you guys want to see me go there and plumb the depths of literary nerdiness, and 3.) philosophically, I like to think that an adaption ought to be able to stand on it's own.
I hope I didn't offend anybody who liked the movie, and I'm glad you all had enjoyable times, but most people seemed to disagree with my initial assessment, so I thought I'd give an honest and fairly thorough accounting of why I felt this way to defend my stance and also in case anybody was curious.
On positive note, out of the first two hours that I saw, I did enjoy the actor who played Bilbo, the gorgeous outdoor shots, Balin and Dwalin, and the Great Goblin's hilarious Goiter Beard/Chin Scrotum.
|
|
|
|
|
username
Title: owner of a lonely heart
Joined: Jul 06 2007
Location: phoenix, az usa
Posts: 16125
|
thats a fair assessment & defense of your position. i cant argue against those points. wont change my opinion of the movie, but i can understand your critique.
|
Klimbatize wrote: |
I'll eat a turkey sandwich while blowing my load |
|
|
|
|
SoldierHawk
Moderator
Title: Warrior-Poet
Joined: Jan 15 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 6085
|
Lesh, while I completely understand your critiques and acknowledge that pretty much everything you said was dead on, I still adored the hell out of the movie in spite of (and occasionally because of) its flaws. However, this I have to comment on:
LeshLush wrote: |
Panning helicopter shots of a line of people walking across a hill. |
Peter Jackson could make a three hour movie consisting of NOTHING but those shots, and I would pay $20 to see it. Without a thought. I know they're overused and manipulative, but god DAMN they're beautiful. I just never get tired of them, ever.
|
William Shakespeare wrote: |
Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none. |
|
|
|
|
Lady_Satine
Title: Head of Lexian R&D
Joined: Oct 15 2005
Location: Metro area, Georgia
Posts: 7287
|
On the note of reusing stuff from the Trilogy, was that intended to be Weathertop (where Strider was with the Hobbits and the Nazgul strike) or just a close resemblance?
|
"Life is a waste of time. Time is a waste of life. Get wasted all the time, and you'll have the time of your life!" |
|
|
|
Black Zarak
Title: Big Coffin Hunter
Joined: Feb 01 2006
Location: Phyrexia
Posts: 4098
|
I actually saw a movie in theaters in a time frame where I can discuss it and still be relevant! I just saw this the other night in 3-D, it was also my first 3-D movie by the way.
Thoughts (may be slightly spoilerish):
I liked it quite a bit, though at times it kind of felt less stirring and epic and "more of the same." It was by no means bad, but there weren't any goosebump-inducing moments like the Balrog's appearance in The Fellowship (well, except maybe when Radagast encounters the necromancer and is nearly killed by the Witch King, I do love the Nazgul...) and while the music was still great, it didn't have the same epic feel a lot of the music from the trilogy had. Like the party's theme music isn't nearly as bombastic and moving as the The Fellowship's theme was. Still, the story was engrossing and I didn't ever check my watch during the three hour run, and I don't think I've ever been to a movie where I didn't check my watch at some point. There were also some scenes that it was an undeniable pleasure to see on big screen, like the trolls and when they're taken by the dawn. I always loved the old Rankin Bass Hobbit cartoon movie as a kid and it was a bit of a thrill to see my favorite scenes from that childhood memory play out in live action with a huge budget so they look fantastic.
The visuals and character/location designs were beautiful as always and some effects definitely benefited from the more advanced current CG compared to the trilogy era effects. The Wargs for example, looked a lot better with smoother fur patterns and reflective eyes. The Goblin King was at once both gross and almost charming, when he bows to Thorin and greets him mockingly as King Under the Mountain is great. He also really reminded me of if Denethor really let himself go, which made me chuckle.
I've heard a lot of negative comments about how Jackson made the movie "too dark." Since the book is supposed to be a more light-hearted story about a band of companions (and after accepting Bilbo, friends) on a grand adventure and that adding the subplot with Azog adds a serious, dark aspect a lot of fans don't like. I've also seen a lot of people complaining about the Azog subplot being in there just to pad the movie and add tension where there isn't any in the book, making it easier to stretch it into three movies. The first argument I just don't see as humor abounds (but thankfully doesn't ever get stale) throughout the movie, while the second I can understand but makes me ask, so what? The movie WOULD have been a lot more boring and shorter without Azog hunting them, but why would you want that? I'm not entirely up to date on all the details of Middle Earth's history, but it's my understanding that Azog DID swear to wipe out Thorin and his bloodline, though somewhat indirectly as I believe in the books he vows to wipe out ALL dwarves and the movie just makes the feud more personal. Seeing as how they weave this subplot pretty seamlessly into the events that actually occur in the book (i.e., the Goblin King mentioning Azog's offer of a reward for the dwarves when they're captured, Azog being the commander of the Warg riders who tree the party towards the end, etc.), I didn't mind it all. Plus it serves as sequel hook because you want to see this score get settled for good.
The acting is pretty great from all the players, but it was so awesome to hear Ian McKellen spouting Gandalfisms again! Kate Blanchett somehow looks even hotter as Galadriel than she did in the trilogy, Christopher Lee chews the scenery while being obviously so very evil, Hugo Weaving is great as always and the way they tied into The Fellowship with a bit of Elijah Wood showing up was a great framing device (I think that's the right term for it.) Really though, Martin Freeman steals the show. I was a little wary when I first saw him in trailers, etc, but he kills throughout his entire performance, he perfectly captures the essence of a Hobbit with adventurous roots fighting with his more comfy, home-bound side and everything from the looks he gets when stuck in a situation he sees no way out of to the way he bravely (yet completely inexperiencedly) fights endears you to the character. The movie probably could have just been three hours of Gandalf and Bilbo quipping back and forth and I still would have loved it, the two have great chemistry.
The dwarves were cool, but they do suffer a little from lack of characterization beyond "the fat one", "the young one", etc. That can be forgiven though as it's just the first of three movies and they were more concerned with fleshing out Thorin and his closest advisers within the party first. Sometimes I'd forget that the majority of characters in the film were dwarves, so during some of the fight scenes I'd be thinking "Wow, those orcs are HUGE!" until I remembered they were normal sized, just fighting short foes. It works though, because they seem all the more intimidating for their difference in size next to the dwarves. I also liked how Azog's prosthetic was essentially a sharpened spike of iron driven into the stump of his arm, a barbed point sticking out near his elbow shows that the procedure to attach it was just as violent as you'd expect orc surgery to be.
Finally, as this was my first 3-D movie, so 3-D thoughts! Most of it was pretty subtle, just enough to give the characters and scenary depth, but the parts that popped out, popped WAY out and I'll admit they caught me a few times. One part that really fooled me was during the beginning exposition on the fall of the Erebor, when the dwarven king is looking out over his treasure room in the background and Thorin (I think?) slips in the foreground from off-screen, I was about to yell at the guy who was walking in front of my view of the screen until I realized it was the 3-D. When the eagles save them at the end, there is a shot where I kinda jumped because it's set up so one of the eagles appears to fly in right over your shoulder. The final 3-D scene that really stuck with me was when Smaug's eye opens at the very end; Before it even opened I was amazed at how pebbly and contoured the closed lid looked, trhen the eye opens and wow. So much detail and so much depth! You can see the depth of the wrinkling in the dragon's iris, it's like actually staring into someone's eye at extremely close range.
Overall, I liked the first section of The Hobbit quite a bit. It has allayed my fears that it would just be a soulless cash grab trying to recapture the first trilogy's thunder and I am eagerly awaiting the next installment, the darkening of Mirkwood should be really cool to see on screen.
|
REVIEWS, LEGOS, NONSENSE Check out Zarak's Barracks!
"Let that be a lesson to you, your family and everyone you've ever known..."
"Thanks to denial, I'm immortal!" |
|
|
|
Thorton02
Joined: Mar 13 2009
Location: Arlington
Posts: 467
|
I thought the movie was good enough. The whole Azog thing is crap, but I can look past it since most of the rest of the movie is good....with one big exception:
How the hell did they go from the Trollshaws to ROHAN and then find a hole in the ground that leads them to Rivendell? A treeless plain does not exist west of Rivendell, unless they took some crazy ass route to findthemselves north east of Imladris. It was tough to suspend belief for that scene.
|
No, I don't think I will fuck Stummies. |
|
|
|
@om*d
Title: Dorakyura
Joined: Jul 10 2010
Location: Castlevania
Posts: 4224
|
Saw it and enjoyed it. I could add more, but everything else has been pretty much said already.
|
|
|
|
|
i'll_bite_your_ear
Title: Distillatoria
Joined: Jun 09 2010
Location: van down by the river
Posts: 3707
|
Didn't see it and enjoy it so far.
|
it was the best of times
it was the blurst of times |
|
|
|
GPFontaine
Joined: Dec 06 2007
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 11244
|
Saw it last Friday night. It was for all intents and purposes the same format as The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring.
The only complaint I have is that large groups of mythological dwarves are irksome to me. So therefore I feel bad for Bilbo and Gandolf most of the time.
|
|
|
|
|
Black Zarak
Title: Big Coffin Hunter
Joined: Feb 01 2006
Location: Phyrexia
Posts: 4098
|
Thorton02 wrote: |
How the hell did they go from the Trollshaws to ROHAN and then find a hole in the ground that leads them to Rivendell? A treeless plain does not exist west of Rivendell, unless they took some crazy ass route to findthemselves north east of Imladris. It was tough to suspend belief for that scene. |
Seriously? The terrain not completely matching Tolkien's map bothered you?
|
REVIEWS, LEGOS, NONSENSE Check out Zarak's Barracks!
"Let that be a lesson to you, your family and everyone you've ever known..."
"Thanks to denial, I'm immortal!" |
|
|
|
i'll_bite_your_ear
Title: Distillatoria
Joined: Jun 09 2010
Location: van down by the river
Posts: 3707
|
Black Zarak wrote: |
Thorton02 wrote: |
How the hell did they go from the Trollshaws to ROHAN and then find a hole in the ground that leads them to Rivendell? A treeless plain does not exist west of Rivendell, unless they took some crazy ass route to findthemselves north east of Imladris. It was tough to suspend belief for that scene. |
Seriously? The terrain not completely matching Tolkien's map bothered you? |
He lives there, guess that's why it bothers him so much.
|
it was the best of times
it was the blurst of times |
|
|
|
i'll_bite_your_ear
Title: Distillatoria
Joined: Jun 09 2010
Location: van down by the river
Posts: 3707
|
Ok, i watched it today and i have to say it's great. It surprised me in many ways. There is lots of action, more than in the LotR Films, there are some well made characters, the scenerys are awesome and many scenes just blow you away with their epicness. Overall, i really liked it and there is not much you could not like about it if you ask me.
|
it was the best of times
it was the blurst of times |
|
|
|
|
|