|
Jerusalem posted:This is completely and totally inaccurate, by the way. I died seeing that little dude! He reminded me of something out of Labyrinth or something.
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:59 |
|
|
al-azad posted:Every scene in the book is covered almost to the letter and then they shovel a second and third helping of stuff that never happened. That's not entirely true. All of the extraneous "stuff that never happened" was based on events written in Lord of the Rings that provided more of a back story to the events in The Hobbit. The whole necromancer subplot did happen, although the timing of certain events were different in the book and it was greatly simplified. Also, the whole Azog subplot was in the appendices, though also simplified in the films and Azog did indeed die in the battle of Moria. Gianthogweed fucked around with this message at 00:55 on Dec 15, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:15
|
|
|
Gianthogweed posted:That's arguable. The whole necromancer subplot did happen, although it wasn't explored until the Lord of the Rings. Also, the whole Azog subplot was in the appendices, although he died in the battle of Moria. Arguably they have hosed with the chronology of the Necromancer subplot to such an extent that no, it didn't happen. At least not in the shambling hosed up fashion that Jackson has decided to portray it as.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:18
|
|
|
Rime posted:Arguably they have hosed with the chronology of the Necromancer subplot to such an extent that no, it didn't happen. At least not in the shambling hosed up fashion that Jackson has decided to portray it as. It was simplified for the film, but the story is essentially the same.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:19
|
|
|
marktheando posted:Yes, I meant that Christopher Tolkien really hates the movies, even disowning his son for supporting the LOTR movies. This is fascinating. Where can I read about this in particular?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:20
|
|
|
Kneel Before Zog posted:This is fascinating. Where can I read about this in particular? Here's an article- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1422943/J-R-R-Tolkiens-grandson-cut-off-from-literary-inheritance.html I respect Christopher Tolkien for what he's done to preserve his father's writings, but what an arsehole.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:27
|
|
|
Guigui posted:Wow - I have to admit, I am having mixed feelings about this movie. The acting is great, especially Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggins. But really, everyone was great. The characters were much more relateable than many of the LOTR characters, and there was more humor, which is a good thing imo. This movie had a lot more heart than the LOTR films, which is a difficult achievement since I feel LOTR had a lot of heart as well. And I think that's due mainly to the characters being much more relateable. There were no invincible badasses. They all seemed very believable as real people in real danger. The cinemaography was excellent, the 48 fps really works well during the outdoor scenes especially with the frequent panning over the beautiful landscapes. I don't think the 48 fps works as well with the set pieces though, it definitely has that stage play look at times. The makeup is great, as one would expect from seeing the LOTR movies. I especially liked how each dwarf had a unique look to them. The story is wonderfully told. Every scene in the first part of the book is covered, and in some cases expanded upon. They also added some of the backstory that was revealed in The Lord of the Rings (namely the necromancer subplot, as well as the past history of the Dwarves and their war with Azog). These subplots were simplified, and the chronology was changed a bit, but otherwise it's extremely faithful to the book. There were some complaints that it was paced poorly and stretched to thin, but I disagree strongly with this opinion. I felt the pacing was perfect of the type of epic tale they were trying to tell. The only moment where I felt they expanded too much was in the rock giant scene. This scene was only a paragraph in the book, but Jackson felt the need to extend and dramatize it much more than necessary. Still, it's a great scene to watch in 3D. I saw the film with some friends who never read the books and they found the story very easy to follow, and entertaining to boot. There were no dull moments. Gianthogweed fucked around with this message at 00:49 on Dec 15, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:28
|
|
|
Rime posted:Arguably they have hosed with the chronology of the Necromancer subplot to such an extent that no, it didn't happen. At least not in the shambling hosed up fashion that Jackson has decided to portray it as.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:30
|
|
|
marktheando posted:Here's an article- It should be noted that he and his son reconciled. Years ago.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:32
|
|
|
Saw it in HFR last night, not a fan of it. For certain moments like fleeing Dwarves running in Erebor and Bilbo taking off/putting on his coat it seemed like it sped up Benny Hill style. Other than that it just felt like those Asian historical dramas with warriors and rulers in costumes talking, with way better props and makeup. I don't think it will catch on, and I plan to own the movies in the standard 24fps. I went into it as really skeptical of how they were going to stretch it out to three movies. As a straight from the book adaptation it felt about as solid as you could want. Choices like Thranduil at Erebor, Bilbo saving Thorin's life, Radagast investigating Dol Guldur, Azog being the big bad didn't bother me all too much as they seemed to hit the proper notes thematically in why we were supposed to care about these characters as well as foreshadowing what is to come. You want to say Erebor was the most powerful kingdom in Middle Earth? Fine by me, it's a story about these big important characters in this big important moment, so I'm willing to look past all that. Unexpected emotional moments: Bilbo telling Thorin he would help take back their home, and Gandalf's speech to Galadriel about the reasons Bilbo is with them. The way the movie opens didn't feel jarring but I really really love the Extended FOTR opening, with Bilbo beginning There and Back again, and launching into "Concerning Hobbits". Small nerdy nitpicky things I liked: that tiny goblin scribe, and the Goblin King's improbably cultured voice pretty much sum up the tone of the film. Jackson recreating the trolls, and a shot of Gollum on his island exactly as they appear in the earlier/extended versions of LOTR was pretty neat. I half expected ahot of Martin Freeman fumbling around and finding the ring exactly as Bilbo did in the prologue. I'm guessing there will be a healthy contingent of fans who will like the tone and imagery of this trilogy over LOTR. Oh and androgynous king Thranduil on his giant gently caress off reindeer will be a Deviantart/fanfic phenomenom if he isn't already.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:32
|
|
|
Rime posted:It should be noted that he and his son reconciled. Years ago. Oh really? Well that's good to hear.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:34
|
|
|
Rime posted:Arguably they have hosed with the chronology of the Necromancer subplot to such an extent that no, it didn't happen. At least not in the shambling hosed up fashion that Jackson has decided to portray it as. Would you stop saying this poo poo? Its pretty clear they are making the whole Necromancer mystery a big plot point in this trilogy and I guarantee you the scene where Gandalf gets the map and the key from Thrain will appear in a flashback in the next film thus sealing any "plot hole" you think exists. They showed that scene in the OG trailer, and they probably pushed it back to the second film after making the decision to make it a trilogy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:36
|
|
|
Even if there isn't a flashback, Gandalf obtaining them offscreen isn't a plot hole.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:37
|
|
|
AccountSupervisor posted:Would you stop saying this poo poo? For it to be a flashback would be literally impossible in this new world they've created for themselves, so no, I won't shut up. Boo hoo, I didn't like the movie and what they've done to the plot. "Won't you just go away Rime, and let us circlejerk in peace?" What is this, Reddit?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:38
|
|
|
Rime posted:For it to be a flashback would be literally impossible in this new world they've created for themselves, so no, I won't shut up. Boo hoo, I didn't like the movie and what they've done to the plot. "Won't you just go away Rime, and let us circlejerk in peace?" What is this, Reddit? How would it be impossible exactly? Also I could give a poo poo less if you didnt like the movie but you are making GBS threads a brick over the tiniest plot rearrangement, its just reeks of sperg.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:40
|
|
|
AccountSupervisor posted:How would it be impossible exactly? Why would Gandalf have a flashback involving a place he hasn't even been to yet?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:41
|
|
|
Rime posted:Why would Gandalf have a flashback involving a place he hasn't even been to yet? Where in the film did they state he hasnt been there?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:41
|
|
|
Rime posted:For it to be a flashback would be literally impossible in this new world they've created for themselves, so no, I won't shut up. Boo hoo, I didn't like the movie and what they've done to the plot. "Won't you just go away Rime, and let us circlejerk in peace?" What is this, Reddit? What makes it impossible? There are a million ways Gandalf could have gotten the key.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:43
|
|
|
AccountSupervisor posted:Where in the film did they state he hasnt been there? Where he has a long conversation with Radagast, is entirely unaware that anything evil is going on in "The old elf fortress", says it's been abandoned for centuries, and is completely ignorant of the existence of the Necromancer?" Yeah, that part.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:44
|
|
|
Darko posted:Most of the reviews, positive and negative say the main complaint is that the film is overly, and transparently bloated and drawn out, making it a chore to watch, overall. It's not "all bad"; it's just not very good, with a few bright spots - is the common consensus. I had no dog in the hunt, went in expecting mild disappointment and absolutely loved it. My 14 yo nephew, not a geek, never read the book, loved it. My 72 yo mum, ditto. It's not a fanboys vs the world scenario here. Its just a good movie with related aspects (48 fps, 3 films for 1 book) that have smothered the film itself. I mean hell see it for Freeman's performance if nothing else because everyone agrees he's great. ^^ So he got the key from the black tower of evil rather than the evil tower of blackness, w/e dude sebmojo fucked around with this message at 00:50 on Dec 15, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:45
|
|
|
Got back from it, and yeah, it was pretty cool, no I wouldn't quite put it up with the LOTR films, but still, it's Jackson in Middle Earth. I do think all the extra stuff made the middle of the movie sag a little. I liked all of it, especially Sylvester McCoy being Sylvester McCoy (and having solidified bird poo poo on his face because Radagast just lets birds live in his head), and I like seeing where it will go, but the structure suffers a bit. Still, once they get to the Misty Mountains it's all good. I too love the goblin courier system. Efficient!
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:49
|
|
|
Did anyone else (surprisingly) get emotional when Bilbo was about to kill Gollum, but sees his face and takes pity on him? I thought the facial expressions on Gollum there were perfect, I felt really bad for him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:49
|
|
|
Rime posted:Where he has a long conversation with Radagast, is entirely unaware that anything evil is going on in "The old elf fortress", says it's been abandoned for centuries, and is completely ignorant of the existence of the Necromancer?" So maybe Thrain gave Gandalf the map and key before he got captured by the necromancer, and Gandalf will meet him again in the necromancer's dungeons in film 2 or 3. Or maybe in the movies, Thrain never gets captured by the necromancer. This is seriously not a problem.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:51
|
|
|
Rime posted:Where he has a long conversation with Radagast, is entirely unaware that anything evil is going on in "The old elf fortress", says it's been abandoned for centuries, and is completely ignorant of the existence of the Necromancer?" How does this make it impossible exactly? Gandalf goes to investigate Dol Guldur, finds Thrain(gets the key and map) and get suspicious about the evil presence there being Sauron/The Necromancer but has no proof. Radagast goes, sees the Witch King and The Necromancer and tells Gandalf, which confirms his suspicions along with the dagger. In the second film, at some point when dealing with this subplot, Gandalf explains what happened to whoever(Thorin, Elrond, etc) when he went there and we see the ensuing scene. You make not like the change, but it is in no way impossible and they didnt "gently caress anything up". The only way you are right is they literally cut the entire scene of Gandalf going to Dol Guldur and encountering Thrain despite showing it in the trailer and we just have to accept that he got the key and map some other way off screen. You are forgetting that Gandalf went to Dol Guldur before he returned later and found Thrain there. AccountSupervisor fucked around with this message at 01:00 on Dec 15, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:54
|
|
|
Rime posted:For it to be a flashback would be literally impossible in this new world they've created for themselves, so no, I won't shut up. Boo hoo, I didn't like the movie and what they've done to the plot. "Won't you just go away Rime, and let us circlejerk in peace?" What is this, Reddit?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:57
|
|
|
marktheando posted:So maybe Thrain gave Gandalf the map and key before he got captured by the necromancer, and Gandalf will meet him again in the necromancer's dungeons in film 2 or 3. Or maybe in the movies, Thrain never gets captured by the necromancer. This is seriously not a problem. AccountSupervisor posted:How does this make it impossible exactly? You guys are clearly forgetting the first 15 minutes of the goddamn film where they explicitly state That Thrain was captured by Orcs during the battle for Moria Since that takes place 200 years before The Hobbit, yeah, the chronology has been entirely hosed. There is a brutal, glaring, plot hole.  casa de mi padre posted:If there wasn't a book that had contradictory text, what happens in the film is just fine. Since only idiots can't understand that the book and the film are separate stories, it's not a problem. Here's a thought, maybe the next time Jackson wants to play dress up dolls he can do it with his own writing instead of making GBS threads all over an established world? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 00:59
|
|
|
Saw it last night at the London Imax with 3 friends. I loved it, two were very positive and my other friend hated it, mainly because of the deviations/changes to the book though. He looked like we had spat on his mum. Whilst for the most part I thought the landscape shots looked stunning, the shots of the plains and fields looked very over saturated. Also the goblin secretary was great, reminded me of Salacious crumb.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 01:00
|
|
|
Rime posted:You guys are clearly forgetting the first 15 minutes of the goddamn film where they explicitly state That Thrain was captured by Orcs during the battle for Moria Since that takes place 200 years before The Hobbit, yeah, the chronology has been entirely hosed. There is a brutal, glaring, plot hole. Gandalf could have got the key and map off him before he went into Moria. Not a plot hole.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 01:02
|
|
|
Rime posted:You guys are clearly forgetting the first 15 minutes of the goddamn film where they explicitly state That Thrain was captured by Orcs during the battle for Moria Since that takes place 200 years before The Hobbit, yeah, the chronology has been entirely hosed. There is a brutal, glaring, plot hole. And so he couldnt have possibly been captured by or handed over to Sauron because he was captured by Orcs? That still doesnt make it impossible, sorry.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 01:03
|
|
|
marktheando posted:Gandalf could have got the key and map off him before he went into Moria. Not a plot hole. Why would Thrain give them away while he's still heir to the goddamn throne of Erebor? Why wouldn't he pass them along to Balin or Thorin for that matter? The fact that we're having this discussion at all is evidence of how piss-poor the writing was where they deviated from the source material. AccountSupervisor posted:And so he couldnt have possibly been captured by or handed over to Sauron because he was captured by Orcs? That still doesnt make it impossible, sorry. So if he's been Handed over to the Necromancer by orcs, how does Gandalf get the map and key from him if Gandalf is completely unaware that the Necromancer exists? In the new Chronology the Necromancer has literally just set up shop in Dol Goldur and was still shapeless before then.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 01:06
|
|
|
Rime posted:Why would Thrain give them away while he's still heir to the goddamn throne of Erebor? Why wouldn't he pass them along to Balin or Thorin for that matter? Gandalf can be pretty persuasive.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 01:09
|
|
|
Watched it last night in IMAX 3D, got posters, wasn't disappointed. I'm afraid I might be too much of a fanboy to make an objective opinion, though. Couldn't have found a more perfect Bilbo than Martin Freeman. My friends and I were confused the whole time as to whether we were watching at 48 fps, we decided if we were, it wasn't that noticable. I hope that when the OST comes out, we get a longer version of the Misty Mountains song, because drat, I love listening to those dwarves sing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 01:09
|
|
|
Rime posted:Why would Thrain give them away while he's still heir to the goddamn throne of Erebor? Why wouldn't he pass them along to Balin or Thorin for that matter? Hold on. You're saying that because someone had a problem with them changing the source material, it's evidence that their writing was poo poo? That doesn't make sense. It's evidence that they changed the source material, but as quality is purely subjective your opinion does nothing to prove said quality either way. You're being pretty spergy, dude. I advise toning it down a few notches.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 01:10
|
|
|
Rime posted:What is this, JJ Abrams Star Trek? Did I miss the big reveal where this is really alternate-universe Middle Earth? Pardon me for expecting film producers to remain faithful to the source material! TheChaosDunk posted:Watched it last night in IMAX 3D, got posters, wasn't disappointed. I'm afraid I might be too much of a fanboy to make an objective opinion, though. Couldn't have found a more perfect Bilbo than Martin Freeman. My friends and I were confused the whole time as to whether we were watching at 48 fps, we decided if we were, it wasn't that noticable. I had to double check that I was in the right theater when the trailers started to play because they weren't in 3D. Then there was a big "PUT ON YOUR 3D GLASSES NOW!" announcement, which was nice.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 01:10
|
|
|
Rime posted:Why would Thrain give them away while he's still heir to the goddamn throne of Erebor? Why wouldn't he pass them along to Balin or Thorin for that matter? Why is this so hard for you to understand? Book chronology: Gandalf goes to Dol Guldur, Sauron fled anticipating his arrival. Gandalf grows suspicious of the power there. Thrain is captured by Sauron and kept in the dungeons of Dol Guldur Gandalf, some time later, goes back to Dol Guldur to investigate again and finds Thrain, gets key and map and confirms its Sauron. Movie chronology: Gandalf goes to Dol Guldur, Sauron fled, Gandalf grows suspicious. Thrain is captured by Orcs, and is later handed over to Sauron or captured by Sauron so that he can get his ring Gandalf returns to Dol Guldur, finds Thrain and gets the key and map, also furthers his suspicion that Sauron is there. Events of the movie unfold including Radasgasts encounter at Dol Guldur, confirming for Gandalf that it is Sauron. At some point in the second movie they will probably have a scene involving the discussion of Thrain/The Necromancer and thus we will see the scene they very clearly showed in the trailers of Gandalf encountering Thrain at Dol Guldur. Its a "flashback" from the appendices so it'll probably be a flashback in the movies. AccountSupervisor fucked around with this message at 01:23 on Dec 15, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 01:19
|
|
|
AccountSupervisor posted:Why is this so hard for you to understand? Why is this so hard for you to understand? In the movie, Gandalf has never been to Dol Goldur
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 01:22
|
|
|
Rime posted:Why is this so hard for you to understand? And where do they say that in the film? Because they never say it in the book either, he literally does exactly like he did in the movie and simply explains he was given these things by Thorins father and thats it. Radagasts encounter at Dol Guldur changes nothing about Gandalfs encounters there at all. AccountSupervisor fucked around with this message at 01:33 on Dec 15, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 01:25
|
|
|
I didn't have any problems with 48fps, but the colors in the whole movie looked too blown the gently caress out. And, I know they can keep their special effects in house at WETA, but goddamn, I think it could have done with about 30% less wacky time CG and a little more realism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 01:29
|
|
|
I honestly liked this (2D/24fps) better than Two Towers and Return of the King. I love the LotR movies, regular and EE, I've read all the books, the Hobbit was one of my favorites growing up, and this was just perfect for me. I was enraptured the entire time. I loved the songs, I loved that it got a little silly between all the serious-epicness. There are so many great performances between the company, the council, and new-and-improved Gollum. After it ended and I got up and stretched, I really wished I could plot right back down and start Desolation of Smaug. My only complaints were very minor: Azog wasn't interesting or threatening, because I know he's not the main threat, either in The Hobbit or in the grand scheme of things. He's just an orc. I also wanted more of the songs: the lyrics were a little hard to hear when the dwarves and goblins sang, and I just plain wanted more of them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 01:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:59 |
|
|
NewAge posted:Did anyone else (surprisingly) get emotional when Bilbo was about to kill Gollum, but sees his face and takes pity on him? I thought the facial expressions on Gollum there were perfect, I felt really bad for him. Did anyone else give a deep belly laugh at Goblin Wilhelm?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 01:35
|
|
