|
Nuggan posted:There is a new production blog up on PJ's facebook. That is really cool and nice and heartwarming. Also I can't believe Peter Jackson's daughter there is the same little kid from FOTR it's not been that long right? ...right? poo poo.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 17:45 |
|
|
# ? May 25, 2024 13:09 |
|
sportsgenius86 posted:If you go see this today and a trailer starts for a movie about a teen witch with Emmy Rossum in it, close your eyes and hum or something because it looks like the biggest shitfest ever and I'm still angry that I'll never get those 2 minutes of my life back. When this happened in our theater, about 20 seconds into it an usher came in and signaled the projectionist to kill the audio, like she was about to make an announcement. When the sound was turned off she said "I'm just going to stand here for a minute and act like I'm telling you something important, because I don't want you to have to deal with this." She stayed there until the preview was over, then left.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 17:48 |
|
Nuggan posted:When this happened in our theater, about 20 seconds into it an usher came in and signaled the projectionist to kill the audio, like she was about to make an announcement. When the sound was turned off she said "I'm just going to stand here for a minute and act like I'm telling you something important, because I don't want you to have to deal with this." She stayed there until the preview was over, then left. Seriously, buy her a Christmas gift.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 17:54 |
|
Our showing never bothered to turn on the theater speakers until that trailer was largely over. They were even nice enough to keep the 'advertisement projector' running over the top of it to save our eyes as well.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 17:55 |
|
Wow I'm really curious to see this trailer now...seeing as many movies in the theater as I do I've been tormented by a lot of bad ones in my life but never has a theater considered one so bad that they shielded the audience. edit: Found it, have already seen that one. I mean its bad but come on there have been way worse trailers in the last few years. Maybe the one I found online differs from the theatrical though. MANIFEST DESTINY fucked around with this message at 18:21 on Dec 14, 2012 |
# ? Dec 14, 2012 18:16 |
|
Yes the discussion here also made me curious enough to watch a bad trailer, so thanks for that guys. I got up to the bit where she says 'we prefer the term casters' before I closed the tab.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 18:26 |
|
sportsgenius86 posted:If you go see this today and a trailer starts for a movie about a teen witch with Emmy Rossum in it, close your eyes and hum or something because it looks like the biggest shitfest ever and I'm still angry that I'll never get those 2 minutes of my life back. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9rjhB7KWEc
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 18:27 |
|
Dolphin posted:Because you loved it so much the first time...
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 18:31 |
|
That is a pretty lame trailer but I've seen far worse. Emmy Rossum needs to get better gigs.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 18:34 |
|
Okay, I'm actually a bit confused as how Gandalf knew Bilbo in the movie. Gandalf met Bilbo when Bilbo was a kid and Bilbo doesn't remember. Yet Bilbo somehow impressed Gandalf enough that he remembered him decades later when Thorin's company needed a thief?
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 18:38 |
|
I've read all about the 48fps here and I'm still seeing it that way, but I haven't seen anyone talk about Dolby Atmos yet. Anyone have anything to say about how awesome it is? I saw Brave in Atmos and I wasn't even aware of what it was at the time, but wow all the discreet channels were amazing.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 18:55 |
|
Echo Chamber posted:Okay, I'm actually a bit confused as how Gandalf knew Bilbo in the movie. Uh... yes. Actually, you've got it exactly right. What are you confused about?
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 19:00 |
|
Echo Chamber posted:Okay, I'm actually a bit confused as how Gandalf knew Bilbo in the movie. Gandalf was impressed by Bilbo's mother, Belladonna Took.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 19:04 |
|
Riddles in the Dark was absolutely perfect. That's really all I wanted from this movie.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 19:05 |
|
Saw this film yesterday. GF and I both loved it. Really enjoyed the use of 48 frames and I honestly do not see what the fuss is all about with the haters. Also anyone remember the amount of people saying why don't the Eagles take the Ring to Mordor in LOTR? (probably everyone) We both joked about why the Eagles could've just fly the party to Mount Erebor in this . Eararaldor fucked around with this message at 19:31 on Dec 14, 2012 |
# ? Dec 14, 2012 19:24 |
|
Saw it at midnight in HFR 3D, did not regret that decision. I don't remember the Pale Orc from the book (could be wrong, it's been some time since I read it) and I don't like the inclusion of him and his stupid white warg. He just seemed like an extra enemy shoehorned in to give the audience a big dramatic fight scene, and I feel like that detracts from the build up for Smaug/the Necromancer. Plus his entire characterization is just unsubtle evil, and I think they already had that covered with the goblins. That being said though, I was whooping with everyone else when Bilbo tackled him, so clearly it worked on some level. I was looking forward to the troll and goblin army scenes the most, and was not disappointed. The troll scene was as lighthearted and clever as I remember from the books, but I don't remember that Gandalf saved them? I thought Bilbo just kept them talking until the sun came up and they were caught out. Either way, it was a good scene. The goblin city scenes captured my childhood fears perfectly, with the shrieking, pale, horrible, roiling mass of goblins clambering all over the rickety pathways and honeycomb-like structures, and how primitive and insect-like they are in comparison to the orcs of the LOTR films. HFR 3D really was the best way to see that scene. And I agree: Riddles in the Dark did not disappoint. Captain Foxy fucked around with this message at 19:30 on Dec 14, 2012 |
# ? Dec 14, 2012 19:28 |
|
Captain Foxy posted:Saw it at midnight in HFR 3D, did not regret that decision. Azog exists in the lore, technically, but he was not present in the Hobbit. In the REAL chronology he kills Thror 200 years before the events of the Hobbit, and then is slain in retaliation by Thorin and Thrain in the battle for Moria which we witnessed in the prologue.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 19:37 |
|
Captain Foxy posted:Saw it at midnight in HFR 3D, did not regret that decision. In the book, with the trolls, Gandalf saves them by mimicking the trolls's voices and causing confusion to make an argument until the sun comes up.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 19:41 |
|
Nuggan posted:In the book, with the trolls, Gandalf saves them by mimicking the trolls's voices and causing confusion to make an argument until the sun comes up. I actually like the change. It boosts Bilbo's usefulness in the party early on, so it doesn't seem like he's just a hanger-on, but can bring some cleverness to the party.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 19:47 |
|
It makes me sad that dwarves always seem to lose their kingdoms. Anyway, my theater didn't hand out posters. I'm going back this weekend for 48 fps so hopefully that theatrr will have some.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 19:50 |
|
MortonTheCranium posted:I actually like the change. It boosts Bilbo's usefulness in the party early on, so it doesn't seem like he's just a hanger-on, but can bring some cleverness to the party. I agree, I liked what they did with this. I also like the changes made to the parts with Bilbo fighting the orc when they were in the trees but I worry how it will affect the impact of a part of the 2nd movie. Bilbo fighting the spiders probably wont have the same impact, since we've already seen him stand up to defend the dwarves.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 19:55 |
|
Saw it in HFR 3D. The 48 fps technology didn't disappoint. The first 20 minutes did feel quite weird, as if the projectionist had the movie on fast forward. The awkwardness lasted to some extent for the rest of the film, but for that I'm not blaming 48 fps, but 48 fps along with 3D. I'm confident it's the two technologies together that causes weirdness for many people. The higher framerate itself paid off handsomely in action scenes, which were able to use camera paths never before attempted in film. The 48 fps, non-3D Bluray will look fantastic, mark my words. The movie itself was a disappointment. PJ and his wife are not great screenwriters; it was overshadowed by cool things in LOTR trilogy, but here it's evident. "Hobbit" was one of my favorite books as a child, I wouldn't have believed I'd feel bored several times while watching a big budget movie adaptation. I did love Martin Freeman as Bilbo, he and Ian McKellen saved the movie from sinking dangerously low.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 20:10 |
|
Rime posted:Azog exists in the lore, technically, but he was not present in the Hobbit. In the REAL chronology he kills Thror 200 years before the events of the Hobbit, and then is slain in retaliation by Thorin and Thrain in the battle for Moria which we witnessed in the prologue. Nuggan posted:In the book, with the trolls, Gandalf saves them by mimicking the trolls's voices and causing confusion to make an argument until the sun comes up Thanks for the clarifications. I think I need to go dig out my old copy, but it just won't be the same without my dad doing the 'creepy goblin king' voice! Azog's characterization left something lacking for me, but I did appreciate what that allowed for Bilbo's character. I can understand why they'd want to give Thorin a 'nemesis' and it does allow for more exposure to the development of the encroaching evil elements. Still, definitely more excited to see Bilbo fight the Mirkwood spiders in the second movie.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 20:10 |
|
charismaslover posted:Saw this today in regular 2D, enjoyed it and it was nice to be involved in Middle Earth again. One thing that has been bugging me a bit though - In the book, Bilbo doesn't age rapidly. 17 years pass between the time he leaves the ring to Frodo, and Frodo sets out on his journey, so Bilbo essentially ages 17 years. In the movie, less time passes so I always thought it strange that he aged so rapidly and Gollum didn't. But like others have said, Gollum had the ring for far longer, and like the ringwraiths, had been permanently changed by it.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 20:10 |
|
gwarm01 posted:It makes me sad that dwarves always seem to lose their kingdoms. The dwarves always lose their kingdoms because they're based on the Jews. I think in Tolkien's timeline they've lost about half a dozen capital cities/major kingdoms.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 20:12 |
|
Holy gently caress Christopher Lee is ninety years old IRL.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 20:16 |
|
gwarm01 posted:Anyway, my theater didn't hand out posters. I'm going back this weekend for 48 fps so hopefully that theatrr will have some. This was an IMAX midnight only thing, so if you went to another format you wouldn't have gotten them.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 20:19 |
|
This felt very by-the-numbers. Good visuals, great sound design, and I even liked the thick cartoony accents all the normally dumb monsters had. But man, whose idea was it to stretch the book into three movies? The Hobbit is my favorite fantasy adventure story because it's the Hero's Journey consolidated. There's not enough story to stretch out for this long and while I wasn't bored I certainly wasn't interested in the necromancer or the white orc or Radagast and his CGI hedgehogs.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 20:23 |
|
Just shut up Peter! http://news.moviefone.com/2012/12/11/the-hobbit-unscripted-peter-jackson_n_2277672.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003 ~3:30 he starts going on about how he can't commit to it only being 3 films anymore.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 20:24 |
|
Jesus, 65% on RT. Is this movie really that bad? I just want more LOTR. I'm not overly nitpicky, but at the same time, I won't like a turd like Prometheus just because I desperately want to like it.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 20:24 |
|
Man, Google lied to me and said one of my local theaters was showing it in HFR. =( This was not the case.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 20:27 |
|
oswald ownenstein posted:Jesus, 65% on RT. Is this movie really that bad? No, it's not. I have no idea what the critics are complaining about, honestly. This movie has really shaken my faith in RottenTomatoes being able to determine whether a movie is "good" or not, because loving Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull has a higher score than this, and trust me, The Hobbit is a far better movie than Crystal Skull.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 20:29 |
|
It's cool to hate.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 20:30 |
|
oswald ownenstein posted:Jesus, 65% on RT. Is this movie really that bad? Just ignore the negative reviews. The movie's fantastic.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 20:31 |
|
Really, only 65%? That seems too low for me, but I'm still in the honeymoon afterglow stage. I'll have to re-assess once I see it again because clearly I'm gonna see it againSchizotek posted:The dwarves always lose their kingdoms because they're based on the Jews. I would say that I'm disappointed in my ethnicity/religion being depicted as a race consisting entirely of short, bearded men, but then I would have to pretend I've never been inside a synagogue.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 20:33 |
|
BobTheSpy posted:No, it's not. I have no idea what the critics are complaining about, honestly. This movie has really shaken my faith in RottenTomatoes being able to determine whether a movie is "good" or not, because loving Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull has a higher score than this, and trust me, The Hobbit is a far better movie than Crystal Skull.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 20:37 |
|
oswald ownenstein posted:Jesus, 65% on RT. Is this movie really that bad? Here's the top rotten review on RT: quote:My first thought in watching “The Hobbit” was: Do we really need this movie? It was my last thought, too. Having powered his way through the “Lord of the Rings” trilogy, which had its occasional majesties, director Peter Jackson now feels compelled to give us this prequel, based on the Tolkien novel that spawned the cult I never joined. As you can see, if "I just want more LOTR" is your motivation you should be ok.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 20:37 |
|
Dolphin posted:Because you loved it so much the first time... It looks infinitely times better than The Host https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRKjf8b4f2E gohmak fucked around with this message at 20:55 on Dec 14, 2012 |
# ? Dec 14, 2012 20:41 |
|
BobTheSpy posted:No, it's not. I have no idea what the critics are complaining about, honestly. This movie has really shaken my faith in RottenTomatoes being able to determine whether a movie is "good" or not, because loving Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull has a higher score than this, and trust me, The Hobbit is a far better movie than Crystal Skull. Rotten Tomatoes has never been useful for determining if a movie is any good. An ok movie everyone agrees is fairly decent is going to get a high RT rating, a great movie that divides critics is going to get a poo poo rating.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 20:43 |
|
|
# ? May 25, 2024 13:09 |
|
Movie seems polarizing and mostly based around 48fps complaints? I'm still going to see it in 48 FPS anyway. I've been playing computer games for years, my body is ready.
|
# ? Dec 14, 2012 20:52 |