So.... THE HOBBIT, anyone? (possible spoilers)

[RickyDeg]

Finally saw THE HOBBIT[/b] last night, in High Frame Rate 48fps 3D. First of all; it was real nice to return to Middle-Earth, and with an abundance of skillful effects, excitement, humour and a wonderful score it became one heck of an adventurous ride. Good acting aswell, and especially sweet to see the returning cast. However, it was impossible not to feel an overwhelming sense of “haven't I all seen this before?” but that was to be expected and not necessarily a bad thing.

The a/v presentation in my cinema was great. Not overly impressed with the 48fps 3D, but mostly cause I still feel that 3D distract my eyesight more than it draws me in (hence, I prefer 2D). It wasn’t bad by any means though and the High Frame Rate did create a somewhat smoother, sharper image. All that talk of nausea I simply don't get. The thing that did impress me however was the audio mix, formidable high-class! Thinking this might be a new home cinema reference once it hits Blu-ray!

 

[Fuzzy Bear]

Is the HFR not 48 fps? I don't think you get HFR 24, its 48 or 24 not both.

I saw it on Friday. I also very much enjoyed seeing Middle earth on the big screen again. I can see why it's got mixed reviews, due to pacing and gimmicks of dwarfs, but it was everything I wanted from it.

 

[RickyDeg]

Naturally it was 48fps, nothing else! :doh: (OP edited)

 

[Fuzzy Bear]

So was it an improvement, would you like to see more films in 48?

I really can't stand 3d so saw the 2d, which sadly is not available in 48, in my cinema anyway.

What did you think of the dwarfs overall?

 

[RickyDeg]

I enjoyed the dwarfs more that I expected to. And I personally had no issues with the pacing of the film either, as many others have reported. Yes, the film is long, but time pretty much flies by when you enjoy something.

I'll try to minimize my 3D viewing as much as I can from now on cause I don't think it does the trick for me. The problem is that in my city some movies are not always shown in both 2D and 3D (which is the case with THE HOBBIT) which robs you of choices (and I don't like that!). Anyway, yes the 48fps was a slight improvement I think, but not enough for me to fall in love with it at this point.

 

[Anonymous]

It feels like I've been away from The Shire for far too long

I managed to see The Hobbit on Thurs 13th (release day) and did I enjoy it.

My favourite part was Bilbo and Gollum playing their game of riddles.

Just waiting now till April / May for the DVD / Blu Ray releases with the additional xx hours of unseen footage, the making of, the interviews etc etc etc

 

[AnotherJoe]

Although 3 hours for only the firtst 6 chapters seems a bit much the film actually passed quite quickly.

My main bugbear (as with LOR) is that whoever does the screenplay thinks he can improve on the classic story and change various bits of the storyline.

Theres a reason why JRR Tolkien is one of the worlds most revered authors and the bloke is charge of the screenplay is someone we've never heard of!

 

[plastic penguin]

Peter Jackson! |(

 

[RickyDeg]

It feels like I've been away from The Shire for far too long

I managed to see The Hobbit on Thurs 13th (release day) and did I enjoy it.

My favourite part was Bilbo and Gollum playing their game of riddles.

Just waiting now till April / May for the DVD / Blu Ray releases with the additional xx hours of unseen footage, the making of, the interviews etc etc etc

I certainly hope you are right there, that it will be released in April / May. I remember the LOTR movies when they came out in cinemas December 2001, 2002 and 2003 we had to wait til august/september the following year for the individual DVD-releases. Far too long to wait!

 

[bigboss]

It feels like I've been away from The Shire for far too long

I managed to see The Hobbit on Thurs 13th (release day) and did I enjoy it.

My favourite part was Bilbo and Gollum playing their game of riddles.

Just waiting now till April / May for the DVD / Blu Ray releases with the additional xx hours of unseen footage, the making of, the interviews etc etc etc

I certainly hope you are right there, that it will be released in April / May. I remember the LOTR movies when they came out in cinemas December 2001, 2002 and 2003 we had to wait til august/september the following year for the individual DVD-releases. Far too long to wait!

....or wait until all 3 films are released (Winter 2013 & Summer 2014) & buy the extended special edition!

 

[duaplex]

I'm with BigBoss there I will wait until the box set is released, hopefully they wont make a hash of it like TLOR where they released a non extented edition first!

As for the film....Loved it! I watched it in 2D. I wanted to enjoy the cinematography and colours in its true form, without wearing glasses to darken the picture. Having said that I will go see it again and this time opt for 3D, purely for the experience of it.

 

[RickyDeg]

It feels like I've been away from The Shire for far too long

I managed to see The Hobbit on Thurs 13th (release day) and did I enjoy it.

My favourite part was Bilbo and Gollum playing their game of riddles.

Just waiting now till April / May for the DVD / Blu Ray releases with the additional xx hours of unseen footage, the making of, the interviews etc etc etc

I certainly hope you are right there, that it will be released in April / May. I remember the LOTR movies when they came out in cinemas December 2001, 2002 and 2003 we had to wait til august/september the following year for the individual DVD-releases. Far too long to wait!

....or wait until all 3 films are released (Winter 2013 & Summer 2014) & buy the extended special edition!

If you meant getting all 3 Hobbit movies together in a box-set I think we have to wait til at least 2015, after all three have been theatrically released. Either you were joking or one of us missed something?

Then again, Blu-ray might be passé by then. I hear Redray 4K is on it's way

 

[hammill]

I'm with BigBoss there I will wait until the box set is released, hopefully they wont make a hash of it like TLOR where they released a non extented edition first!

As for the film....Loved it! I watched it in 2D. I wanted to enjoy the cinematography and colours in its true form, without wearing glasses to darken the picture. Having said that I will go see it again and this time opt for 3D, purely for the experience of it.

They sell millions of copies of the theatrical edition, then they bring out the extended edition which also sells very well. As a mug who bought both sets (although the extended is worth it) I am annoyed as the next man, but given the extra revenue this tactic generated, I doubt they think they made a hash of it and will do the same again.

 

[RickyDeg]

Although 3 hours for only the firtst 6 chapters seems a bit much the film actually passed quite quickly.

My main bugbear (as with LOR) is that whoever does the screenplay thinks he can improve on the classic story and change various bits of the storyline.

Theres a reason why JRR Tolkien is one of the worlds most revered authors and the bloke is charge of the screenplay is someone we've never heard of!

Good point. As someone who've never read any of the books I don't have conflicts on that issue, I just enjoy it exactly for what it is without any point of reference. But I fully understand the frustration because it is after all an adaption. Especially if they've changed things so much that it makes no sense. From a filmmakers point of view certain changes are probably looked upon as a necessity.

 

[landzw]

Well there has to be one, i'm completely the oppisite. I don't feel the need for the extended editions of any of the LOTR films as i think they are long enough and to be honest who would want extended versions of the Hobbit ? over all the film is rubbish! Ok i have to admit the story line was good, the effects are really nice but its destroyed the comedy characters, it completely loses its seriousness like the last 3 Star Wars films.

It seems they have tried to hard to make it to friendly to please everyone and i'm sorry a quality film does not get respect by doing that.

Dont waist money going to Cinema and just wait till its on Blu-Ray

 

[The_Lhc]

Well there has to be one, i'm completely the oppisite. I don't feel the need for the extended editions of any of the LOTR films as i think they are long enough and to be honest who would want extended versions of the Hobbit ? over all the film is rubbish! Ok i have to admit the story line was good, the effects are really nice but its destroyed the comedy characters, it completely loses its seriousness like the last 3 Star Wars films.

Errm, the book isn't particularly serious (especially not in the early chapters)

It seems they have tried to hard to make it to friendly to please everyone and i'm sorry a quality film does not get respect by doing that.

Sounds to me more like they've stayed faithful to the tone of the early part of the book to me (for reference I've been (re)reading Tolkien for the last 30 years). It was written as a childrens book, by nature it has a lighter tone to it than LOTR.

 

[The_Lhc]

Although 3 hours for only the firtst 6 chapters seems a bit much the film actually passed quite quickly.

My main bugbear (as with LOR) is that whoever does the screenplay thinks he can improve on the classic story and change various bits of the storyline.

Theres a reason why JRR Tolkien is one of the worlds most revered authors and the bloke is charge of the screenplay is someone we've never heard of!

Good point. As someone who've never read any of the books I don't have conflicts on that issue, I just enjoy it exactly for what it is without any point of reference. But I fully understand the frustration because it is after all an adaption. Especially if they've changed things so much that it makes no sense. From a filmmakers point of view certain changes are probably looked upon as a necessity.

As someone who's read the books many, many times (LOTR was the first "serious" book I ever read, when I was 9, actually read it before The Hobbit!), I've never had any issues with the changes that were made to the LOTR films, in fact I was over the moon when I found out that Tom Bombadil had been excised from the films, I always hated that ****! The only bit I would have liked to have seen in FOTR was the Barrowight sequence, that might have been nice but I understand that without Tom it's impossible to save the Hobbits from that danger and of course the film was quite long enough as it is, especially in Extended form (which were the only versions I bought incidentally).

 

[duaplex]

I really hope Jackson continues beyond these three films, there are many books that delve deeper into the world that Toilken created. Can you image The Silmarillion coming to life.

 

[The_Lhc]

I really hope Jackson continues beyond these three films, there are many books that delve deeper into the world that Toilken created. Can you image The Silmarillion coming to life.

Got to admit I'm struggling to see how they could do The Silmarrilion, it'd be a bit like trying to film the bible and you're not exactly overflowing with sympathetic central characters for the public to identify with. I wouldn't mind seeing it but I'm not sure I'd want to *watch* it, if you see what I mean.

Anyway Jackson has said he's not against the idea (although he didn't mention the Silmarillion itself, he doesn't see any reason why they couldn't do "new" Middle-Earth stories in the same way that Star Wars has expanded beyond the original three films, which isn't entirely encouraging!) but says the Tolkien estate has said a firm "no" to any more films for the time being.

 

[duaplex]

Of course I see your point, I like the idea of it thats all. I didn't know about the estate saying no for now. That of course will change in time. What about the The Children of Hurin, that was a good read

 

[6th.replicant]

Apparently, Jackson's developing a three-part, nine-hour-long version of JRRT's Smith of Wootton Major, which will be shot in 3D / 96fps*

* A download of a sepia 2D / 12fps version will be available from Linn, which will attract a 50% price premium compared to the DVD.

 

[Alantiggger]

I went along last Friday with my wife and younger son and watched it in 2D (son and wife both fed-up now with 3D)

We all enjoyed it. When finished my son and I wished it had lasted another hour or so.... thought it was Fantastic !

Guess we'll see more of the Dragon in the next part.

 

[FennerMachine]

Saw it on Tuesday.

Best 3D I've seem so far.

Slightly different to LOTR's as its less 'dark', more humorous but the same basic cinematic style.

Great film overall, might go to see it in 2D as well.

48FPS was good, very smooth. It might have helped with the 3D due to less blurring?

 

[bigboss]

I watched it couple of days ago in 3D non-HFR. Didn't enjoy the blurring & motion during the first 5-10 mins. The movie was good (very good, if you don't compare with LOTR). The 3D IMAX HFR show was starting at 7;30pm, which was when we reached the cinema. Decided to eat first & went for the 8:10pm non-IMAX show.

Will watch it again in a week or so on 3D HFR IMAX.

 

[dcanham001]

Agree with the_lhc on this one

The hobbit was written as a children's book and LOTR as adult. my concern before I saw the film was whether they could balance the tone of the book with the tone of the LOTR films as they are quite different - can you imagine a troll called Bert in LOTR? Fortunately I think they managed to pull this off.

The film was slow and possibly over-long but keep in mind it is the first of a trilogy so needed to establish the new characters and set the scene

I also thought the animation on Gollum has gone up a notch or two. His facial expressions were even more convincing then in the LOTR films

In regards to the screenplay it was adapted by Fran Walsh, Phillipa Boyens (both who adapted the LOTR), Peter Jackson and Guillermo del Toro. I can't think of 4 people i'd rather have doing the job to be honest