Jump to content



Photo

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 +Chicane-UK

Chicane-UK

    Neowinian Senior

  • 9,667 posts
  • Joined: 02-November 01
  • Location: The UK!
  • OS: MacOS 10.9 Mavericks
  • Phone: Google Nexus 4

Posted 19 December 2012 - 08:37

Kind of surprised that I'm the first person to post this thread?

I had fairly moderate expectations for the film. Whilst not a huge fan of the source books (I've read them all once, years ago) I did enjoy Lord of the Rings purely for the scale of the films and how ambitious they were - and of course how well executed they were.

I was less positive about The Hobbit because of reading some negative reviews, and also because I felt with such a small book, I couldn't understand why the film was being turned into three movies when two would probably have been ample. I also felt concerned reading various op-ed pieces about this whole 48fps thing, and was doubtful that Martin Freeman would work in the lead role as Bilbo Baggins.

So I went into the film (IMAX 3D presentation) with modest expectations. However I'm pleased to say they quickly all fell aside as the movie began to get going. Firstly I have to say something about both the utterly magical visual effects, and the cinematography of the film. They are utterly spectacular. The massive vistas (both real and computer generated) are fantastic, and the way in which the visual effects are combined together in battle scenes and so forth are simply breathtaking. Even if you hate fantasy films, you couldn't fail to be impressed by how this film looks.

I found the story ambled along at a pretty respectable pace taking time to explain things well for the generally clueless folks, and helping set things up. It never really felt like it dragged and, as a rarity for me, I didn't really check my watch at any point to see how long the film had been going - it engrossed me sufficiently.

There was a boat-load of action, with some really good / gripping scenes. I'd say at this point there were quite a few scenario's which even for a fantasy film were a bit far fetched (a scene with the heroes riding a collapsed bridge to the bottom of a chasm.. without it disintegrating into a thousand pieces was a bit of a stretch for me!) but overall there was plenty of hacking and slashing, and magic, and cool things going on.

The cast seemed pretty spot on really. They all worked, you did eventually get to know / remember all of the dwarves, and I think Martin Freeman took the role of Bilbo really well...

So all in all - I walked out of the cinema very surprised and very pleased. I thought the film was excellent - some good comedy, some real darkness and dark imagery, and a great adventure backed up stunning visuals. Kudos to Peter Jackson.

9/10!


#2 +warwagon

warwagon

    Only you can prevent forest fires.

  • 25,731 posts
  • Joined: 30-November 01
  • Location: Iowa

Posted 19 December 2012 - 18:18

Once again the question has to be asked.
Spoiler


#3 Shadrack

Shadrack

    Neowinian Senior

  • 15,029 posts
  • Joined: 20-December 01

Posted 19 December 2012 - 18:26

I thought Journey was excellent. I enjoyed Journey more than I enjoyed Fellowship. I thought that the reviews were too critical, honestly.

The review I read on The Verge was especially over the top critical of the film. They complain that the pace of the film is too slow and there is too much over explaining that is done, and then complain about not spending enough time describing the Shire.

The Hobbit, as a movie series, is clearly a prequel. As a prequel, the movie expects the audience to be familiar with the three LoTR movies. There is no need to cover ground already covered in the original 3 movies again in a prequel.

#4 OP +Chicane-UK

Chicane-UK

    Neowinian Senior

  • 9,667 posts
  • Joined: 02-November 01
  • Location: The UK!
  • OS: MacOS 10.9 Mavericks
  • Phone: Google Nexus 4

Posted 19 December 2012 - 21:22

Once again the question has to be asked.

Spoiler


That is a pretty fair question :D

#5 +jamesyfx

jamesyfx

    Neowinian Senior

  • 8,382 posts
  • Joined: 04-February 06
  • Location: Manchester, UK
  • OS: OS X 10.9 / Windows 8.1
  • Phone: Nexus 5

Posted 19 December 2012 - 21:31

I've just been to see it, and I was pleasantly surprised by it. After reading opinion and critic reviews I entered the cinema with not much hope for it. But yeah, I enjoyed it. 8/10.

I would say make no assumptions and just give it a watch if you're unsure.

#6 Growled

Growled

    Neowinian Senior

  • 41,508 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 08
  • Location: USA

Posted 20 December 2012 - 00:35

I liked it but my only problem is that just like LOTR it is too darn long. I was worn out before it was over.

#7 mattmatik

mattmatik

    formerly soLoredd

  • 4,925 posts
  • Joined: 25-November 03
  • Location: California

Posted 20 December 2012 - 00:47

Saw it twice, once on midnight release and yesterday @ IMAX 3D. I really enjoyed it but I would like to see what PJ has in store for the extended version. I loved Fellowship but even moreso once the EE came out.

As for the eagle question, in the book
Spoiler


I thought Journey was excellent. I enjoyed Journey more than I enjoyed Fellowship. I thought that the reviews were too critical, honestly.

The review I read on The Verge was especially over the top critical of the film. They complain that the pace of the film is too slow and there is too much over explaining that is done, and then complain about not spending enough time describing the Shire.

The Hobbit, as a movie series, is clearly a prequel. As a prequel, the movie expects the audience to be familiar with the three LoTR movies. There is no need to cover ground already covered in the original 3 movies again in a prequel.


I also read that review and felt similarly. I thought there could have been more explaining actually!

#8 ManMountain

ManMountain

    Neowinian

  • 891 posts
  • Joined: 01-November 01
  • Location: Scotland
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro MC x64
  • Phone: LG Nexus 5

Posted 31 December 2012 - 03:44

Went with an open mind to see it earlier this evening (3D iSense HFR), an easy 8/10 :)

#9 greenwizard88

greenwizard88

    Neowinian Senior

  • 1,742 posts
  • Joined: 28-November 04

Posted 31 December 2012 - 04:12

I didn't like it at all. I'd give it a 7/10 on a good day. It was like Michael Bay shat all over Peter Jackson's camera and the result was "The Hobbit". I'll admit, they lost me at the very beginning: Why start with Frodo? The shire wasn't done well, and it pretty much went downhill. The effects were too much, and the story - perhaps the panicle D&D quest line - was too explained. Who cares why there's orcs or goblins attacking, they're orcs! they're goblins! that's what they do!

And it was long, too long. I wouldn't have minded seeing "The Hobbit" in 2 movies, but this 1) wasn't the hobbit, it was Michael Bay's The Hobbit, and 2) it added too much back story to really be considered the hobbit anymore.

However, if you're asking me how I liked Michael Bay's The Hobbit, it was alright. But it wasn't anything like the LotR movies.

#10 sundayx

sundayx

  • 12,034 posts
  • Joined: 27-October 04
  • Location: Hong Kong

Posted 31 December 2012 - 04:40

Actually to me it felt just like a LotR movie. It felt like the opening of a 3 part movie, it felt somewhat too-long (just like LotR), you visit new and old characters, more importantly, it was an adventure. I gave it an 8/10.

Some would argue it tried to make too much connections to LotR which I think is fair enough.

#11 Dashel

Dashel

    Disgustipator

  • 7,589 posts
  • Joined: 03-December 01
  • Location: USA

Posted 02 January 2013 - 05:12

Loved every minute (IMAX). The 3D and visual quality was stunning. The Rivendell scene alone was jaw dropping. The added bits fit nicely for me as well, the Hobbit was always my favorite. Thorin and Bilbo were fantastic. The intro/outro of Smaug, the jackrabbit sleds, there are just too many good parts for me to think of that apart from some miraculous falls and minor source quibbles, they nailed it.

The soundtrack isn't bad either, the Misty Mountain/Lonely Mountain bookends sounded wonderful.

#12 jrolson

jrolson

    Neowinian

  • 67 posts
  • Joined: 13-November 06

Posted 02 January 2013 - 06:24

Once again the question has to be asked.

Spoiler


Spoiler


#13 soumyasch

soumyasch

    Neowinian

  • 676 posts
  • Joined: 05-June 05

Posted 02 January 2013 - 06:37

The pacing of the movie was too slow. Things did start out nicely, and lot of things did happen. But they did not do much to push the story forward, making it kind of boring to sit through the two and a half hours :( It was kind of like the effects team was showing off, rather than telling an enjoyable story. But Gollum stole the show. That sequence in
Spoiler
, though.

#14 TDT

TDT

    Firestarter

  • 983 posts
  • Joined: 17-March 10
  • Location: Bucharest, Romania

Posted 30 March 2014 - 21:50

I'm a little surprised that there's no similar thread for Desolation of Smaug here... But anyway, being a big LoTR fan I am quite positive that I'll enjoy every damn movie that features Tolkien's stories (and made with the same quality, of course). I didn't expect to see anything else after LoTR, but The Hobbit was a great surprise, Unexpected Journey and Desolation of Smaug. I really wonder why some people are saying that these movies are too long...for me they're too short! I love the legends, artifacts, characters, everything is pictured quite beautiful by Peter Jackson, his team and the actors. It really gets you INSIDE that world for a few hours. And after the movie ends, I'm like "that's it???? DAMN YOU!", every time... 

 

This year, The Hobbit will end, and unfortunately I've read that this will be the end of all the movies featuring Tolkien's universe. :( Too bad, I wished these adventures will never end...





Click here to login or here to register to remove this ad, it's free!