http://gamingtrend.com
April 16, 2014, 05:06:23 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Hobbit finds a director  (Read 25434 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
rshetts2
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2420



View Profile
« Reply #640 on: January 01, 2014, 11:37:03 PM »

Finally saw it today.  Liked it a lot.  Smaug was awesome.  The movie is much faster paced than the first one and the 2 hours and 40 mins went by surprisingly fast.  The movie also seemed to have a bit more serious tone and while there were some amusing bits in the fight scenes, they werent played as much towards the comedy side as the first movie.   All in all I felt it was better than the first ( and I liked the first one )   I think the final movie, based on where they leave off in Desolation, will deal with a lot more of the peripheral story lines, which is fine by me.  It should help fill in a lot of the background that links the happenings in The Hobbit to The LOTR, something that the books themselves never did.
Logged

Can you see the real me? Can ya, CAN YA?
JCC
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 2359


View Profile
« Reply #641 on: January 02, 2014, 02:01:38 AM »

Saw it this week. Loved it. I think I may end up liking these movies even more than the LOTR trilogy (which I love). It's nice to not endure constant doom and gloom which gets ponderous on repeated viewings. Plus, Bilbo is so much more likable then Frodo. Thinking about it, I've also always preferred the Hobbit book to the LOTR book trilogy as well.... Hmmmm....
Logged

-John

XBox Live ID: "JCC Davros"
rshetts2
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2420



View Profile
« Reply #642 on: January 02, 2014, 02:04:18 AM »

Quote from: JCC on January 02, 2014, 02:01:38 AM

Saw it this week. Loved it. I think I may end up liking these movies even more than the LOTR trilogy (which I love). It's nice to not endure constant doom and gloom which gets ponderous on repeated viewings. Plus, Bilbo is so much more likable then Frodo. Thinking about it, I've also always preferred the Hobbit book to the LOTR book trilogy as well.... Hmmmm....

I think a lot of the Bilbo vs Frodo thing is due to Martin Freeman.  He is simply rocking the role of Bilbo. 
Logged

Can you see the real me? Can ya, CAN YA?
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #643 on: January 02, 2014, 03:58:13 AM »

K, but the recursion thing with the Eye of Sauron? Watch out! #fractalofevil
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
YellowKing
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2841



View Profile
« Reply #644 on: January 02, 2014, 01:18:40 PM »

One thing that really bothered me was Legolas' eyes. Every time they showed him they had the blue contacts cranked up to 11. It was like Peter Jackson was going "Look at his eyes. They're blue! Blue as the motherflippin sky! LOOK AT THEM!

Yet in the LOTR trilogy they are not that blue. In fact, in many scenes they're so dark they almost look brown. If you're going to insert a well-known character in your prequels, at least have some consistency.
Logged
JCC
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 2359


View Profile
« Reply #645 on: January 02, 2014, 06:28:37 PM »

Quote from: YellowKing on January 02, 2014, 01:18:40 PM

One thing that really bothered me was Legolas' eyes. Every time they showed him they had the blue contacts cranked up to 11. It was like Peter Jackson was going "Look at his eyes. They're blue! Blue as the motherflippin sky! LOOK AT THEM!

Yet in the LOTR trilogy they are not that blue. In fact, in many scenes they're so dark they almost look brown. If you're going to insert a well-known character in your prequels, at least have some consistency.

Agreed, both my wife and I were freaked out by that. Maybe legolas will have his eyes burned by dragon fire or something in the next movie...
Logged

-John

XBox Live ID: "JCC Davros"
kratz
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 4184



View Profile
« Reply #646 on: January 02, 2014, 08:46:26 PM »

I tried to go into this being open to just enjoying the ride, but man... I just can't do it.  My disappointment from movie one continues in movie 2.  I was encouraged by reviews that said this was a better film, but while maybe the overall rollercoaster was better executed than film 1, it lacked the really great scenes that film 1 managed to include around all of it's idiotic shit beard and CGI rock monsters.

My complaints, in order of importance:

1. They are taking a very short book and adding a bunch of stuff into it.  I don't have an issue with this per se, but it drives me up the wall when they give short shrift to things that are actually in the book and important to the development of characters in order to make more time for their invented shit, particularly if they can turn something about character into a huge action set piece.

Case in point: Spider scene.

Case in point: Bjorn. The way Gandalf foists the band on Bjorn, and how it's exactly what he did to Bilbo at the beginning of the book (and one of the best parts of film one!), it's funny... and they turned it into them running into his house uninvited and slamming the door... and then remove all of their interaction with him. Boo!

Case in point: Turning Bilbo's repeated conversations with Smaug into one action set piece.

2. I just don't feel like much care was taken with anything, and that source material aside the are just sorta weak films that just rush from action set piece to action set piece with little regard for characters or story or motivation or depth.  I think that the criticism often has so much to do with comparisons to the source material that it's hard to just judge them on their own merits, but doing so, they are the fantasy equivalent of Michael Bay... I think some of that crappiness is covered up by good casting, and the occasional interlude that lifts almost directly from the source material and ends up being great (e.g. events at Bag End and Gollum, which were both great).  I keep harping on it, but turning everything into an over-the-top action sequence just pissed me off.

I will, as I did with the first, give it another try on home video to see if my ire softens on a second viewing, but... man.
Logged
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #647 on: January 02, 2014, 09:15:43 PM »

Kratz, I totally agree.

These films are not The Hobbit - they are LOTR Ep.1 and Ep.2.
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
metallicorphan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 16378



View Profile
« Reply #648 on: January 02, 2014, 10:04:02 PM »

Quote from: kratz on January 02, 2014, 08:46:26 PM


Case in point: Bjorn. The way Gandalf foists the band on Bjorn, and how it's exactly what he did to Bilbo at the beginning of the book (and one of the best parts of film one!), it's funny... and they turned it into them running into his house uninvited and slamming the door... and then remove all of their interaction with him. Boo!



Yeah that upset me when i saw the film as well,'Queer Lodgings' is like the second biggest chapter in the book,but the Theatrical version was quite pointless,PJ has promised us more of him in the Extended Version..so there is that to look forward to,but as you said,it won't be like the books introduction where Gandalf is explaining the adventure they have had and introducing the Dwarves 2 by 2 to Beorn as we have already seen them break in,but i guess it would be like you mentioned,too much like what happened in the first movie(except they cut that short as well by having them all fall into Bilbos house when he opened the door)


However,like JCC,i am loving these films more than LOTR at the moment,maybe because i have watched LOTR a million and one times and maybe a little burned out on them,and i am hungry for more Middle Earth,right now from the first two films these feel like the perfect companion films to LOTR...kinda gutted that Hobbit 3 got put back to its original release date Dec 2014 instead of June or July whenever it was first moved
Logged

Manchester United Premier League Champions 2013!!

Xbox LIVE:Metallicorphan
Wii:8565 1513 0206 1960
PSN:Metallicorphan
JCC
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 2359


View Profile
« Reply #649 on: January 02, 2014, 10:52:13 PM »

I get the complaints of Kratz and others completely. They are definitely adding tons of stuff that was never in the books and are only adhering to the main plot points vs details from the books.

I think as I have gotten older and (less) wiser, I have lightened up a lot on movie adaptations of books. I have come to understand that what makes a good movie/tv show is not always the same thing that makes a good book. So, I don't obsess over strict adherence to the original material and try to enjoy a movie for what it is. Often I find I end up liking the movie(s) better than the book(s). That certainly applies in my case to Game of Thrones, The Hunger Games, and so far all of the LOTR/Hobbit movies. I should admit I am not the biggest fan of the books in all of those examples. I liked them but didn't love them, but I tended to enjoy the movie versions significantly more.

This is definitely true of Tolkien. I certainly appreciate how innovative he was propelling the high fantasy genre almost into existence or certainly laying the framework for what it is today. But, I find his books boring - especially Lord of the Rings. I actually enjoyed the LOTR books better AFTER I saw the movies. So anyway, not holding the source material in such high regard probably makes it easier for me to not hold the looseness of the movie adaptations.

Another example is the Steig Larsen books (Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, etc.) I enjoyed the books to a point, but I absolutely love the Swedish movie adaptations. In fact, the 2nd movie is probably my favorite and it was based on my least favorite book! I enjoyed the Hollywood adaptation of the first book as well to a lesser extent (this isn't a knock on it, I thought it was VERY well done) and it was (shockingly) more strictly adherent to the books than the Swedish movies were!

On the other hand, I used to rail at all the wretched attempts at Stephen King movies back in the day, so I get where you guys are coming from. smile
Logged

-John

XBox Live ID: "JCC Davros"
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #650 on: January 02, 2014, 10:58:17 PM »

Bilbo Baggins, IIRC, never had a "my precious" moment himself. It simply wasn't a thing, and his entire time with Smaug was pretty much veiled as invisible. I was worried that it would be in that stupid half-world view with the roaring black-and-white wind.

Spoiler for Hiden:
Turns out, they found a worse way to deal with it by tacking on an action scene during what was supposed to be an encounter where the dragon was trying to figure out riddles.

Bag End indeed.
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
Bullwinkle
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 15163


Watch me pull a rabbit outta my hat.


View Profile
« Reply #651 on: January 03, 2014, 12:58:04 AM »

Quote from: JCC on January 02, 2014, 10:52:13 PM

I get the complaints of Kratz and others completely. They are definitely adding tons of stuff that was never in the books and are only adhering to the main plot points vs details from the books.

I think as I have gotten older and (less) wiser, I have lightened up a lot on movie adaptations of books. I have come to understand that what makes a good movie/tv show is not always the same thing that makes a good book. So, I don't obsess over strict adherence to the original material and try to enjoy a movie for what it is. Often I find I end up liking the movie(s) better than the book(s). That certainly applies in my case to Game of Thrones, The Hunger Games, and so far all of the LOTR/Hobbit movies. I should admit I am not the biggest fan of the books in all of those examples. I liked them but didn't love them, but I tended to enjoy the movie versions significantly more.

This is definitely true of Tolkien. I certainly appreciate how innovative he was propelling the high fantasy genre almost into existence or certainly laying the framework for what it is today. But, I find his books boring - especially Lord of the Rings. I actually enjoyed the LOTR books better AFTER I saw the movies. So anyway, not holding the source material in such high regard probably makes it easier for me to not hold the looseness of the movie adaptations.

Another example is the Steig Larsen books (Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, etc.) I enjoyed the books to a point, but I absolutely love the Swedish movie adaptations. In fact, the 2nd movie is probably my favorite and it was based on my least favorite book! I enjoyed the Hollywood adaptation of the first book as well to a lesser extent (this isn't a knock on it, I thought it was VERY well done) and it was (shockingly) more strictly adherent to the books than the Swedish movies were!

On the other hand, I used to rail at all the wretched attempts at Stephen King movies back in the day, so I get where you guys are coming from. smile

I have tried to read The Hobbit a half a dozen times.  The only Tolkein book I was able to finish was Fellowship, a few months before the movie.  I leaned over to my wife at one point in the movie where they were walking across a plain and said, "This was twenty pages in the book."  I wasn't really kidding.

My child desperately wanted to read the Hobbit, but settled for Fellowship.  She just couldn't do it.  Today I was playing games at a friend's house.  He also is freaking out about destroying the source material (in such an overwrought way that it's comical).  My kid was there and mentioned giving up on the book.  I told her she just has to skip the songs.  I thought he was going to faint.
Logged

That's like blaming owls because I suck at making analogies.
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #652 on: January 03, 2014, 01:05:46 AM »

Yes, Tolkien was horrid at getting to the point - it seems like Peter Jackson suffers the same ailment.

The Hobbit was not the same as LOTR. I had never finished LOTR until I was adult. The Hobbit was a pretty easy read, and there was far more "adventure" in its telling.
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
kratz
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 4184



View Profile
Re:
« Reply #653 on: January 03, 2014, 01:43:33 AM »

I actually thought the Hollywood Girl with the Dragon Tattoo was vastly superior to the Swedish films... and maybe better than the book in that I think it nailed the Lisbeth character in a way that even Larsen didn't quite understand. I felt the Swedish films were really weak.


Sent from my KFAPWI using Tapatalk
Logged
kronovan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7844



View Profile
« Reply #654 on: January 03, 2014, 01:52:47 AM »

I've read the Hobbit and LotR trilogy enough times -mostly to children- that I've lost count. Having read it that many times I couldn't care less how much The Hobbit diverges from the original story. I was more concerned about content being dropped in the 1st trilogy movies and was miffed a bit when Tom Bombadil and the barrow wraiths sections weren't there in the Fellowship. As long as the extra content adds something and doesn't drag on too much I'm OK with it. So far I've enjoyed both movies, so it's worked for me.
Logged
JCC
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 2359


View Profile
« Reply #655 on: January 03, 2014, 03:13:26 AM »

I was relieved when the useless tom bombadil portions were cut. But, that was nothing compared to how happy I was that the completely anticlimactic scouring of the shire was excised. That add on to the ending just sucked.
Logged

-John

XBox Live ID: "JCC Davros"
kronovan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7844



View Profile
« Reply #656 on: January 03, 2014, 03:42:49 AM »

Wot! Useless! How could anyone think stuff like this was useless:

"Hey dol! merry dol! ring a dong dillo!
Ring a dong! hop along! fal lal the willow!
Tom Bom, jolly Tom, Tom Bombadillo!"


Besides all that fun, didn't he have a meth lab and psylicybe mushroom farm in his basement? I mean the guy was the most fun character in the entire trilogy.  icon_biggrin
Logged
JCC
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 2359


View Profile
« Reply #657 on: January 03, 2014, 04:50:06 AM »

 icon_biggrin
Logged

-John

XBox Live ID: "JCC Davros"
metallicorphan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 16378



View Profile
« Reply #658 on: January 03, 2014, 08:51:42 AM »

Quote from: JCC on January 03, 2014, 03:13:26 AM

I was relieved when the useless tom bombadil portions were cut. But, that was nothing compared to how happy I was that the completely anticlimactic scouring of the shire was excised. That add on to the ending just sucked.

I am complete opposite,i absolutely loved the Scouring of the Shire,gutted that he left it out of the movie..instead we got half a dozen false endings instead icon_confused
Logged

Manchester United Premier League Champions 2013!!

Xbox LIVE:Metallicorphan
Wii:8565 1513 0206 1960
PSN:Metallicorphan
rshetts2
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2420



View Profile
« Reply #659 on: January 03, 2014, 01:29:18 PM »

Quote from: metallicorphan on January 03, 2014, 08:51:42 AM

Quote from: JCC on January 03, 2014, 03:13:26 AM

I was relieved when the useless tom bombadil portions were cut. But, that was nothing compared to how happy I was that the completely anticlimactic scouring of the shire was excised. That add on to the ending just sucked.

I am complete opposite,i absolutely loved the Scouring of the Shire,gutted that he left it out of the movie..instead we got half a dozen false endings instead icon_confused

And this is why it is so difficult to translate books to movie format and actually please everyone. 
Logged

Can you see the real me? Can ya, CAN YA?
metallicorphan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 16378



View Profile
« Reply #660 on: January 07, 2014, 08:04:06 PM »

Quote
Total Lifetime Grosses
Domestic:    $230,360,654      30.4%
+ Foreign:    $527,000,000      69.6%
= Worldwide:    $757,360,654   

In Release:    25 days / 3.6 weeks

Box Office Mojo
Logged

Manchester United Premier League Champions 2013!!

Xbox LIVE:Metallicorphan
Wii:8565 1513 0206 1960
PSN:Metallicorphan
metallicorphan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 16378



View Profile
« Reply #661 on: February 15, 2014, 11:47:30 AM »

just an update on how this film is doing now that its pretty much starting to stop playing in a lot of countries

Quote
Total Lifetime Grosses
Domestic:    $255,625,377      29.8%
+ Foreign:    $602,700,000      70.2%
= Worldwide:    $858,325,377   

In Release:    63 days / 9 weeks


So not as great as the $1 billion Hobbit 1,but the film is set to release in China next week and Japan the week after,so i can certainly see it breaking $900 mill which is no bad tally

Kinda wish the July 2014 date was still up for Hobbit 3 instead of being moved back to December(where it was originally),because then we would have the Extended Edition of Hobbit 2 earlier
Logged

Manchester United Premier League Champions 2013!!

Xbox LIVE:Metallicorphan
Wii:8565 1513 0206 1960
PSN:Metallicorphan
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.169 seconds with 67 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.078s, 2q)