The Hobbit An Unexpected Journey

I never read the Hobbit so I don't know how accurate it was but I have to say I thought the dwarf singing was well done. I will say there is no were bear and very little (like less than a minute) of Smaug in this chapter but I enjoyed it as much as I did the Fellowship of the Ring.
 
My Son dragged me to it. We had moved him into a new apartment, so we didn't have television (or furniture at his old place for that matter, we slept on the floor). He and his buddy loved it. I found it tedious and pointless. The colors seemed a little washed out; I don't know if it was for "mood" or if our theater just didn't have good equipment. It was just a series of adventures with no real finish. At the "end" of the movie they could see where they were going but hadn't reached it. They fended off the bad guy but didn't defeat him. They let us know the new bad "guy" waited at the new place so that we would go to the next movie.

The main problem was that the Hobbit and LOTR are both so well known and LOTR was already turned into movies but the Hobbit was the "first" in the series. The second problem was that apparently they are doing the Hobbit in a three movies series. I think its tough to have a satisfying ending to a movie where there is no real ending because the book continues the story.
 
Chiller2 said:
I never read the Hobbit so I don't know how accurate it was but I have to say I thought the dwarf singing was well done. I will say there is no were bear and very little (like less than a minute) of Smaug in this chapter but I enjoyed it as much as I did the Fellowship of the Ring.
Click to expand...

We will see more of the were bear and smog in the coming films. I'm a big a big Tolkien fan and I loved the movie. Very well done. They added content to tie the Hobit into the Lord of the Rings and I thought it was well done also. Its so good I'm seeing it again soon.
 
The movie just made me want to vent. Way too much creative control for my tastes. If they had of only changed/ added more subtle things, I might feel different, but I was squirming throughout the whole movie.

At least they nailed Gollum.:thumbup:
 
I was really excited about seeing it. Epic action and adventure in a more condensed story than LOTR. Then I found out it's not a single film, but a trilogy spread out over years.

Three films, three hours each, just to tell the Hobbit story?!? Get real. Smells of greed and pretentiousness.

Might still see it, but I'm not looking forward to it.
 
*SPOILERS* I like the ideas, but I hated the execution. Radagast was obnoxious. The "mushrooms" comment at the council? Urgh. And this whole thing with Azog. Ultimately, I hate the designs. I feel Guillermo Del Toro here, and its not a good thing.
 
Maybe, after all 3 are released, they'll offer a CONDENSED version, rather than an extended version, just to make us Tolkien Connoiseurs happy.

Haven't seen it, but I've heard it's a great movie for pre-teen boys to enjoy, and I've got a few of those.
 
I saw it and enjoyed it.

Been a goodly number of years since I read The Hobbit (I dunno, 35?). I think it's an interesting idea to take a book like that and make three movies out of it so that NOTHING gets left out. First installment was 169 minutes, almost 3 hours. Didn't feel that long.

Good Boogie. I recommend it.
 
We saw it earlier this week. Like many, I'm a stone Tolkien freak; read the trilogy for the first time back in the mid-60s, and many re-reads since. The other books as well.
I too was a little put off by the idea of stretching The Hobbit out to three movies... However, it's apparent that Jackson is adding a great deal of Tolkien's own material which was written and left out, or written as backstory after publication.
The bit with Bolg and Thorin for instance was evidently backstory written by Tolkien himself. Likewise the expanded coverage of Radagast.
So, we found it very enjoyable, and there's plenty of material to fill up two more films.
 
My sister got me a leatherbound, gold fringe on the paper copy of the Hobbit, that I'm reading right now. I have the big movie edition of Lord of the Rings (the whole book), and have a condensed Silmarillion paperback. The original hardcover edition of the Silmarillion was literally dog eared and gnawed upon by one of my dogs. Dreams of picking up a hardcover tome of all the books is just a distant wish. The Hobbit is full of the same wonder and awe that I had as a little kid reading it.
 
I found the Silmarillion good for reference but hard to read as a novel. Just my prefs
 
The Silmarillion was sort of like the tale of the Devil in the Bible. The most powerful creature that God (called Illuvatar or Ea by Tolkien) created in Morgoth, tries to create his own creatures, and fails horribly. They are horrible, nasty monsters. He tries to create beings like elves, but they turn out to be orcs. He falls from grace, and fights against the other "angels", and goes off on his own. Sort of a Lucifer fall from grace type of story. Sauron was a good guy once, but craved order among all else, and went along with Morgoth, and they declared war on Middle Earth. Conjecture is that while Morgoth was extremely powerful, Sauron was much smarter and more cunning, and Morgoth was wholly aware of this.

Lots of great stories, I got lost among all of the fights and destruction wrought by Morgoth. It gives the backstory on Sauron and several key characters. To tie into the Lord of the Rings and Hobbit, it gives a prelude in as much as Sauron went to Atlantis (I forget what Tolkien called it), and made them, Aragorns heirs, worship Morgoth, instead of God. Elendil and his sons escaped to Middle Earth, and God destroyed Atlantis, killing Sauron. Sauron's ghost went back to Mordor, and got ready to fight Elendil and the last of the elves. Not sure if Sauron was wearing the ring when he died, or if he had it under safe keeping in Mordor. He supposedly made it in Mordor before he went to Atlantis, supposedly he got his butt kicked and then went to Atlantis.
 
stalbot said:
I'm gonna see it. Looking forward to it. But, Jackson got away with some uneeded changes to the story in the LOTR movies that evidently bolstered his confidence in doing it to this one. It will be cool to see it, but will be disappointing if he ventures too far from the book.
Click to expand...

I was hugely disappointed in what he did with "The Scouring of The Shire" in "Return of the King". This is a pivotal charper in the ending
of the Trilogy and he alledgedly chose to ignore it out some personal dislike. A major mistake, imo.
 
Does anybody feel like the Spyderco Southard belongs in the Hobbit movie? Everytime I see that knife I can't explain it but I just think of the LOTR universe. (That is part of the reason I bought it and I am excited to get it in the mail this week). The blade shape reminds me of the organic lines that most of the elven swords/knives have, the earth-brown G10 reminds me of the color representing Tolkien's love of nature and the titanium lock sides reminds me of something the Dwarves would have forged. I am going to call this my Hobbit knife (although Hobbit may be the wrong name as I doub't many Hobbits carry a knife with them daily).

Haven't seen the movie yet, planning to this week. Huge Tolkien fan so I am a little reluctant to see it (though the previews look great).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top