Escape to the Movies: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

MovieBob gives us some insight regarding Peter Jackson's latest low budget extravaganza.

Watch Video

Woot, that totally alleviates like 90% of the worries I had about the Hobbit. Clearly I'm going to have to go see it.

I've got the tickets for tommorrows show.
Was expecting a spoiler box at the start and in that case it would've been the first time I would've turned around and came back later :D

Eh? You're early this week. Anyway I wasn't particularly worried about The Hobbit and was planning on seeing it anyway.

Bob: did you just call 20/30 somethings old. those "video stores" are not that far gone.

OT: I did kind of feel that this would be an endzone dance, but didn't realize that they would try to "expound" so much

on the other hand: does that mean we get 2 of these this week, or is this supposed to be tomorrow's?

Awesome news. I was really hoping this wouldn't be bad. I mean I always knew it would never live up to LoTR standards but I desperately wanted it to be good, and it is apparently :D

want to see it anyway. but for some reason here in australia, i still have to wait till the end of this month.

THIRTEEN DWARFS! There are thirteen Dwarfs MovieBob, not twelve, thirteen. I haven't read the book in years and I know that, they always go on about how Bilbo ups the Dwarfs from thirteen to fourteen in order to avoid the unlucky number.

Also, you're worried about them running out of action for the next two movies? Five words. The Battle of Five Armies.

Ugh, nerd bitching aside, I'm glad to hear that the movie is actually pretty good.

Watched it yesterday, and loved it. The multiple threats thing make the world seem bigger and more alive, but the relatively small scale of the main story makes it relatable and fun.

And it even had a Wilhelm Scream.

48 FPS movies? THIS is the direction I want to see movies go! Fuck 3D!

Ahem, yeah cant wait to throw my money at this next week!

Guffe:
I've got the tickets for tommorrows show.
Was expecting a spoiler box at the start and in that case it would've been the first time I would've turned around and came back later :D

I don't think that he can spoil a 70-year-old book.

OT: well, that sounds good enough. I am worried that the drive to make things dramatic will squeeze out Bilbo when they start getting into the big fight scenes, but Jackson did balance Frodo and Sam's journey with the Three Hunter's ass-kicking in the original trilogy, so things may just pan out.

erttheking:
THIRTEEN DWARFS! There are thirteen Dwarfs MovieBob, not twelve, thirteen. I haven't read the book in years and I know that, they always go on about how Bilbo ups the Dwarfs from thirteen to fourteen in order to avoid the unlucky number.

Also, you're worried about them running out of action for the next two movies? Five words. The Battle of Five Armies.

Ugh, nerd bitching aside, I'm glad to hear that the movie is actually pretty good.

Er wait, isn't Gandolf with them?

In that case it would be 12 dwarfs +1 wizard meaning they need bilbo to make it 14 so it is not unlucky. If there were 13 dwarves + 1 wizard they would already have 14 and be fine?

Seeing it at the IMAX next Tuesday! Because it's IMAX, we also get to see the first 12 minutes of the new Star Trek. Though I'm not too sure whether to use "get to see" or "have to see", judging on the first one...

I think he may be talking about the movie Savages at the end (saw it and its so slow and long, and the worst is that the story is as simple as it gets and the ending is terrible)

So with the video up today, there won't be another video tommorrow? I'm fine with that seeing I won't be able to watch it at the release time (will be at work for some Xmas sales).

Either way hopefull I will be able to watch it with my bro in one of my days off from work.

Ok now I want to know which filmes you were referring to as being "danm too long".

It is thirteen. Thorin, Balin, Dwalin, Dori, Nori, Ori, Bifur, Bofur, Bombur, Fili, Kili, Oin and Gloin.

And I am pleased to hear Bob liked it. Was going to go see it anyways, but it's still nice to hear. :)

About what I expected. There's no way The Hobbit could ever match the thunderclap that was Fellowship of the Ring. The first time I was in the theatres and saw them walk through the vaulted halls of Moria, I almost cried, because it was more awesome and epic than anything I ever imagined in my dreams. Nothing I've seen since has ever topped that. But given all the work and talent and source material involved, I didn't really think they could screw it up.

FelixG:

erttheking:
THIRTEEN DWARFS! There are thirteen Dwarfs MovieBob, not twelve, thirteen. I haven't read the book in years and I know that, they always go on about how Bilbo ups the Dwarfs from thirteen to fourteen in order to avoid the unlucky number.

Also, you're worried about them running out of action for the next two movies? Five words. The Battle of Five Armies.

Ugh, nerd bitching aside, I'm glad to hear that the movie is actually pretty good.

Er wait, isn't Gandolf with them?

In that case it would be 12 dwarfs +1 wizard meaning they need bilbo to make it 14 so it is not unlucky. If there were 13 dwarves + 1 wizard they would already have 14 and be fine?

No, because in the book, Gandalf's more like a corporate recruiter than an actual member of the team. He disappears for a big chunk of the book.

That is why I have been trying to avoid as much of the Lord of the Rings as possible this year. I have been trying not to go into it with the wrong expectations. I want to see Peter Jackson adaptation of the Hobbit rather than the prequel to the Lord of the Rings if that makes sense.

Some critics have also complained about the heavier use of CGI and lack of practical effects. Is it as much of a problem as some people say?

Even with a decent review, I just cannot muster up any desire to see this. The melodrama toward the end of Return of the King really got on my nerves and some of the liberties he took with the characters really started to grate on me (Aragorn, Faramir, and Legolas in particular). So his added exposition, even if it holds relatively true to the lore, just doesn't sit well with me.

Oh, and overly long in a couple of weeks made me think he is talking Les Miserable.

Gonna skip out on this one. Was bored out of my mind with the first two films. Didn't bother with the third.

I did see all the action in all the trailors and I bet it's all cut from the film and it's all walking and talking.

FelixG:

erttheking:
THIRTEEN DWARFS! There are thirteen Dwarfs MovieBob, not twelve, thirteen. I haven't read the book in years and I know that, they always go on about how Bilbo ups the Dwarfs from thirteen to fourteen in order to avoid the unlucky number.

Also, you're worried about them running out of action for the next two movies? Five words. The Battle of Five Armies.

Ugh, nerd bitching aside, I'm glad to hear that the movie is actually pretty good.

Er wait, isn't Gandolf with them?

In that case it would be 12 dwarfs +1 wizard meaning they need bilbo to make it 14 so it is not unlucky. If there were 13 dwarves + 1 wizard they would already have 14 and be fine?

The thing is that Gandolf didn't intend to stick with them all the way. He left them at the entrance to Mirkwood.

erttheking:

FelixG:

erttheking:
THIRTEEN DWARFS! There are thirteen Dwarfs MovieBob, not twelve, thirteen. I haven't read the book in years and I know that, they always go on about how Bilbo ups the Dwarfs from thirteen to fourteen in order to avoid the unlucky number.

Also, you're worried about them running out of action for the next two movies? Five words. The Battle of Five Armies.

Ugh, nerd bitching aside, I'm glad to hear that the movie is actually pretty good.

Er wait, isn't Gandolf with them?

In that case it would be 12 dwarfs +1 wizard meaning they need bilbo to make it 14 so it is not unlucky. If there were 13 dwarves + 1 wizard they would already have 14 and be fine?

The thing is that Gandolf didn't intend to stick with them all the way. He left them at the entrance to Mirkwood.

Ahh I stand corrected, thank ya!

I know I am not gonna enjoy this as much as LOTR, that's a given considering I consider them almost perfect movies. The Hobbit should be good but the lack of practical effects make it look unrealistic IMO.

I was really scared that the movie was going to be ok.
But after seeing it, I can't think of a better form of adapting the book.

Love the movie.

i saw it on the opening midnight premiere in IMAX+3D+HFR
And it was amazing!

The 48fps makes things so clear and fluid...
Though a lifetime of "24fps = realtime" conditioning makes my brain think im watching a sped up film,
even though the motions occur at a normal pace.

This is both weird and interesting.
mostly since apperantly our brains can recognise framecounts and can associate a certain "speed" with it.

The strange thing is is that this does not occur with games running at 50fps (or even a varying fps)

My guess is that we just have to get through this and get used to the feeling,
This might however take a long time to ajust.

Yay for Bob liking Hobbit! Was there ever any doubt? :)

And to quote everyones favorite daddy figure:
"Nooooooooooooo!"
The horrible argument of "is X fps better Y fps? Is Y fps even enough? Or is X fps just a waste of money and needless luxury?" is spreading from games to movies! Gods help us!

Sylvester McCoy's in this? We've got the 7th Doctor involved?

This should bring in a nice cross-section of fans!

*sudden realization* Crap...I just gave some fanfictionist/fancomicist ideas, didn't I?!?

Oh thank god, I knew it wasn't Lord of the Rings but I was worrying that it wasn't going to live up to my expectations. I can't wait till I go see the movie on Sunday!

GamemasterAnthony:
Sylvester McCoy's in this? We've got the 7th Doctor involved?

This should bring in a nice cross-section of fans!

*sudden realization* Crap...I just gave some fanfictionist/fancomicist ideas, didn't I?!?

Dude, relax. If you're worried about crossovers I can assure you that you are years late to that party.

OT: Should be going to see it Sunday, I'm uncontrollably excited. Glad to hear most of the reviews are good, and I don't hink anywhere in my backwater area has the 48fps thing anyway, so that should be a non issue.

Can't wait!

I know what too damn long is...

image

Just got back from seeing this and I agree with everything Bob said except the pacing really felt off at times with the best comparison being The Fellowship of the Ring compared to the Extended Version. In extended FOTR, it felt they sacrificed the good pacing they had to slow things down (or grind them to a halt) to shove in scenes with extra back story/action/Fan Wank and the Hobbit feels exactly the same. You could probably have chopped 20 minutes without really losing anything.

Don't let that put you off though. I saw it in 3D at 24fps and while the 3D really works well, the darkening of it by the glasses is a bad thing when dealing with the fantastic New Zealand landscape.

Talking of New Zealand landscape, have fun playing "Location Spotting". I swear they reused outdoor areas seen in LOTR a couple of times at least.

I hope you don't mean Les Miserables was too damn long, Bob. I think a two and a half hour musical is perfectly fine, especially if you're a theatre watcher like me.

rvdm88:
i saw it on the opening midnight premiere in IMAX+3D+HFR
And it was amazing!

The 48fps makes things so clear and fluid...
Though a lifetime of "24fps = realtime" conditioning makes my brain think im watching a sped up film,
even though the motions occur at a normal pace.

This is both weird and interesting.
mostly since apperantly our brains can recognise framecounts and can associate a certain "speed" with it.

The strange thing is is that this does not occur with games running at 50fps (or even a varying fps)

My guess is that we just have to get through this and get used to the feeling,
This might however take a long time to ajust.

that has to do more with how the frame is changing. in a movie that still uses reals (even digital to some extent) you can see scan lines (well your brain does, but the brain processes it, and tells you how fast it is going), but on a game the frame on the screen is being displayed, and then deleted, and replaced without anything moving (things on the screen can move, but there is nothing for the brain to process as in motion besides what is cognitively seen moving)

also there is still great debate as to whether the human brain can even process anything higher then 50fps (I know that 60 is a standard, but it has to do with if an image is inter-spliced onto one frame of a frame test (replacing a frame that should be there) will it be seen, or even recognized, and I think at last results it came back that above 50fps only about half the people saw/realized it. and it was because of this likelihood that people wouldn't be able to recognize everything, and in addition the cost of the cameras needed to actually record is why it took Soooooooo long for the film industry to move up the frame rate. while with games it's all a matter of controlling everything else that is going on besides the render (and simplifying the render itself because it is still considered the most expensive thing you do during any given frame)

dangoball:
Yay for Bob liking Hobbit! Was there ever any doubt? :)

And to quote everyones favorite daddy figure:
"Nooooooooooooo!"
The horrible argument of "is X fps better Y fps? Is Y fps even enough? Or is X fps just a waste of money and needless luxury?" is spreading from games to movies! Gods help us!

the thing is that in games it is more an argument about other things like: stability, calculation density, and other logic stuff (also see post 33) while in a non 100% CGI film (still having real actors doing stuff) there is actually something to be said for cost (of equipment to film, having to update/upgrade theaters, and then having the difference be recognizable.

then when it comes to even computer animated, or hand draw film fps is also a thing because it has to do with how many screens need to be created, or how many essentially screen caps need to be taken then concatenated together to make the finished thing. technically this discussion actually holds more water in the realm of film then in video games (again post 33)

Sylvester mc coy is in this movie? Does he at any point in the movie rrrrrregenerate?

I'm worried my dad wants to go see this movie with me which considering how much he likes the book means he is not going to like all of the changes to the story.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here