Escape to the Movies: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5
 

TheSchaef:

Blood Brain Barrier:
What movie were you watching? Either you don't consider thematically multidimensional exposition as "contribution to the story" or you weren't paying attention.

Isn't the last 20 minutes of the movie, after all the characters have exited the film, a little late for thematically multidimensional exposition?

Why last 20 minutes? What about the first 20, where we meet a central character and significant themes are introduced which run through the whole movie right up until the end?

On Topic: The Hobbit. What the hell are the critics going on about? It's an excellent film. Rousing, beautiful and touching. There were parts I didn't like but I won't judge them yet because I am sure they are setting up the next films. And unlike everyone else, I thought the weakest part of the film was Gollum's scene.

And compared to LOTR, it was far less hammy. Mainly because the actors were in another class. The action was much better too.

Blood Brain Barrier:
What about the first 20?

um... what about them? Any other parts of the movie that I totally wasn't referring to, that you want to bring up for no reason?

TheSchaef:

Blood Brain Barrier:
What about the first 20?

um... what about them? Any other parts of the movie that I totally wasn't referring to, that you want to bring up for no reason?

Well, obviously if you suggest the last 20 minutes are the only ones contributing to the plot, you are saying the the other odd 160 aren't. I'm saying they are. That's not a reason?

Blood Brain Barrier:
Well, obviously if you suggest the last 20 minutes are the only ones contributing to the plot, you are saying the the other odd 160 aren't.

I'm not sure how you got a suggestion that the last part of the movie contributes to the plot, from my direct statement that it does NOT. I do not think two ideas could possibly be more diametrically opposed.

Also, I do not see the logic that says talking about the merit of one portion of the movie says anything at all about a completely different portion. One might as well yell at me because talking trash about The Phantom Menace means I don't think The Empire Strikes Back did anything for Star Wars.

I said that The Thin Red Line was unnecessarily long. The reason I chose to state in support of that claim is that there is a significant amount of footage after the characters have exited the film, mostly in the form of extensive shots of "Guadalcanal" jungle foliage and wildlife. And this from a film that already had to shave down 45 minutes before screening and cutting out some half-dozen other characters from the story.

TheSchaef:

Blood Brain Barrier:
Well, obviously if you suggest the last 20 minutes are the only ones contributing to the plot, you are saying the the other odd 160 aren't.

I'm not sure how you got a suggestion that the last part of the movie contributes to the plot, from my direct statement that it does NOT. I do not think two ideas could possibly be more diametrically opposed.

Um...
"There literally was no contribution to the story from before George Clooney's 30-second appearance"

If by "from before" you simply meant "from", the sentence was badly put.

Also, I do not see the logic that says talking about the merit of one portion of the movie says anything at all about a completely different portion. One might as well yell at me because talking trash about The Phantom Menace means I don't think The Empire Strikes Back did anything for Star Wars.

That's not a comparative statement like you made. A better example would be saying "this apple is big". It's only big compared with other apples, so you can't talk about the "bigness" without mentioning other apples - which is what you want me to do.

I said that The Thin Red Line was unnecessarily long. The reason I chose to state in support of that claim is that there is a significant amount of footage after the characters have exited the film, mostly in the form of extensive shots of "Guadalcanal" jungle foliage and wildlife. And this from a film that already had to shave down 45 minutes before screening and cutting out some half-dozen other characters from the story.

Maybe the film isn't about the characters? I haven't seen it for a while, but from what I remember the ideas it flirted with weren't necessarily grounded in the actions of people in the movie. In fact I'd say the opposite is the case.

Blood Brain Barrier:
Um...
"There literally was no contribution to the story from before George Clooney's 30-second appearance"

If by "from before" you simply meant "from", the sentence was badly put.

Only if you read "before" as "160 minutes before", as opposed to desiring to include that scene as being somewhat pointless.

That's not a comparative statement like you made.

No. It's the statement YOU made, based on a single example I cited.

It's only big compared with other apples, so you can't talk about the "bigness" without mentioning other apples - which is what you want me to do.

No, what I "want you to do" is NOT say "if you say this apple is big, then you are also saying that every other apple is big".

Maybe the film isn't about the characters?

... It was about the characters when you were lecturing me about the characters...

I haven't seen it for a while, but from what I remember...

... in a movie you don't seem to recall with crystal clarity. Makes me wonder why my one comment about one movie, with one scene as an example, was a hill you felt was worth dying on.

/waits for the lecture about how "the hill" was on Iwo Jima and not Guadalcanal.

I have no idea what you're on about, in any of that drivel.

Let's get back to the Hobbit.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5

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