Page 1 of 8 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 109

Thread: The Hobbit

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,109

    Thumbs up The Hobbit

    48fps was amazing, really legitimizes the fast cuts and camera work style of action, michael bay needs to shoot all his future movies in this lol. but yeah. DAMN. make sure you see it in this format if you can.

    plotwise, it was paced pretty good, but god damn what a long movie, and they really stretched the story out, it was less of a "hobbit" movie, and more like "lord of the rings: episode 1"... prequel smell aside, tastefully done, eh some people i watched it with complained that it didn't feel like the hobbit book, but i went into the movie expecting them to "lotr tone" it, so i was prepared

    darth maul orc with the ghetto claw hand was pretty lulz

  2. #2
    New Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    42

    Default

    Gotta agree with seeing it in 48FPS. Takes a bit to get used to but it's worth it.

  3. #3
    BANNED Phil Clark's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    St. Charles, Mo
    Posts
    5,114

    Default

    I am off the week between Christmas and New Years, and my wife has to work, so I may try to go see it that week at a noon showing, in 48fps 3-D, just to say I did.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,835

    Default

    I didn't really see anything new in the 48 fps. Maybe I'd need a side-by-side viewing with 24 fps. But there was nothing that really jumped out at me as, "wow, this is totally different".

    I thought the pacing was good, not once did I look at my watch. Obviously they have expanded a LOT from the sparse descriptions of things in a children's book, and things are dealt with in a lot more detail. But I can easily see how they can make seven or so hours of out of the book (I'm expecting two hours or so will be LotR prologue stuff).

    My main criticism is the obsessive falling fetish that the movie has. Like half the runtime is dedicated to falling, sliding, falling, slipping, rolling, falling. I really hope they worked it out of their system so the next movie can have less of it.

  5. #5
    Veteran Member Simbob4000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    6,984

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Samy View Post
    I didn't really see anything new in the 48 fps. Maybe I'd need a side-by-side viewing with 24 fps. But there was nothing that really jumped out at me as, "wow, this is totally different".

    I thought the pacing was good, not once did I look at my watch. Obviously they have expanded a LOT from the sparse descriptions of things in a children's book, and things are dealt with in a lot more detail. But I can easily see how they can make seven or so hours of out of the book (I'm expecting two hours or so will be LotR prologue stuff).

    My main criticism is the obsessive falling fetish that the movie has. Like half the runtime is dedicated to falling, sliding, falling, slipping, rolling, falling. I really hope they worked it out of their system so the next movie can have less of it.
    Falling fetish...so The Hobbit is like Antichrist. Where are you guys seeing it, at special screenings? I didn't think it came out for a few more days.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,835

    Default

    Premiere here was last night.

  7. #7
    Senior Member Arvandor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Sheffield, England
    Posts
    2,838

    Default

    I agree that the 48fps is amazing, and the critics don't know what they're talking about. Everything is sharper and clearer, especially in 3D. The underground scenes looked fantastic.

    I'd been wary, with the mixed reviews and the stretching out into a trilogy. But I loved, and was not bored for a second
    virtue untested is innocence.
    When you choose the lesser of two evils, always remember it is still an evil.

  8. #8
    The Notorious BIB mattbib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Wilmington, Delaware
    Posts
    14,822

    Default

    Just came back from the midnight premiere in IMAX 3D. The 48FPS was pretty jarring at first, and there were a lot of scenes that were hard to follow early on, but by the end I was very happy with the quality. The film was visually beautiful and felt very much like the LotR. I agree it was very long...then again I saw it at midnight so that didn't help. Pacing was decent, though I completely agree with the overdone action sequences that involved the unrealistic falling and crashing. I know this story is meant to have a lighter tone, but those scenes really pulled me from the movie. A lot of the goblin and orc scenes really came across as overly animated, but that didn't really bother me too much.

    The main cast was great, of course, and I was happy with the use of Frodo in the beginning as well as the rest of the Ring-related parts of the story. Loved the council with Galadriel and Saruman. My favorite part was the fire and the Eagles. I knew it would be. Man, the Eagles scene was just beautiful.

    Looking forward to the next chapter, and I'm sure I'll check this one out again, maybe in a different format.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,835

    Default

    Yeah the Eagles scene was the only one that really got a tear in my eye, although seeing Elijah Wood and Ian Holm got close.

  10. #10
    Not my job to care Hiromi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Posts
    7,188

    Default

    I have to say I really like the albino Orc antagonist addition, works especially well since we only get a glimpse of Smaug.

    Likely Smaug will step into the main antagonist role next movie, and White Orc will resume it for the battle of five armies. And the necromancer will step up at some point, but who knows when.

    I can't remember if Radagast was actually in the Hobbit but I don't think so, regardless he was a fun character.
    "Tragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you fall into an open sewer and die." -Mel Brooks
    OIF 08-09
    OEF 10-11
    Do it yourself tech support link

  11. #11
    Veteran Member Simbob4000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    6,984

    Default

    So does this 48FPS look anything like when a HDTV tries to run a movie at 48FPS? Because that makes movies unwatchable.

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,835

    Default

    I think the Necromancer will be a main antagonist in the second movie and Smaug in the third. Because Dol Guldur is on the way to Erebor.

    Simbob, I didn't notice anything special about the 48fps, it was just like a normal movie.

  13. #13
    Not my job to care Hiromi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Posts
    7,188

    Default

    The problem with Smaug being the main antagonist in the third movie is that there's still a chunk of story left after he dies, notably the war of five armies. And the addition of the white Orc makes him the perfect candidate to lead the Goblin force, further more the conflict between him and Thorin gives them the perfect opening to flesh out that part far beyond what the book did. I think the second movie will mostly be about the Dwarves and Bilbo and will climax with the death of Smaug. Otherwise he'd have to die in the middle or thereabouts of the third movie, which doesn't feel right story structure wise given the build up he's had. The Necromancer side story can really take place anywhere(and could honestly be stretched out to encompass both movies) since its a side story(doesn't involve the main party or storyline at all).
    Last edited by Hiromi; 12-14-2012 at 02:06 AM.
    "Tragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you fall into an open sewer and die." -Mel Brooks
    OIF 08-09
    OEF 10-11
    Do it yourself tech support link

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,835

    Default

    I really doubt they're doing to do the Necromancer story without the main characters being there...they're going to get pulled into it on the way to Erebor.

  15. #15
    Well excuuuse me princess Mike Pothier's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Second star to the right, straight on till morning
    Posts
    3,609

    Default

    Just got back from the movie. I loved it. Martin Freeman owned the role. He really brought Bilbo to life, and his transformation was believable. The best scenes in the movie were him sparing Gollum and saving Thorin's life.

    The biggest weakness in the movie was, alas, Peter Jackson's damned insistence on making everything way over the top. There can't just be rock giants in the mountains, the company has to go riding on their knees! The 3 trolls became another action sequence! Wargs chasing the sledding Radagast! Cripes, dial it down, just a hair. I don't need a rollercoaster ride every 20 minutes.
    Life is but a dream.

    Meeps? MEEEEEEPS!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •