The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey | Official Thread

[Ixion]

Added the productions diaries, some more wallpapers, and a shit load of screenshots.

[-Kwesnoth-]

Soo looking forward to this, watching it the day it comes out. Only thing I won't like is that usage of CGI, but its to be expected. :/

But I want to see the Smaug!! I'm re-reading the Hobbit so I can better visualize the story.

EDIT/ And you fucking rock Ixion for setting up that OP. I'll rep when I can.

[Yuuichi]

I have that weekend off. Dare I fight crowds and go? Haha

[Ixion]

I want to see the Smaug!!

You'll only get glimpses of him in the first movie apparently.

And you fucking rock Ixion for setting up that OP. I'll rep when I can.

Thank you sir!

I have that weekend off. Dare I fight crowds and go? Haha

You can always buy tickets online, which is probably your only chance of seeing it opening weekend. And if you want to see it in 48 FPS, make sure you check the link in the OP, so you can find nearby theaters that will use the feature.

[RedDragon7]

Hearing some great buzz. Going to try out the HFR, still concerned but I've heard if nothing else it's immaculate PQ.

[PeanutButterMunky]

I'm getting giddier with every passing second. Wee!

[Ixion]

Hearing some great buzz.

The critics aren't exactly gushing (RT now stands at 73%), but most of the normal folk seem to have really enjoyed it.

It will be interesting to see how RottenTomatoes and IMDB differ with this movie.

[Ernsty]

I received free advance screening tickets to see it next Tuesday, December 11th. I believe it is a 3D screening but not sure if it's 48 FPS. Hope it's good, I really liked the Lord of the Rings trilogy and maybe Andy Serkis will finally get an Oscar out of the new Hobbit trilogy.

[RedDragon7]

The critics aren't exactly gushing (RT now stands at 73%), but most of the normal folk seem to have really enjoyed it.

It will be interesting to see how RottenTomatoes and IMDB differ with this movie.

I haven't actually checked that much, this time. I kinda just went off a review or two that I read.

To their credit, I'm not sure why this movie and possibly the next 2 are nearly 3 hours. That might be the core of the issues.

[Ixion]

To their credit, I'm not sure why this movie and possibly the next 2 are nearly 3 hours. That might be the core of the issues.

There are two reasons for extending it to a trilogy:


1) I'm not sure if you've read the book, but Gandalf continuously leaves the group to take care of other business, which is not elaborated upon at all in the book. However, in the Appendices of Return of the King, Tolkien explains what Gandalf was doing. So all of that will be shown in these movies, and that sub-plot turns out to be a pretty big deal.

2) More importantly, The Hobbit is a very fast-paced book. There's a war in the book that only takes up two pages, just to give you an idea. So in order to flesh everything out as much as LOTR, more time is needed.


So it makes sense in theory, but yes, some of the reviews do feel the movie is too long and padded.

[RedDragon7]

I've read about a third of the hobbit, maybe more. There are many moments in the book that either don't need to be in the movie or could be sped up. For instance reviews are criticizing the movie for being repetitive. They keep getting in these little messes and then get out. Get trapped and escape.

I get that Jackson is putting in other stories but movies need to be concise.

We'll see how it goes, but as it stands this one book is getting the same treatment at the entirety of the LOTR trilogy. Could be a bit much.


Tapatalk

[Ixion]

Well, that's what happens in the book. It's a lot more whimsical than LOTR, and doesn't have as focused of a plot.

A lot of the negative reviews have said that Tolkien's book is part of the problem. So basically, if you like the book, I'm assuming you'll like the movie.

But I agree that three long movies sounds like a bit too much. Personally, I would have preferred two 3-hour movies, which was the original idea.

[PeanutButterMunky]

Well, that's what happens in the book. It's a lot more whimsical than LOTR, and doesn't have as focused of a plot.

A lot of the negative reviews have said that Tolkien's book is part of the problem. So basically, if you like the book, I'm assuming you'll like the movie.

But I agree that three long movies sounds like a bit too much. Personally, I would have preferred two 3-hour movies, which was the original idea.

I guess we'll wait and see.

[RedDragon7]

Well, that's what happens in the book. It's a lot more whimsical than LOTR, and doesn't have as focused of a plot.

A lot of the negative reviews have said that Tolkien's book is part of the problem. So basically, if you like the book, I'm assuming you'll like the movie.

It is the book, indeed. We'll see whether it should've been "adapted to the big screen" or whether the more literal translation works.

But I agree that three long movies sounds like a bit too much. Personally, I would have preferred two 3-hour movies, which was the original idea.

Yep.

[Ixion]

Currently at 27 fresh and 9 rotten on RT (75%).

I've read most of the reviews and these are the common pros and cons...


Pros:

-Very good acting
-Stunning locales, cinematography, and visual effects
-Great cast of characters
-A strong sense of fun
-Impressive set pieces
-Gollum scene is terrific
-Howard Shore nails the music again


Cons:

-HFR is distracting
-The length will test your patience
-A bit too much filler
-Visuals can overwhelm the narrative
-Story is a bit unfocused

[PeanutButterMunky]

If you go into a LOTR movie without patience, you're doing it wrong.

[THUGGEDOUT]

Tickets booked for 2D release this Saturday, can't wait!

[PeanutButterMunky]

Tickets booked for 2D release this Saturday, can't wait!

I'm a little bit jelly. I'm debating whether or not to drive an hour and a half to see it in all its high frame rate glory.

[Blacksite]

I'll probably see it on Sunday. Only thing that has me worried is the filler.

[Wrath]

Tickets booked for 2D release this Saturday, can't wait!

You should've gone 3D for this one!

I'm a little bit jelly. I'm debating whether or not to drive an hour and a half to see it in all its high frame rate glory.

That high frame rate has me worried a bit because I absolutely hate that 120 fps soap opera look on HDTVs with Puremotion (or whatever your brand of choice calls it) enabled...

It takes away the movie feel.

[PeanutButterMunky]

That high frame rate has me worried a bit because I absolutely hate that 120 fps soap opera look on HDTVs with Puremotion (or whatever your brand of choice calls it) enabled...

It takes away the movie feel.

I feel the same way. I guess we'll see.

[admartian]

You should've gone 3D for this one!



That high frame rate has me worried a bit because I absolutely hate that 120 fps soap opera look on HDTVs with Puremotion (or whatever your brand of choice calls it) enabled...

It takes away the movie feel.

Love it with action scenes or movies set in modern times/future settings (like Transformers etc).

But yeah I get what you mean.

Still, hate the 3d gimmick these days and avoid it when I can.

[Ixion]

That high frame rate has me worried a bit because I absolutely hate that 120 fps soap opera look on HDTVs with Puremotion (or whatever your brand of choice calls it) enabled...

It takes away the movie feel.

That's not 120 FPS. That's 120 Hertz. It's completely different.

[PeanutButterMunky]

That's not 120 FPS. That's 120 Hertz. It's completely different.

I think he's just referring to the weird sped up feel to the movies on those TVs that makes them look like a BBC documentary instead of a movie.

[RedDragon7]

Love it with action scenes or movies set in modern times/future settings (like Transformers etc).

But yeah I get what you mean.

Talking about 3D or high frame rate?

That's not 120 FPS. That's 120 Hertz. It's completely different.

Technically yes, it's very different. From what I've heard thus far, HFR is an acquired taste.

One thing I'm looking forward to is the PQ that is being raved about.