The Hobbit

[beecue]

JTSoD4BBCJc&hd=1

[cityhunter2501]

omg sweet, hobbit is way better than LOTR Trilogy

[JAYMEZ]

Awesome! Two movies as well!!

Its so wierd seeing release dates 2010 and 2011... God we are getting old.

[ekguy]

thats going to be sweet. And kinda excited to see which Tin Tin book they'll do if they even do one at all. Wondering if they'll write something new for a movie.

[Trini]

looking foward to see tintin

[thrasher22]

Originally I didn't think he was going to have any part in the film because of contract disagreements, or so I heard. Its wicked they got him on board at least in this role. The Hobbit was one of the first books I read as a kid, I'm soooo excited for this.

[tawheed]

Originally posted by cityhunter2501
omg sweet, hobbit is way better than LOTR Trilogy

uhh no.

[403Gemini]

Originally posted by tawheed


uhh no.

:werd:

dont get me wrong, the hobbit is good, but LOTR is just epic!!!

[viff3r]

Hello, what's this?

[SHO]

Originally posted by viff3r
Hello, what's this?

This is a thread in a Community Car Forum called Beyond.ca

In this particular thread we are discussing the new Hobbit movie which is scheduled to be released in the future.

Hope this helps!:)

[RC-Cola]

Originally posted by 403Gemini


:werd:

dont get me wrong, the hobbit is good, but LOTR is just epic!!!

Yes but in the Hobbit there's a Dragon! :thumbsup:

[Kavy]

Originally posted by RC-Cola


Yes but in the Hobbit there's a Dragon! :thumbsup:

and only 1 hobbit which means no weird homosexual moments...........

[403Gemini]

Originally posted by RC-Cola


Yes but in the Hobbit there's a Dragon! :thumbsup:

yeah, but smaug doesnt compare to ring wraiths ;)

[pf0sh0]

ring wraiths > smaug

[katana9x4]

i dunno you guys smaug is pretty fuckin' pwntage

[beecue]

http://movies.ign.com/articles/851/851208p1.html :thumbsdow ... hope it gets settled quickly

[pome902]

Yay i love the hobbit :drool:

[beecue]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080425/ap_en_mo/film_hobbit_del_toro .. :clap: can't wait .. but it's going to take 4 years to make :eek:

[beecue]

Trailer up, looks ok.

JTSoD4BBCJc&hd=1

[Vagabond142]

Looks "okay?!" How about "Looks fucking incredible!" :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[RC-Cola]

I was somewhat disappointed that they didn't show Smaug at all.

[TaiChino]

Looks awesome!

But can't help but think of this off the bat.

V1HSNV9y25A

[Darkane]

Originally posted by RC-Cola
I was somewhat disappointed that they didn't show Smaug at all.

I don't think they have Smaug footage yet. They only started filming 2-3 months ago.

[Zephyr]

2v1jCEqA12k
NO9lTlww7UU
Y22IbgsinJA
bTAPvb4tf7U

I can't wait for this movie. I can't believe it's been 10 years since LOTR

[dj_patm]

Won't be seeing this. I've had enough watching people walk in the Lord of the Ring movies.

Plus this trailer doesn't make the movie look very interesting.

[03ozwhip]

Originally posted by dj_patm
Won't be seeing this. I've had enough watching people walk in the Lord of the Ring movies.

Plus this trailer doesn't make the movie look very interesting.

+1to the nerds it looks FUCKIN AWESOME! :thumbsdow
http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s5/cory_mr2/geek.jpg

[Inzane]

Originally posted by RC-Cola
I was somewhat disappointed that they didn't show Smaug at all.

Are you one of the new generation that prefer all the money shots spoiled in the trailers?
:dunno:

[beecue]

yYz0JWJioOM

It's now going to be 3 movies.

[Tik-Tok]

http://v.cdn.cad-comic.com/comics/cad-20120801-bce33.png

[Graham_A_M]

^ hahaha. I cant wait to see this. I loved the cinematography of the LOTR trilogy.

That was an epic series for sure. I dont mean that in the least geeky way at all. :dunno:

[Markll7]

I wonder how much extra shit they are going to make up for the movie. To be honest with you guys I just wish they'd finish so that the actor for Bilbo can go back to making Sherlock lol

[Mys73ri0]

e0com3eJDkE

1:22 -> is that santa claus on his sleigh?

[ekguy]

Can't wait for this!!! 1 movie, 2, 3...7 doesn't matter to me. If it's tolkien's story being put on the big screen I'll watch it.

[taemo]

just bumping cause you can start buying Ultra AVX tickets now and the good seats for the 14 and 15 are almost all taken.
Got some good seats on the 16th and looking forward to this.

Apparently they broken this into 3 movies?

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey - 2012
The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug - 2013
The Hobbit: There and Back Again - 2014

[ArjayAquino]

I just ordered 2 reserved tickets for IMAX in chinook for the 15th. Theatre is more than half full already.

[Vagabond142]

Saw it today. Met every expectation I had of it, and I continuously claim to be one of Beyond's bigger geeks, so that's saying something. Never felt slow to me, good pace, awesome action, and Thorin Oakenshield is played to perfection by Richard Armitage. But Bilbo... Martin Freeman does magic like Ian McKellen does with Gandalf.

[Xtrema]

3hrs of Meh, but I have to say I was never a big LOTR fan.

Can't believe there will be 6 more hr of this.

Actors' performances are great. Gandalf feels very detached in Bilbo's house. This is probably where Ian was complaining about green screens ruin his acting.

But as with all LOTR flicks, if anyone has any logic, movies will be over in 10mins.

[ipeefreely]

I saw it in 2D (I hate stupid 3D shit) on Saturday afternoon with my wife... the first part of the movie was boring :zzz:... but the movie overall was pretty good! :thumbsup:

The actors were excellent but the script really sucked! :thumbsdow

The "new" white orc added nothing to the story other then to stretch it out even longer (more $$$ for Peter I guess...). They should have just kept just the goblin king as the main enemy... they didn't even develop many of the main characters (the Dwarves). I pretty sure the fat one didn't even have a line in the whole 3hrs! :rofl:

Overall I like the cartoon from the 70s better! :rofl: I think I'll watch it again tonight! :burnout:

On a side note... my wife won some tickets from Warners to see it in 3D last Wednesday night but UPS fucked up and then Warners told us the theatre would have our names but they didn't tell us which theatre! :facepalm: Pretty much epic fail all around... :nut:

EDIT:
I've mentioned this before... my wife's a hudge J. R. R. Tolkien nerd so this her review:


A disappointment. The film's script and structure are very weak and the whole thing feels bloated and sloppy in terms of pacing. The ending is abrupt and unsatisfying and there is little emotional payoff.

The decision of the filmmakers to stretch this story out to three films was a poor one. Tolkien's novel does not have the requisite three climaxes to support three films, each of which need to have their own satisfying arcs. The filmmakers know this, and thus have introduced the completely superfluous character of The Pale Orc, whose presence is contrived and tedious, and very, very "Hollywood". I will leave speculations as to the reasons for the three-film decision to others, but I do not think it was made out of love for the source material.

While the three "Rings" films were flawed, both as adaptations of Tolkien's material and as films in their own right, they did have a special magic and each felt substantial and rewarding to watch. In "The Hobbit" that magic is gone. Everything feels rote and by the (Hollywood) book.

In regard to the actors' performances, Freeman as Bilbo was earnest but often relegated to the sidelines and even by the end of the film I did not feel we the audience truly got to know this character. In fact, the film's story often seems like it not told from Bilbo's perspective but from Gandalf's. McKellen, as Gandalf, understandably seems bored and does not convey quite the same warmth and sincerity that he did in "Rings". Armitage as Thorin is appropriately grim but he is given very little do and I never felt indignance at his treatment of Bilbo. The rest of the dwarves remain completely undeveloped, except for Stott as Balin, who has a very likeable screen presence, and Nesbitt as Bofur who is given one good scene in which to shine. Finally, McCoy as Radagast is very likeable, but his scenes feel tacked on, tonally a bit off, and interfere with the film's structure.

I think this would have been a more successful film if the attempt had not been made to tie it to the "Rings" material. While the atmosphere in the film is lighter than in "Rings", the underlying sense of groping for an epic tone is always present and distracting. The need to make the subject matter grander has resulted in additions which do not feel like "The Hobbit" or even like Tolkien. The worst of these, as alluded to above, are the Pale Orc's scenes, which often consist of him evilly delivering monologues to his minions. I am also uncertain why he was depicted as a CGI creature when a real actor in prosthetics would have been so much more effective. Even the character design is bland and video-game like, and bears no resemblance to any of the Orcs depicted in this film or the previous "Rings" films, which by comparison seem so much more real and threatening.

The art and technical teams even seem a bit off in this film. For example, the sets and costumes of the (horribly trite) prologue are very "Dungeons and Dragons" and overdesigned. The cinematography throughout the film was not beautiful. The extreme closeups that were used to such great, intimate effect in "Rings" are gone, presumably because there is little room for 3D and CGI in such shots. Establishing shots seem rare and the audience (and characters) are given little chance to marvel at the scenery as in the "Rings" films.

In summary, this is a disappointing film that may threaten the legacy of the original "Rings" films. I wish the filmmakers had been brave enough (like Bilbo in the book), to remain true to their own convictions (if they indeed still have them) and cast off the Hollywood influence that pervades this film.

theonering.net (http://www.theonering.net/reviews/review.php?id=625)

[Mitsu3000gt]

Saw this in the 3D IMAX w/ 48 FPS and it looked like absolute garbage. The entire film looks like either a soap opera, a live play, or a low budget film on the Space channel. I enjoyed the movie and the scenery, etc. but the FPS makes it look like you're watching the filming live which I personally hated. It all looks like you're watching some sort of unfinished director's cut or something.

If any of you have LCD TV's with that "tru motion" or similar feature that inserts fake frames to up the frame rate, it looks exactly like that. If your at all sensitive to it I suggest you watch it in 2D (I hear that is still 24 FPS but I can't confirm).

[ipeefreely]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt
If your at all sensitive to it I suggest you watch it in 2D (I hear that is still 24 FPS but I can't confirm).

Yup, 2D is in 24FPS... looks good... doesn't need any 3D 48FPS magic... :nut:

The script could use some magic though.... :rofl:

[Markll7]

Saw it 3D opening night and then again in normal, don't waste your money on imax unless you want to see the Star Trek 9 minute preview.

[urrforce]

going to see this tonight cannot wait

finals over and it's time to catch up on movies and tv lol

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt
Saw this in the 3D IMAX w/ 48 FPS and it looked like absolute garbage. The entire film looks like either a soap opera, a live play, or a low budget film on the Space channel. I enjoyed the movie and the scenery, etc. but the FPS makes it look like you're watching the filming live which I personally hated. It all looks like you're watching some sort of unfinished director's cut or something.

If any of you have LCD TV's with that "tru motion" or similar feature that inserts fake frames to up the frame rate, it looks exactly like that. If your at all sensitive to it I suggest you watch it in 2D (I hear that is still 24 FPS but I can't confirm).

Saw it @ 24fps 3D, not impressed. Most said 48fps are worse but lucky, only Sunridge and Chinook carry that.

if you are carry 12 dwarfs that can't fight and you have hawks/eagles on your side, fly them the fuck there. Toward the climax, I knew the hawks are coming and I just shook my head. Gandulf is ALL powerful unless you need him to be.

[littledan]

I'm not impressed that they killed off my favorite main character from Strike Back TV show just so he could film this hobbit fairy tale bs

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by Xtrema


Saw it @ 24fps 3D, not impressed. Most said 48fps are worse but lucky, only Sunridge and Chinook carry that.

if you are carry 12 dwarfs that can't fight and you have hawks/eagles on your side, fly them the fuck there. Toward the climax, I knew the hawks are coming and I just shook my head. Gandulf is ALL powerful unless you need him to be.

Yeah it's subjective, but I hated the 48 FPS.

I also agree 100% about Gandalf, I always wondered that through all the Lord of the Rings series. I was always asking myself "why doesn't Gandalf just....." haha. I guess it wouldn't be much of a story then!

[urrforce]

movie was great really really enjoyed it great battle scenes good amount of humor and kept really true to book (which i guess jackson is known for)


the 48fps though? there was points during some scenes where i felt like my eyes just couldn't keep up to what was happening on the screen

[Quiet10]

Maybe the reason the Eagles didn't want to carry them there is because they have to fly through/over Murkwood Forest, which is now all dark and evil.

That's the only explanation I can think of, otherwise, I was thinking the exact same thing.

:dunno:

[ZenOps]

Saw it in 3D at Empire #10 on their "EE" screen.

I was actually impressed at how little if any jitter there was. The smooth motion effect did look a little "off" at first, so if you do not like the 120 hz HDTV's, you are going to hate the high motion capture.

Yes, the ultrasmooth motion does make it look like "soap opera-ish" and it definitely does bring out any minor imperfections in makeup (and there were quite a few on the dwarves) especially the forehead of a certain dwarf... lol.

Me personally, I like the high Hz/Fps.

[403Gemini]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt


Yeah it's subjective, but I hated the 48 FPS.

I also agree 100% about Gandalf, I always wondered that through all the Lord of the Rings series. I was always asking myself "why doesn't Gandalf just....." haha. I guess it wouldn't be much of a story then!

From what I understand about "wizards" in Tolkein's lore is that they are more about divination magic / foretelling the future and seeing the possible futures vs explosive/offensive magic. It's a very different mindset from most fantasy stories.

[nonofyobiz]

I just watched it tonight, in the UltraAVX 3D Crossiron theatre.

Definitely wasn't blown away. Never really got too invested in the story and found the 3D too blurry when the scene was moving fast. It was ok though.

I loved the lord of the rings movies (up until the army of ghosts:rolleyes: ). Never read the books though

[403Gemini]

The problem I have with the Hobbit is I dislike how they're making it 3 movies by adding the additional stories that Tolkien wrote. The movie feels too busy and all over the place because there is no definitive story.

Lord of the rings - Destroy the ring

The hobbit (movies) - ??? White orc? Smaug? Smeagol? Necromancer?

Just WAAAAAY too much and nothing fleshed out.

[msommers]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt


Yeah it's subjective, but I hated the 48 FPS.

I also agree 100% about Gandalf, I always wondered that through all the Lord of the Rings series. I was always asking myself "why doesn't Gandalf just....." haha. I guess it wouldn't be much of a story then!

Dude I constantly thought about that! Those eagles come in just at the right time when really, they could have taken them to Mount Doom and be done with it!

My buddy was saying that the main protagonist in The Hobbit (1) doesn't actually exist in the book. Is that true?

[403Gemini]

Originally posted by msommers


Dude I constantly thought about that! Those eagles come in just at the right time when really, they could have taken them to Mount Doom and be done with it!

My buddy was saying that the main protagonist in The Hobbit (1) doesn't actually exist in the book. Is that true?

Bilbo? No, he's in the book ;)

[ipeefreely]

Originally posted by msommers
My buddy was saying that the main protagonist in The Hobbit (1) doesn't actually exist in the book. Is that true?
See my post... ;)

Originally posted by 403Gemini
Bilbo? No, he's in the book ;)
:rofl:

[403Gemini]

Originally posted by ipeefreely

See my post... ;)

:rofl:

I actually didn't read your wifes review until just now (avoided this thread until I saw the movie) and I think she hit the nail on the head with ALL of her points.

They're trying to make this story too grand and epic, which in it's own right it certainly is - but it's not the Rings... it's its own tale and they're trying too hard to foreshadow.

[beecue]

IcCK55ZnoKM

Looks so much better than the first one.

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by beecue
IcCK55ZnoKM

Looks so much better than the first one.

http://movieboozer.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/The_Hobbit.jpeg


A little...

[403Gemini]

Way too much emphasis on gimmicky 3D effects, too many things jumping at / pointing towards the camera. I was distracted by that in a 2 minute trailer, not really making me excited to sit through 2.5-3 hrs of that. :(

[DJ Lazy]

An older video, but worth the watch!
qWuJ3UscMjk&feature=endscreen&NR=1

[BigMass]

Originally posted by beecue
IcCK55ZnoKM

Looks so much better than the first one.

but still about 100x worse than LOTR. And it has nothing to do with the story. The direction, the "Rated CG" and the over the top-neverending no consequence action sequences just to keep the ADD kiddies happy. Looks about as "dialed in" as it can get. Totally has the feeling that the Star Wars prequels did. Very disappointing

[403Gemini]

^^Basically how I feel. LOTR movies had a very real feeling of dread and death as the story unfolded. Hobbit just has a feeling of a ride through a theme park. Every movie that progressed with LOTR just became more and more tragic. Boromir died in the first movie and it was a pretty epic death. The fellowship split up. Two towers the attack on Helms Deep was also a feeling of "this is the end" when they started arming the children to fight. The "Return of the king" when Gondar is under siege was probably one of the best "war" scenes in fantasy where you see moral failing, and it's the last stand of man vs forces of Sauron.

The hobbit doesn't really invoke any of that emotion.

[Tram Common]

Originally posted by beecue
IcCK55ZnoKM

Looks so much better than the first one.

Looks like garbage... just like the first one.

How they are managing to absolutely fuck up the coolest, most straight forward book in the Middle Earth world is beyond me. :dunno:

[DJ Lazy]

Originally posted by 403Gemini
^^Basically how I feel. LOTR movies had a very real feeling of dread and death as the story unfolded. Hobbit just has a feeling of a ride through a theme park. Every movie that progressed with LOTR just became more and more tragic. Boromir died in the first movie and it was a pretty epic death. The fellowship split up. Two towers the attack on Helms Deep was also a feeling of "this is the end" when they started arming the children to fight. The "Return of the king" when Gondar is under siege was probably one of the best "war" scenes in fantasy where you see moral failing, and it's the last stand of man vs forces of Sauron.

The hobbit doesn't really invoke any of that emotion.


It's been awhile since I read The Hobbit, but I don't recall the The Hobbit EVER having the same "Death and Dispair" that the LOTR's had.

So whats your point?

[BigMass]

Originally posted by DJ Lazy



It's been awhile since I read The Hobbit, but I don't recall the The Hobbit EVER having the same "Death and Dispair" that the LOTR's had.

So whats your point?

it doesn't. That's why my criticism was at the direction, screenplay and production. Not the story itself. Plenty of movies aimed at kids can still be done well. The Hobbit was not one of them (average at best). Well at least, not deserving such a piece of literature.

[403Gemini]

Originally posted by DJ Lazy



It's been awhile since I read The Hobbit, but I don't recall the The Hobbit EVER having the same "Death and Dispair" that the LOTR's had.

So whats your point?

I suppose we're just not at the part of the story yet , maybe it's just Peter Jackson dragging the story out into three movies. Smaug was pretty awesome in the books and seemed more of a threat in the books than he is in the movies. The white orc is a bland distraction from the main purpose of the story.

But yeah you're right, story doesn't really compare to LOTR. Guess just spoiled with that story and it's tough making a kids story feel as grand lol

[DJ Lazy]

Originally posted by 403Gemini


I suppose we're just not at the part of the story yet , maybe it's just Peter Jackson dragging the story out into three movies. Smaug was pretty awesome in the books and seemed more of a threat in the books than he is in the movies. The white orc is a bland distraction from the main purpose of the story.

But yeah you're right, story doesn't really compare to LOTR. Guess just spoiled with that story and it's tough making a kids story feel as grand lol

It's really getting dragged out into 3 movies? That youtube I posted above only talks about 2 movies. Clearly I don't keep up on my movie news enough. :rofl:

Anyways, Maybe I am just a sucker for the whole Hobbit/LOTR thing and just like seeing it on the silver screen. I enjoyed The Hobbit Part 1. I can typically look past a lot of what people complain about when it comes to certain styles of directing and such.

I will agree about the White Orc though, IMO it didn't really add all that much to the movie and if anything it takes away from Bilbo as the main character and puts more emphasis on Thorin (or whatever his name is).

[403Gemini]

Don't get me wrong , I'm a sucker for almost anything fantasy and Hobbit/LOTR are probably the best movies to come out in that genre within the last 20 years (or ever...), just the Hobbit seems to be taken in a different direction than LOTR ... just feels more gimmicky than LOTR with the emphasis on 3d, which I loathe.

[DJ Lazy]

I have yet to see a movie in 3D.. haha :nut:

That video of the Making of The Hobbit I posted shows how even the conceptual Artists pencil sketched in 3D.