The Hobbit

[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.

[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]

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!

[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?

[beecue]

It's now going to be 3 movies.

[Tik-Tok]

[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.

[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]

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 ... but the movie overall was pretty good!

The actors were excellent but the script really sucked!

Spoiler:

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!

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

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! Pretty much epic fail all around...

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

[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...

The script could use some magic though....