The Hobbitt

I finally saw it, and I really liked it. I can't wait for the next installment. I saw the normal version and it looked fine to me. The sound in the theater was superb! Dr. Who fans may have noticed Sylvester McCoy played the Brown Wizard. Benedict Cumberbatch plays The Necromancer. You only get to see his silhouette, but I am sure he will have a larger part later. I read the book years ago and forgot a lot. I want to re-read it, but I think it has vanished into my daughter's room somewhere.
 
I have a few nits to pick:

  • The pale orc - he didn't exist in the book (or the appendices in LoTR, either)
  • The troll scene - didn't play true to the book either
  • The goblin escape - the scene between Bilbo and Gollum ('Riddles in the Dark') takes place after Gandalf rescues the dwarves - Bilbo is lost during the escape when he falls off (Dwalin's?) back
  • Bilbo is a little too decisive and brave - he's supposed to be much more of a wilting lily until the whole Mirkwood episode
  • The dwarf party is not adverse to seeing Elrond in Rivendell in the book
I'll give the Radagast / Dol Guldur bit a pass since it is in the LoTR appendices as well as the rewrite of the 'Out of the Frying Pan, Into the Fire' scene since the changes were due to the whole inclusion of the pale orc (which I already bitched about in my bullet points). We'll see how they handle Beorn and Mirkwood in Part 2 next December - if they do a good job of it, my opinion of the first movie will probably improve. As it stands, I give it a B (mostly because they actors do a good job with what they've got).

-D
 
I have a few nits to pick:

  • The pale orc - he didn't exist in the book (or the appendices in LoTR, either)
  • The troll scene - didn't play true to the book either
  • The goblin escape - the scene between Bilbo and Gollum ('Riddles in the Dark') takes place after Gandalf rescues the dwarves - Bilbo is lost during the escape when he falls off (Dwalin's?) back
  • Bilbo is a little too decisive and brave - he's supposed to be much more of a wilting lily until the whole Mirkwood episode
  • The dwarf party is not adverse to seeing Elrond in Rivendell in the book
I'll give the Radagast / Dol Guldur bit a pass since it is in the LoTR appendices as well as the rewrite of the 'Out of the Frying Pan, Into the Fire' scene since the changes were due to the whole inclusion of the pale orc (which I already bitched about in my bullet points). We'll see how they handle Beorn and Mirkwood in Part 2 next December - if they do a good job of it, my opinion of the first movie will probably improve. As it stands, I give it a B (mostly because they actors do a good job with what they've got).

-D


I give passes to some of the points you make as well.

The pale orc is Azog, from the Appendices under "Durin's Folk" and in the movie, he kills Thrain, Thorin's father - but this is different than the book.

The war between the orcs and dwarves was sparked when Thorin's grandfather, Thror, literally walked into Moria by himself and was killed by Azog and his head was cut off. Thror's only companion, Nar, was sent back by Azog as a messenger to the dwarves not to come ever again to Moria as beggars.

Thrain, Thorin's father, gathered as many of the dwarves as he could to take vengeance on Azog and the orcs of Moria.

But in the book, Thrain is not killed by Azog, but rather Thrain's cousin, Nain - and it is Nain's son, Dain who actually kills Azog.

In the movie, Thorin faces Azog but only wounds him but cutting off his arm.

It would be my guess that PJ & Co. changed this for the big payoff when we get to the Battle of Five Armies so that Thorin can face Azog and kill him.

However, this will be different than the book, because, Azog was killed by Dain and it was Azog's son, Bolg, that we read about in the Hobbit who comes with the orcs from Moria in the Battle of Five Armies - and it is Beorn who kills Bolg.

Kinda convoluted from the book - so I can understand how PJ & CO changed this to be more directly connected between Azog<-->Thorin.

I agree that Bilbo's courage is developed too soon, but given where PJ cuts off the first movie - it is a 'feel good' moment where Bilbo saves Thorin from Azog.

I get the Radagast tie in - but I didn't like the bunny sled sequences.

The Troll scene I give a pass to --- in the book it is Gandalf and some ventriloquism/voice throwing 'magic' that gets the Trolls to bicker amon themselves until dawn.

I'm still noodling out what I don't like about the meeting in the movie at Rivendell between Saruman, Gandalf, Galadriel, and Elrond. I tend to take this as a meeting of the White Council in regards to Dol Goldur and the power that is taking shape there.

In the book, by this time, the White Council knows that it is Sauron taking shape again and is looking for the One Ring. And Saruman is playing both sides against the other to delay any move against Dol Goldur so that more can be known concerning the whereabouts of the One Ring.

The movie makes it seem as if none of the Wise know about Sauron reforming or that the One Ring was not destroyed in the Second Age, and is being sought after.
 
Didn't get the link between Azog and Dain (didn't remember the name of the pale CGI orc), but that makes it a bit less annoying to me...but not much. But thanks for clearing that up for me, Erik.

And, yeah, the whole White Council meeting was also annoying since in the Hobbit, there isn't much concern by Elrond about the dwarves' quest.

-D
 
I saw in it in 48fps Readl3D and found the 48fps really sharpened up the 3D image and removed all the motion and panning artifacts we are so used to seeing in 24fps projection. Of course this is the most contentious comment about the movie's technology but for my part I am all for it.

To heighten how much clearer this form of projection is, the next day I went to see Skyfall with film projection and presumably Dolby Digital audio. The print wasn't worn out by any means but there was parts of the film where the focus wasn't sharp, a large number of motion and panning artifacts and a just a much poorer quality cinematic experience. 48fps is just so much better I find it hard to understand the nay sayers.

But aspect of the Hobbit's technology that hasn't been discussed in this thread is the audio. I was fortunately to experience the film in Dolby Atmos and the 64 channel audio really added to the cinematic experience. Having sounds not only along the sides and behind you but also above you provided the director a means to position audio events across the entire auditorium, a feature that I felt was used to great effect and added considerably to the realism.
 
I was amused and will see the other parts, but not impressed. To much changes from the book for my taste. Also, I don't see the need (storywise) to turn it into more than one movie. As for the picture (Imax 3D 48fps Dolby Atmos etc), 3D still isn't perfect, but it's getting better.

But hey, I went with my gf and my other best female friend and I got to sit in the middle... :banana:
 
I just finished re-reading the book. I sure forgot a lot in 40 years! They certainly are embellishing the story for the movie. The Necromancer isn't even seen in the book, they just talk about him. No Orcs in the book either. Oh, well, it doesn't diminish my enjoyment of the film.
 
Wow, some of you guys are really Hobbit geeks. Not that that's a bad thing. :D

cubdog
 
movie was slow as expected. the ddp (dwarf dinner party) could have been cut in half. the word game between dildo and golum was gut-wrenching. the battle of the burning trees was ok.

after seeing this, i watched lotr again, and remembered a clip from this flick that best describes the trilogy.

http://youtu.be/AxAEo3CWeq8
 
I live in a small country town in New Zealand. It is about 12-15 minute drive into the country to Hobbiton, where they built the village for the movie film set.
It is a big tourist attraction. Coach loads of visitors from around the world.
I have been past but never been in.
LzidQ10DImGPNOjz-DmuAKVnpw2LzdaHZCj8DHj_DlTlthBCvW3TyWFCLv8uCESSYZCLyyCrYf_KjgnSRm4Dtrncv_AACJAA3yZJTbdOWLaPe7OwBGAJpS2SkEY3fudEse03ModdEC-ZzbiGshkhJb87zBZBym8=w241-h160-k-no


 
I live in a small country town in New Zealand. It is about 12-15 minute drive into the country to Hobbiton, where they built the village for the movie film set.
It is a big tourist attraction. Coach loads of visitors from around the world.
I have been past but never been in.
LzidQ10DImGPNOjz-DmuAKVnpw2LzdaHZCj8DHj_DlTlthBCvW3TyWFCLv8uCESSYZCLyyCrYf_KjgnSRm4Dtrncv_AACJAA3yZJTbdOWLaPe7OwBGAJpS2SkEY3fudEse03ModdEC-ZzbiGshkhJb87zBZBym8=w241-h160-k-no


It's about time you showed up in this thread.
 
Back
Top Bottom