The Hobbit

Z

Zignor 3_sl

shitlord
180
1
I liked the movie, but I was left with a similar feeling as when I watched TTT for the first time. There was some clunky editing, lots of book scenes missing, not nearly enough intimate character moments, and lots of material that was either stretched out from the book or entirely invented, without enough book-faithful stuff to counterbalance it all.

Fortunately TTT's extended edition corrected a LOT of the problems I found in its theatrical release and I find it to be a far better film. I hope - but don't expect - that the extended version of this one will offer the same level of improvement. I wouldn't mind most of the PJ-invented stuff if it didn't come at the cost of sailing through or completely cutting great moments from the book.
 
Mist

Mist

Eeyore Enthusiast
<Gold Donor>
30,524
22,468
Thank you everyone in this thread for lowering my expectations of this movie. I ended up liking it a lot, at least the first 80% of it or so. The last 20 minutes or so felt completely unnecessary. Giant gold dwarf? Wtf.

But overall it was a pretty good movie.
 
j00t

j00t

Silver Baronet of the Realm
7,380
7,473
Me too. The look on smaug's face when he saw it was excellent.

As others have said... Ups and downs were added to the narrative in the movie because that section of the book didn't have much. I'm fine with more middle earth at the cost of some purism to one of middle earth's stories
 
Void

Void

Experiencer
<Gold Donor>
9,489
11,204
I enjoyed it well enough, but if I'm going to nitpick (and I am), things like the dwarves being mostly buffoons the entire time really didn't sit well with me at all (same with the first one). Not to mention, you either have these good looking "human" looking dwarves who are the important ones, or you have completely ridiculous looking ones that are there for not much besides comic relief and reminding us that they are dwarves and not just a bunch of humans running around. Elves being absolute killing machines compared to dwarves is another pet peeve, but Evangeline Lily is hot as fuck and did a really great job I feel, so I'll let it pass.

Smaug was downright fucking awesome though, minus the parts where they made him dumb of course, but I don't know that I could have even envisioned a better Smaug. He was everything I expected and more. The vast throne room was awesome too...until it seemed to go on for miles and you realized just how much gold that would have entailed, but whatever, they're dwarves and I guess the entire mountain must have been gold.

I was mediocre on the movie, liking parts of it, not really liking other parts, but Smaug sealed the deal for me. Yeah I'd like him to not have been retarded and walking right past all the dwarves or being tricked by another group yelling, "Over here!" repeatedly, but his conversation with Bilbo and his sheer awesomeness really gave me a dragon-boner. I'll watch (pirate) the last one for Smaug alone, with a helping of Evangeline Lily.
 
Big Phoenix

Big Phoenix

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
<Gold Donor>
45,006
94,131
I really dont like the whole physical comedy thats been in these two. The whole floating down the river in barrels sequence just didnt do it for me.
 
McCheese

McCheese

SW: Sean, CW: Crone, GW: Wizardhawk
6,895
4,277
Vvoid_sl said:
I enjoyed it well enough, but if I'm going to nitpick (and I am), things like the dwarves being mostly buffoons the entire time really didn't sit well with me at all (same with the first one). Not to mention, you either have these good looking "human" looking dwarves who are the important ones, or you have completely ridiculous looking ones that are there for not much besides comic relief and reminding us that they are dwarves and not just a bunch of humans running around. Elves being absolute killing machines compared to dwarves is another pet peeve, but Evangeline Lily is hot as fuck and did a really great job I feel, so I'll let it pass.

Smaug was downright fucking awesome though, minus the parts where they made him dumb of course, but I don't know that I could have even envisioned a better Smaug. He was everything I expected and more. The vast throne room was awesome too...until it seemed to go on for miles and you realized just how much gold that would have entailed, but whatever, they're dwarves and I guess the entire mountain must have been gold.

I was mediocre on the movie, liking parts of it, not really liking other parts, but Smaug sealed the deal for me. Yeah I'd like him to not have been retarded and walking right past all the dwarves or being tricked by another group yelling, "Over here!" repeatedly, but his conversation with Bilbo and his sheer awesomeness really gave me a dragon-boner. I'll watch (pirate) the last one for Smaug alone, with a helping of Evangeline Lily.
Click to expand...
I somewhat forgive the buffoonery of the dwarves simply because they were portrayed as kind of hapless in the book as well. Not to the extent that the movie goes, but I don't remember reading the book and thinking "wow, these dwarves are bad asses." It was more like, "What the hell would these dwarves have done without Gandalf and Bilbo?"

Anyway, I'm hoping that we get to see some elf-style badassery from the dwarves during the Battle of Five Armies. We should get a whole army of heavily armed dwarves intent on kicking elf ass.
 
Needless

Needless

Toe Sucker
9,243
3,310
The dwarves were virtually useless in the entirety of the books, they need to make them appealing some how lol
 
T

Troll_sl

shitlord
1,703
6
The initial problem was that there were 13 dwarves and only so much book.

But instead of giving them any real character, we just got 8 or 9 Jar Jar Binkses.
 
L

Lenardo

Vyemm Raider
3,574
2,482
The uselessness of the dwarves in the river in the book was even more profound

they were sealed up in the barrels in the book. bilbo put the covers on etc. then he rode down on a barrel (no orc fights with elf killing machine help) until lake down then the dwarves all were let out for the "i am thorin son of thrain king under the mountain and i have returned" bit. no river boat, etc, and wtf is with the black arrow just being -basically- a ballista bolt, it would be cooler- and TRUE TO THE BOOK- if the black arrow was...an ARROW shot from a fucking Bow.

however i loved the movie and look forward to july(if that release date is still true) and seeing The Hobbit:there and back again. though i think it should b e The Hobbit : War of the Five Armies.
 
chaos

chaos

Buzzfeed Editor
17,324
4,839
Yeah I think people have a false memory of the dwarves being badasses or the tone of the book being more serious. The dwarves were dumbasses in the book and there were only a couple of serious parts. I thought the river sequence was fine.
 
Tarrant

Tarrant

<Prior Amod>
15,572
9,022
chaos_sl said:
Yeah I think people have a false memory of the dwarves being badasses or the tone of the book being more serious. The dwarves were dumbasses in the book and there were only a couple of serious parts. I thought the river sequence was fine.
Click to expand...
Pretty much this.
 
Jysin

Jysin

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
6,290
4,056
I was going to say, every LoTR and Hobbit movie thus far has been a December release. Why would they change that?
 
Mist

Mist

Eeyore Enthusiast
<Gold Donor>
30,524
22,468
etchazz_sl said:
probably so PJ can make it extra shitty. since most people don't seem to care if it stays true to the book or not, he could throw in some imperial walkers and ewoks for extra awesomeness.
Click to expand...
The Battle of Six Armies! Let's throw in some Ultralisks and Mutalisks to make 7!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.