Just got back myself. Haven't read the books, so can't compare but I really liked the movie. I might go watch it again sometime later.

It sucks I have to wait another year to find out what happens. >_>

 

Go see this shit, people. It was quite good. 9/10

Essentially, the Patrick Rothfus link gave pretty good insight into what this movie was, and his comments were made before the movie even came out. Unlike Rothfus, though, I didn't grow up quite as attached to the hobbit, so I didn't mind as greatly the epically increased amount of action scenes and drama.

Also, as I've gotten older, I've started to separate books and movies into their own categories of judgments as mediums. They have different strengths, and anyone who prefers the strength of books for subtlety is always going to see the failure in a movie adaptation.

And Jackson does make some damn great movies, canon commitment aside.

 

Pros:

- It's fucking gorgeous. 48 fps is indeed the future. Well done, PJ.

- Martin is a really likable Hobbit. Not once did I feel an urge to facepalm while he was onscreen. I cannot say the same for Elijah and Sean.

- Cheesy throwbacks to LOTR.

- Stuff not in the book that I wasn't really expecting.

- Goblin King's neck waddle. It's mesmerizing.

Some cons:

- The familiar spinning shots of the company walking/riding/running feels much more like a New Zealand Tourism incentive video than LOTR ever did.

- Lacks the overall epic quality that LOTR has in spades, but I attribute that to Tolkien's no-so-epic plot.

- The comedic aspect. It's funny at times, but more often than not it feels forced.

I give it a solid 8.5 out of 10. Immensely enjoyable.

 

Very similar to what last poster said about the movie. Probably an 8/10.

From previous experience, I am reluctant to really judge the movie alone. I found the LotR trilogy to be much bigger than the sum of its parts.

I'll take a moment to talk about HFR (48fps). Agreed with last post - it is definitely the future.

It took me 15 minutes to get used to it. I'm a visual artist so kept comparing scenes mentally with what I thought they'd look like in 24fps and found 48fps much better. By the end of the movie though I didn't watch to go back to 24fps.

Specifically - two major critiques have been that either 48fps doesn't look cinematic enough or it makes the fake prosthetics stand out. The latter - just ridiculous. True (they are visible at times - Gandalf's nose) but I'd put that one on the Make Up team rather than frame rate.

The cinematic feel issue is one of tradition - you're used to seeing movies in a 24fps. Nothing special about it. It's kinda like how photographer found color photos obscene when they first saw them. Doesn't mean BW was superior.

If you've ever played a high quality video game with motion, it's like that (awesome).

It is especially visible on the CGI. It REALLY 'pops out' good CGI because there is negligible motion blur when the camera pans. Although one would say that it highlights the opposite for bad CGI (which for the most part PJ makes sure is not an issue).

Similarly, it's a pleasure while watching the actors. Given the lack of blur the actors' expressions are a joy to watch cinematically. Martin Freeman takes advantage of it to the full. And the scene with him and Gollum...nothing else in cinema compares technically (if you thought Avatar had technical merits wait till you watch this).


I freely admit I'm biased towards most upcoming technologies (hence this too). And also give how PJ the director wants us to watch it like that.

I suppose I'm diverting but given how it could possibly be a turning point for cinema like LotR was for CGI (also integral to the director) - and critics have bashed it; I wanted to drop in a line. So give it a chance...

 

This is something I've specifically had to develop for LoTR.

I'm one of those lore freaks that will obsess over every little thing, it's just the way I'm built. If I couldn't separate film and movie, I wouldn't be pleasant to be around.

At this point, I watch them not for the story, but for the visual interpretation of things I've imagined my whole life. If I want the story, I'll go back and read the books again. I love props, I love design work, and seeing things I've only dreamed about come to life on screen just makes me happy. I've spent more time watching the appendixes on my copy of LoTR than the actual movies.

Spoiler

Awesome things, and not so awesome things.

+ Beginning of the movie, background/view of Erebor/Dale. Fucking awesome. Without doubt my favorite part of the movie.

- War of Dwarves and Orcs/Azog (That scarred up white Orc), screwed from a lore perspective. Super cool to look at though.

+ Getting to see the origin of the Oakenshield epithet.

- All things Radagast.

+ Andy Serkis.

- A lack of time scale, same as LoTR. Sure I know that Smaug attacked Erebor in TA 2770 and the Hobbit takes place in TA 2941, but most people are just going to think its been a couple of years. Same thing happened with Bilbo's departure to Frodo's departure in Fellowship. The movie makes it look like a couple of months, maybe a year at the most, where its actually been 17 years.

- Wolves/Warges/Final Battle, canonically there are very few things right with this whole scene. Luckily it happened to be awesome to watch.

- Lack of Gwaihir at the end. I get that it was the end, but I've been waiting a long time for this. The next movie better start with a decent section on the eagles.

I'll freely admit that most of my gripes are bullshit, nothing more than me fretting over canon.

Scenes dragged on just enough to be uncomfortable, I could literally feel the movie being stretched. I know Pete wanted to do it in two movies but just couldn't, so instead 2 and a half movies get stretched into 3.

It's decent, and people I know that have seen it but haven't read the books, say it was amazing. Setting the lore freak aside for a bit, I'll give it 8/10.

 

The Riddles in the Dark were definitely my favorite part of the movie. Freeman and Serkis just nailed it.

 

Just saw it, pretty good movie all around. I liked almost everything from start to finish; even the Exposition Council didn't irritate me as much as I expected them to.

Spoiler

And fuck the haters, Radagast the Brown's Amazing Rabbit Sleigh Ride (TM) was one of the most hilarious things I've seen all year. Practically redeemed the few bad bits all on its own.

 

I saw it earlier today. It's been quite a while since I'v read the book but how come there was no scene with the dwarves in barrels ? I'm almost certain I saw a bit about that in the production blog.

 

That scene takes place when they escape from the elves in Mirkwood, which will be in the second movie (I think).

 

Oh cool, I didn't realise they had started filming the second film yet.

 

Pretty sure they filmed this the same as LotR, in one go.

Saw it at the midnight showing, wanted to digest a bit.

Spoiler

Radagast the Brown made me angry at many points. But also quite happy. Especially his use of magic which Tolkien hinted at dealing with beasts and the mushroom comment because I'm pretty sure that's directly from Tolkien somewhere.

I get the increased involvement of Azog. But I still didn't like it. I intellectually understood several changes in fact. But at times they frustrated the shit out of me.

Bilbo was more spot-on than I ever expected. I was shocked and pleased, even when they would increase his dialogue beyond the book's.

I was not happy with the Gollum-Bilbo riddle-fest/subsequent escape. I found chance (Bilbo lucking into his "time" answer) to be an important part in the book, one that stuck out. I disliked that it did not exist in the movie.

The appendices additions were actually fewer and further between than I hoped. But I wasn't upset with the pacing of the movie knowing it would be three movies.

My favorite part though? The very end. They handled Smaug perfectly. See his eye from under a mountain of gold gave me shivers and brought my excitement level for the next installment to the top.

 

Azog's greater involvement was rather retarded. Azog fucking died at the gates of Moria, why couldn't they just use Bolg, who actually was the leader of the Orcs in the book. I hate that kind of shit in movie adaptations.

 

Just saw it in HFR 3d and fucking loved it.

Loved HFR and I would definitely love to see more movies taking advantage of it. I loved the increased use of songs especially the first scene with the dwarfs in the kitchen.

The only thing I hated about the movie was the increased use of Azog.

 

The whole time he was on screen, I couldn't stop staring at it. In its whole HFR 3D grotesque glory.

 

Yeah also liked it a lot... It is a lot funnier and less serious than LotR but that is the book also. A few "free" interpretations of Canon but like others here said.. it is a movie so there are bound to be differences.
48 mixed with 3D is really great so I hope we will see more of that in the future.

All in all 8-9/10

 

I liked it in a 6/10 kind of way. I can't give more because I'm a Tolkien fan. So, because the rant would be too long, here is a pro/cons list:

Pros:
-The songs. That was a fundamental part that wasn't considered for LOTR.
- Erebor background and history.
- Dol-Guldur
- Stone Giants
- Misty Mountains with all its scenes.
- Gollum
- Thorin
- Smaug
- The "mental illness" that affected Thror. The glimpse at last of the Seven.
- The map

Cons:
- Gandalf
- White Consil
- Azog
- Mirkwood
- General shit that's not in the book, so they could make 3 movies from 300 pages.

All hail and bow to Galadriel and Lord Elrond. Are you a Maia? Bow too you peasant! WTF was that shit?? Worst, they made Gandalf ignorant of the political background in the ME because they needed more "magic" in the movie. When it was Gandalf who orchestrated the quest in the first place because he "felt" it could be fundamental in the future. If you're going to use the appendix to fill a Trilogy, use ALL of it, not the parts that suit you. It was Gandalf the White vs The Witch-King of Angmar all over again.

 

HFR 3D DBOX was fucking amazing, same gripes as above 9/10

 

Right, so by extension anyone who did like the movie isn't a real Tolkien fan?

 

If that's what you think, it's okay man. I do not share your point of view.

 

Obviously. But the truth is that the real Tolkien fans wouldn't even watch this movie.

By the way, it's still two more weeks before I can watch it, but I'm curious - are these rumors about a hot romance between Gandalf and Galadriel true? Because I totally want to see it.