The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

Lol, yeah, not me. I love the films...but just no....thanks.

I did the original Star Wars trilogy back in '84.....6 hours in a seat at the age of 14.
My spine certainly would not take it now. :(
 
MooMoo444 said:
Having a marathon LotR/Hobbit session leading up to this. Watching all 5 movies so far back to back, in their full extended version.

I started in March.
Click to expand...

I don't know how anyone can sit and watch 9+ hours straight of a trilogy. I'm done after 3 hours.
 
Going to see this tonight. Didn't think much of the previous 2 films - they seemed over-long to me. Lets hope the 2h 44m or whatever it will be, is justified this time.
 
i've never liked these kind of films so probably shouldn't comment.... but i can't help but mention how utterly fake and awful all the CGI looked when i saw a trailer for this at the cinema a few weeks back. :/
 
marc2003 said:
i've never liked these kind of films so probably shouldn't comment.... but i can't help but mention how utterly fake and awful all the CGI looked when i saw a trailer for this at the cinema a few weeks back. :/
Click to expand...

Sadly I would have to agree. The use of cgi was very poorly implemented and didn't come close to the actors/cgi used in LOTR.

Will wait for its release and watch it at home as I found the first two disappointing. Hope this one holds my interest for longer than the previous two.
 
Well just got back from seeing it in 3d as usual pointless.

Im not a huge fan of this series so that will tarnish my opinion of the film a bit.

Well i only fell asleep once and nodded off waking myself up about 5 times - I did the same in the First film - I stayed awake for the whole of The Smaug one and I watched that twice.

Didn't tick the boxes for me too much, felt like id seen it all before many times now. The comical character was annoying, the fighting over-long, like the recent superman film. Overall it was enjoyable enough but im glad its all over this time for good
 
I watched all three films last night in 3d and it was heavy going on my eyes.

I love the third film however I thought it was a little short. I felt the start were they killed smaug could have been a little longer. The battle scenes were fantastic and there was a few funny moments. Can't wait to watch it again :D
 
I'm off to see the film as soon as I finish this post. Not at one of the "premium screens" - just a standard 3D showing, but oh so looking forward to this.
 
Well... that wasn't great. The Hobbit, followed by Lord of The Rings, was the first fantasy book I read as a kid so I've always been happy for them to have been committed to screen. And I've also been an enthusiastic watcher of the two trilogies.

That said, I'm quite glad it's all over - I don't think the Silmarillion or the Adventures of Tom Bombadil have much filmic attraction!. The final Hobbit film seems like a film for films sake; almost entirely pointless. I'd read a review in the Telegraph a couple of days ago, and apparently Jackson managed to turn the remaining 40-odd pages into a two and a half hour film.

I'd recommend going to see it, it's OK viewing and it'll give a finality to Tolkein on the big screen but it's probably the weakest of the six films. I don't mind the plot holes, I don't mind the laughable dialogue, and I even don't mind the expansion of the books. What I don't particularly like is that this film looks like a 3 hour advert for a computer game - the bit where a disclaimer announces not actual gameplay footage. With the CGI and technology available to them, it's a shame that it already seems like it's a bit dated.

It has its moments. Martin Freeman and Sir Ian McKellen are both excellent, and I'll generally watch anything fantasy related.

I'm glad I watched it, and I'm glad it's finished! :)
 
toshj said:
What I don't particularly like is that this film looks like a 3 hour advert for a computer game - the bit where a disclaimer announces not actual gameplay footage. With the CGI and technology available to them, it's a shame that it already seems like it's a bit dated.
Click to expand...

Your quite right, there really is a game like aesthetic to the Hobbit films (seeing TBOFA Sunday) that was not there on the LOTR trilogy. Everything is bathed in a glowy bloom, just like a lot of games, and the HFR makes it seem even more gamey. The quality of the CGI does seem lacking at times, and a step back from what WETA has produced in the past, which is quite baffling. Considering the locations they had at their disposal, there is way too much green screen, and too many CGI characters.
 
It's a shame really, the reviews for the Hobbit films have been poor to average. I hated the first film, it takes far too long to get going and when it does it's still not all that great. The second was an improvement and I actually enjoyed this one, mostly. Unfortunately, my feelings about the third are similar to how I felt about the first film. It seems like the second film contained the best parts of the book, or the most in-depth parts anyway, and in the other two they've had to add in a lot.

If you condensed what was in the three films, removing the unnecessary parts and characters, you'd probably have one really, really good film. The book just never suited a trilogy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom