DELETED_74993

This is what I was hinting at earlier - we saw it as it 'actually happened' in The Hobbit, whereas the LOTR version was a story being told from someone else's point of view. Just look at it as different interpretations.

I just hope they don't do a Lucas and at some random time in the future release a version of LOTR with footage from The Hobbit in. :/ No need.
 
Why did they change the way in which Bilbo found the ring? The LOTR saw Bilbo just sort of coming across is as he was fumbling around but in The Hobbit, Bilbo actually sees it fall from Gollum...?
Click to expand...

Bilbo definitely doesn't see Gollum drop the ring in The Hobbit movie.

He just stumbles across it.
 
Seeing this tomorrow and feeling a great deal of trepidation about it. Tolkien was that thing for me as a kid and teen that got me through the hard times. I've been a fan for of his works for over 30 years and still attempt to read the books once a year.

I wasn't the biggest fan of the LOTR films. I thought the first was mostly pretty great but it all went downhill the further things went. Although RotK won the awards, I thought it was by far the worst of the films and I don't even bother to watch it now when I have a rewatch.

It's hard to pinpoint exactly what I didn't like about the films overall but the sort of individual things that drove me mad was Gimli being made the comedy relief for example.

I'm trying to go into it with an open mind but already I'm thinking that it's a pretty cynical thing to not coat the most recognisable actors playing dwarves in dwarf make-up (James Nesbitt and Aidan Turner look embarrasingly un-dwarf like).

Anyway here's hoping. :)
 
B1gbeard said:
I'm trying to go into it with an open mind but already I'm thinking that it's a pretty cynical thing to not coat the most recognisable actors playing dwarves in dwarf make-up (James Nesbitt and Aidan Turner look embarrasingly un-dwarf like).
Click to expand...

Some humans look naturally a bit dwarflike, others elfin, why could variable looks not apply to dwarves as well?
 
krooton said:
Some humans look naturally a bit dwarflike, others elfin, why could variable looks not apply to dwarves as well?
Click to expand...

I don't think I've seen a Tolkien representation of an elf or dwarf that could be mistaken for human but I guess there could be. Aidan Turner to me smacks of "we have no eye candy, you have to have eye candy, so lets make some up". Maybe it won't look as obvious in the film.
 
Back from seeing it at the BFI IMAX in in IMAX 3D at 24fps. Very enjoyable film, maybe just a little too long. There are a couple of memorable moments and it is very easy going. The 3D was ok, nothing to write home about and I’m not going to rush to see the HFR version. I wouldn’t mind seeing it again in 2D.
 
simulatorman said:
Back from seeing it at the BFI IMAX in in IMAX 3D at 24fps. Very enjoyable film, maybe just a little too long. There are a couple of memorable moments and it is very easy going. The 3D was ok, nothing to write home about and I’m not going to rush to see the HFR version. I wouldn’t mind seeing it again in 2D.
Click to expand...

I thought the 3D was some of the best I've seen, not overly in your face all the time and much more subtle. I did see it in HFR which I enjoyed as well though.

This film really does seem to be splitting people, with some giving 4/10, others 9/10. I agree it dragged a little at the beginning, but I really liked it towards the end. I would give it 8+/10, although I still think I prefer Lord of the Rings so far.
 
Last edited:
Finally got around to watching it earlier tonight and have to say what a stupendously terrific movie.

Watched in 3D HFR and yes its very different to watching it in regular 3D, took some time getting used to. At some points i found it a bit disconcerting as it seemed like it was running at double speed. My 13 yr old niece even noticed the difference, said it looked fake in some places and my missus sadly didnt enjoy the HFR as it gave her a bit of a headache ie she had to keep blinking her eyes to get used to it. Whereas me? absolutely loved it, thought the picture quality was stupidly sharp especially on the Gollum bit.

The movie itself was brilliant from start to finish, even though ive read the book numerous times and found some parts missing or extra bits added on ie the Troll bit was one that stood out for me really but i didnt let that bother me too much. In fact i found the movie just about got it right with the book. Obv this is the first part of the 3 movies and it will be interesting to see how the other 2 movies stick to the book. But all in all i thought it was a very well done movie.

Like others in here, i did find the first part of the movie dragged a bit but once it got going ie the goblin mine and gollum part...it was superb imho. Compared to LOTR it comes very close but ill hold judgement till the final 2 movies are out but so far so good Peter Jackson. Its just a shame that they didnt do Hobbit first then LOTR...seeing as Hobbit is the start of the whole LOTR trilogy but on the whole it doesnt really bother me as much. Now i gotta get round to watching the blu ray extended versions of the LOTR trilogy, got my set the other day.

For me the movie was 9/10...one of the best 3D movies ive seen this year and the HFR does take time getting used to but i think its something they should be doing now when producing movies.
 
At which point in the book does the movie finish? Currently re-reading it before I see the film but won't have time to read the whole thing. Best use spoiler tags if you post.
 
think the series ie the hobbit will over take the lord of the rings as being the best film released tbh, will beat starwars, ET and Titanic at the box office and for me at least be something to watch over and over again, loved the first 3 and watched them many times over one after each other, hoping to do the same with these once they have all been released,going to pre order the box set as a must to keep :)
 
Mat said:
I saw this on Sat and have one question...

Why did they change the way in which Bilbo found the ring? The LOTR saw Bilbo just sort of coming across is as he was fumbling around but in The Hobbit, Bilbo actually sees it fall from Gollum...?
Click to expand...

:eek:My god, i came into this thread to ask the exact same thing.
For contunuity's sake, it wouldn't have been too awkward to do surely?
 
Watched it last night in 3d 24fps. Didn't want to risk my first experience of the film being spoiled by the over shiney 48fps.
I enjoyed it enough to now go watch it in HFR to see what all the fuss is about.

As regards the comments about poor cgi in LOTR? I'd have argued until bedtime about that....then i watched LOTR on blu-ray and the extra clarity really does show up the cgi and green screening.
I'm guessing (from reviews) that HFR does the same, so i wanted to beleive the story first, hence 24fps first viewing.

Me and the wife both really enjoyed it though. The gollum scenes were excellent as was the battle in/escape from the goblin caves.
 
Nitefly said:
Wow I really was in the minority!
Click to expand...
Lol, you didn't like it then?

To me LOTR and The Hobbit are fan films.
The average non-fan would probably complain that it was slow, overlong, even boring?
A fan would expect the pace that the film was set to and probably still love it.

For me.....the music played a huge part and took me straight back to middle earth (LOTR styley) where i've invested so much time as i love the trilogy. So, i was comfortable from the first minute.
 
Went to see it in 3D Imax 24fps

Completely cemented my opinion on regular 3D. Completely destroys the details on large scale shots that pan, especially the likes of the caverns and Erebor.

Really want to go and try it in 48fps 3D to see if Peter Jackson is correct in that It solves a lot of the problems.

Because for me, that is certainly the last Blockbuster I'll see in 3D, and refuse to ruin Star Trek with it.

As far as the film goes, fits very well in with The Lord of The Rings in how it looks and feels. Obviously being set on the time it was, it has more magic and fantasy, very enjoyable, spot on casting and CGI, beautiful imagery, can't fault it really, really enjoyed how he's brought in the connections between the two books, an it will really pull the 6 films/two books together nicely.
 
Last edited:
Nitefly said:
Wow I really was in the minority!
Click to expand...

Yep seems like you are:p

I honestly though the 3D HFR was brilliant, yes it takes some time getting used to it but i dont know how it compares to the normal 3D or plain 2D ie whether its as sharp or not. Suppose someone who has seen all 3 in each format will be better placed to comment. But for me i found it very very sharp especially the Gollum bit, literally could see every sngle mark on his body. Which up this day i havent seen such sharpness on any other movie ive seen this yr including the blu rays i have watched.

Think i will go and see it again in normal 2D and 3D and see if its as sharp as the HFR movie.

One thing ill say is that there are parts i found in the movie that seemed to be running as double speed. In the beginning of the movie is where i found it was or maybe its my eyes deceiving me. And yes HFR does it give it a bit of a weird look ie some of the scenes look like its a set.

But cant fault the picture quality of HFR.
 
I saw it in the 48fps 3D. Took about 10 minutes to get used to it but after that it was quite seamless I thought, I just forgot it was 3D after a while and was enjoying it. There were some good scenes where bats came flying at you etc. that reminded you every so often that you were watching it in 3D. It seemed well integrated to me anyway.
 
Felt a bit slow at parts but not to the point of been annoying, i watched it with the high frame rate at imax in sheffield. I dont know if it was a combination of the 3D and High Frame rate but some parts looked disturbingly real lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom