[This message has been edited by #1 (edited 12/13/2012 12:25p).]

quote:

---

posted 9:25p, 08/04/08



Page 2.

Let's hope I'm still alive for the movie release

---

YAY!!! I made it!!!!!!!

Sitting in the theater ready to watch it HFR 3D with Dolby Atmos. 43 mins!!!

Just got out of the midnight release. As a huge fan of Tolkien who enjoyed Jackson's original trilogy, I absolutely LOVED this movie. Absolutely wonderful, and I can't wait to see the other two.

OH MY GOD, I loved this movie. I'll post a full review when I get home, but I'm pretty sure I had a stupid grin on my face through most of that.

And the 48fps is amazing once you adjust to it. The most crystal clear image you've ever seen. Everything was beautiful to look at.

That movie was awesome.

Agree with posted. I loved the 48fps... My cinephile bro in law however wasn't thrilled with it. Loved it overall, a couple parts I could have done without and going to take me some time to come to terms with some of the tweaks PJ made.

On to the 1100 IMAX showing to see it in good ole fashioned 24fps!

Well as I'm sure you guys can tell, I'm a huge LOTR fan, and have been anticipating The Hobbit for 9 years now. I've never looked forward to a movie nearly as much as this one, and it would be easy to understand if the movie didn't end up meeting my sky high expectations.

I'm happy to say that not only did it not disappoint, it far exceeded my expectations. That's probably the happiest I've ever been in a movie theater, and the 3 hours flew by in a flash. It felt like 20 minutes.

I loved everything about it. First of all, the visuals. Everything was amazingly detailed and crystal clear. Seeing the bright green colors in the Shire, Rivendell in all its glory, all the landscapes, etc. Even CGI creatures like Azog and the Wargs looked stunning.

Second, the score. Absolutely brillant. I adore Howard Shore's score in the original trilogy, and this one did not disappoint. Loved how it weaved in some of the themes from the trilogy at appropriate times, while remaining fresh at the same time. Just awesome.

Third, the story. I was completely enthralled the whole running time. Like I said, it flies by. And the tweaks Jackson has made to the story all resulted in a fantastic story, imo. The story of the Hobbit is all there, while weaving in the larger threads that weave into the grand scheme of LOTR. I thought it was very cool what they did with the Necromancer and the Witch King. The Witch King especially. And of course, the riddles in the dark scene. Just awesome. Easily the best Gollum scene in the entire series.

All in all, just an absolutely great experience. I was blown away. I cannot wait to see the next two films. I would definitely recommend the 48fps to those that want to have a new experience. Will be checking it out in IMAX later this weekend.

Saw it at midnight last night. Loved it!

I thought it was very well done. For some odd reason I forgot that they were splitting it into 3 movies. As I was sitting there looking at my phone, I couldn't help but to think "Dang, they sure have a lot to cover." It wasn't until like 2 minutes left that it struck me that "oh, wait. This is goingto be multiple films." I for sure recommend it to anyone. Very good flick.

Did it really have this scene?
http://www.theonion.com/articles/the-hobbit-to-feature-53minutelong-scene-of-bilbo,30727/

quote:

---

Did it really have this scene?
http://www.theonion.com/articles/the-hobbit-to-feature-53minutelong-scene-of-bilbo,30727/

---

Yes, and it was really well done!

Not sure why the critics are panning this, I thought it was, frankly, glorious.

The tweaking and the extra bits make this play out like an extended author's edition of The Hobbit. Pulling in a lot of extra material from Tolkien's notes that makes a lot of the secondary plots (IE The Necromancer, the backstory to Smaug) all mesh much better.

Film critics are freaking out that the film seems to lack "narrative focus" but while the Hobbit was short there always seemed to be a meandering sort of story.

If you loved the Hobbit, LOTR, the Silmarillion, and realize that Tolkien left a whole lot on the cutting board we never really read you will absolutely love this movie.

That's what I was hoping for. There was a LOT of peripheral material that could be used to fill out the story, and it sounds like they used it.

Good to hear.

I wonder what the non-fanboys think though. The critics have not been kind. The guy @ CNN called it the ugliest movie of the year.....

Thanks to kids + work + holiday parties I probably wont see it until next week. I still can't decide about the 48fsp thing though.

Can't wait to see this now! Thanks for the feedback from everyone who's seen it.

And I could give a flying **** what the critics think. Movie critics, sports journalists, news reporters and politicians are all the dumbasses of society that feel it necessary to tell us what we are supposed to think.

Nice. It sounds like it is the movie Jackson wish he could have made when he made LOTR but couldn't because the studio didn't know how well the movie would be received.

This one he could make for us fanboys because the studio will pretty much "ok" anything Jackson wants to do.

^ Agree about critics. If critics are panning it then it will obviously be awesome. Because critics generally suck.

Just like the LOTR movies, the visuals are stunning, but just like those other movies, I just get bored out of my skull watching them. It just seems to take forever for the film to get anywhere. Scenes go on and on and on way longer than needed. It reminded me a lot of 2001, in that half the movie can be taken out without really affected the story. I don't mind movies that move at a slow pace, but movies that want to try to squeeze out every little detail drives me crazy.

Yeah, I won't watch the original movies, especially ROTK on live TV because I can't fast forward through the skullduggery.

whereas, because I love how Middle Earth was visualized, I have the extended editions just so i could see more skullduggery lol...

Just 24 hours to go for me!

Can't wait!

Are we to the point of accepting general discussion and "read at your own risk?" because spoilers (maybe) below:


I've read and seen the Hobbit countless times...book, the classic cartoon, and even a community theater version (which was terrible) so, while I was excited at Jackson bringing the story to the screen, I can't say that I was expecting to be on the edge of my seat because "I've heard this one before" syndrome. With all the familiarity I had going in, there was enough "new" stuff (I presume from all the other stuff Tolkien wrote) to make it a fresh take and the classic parts are done so well I was almost giddy to see it again.

I saw it on a Cinemark XD (fake IMAX) at 48 fps. I commented on the technology piece in the other thread so all I'll say here is that it isn't a deal breaker but it isn't really all that great, either. The only gripe I have was that the damn white Orc was waaaay too CGI. Like skin texture and everything was Gamecube quality. I usually don't let stuff bother me but it was always so apparent and fake looking...and maybe I expect more because Jackson's WETA folks usually do a great job.

[This message has been edited by Noblemen06 (edited 12/14/2012 7:56p).]

Your complaint about Azog, which is one I've heard on some other sites, is odd to me because I found him to be the best-rendered character in the film. Damn near photoreal, imo, on par with Avatar.

If there were any characters that were a bit under par, i'd say it was the goblins in goblin town. Not sure why they redesigned them, I thought the goblins from Moria in FOTR would've been awesome to see again in this one.

The wargs also looked sick.

Cate B is stately beautiful, too.

THERE WAS A DRUNK GUY IN THE THEATER THAT KEPT YELLING DUCK DYNASTY WHEN THE DWARVES DRANK. HE ALSO KEPT TELLING HIS WIFE THAT GANDALF WAS DUMBLEDORE.

Azog was AWESOME I thought.. especially with the spike through his arm thing-- badass!

It was good.

Liked the fairly accurate telling of the story with all the fragment storylines worked in to fill it out. There wasn't a lot that was added that wasn't derived from Tolkien's writings.

So in Houston is the Edwards Marq*e IMAX 3d and hfr? I haven't been able to figure out if this is the place to see it or not. Should I just see it at a theater showing it in hfr 3d and skip the IMAX? I would prefer to see it with the Star Trek prologue and see the hfr 3d

Marq'e has it in HFR 3D, regular 3D, and IMAX 3D. But because the IMAX is film and not digital, they don't have HFR IMAX.

I guess I'll just go to a closer hfr 3d like Edwards then. Thanks

Even though no one really argued otherwise, I'll eat crow anyway -- my box office predictions were WAY off on this one. Didn't even break $100 million on opening weekend, much less $140 million.

I expected it wouldn't have such a huge opening, as none of the LOTR films did either, but I'm honestly surprised it opened to only $84 million. Sure, it broke the December record, but that's not saying much considering inflation, 3D upcharge, IMAX, etc.

Not really looking good on the long term either, only made $7 million on Monday and it's already below ROTK's 4-day total.

I guess I overestimated the popularity of LOTR.

i really think a lot of it has to do with the HFR and the very polarizing effect it has on people. In addition, I really think it should have just been 2 movies. There seemed like a lot of scenes that could have been tightened up in this one. I felt very much like an extended cut, not a theatrical cut (if that makes any sense).

2 movies? Try 1. By incorporating the Unfinished Tales, etc., Jackson made this a very targeted endeavor. Discussed at length a few pages back.


[This message has been edited by Ol Jock 99 (edited 12/18/2012 5:43p).]