[A Demon Llama!]

Well isn't this an opinion based forum. I did put "I feel." All the posts here are peoples own opinions.

This post has been edited by A Demon Llama!: 19 January 2013 - 08:56 PM

[worry]

I didn't address the content of your opinion, only your extrapolation.

Premise A] Llama didn't read the books;
Premise B] Llama did not enjoy the movie that much;

Conclusion: Only fans of the books will enjoy the movie above a so-so level.

Can that conclusion really be drawn from those premises alone?

This post has been edited by worrywort: 19 January 2013 - 09:15 PM

[A Demon Llama!]

Anyone can conclude what they wish. I never said that that must be correct. I just said that is how I feel like it is.

Most of the people I know that are fans of the books really enjoyed the movie, and the few that haven't didn't praise it as much. Plus, it seems like the trend now in making movies is catering to the people that have already read the books. Like in the case of the Twilight books or the Hunger Games. I've seen the Hunger Games and like the Hobbit it seemed that there was something missing. Maybe if I read the books I would enjoy it/understand it more, which shouldnt be the case.

Also, the biggest part of that statement was that I felt as if the movie or story was unfinished, and as someone who hasn't read the books there was no satisfaction at the end. The people that did read the books know what will happen and maybe don't care that the movie did not finish, they view it as one part. The movie has to stand on its own, and not rely on what will happen in the next one or two after it.

Thats my OPINION, be it right or wrong. No definitive conclusions are being made.

This post has been edited by A Demon Llama!: 19 January 2013 - 09:41 PM

[polishgenius]

A Demon Llama!, on 19 January 2013 - 09:29 PM, said:

Plus, it seems like the trend now in making movies is catering to the people that have already read the books.

This has been true for The Hunger Games (to a ridiculous extent) and the later Harry Potters, but the opposite is true for The Hobbit.

I'm quite surprised that you've found fans of the book liked it more than otherwise. I've found it the other way, if anything.

This post has been edited by polishgenius: 19 January 2013 - 09:40 PM

[worry]

Feelings?!?!

[QuickTidal]

A Demon Llama!, on 19 January 2013 - 09:29 PM, said:

Anyone can conclude what they wish. I never said that that must be correct. I just said that is how I feel like it is.

Most of the people I know that are fans of the books really enjoyed the movie, and the few that haven't didn't praise it as much. Plus, it seems like the trend now in making movies is catering to the people that have already read the books. Like in the case of the Twilight books or the Hunger Games. I've seen the Hunger Games and like the Hobbit it seemed that there was something missing. Maybe if I read the books I would enjoy it/understand it more, which shouldnt be the case.

Also, the biggest part of that statement was that I felt as if the movie or story was unfinished, and as someone who hasn't read the books there was no satisfaction at the end. The people that did read the books know what will happen and maybe don't care that the movie did not finish, they view it as one part. The movie has to stand on its own, and not rely on what will happen in the next one or two after it.

Thats my OPINION, be it right or wrong. No definitive conclusions are being made.

Two things: One of the people I saw it with the other day has never read any Tolkien, and he quite enjoyed it. Secondly, knowing that there are two more films coming in the trilogy but being annoyed at the lack of resolution at the end of the first film seems...impatient? Just my two cents.

[Brujah]

QuickTidal, on 18 January 2013 - 06:35 PM, said:

Saw it again last night, and this time I DID see it in the High Frame Rate.

STUNNING.

Seriously, not only was the clarity impeccable, but the large action sequences had no blurring, and you could follow anything on screen you chose to, and could clearly see it.

It took about 10-20 minutes to get used to, but after that it was pure cream.

In fact, I wouldn't want to watch it at 24FPS now...it was just better as an experience in HFR.

Oh, and the movie itself holds up to a second watching well.

I'm pretty much with Tidal, here. I saw it my second time, as well. I already posted after I watched it the first time, and basically said how I was extremely impressed. It far exceeded my expectations, which I will admit, were kind of low. I took my son to see it, and I just wasn't expecting it to be on par with LotRs, and I also had a sense that it was more tailored to the younger audience, but afterwords, I had to say that I thoroughly enjoyed it, from beginning to end.

We saw it in 3D, which I highly suggest. In fact, I can't see how anyone would rather not watch it 3D. I'm one of those people who isn't really all that hyped about 3D, but this movie is great fun, and well done in 3 dimensions. In fact, the only two movies that I really harp on for their 3D glory, is this and Avatar.

Anyway, it brings me back to an agreement with Tidal. I liked it just as much the second time. I was afraid that it wouldn't hold up to my previous feelings, having thought that it may have just been some quirky mood, but it really is, point blank, Entertaining, with a CAPS 'E.'

Yeah, it is a bit designed towards a younger audience, which my son can vouch for, as he claims it his favorite movie (at least for now), but that's saying something. The film successfully delights its younger, target audience, but has a wonderful way of doing it, so as to still give us a nice rendition that satisfies us older fans, those of us who grew up with these books.

I've read the posts with criticism, and pondered over the views of those describing how the movie failed to deliver, in their eyes, but I just simply disagree. It's a fun movie, full of nostalgic win.

I have to give a special mention to the scene with Smeagol. I know it's been mentioned already a few times, but it deserves it. It's extremely well done.

"And if its losesss, then we eatss itss!" Queue insane laugh.

[polishgenius]

Brujah, on 20 January 2013 - 03:45 PM, said:

We saw it in 3D, which I highly suggest. In fact, I can't see how anyone would rather not watch it 3D.

3D fucks with my eyes. I hate it.

[worry]

Wow, so you must really hate the real actual world.

[polishgenius]

Why do you think I'm such a mardy bastard all the time?

[A Demon Llama!]

Quote

Secondly, knowing that there are two more films coming in the trilogy but being annoyed at the lack of resolution at the end of the first film seems...impatient? Just my two cents.

I know what your saying, but I don't think its impatience. Why would I want to pay 3 times as much and need to wait through 3 movies for a resolution. Does this need to be in 3 parts anyway? The book is shorter than any of the LOTR ones which had one film each and this one has 3? Seems like an obvious cash grab. I don't know if the film could have been wrapped up in one movie. As said before, a movie cannot rely on other one that might or might not come after to be enjoyable, but have its own nice conclusion or resolution, which this one did in a way, but not really. It was more of a lead in to the next one.

Anyway, if anyone wants to see the movie and they don't have anything against 3D, it looked really good and I would also recommend seeing it that way.

[Macros]

its been stated many times by the director and team that they're pulling in more than the book. They're covering plot points that are basically entire novellas in themselves that receive literally one line in the book. Considering the Hobbit was written as much ligther and basically YA'er fare than Tolkiens other Middle earth works, dealing with the Necromancer didn't have a place in the original novel. Was it a part of the story I always wanted more detail on?
Damn straight it was.

[Jakovasaurus]

Blowing on the embers and getting this going again. Have at it, "Know it Alls!" I place money on the tide coming in quick. #TeeHee #YesiUsedAHashTag #CryMeARiver #BooHoo

[QuickTidal]

And here's the first trailer that will run with MAN Of STEEL this weekend.

Oh gods...the epicness...I CANNOT WAIT.

http://youtu.be/TeGb5XGk2U0

[polishgenius]

I may have said something along these lines before, but I really hate when films go overboard on CGI, especially in action scenes.


Also, Peter Jackson needs to get over his Legorlando crush.

[QuickTidal]

polishgenius, on 11 June 2013 - 05:41 PM, said:

I may have said something along these lines before, but I really hate when films go overboard on CGI, especially in action scenes.


Also, Peter Jackson needs to get over his Legorlando crush.

Oi!

Nay shall harsh words be said about Legolas! He's my fave character to this day, and the fanboy inside me literally squealed with glee at seeing him in this trailer.

Eh, I'm cool with the CGI...it's a TAD jarring because so much of LOTR was practical effects...but to be honest the CGI used in AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY wasn't too nuts. It certainly wasn't STAR WARS level...and I think the scene you are talking about (the silvan elves jumping and gliding through the trees) would likely have been nigh impossible to do with practical effects...so I'm definitely giving it my okay, since I'd rather see something that badass from the elves, than not see it.

At any rate, this looks like it's going to be as enjoyable as the first one was. If not more, because the section with Thranduil and the forest elves is arguably my fave bit from the middle of the book.

[Rictus]

It will be spectacular, of that i'm sure, but all these extra characters, like Azog, feel really unnecessary, for me anyway.

[QuickTidal]

Hagop, on 11 June 2013 - 08:10 PM, said:

It will be spectacular, of that i'm sure, but all these extra characters, like Azog, feel really unnecessary, for me anyway.

I think Azog only exists because without him there would have been no antagonist for the first film. Since Smaug doesn't show up till the second film, the first film would have had little in the way of "threat".

He does feel totally unnecessary, but I can see why he exists filmicly.

Though I hope he's done away with (killed off) in the first half of DESOLATION, so we can focus on Smaug.

[worry]

I have the same hope, and I think it will come true because Bolg is definitely a character in the movies, so there has to be a transfer of power before the third movie/Battle of Five Armies.

[Una]

polishgenius, on 11 June 2013 - 05:41 PM, said:

Also, Peter Jackson needs to get over his Legorlando crush.

Why? I still haven't gotten over my Legorlando crush. It's really nothing compared to my Faramir crush, to be sure. But still, Orlando Bloom has never looked as good since then. He makes a prettier elf than he does a human, for whatever reason.

You know, I think for the LOTR movies, I preferred the extended editions. I wanted more. For the Hobbit, I think in the end, they should do a condensed edition when they do the DVD releases. There should be a director's cut of some kind that cuts the actions scenes down to about 1/2 their lengths and cuts out all the dark bits about the necromancer and all the filler characters and stuff they pulled from the LOTR appendices. That would be awesome!