Fan Reaction to The Hobbit [Now with SPOILERS!]

Post by **kzer_za** » Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:11 pm

Wasn't Martinez pretty hard on the LotR movies, or am I thinking of someone else?

I would say Jackson, Armitage, and everyone else have done a good job both making Thorin a character you'll root for and hinting at his flaws that will be so important in film 3. I do think they could have dialed back on his dislike of elves just a bit (the scene where he argues with Gandalf about Rivendell is a bit too much like "Where was Gondor when the Westfold fell?!"), but that's basically a nitpick.

Mon Dec 31, 2012 12:15 am

I don't what Michael's opinion of the LOTR films was.

Post by **River** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 1:53 am

The baby is taking bottles so I left the baby with my husband and went to a matinee. It was 2D, normal frame rate. I think my viewing experience would have been better if I hadn't been sitting in the very first row. That said, it felt like some of the action was blurred. Like the film wasn't keeping up. But that may have been an artifact of where I was sitting. Also, it's pretty uncomfortable sitting in the front row. And pretty lame seeing a movie by oneself. But I wanted to see the movie and get dinner on the table before midnight (yeah, I was going big yesterday) so I took that crappy seat rather than swap tickets for a later show. However, these circumstances did color my experience.

I understand framing it up with Bilbo talking to Frodo and then narrating that prologue - the framing was necessary to link it with LOTR and the exposition in the prologue was going to have to happen anyway. That said, I do wish the movie could have kicked off with "In a hole in a ground..."

Martin Freeman was perfect. The movie Dwarves came off as much more competent than the book Dwarves, which gave me some mixed feelings. On one hand, I'm not impressed by the re-rendering of the characters. On the other, the pathetic incompetence of the book Dwarves was incredibly irritating to me when I read the book a couple weeks ago. I probably would have found a faithful rendition hard to stomach.

Radagast totally called that hedgehog Sebastian. The bird's nest and bird poop reminded me of Merlin's depiction in The Once and Future King. The scene where Gandalf hands a pipe over to Radagast witht he promise it will mellow him out played very well to the Boulder audience.

It was fascinating that, though Radagast penetrated Dol Guldur, fought off something and recovered a morgul blade, Saruman remained quick to dismiss him.

Goblintown and the Warg fight were both overly drawn out. The Riddle Game and mercy scenes were terrific. So were the songs. And it's taken me too long to get this post composed so I'll stop here.

Post by **SirDennis** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:44 am

(You have a new baby River? Mazel Tov!)

Post by **Túrin Turambar** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 3:46 am

River wrote:And pretty lame seeing a movie by oneself.

With one exception, every movie I've seen since 2008 I've gone to alone. Once I started doing it I haven't looked back. I find it convenient to go when I feel like it, arrive when I like, go into the theatre when I like and sit where I like. Of course, I am single, so it is easier.

The exception was seeing The King's Speech with vison, but I rarely find myself with such a good combination of film and companionship.

Post by **Frelga** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 3:52 am

It was fascinating that, though Radagast penetrated Dol Guldur, fought off something and recovered a morgul blade, Saruman remained quick to dismiss him.

I noticed that, and I thought it was a nice touch. Saruman is only impressed with overt power. He underestimates Gandalf, too.

I also noticed that, in a movie full of good looking, manly men, Christopher Lee still has more badass vibe than the rest of them together. Comes from being a real-life badass, I'm sure.

Also, kudos on making it to the movies. My soon was much older before I managed that feat.

Post by **Túrin Turambar** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 4:50 am

I had never seen Lee in action before FotR, and one of the best things about the film, for me, was seeing him bring Saruman to life. I had never really properly envisioned the character before.

Fun fact - he is now branching out into symphonic heavy metal music. He certainly has the voice for it. See, for example, his latest heavy metal Christmas album, featuring what has to be the most badass version of the Little Drummer Boy ever.

Post by **Frelga** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:00 am

Post by **River** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:11 am

Saruman singing metal...

Post by **Padme** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:13 am

well I didn't like the bird poo on Radagast. Some of the battle scenes were too long and I wanted more Smaug. And I want the next movie out sooner, not later. The people I went to see it with and I discussed how far in the book the movie went, we decided it wasn't far enough into the book

Post by **Túrin Turambar** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:33 am

River wrote:

Saruman singing metal...

The "shall I play for you...on my drum" line doesn't really invite refusal, does it?

Post by **River** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:45 am

No.

Honestly, I didn't even imagine that Little Drummer Boy could be badass until today.

I almost took out my ponytail and started head-banging.

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 8:24 am

Awesome. Just awesome.

Post by **Elentári** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 9:59 am

This may not be the right place for this, but here is the review of AUJ by Janet Brennan Croft, the Tolkien Scholar who was asked to check over the script in that capacity, by PJ:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mythsoc/message/23750

Yes, that is my name in the credits as Tolkien Scholar! Basically I advised on the source of all material in the script and whether they had rights to it or not. I did make comments (many quite snarky, I'm afraid) and suggestions about certain other things, but I don't know how far up they got, though some of the continuity problems I noted did seem to get fixed, at least. They did keep in one little thing I warned them about; I notice several people have caught it. The movie does have a number of differences from the last script I read. I'm doing similar work on some of the games that will be coming out.

Visually, I thought much of it was stunning. Erebor and Dale were gorgeous, as was the expanded view of Rivendell. (And Kili was pretty darn pleasant to look at, too, I must say.) The 48 frames per second or whatever it was actually made viewing from the third row much less nauseating, for some reason. Fights and flights were tediously long, as expected. Stupid jokes were stupid. Anticipation of later events remains one of my main problems with Jackson (for example, we've already seen spiders attack Rhosgobel; how startling will they be in northern Mirkwood? Bilbo has already bloodied his sword; his battle with the spiders will lose its significance for character development). And as Andy pointed out, the whole Witch-king/ Morgul blade thing is non-canconical, AND contradicts the prophecy that allows Éowyn and Sam to kill him. Oh, and the horse make-up -- they did something to make the poor ponies extra-shaggy, didn't they?

But the emphasis on the theme of home was, I thought, a very good bit of scriptwriting. I liked Martin Freeman as Bilbo very much. I'm glad they didn't make him too young, like Frodo.

Still, seeing Erebor from the Carrock would be like standing on the highest overpass in Amarillo and seeing Sandia Peak in Albuquerque.

More another time, praps yesss. I wasn't totally appalled; I will probably see it again; but now I know, as I guessed, that the scenes of meaningless hacking and slashing are long enough for a bathroom break.

Janet

Janet Brennan Croft
Editor of Mythlore http://www.mythsoc.org/mythlore.html

Post by **sauronsfinger** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 11:14 pm

I have only seen this twice. In looking back there are a couple of things that stand out for me as things Jackson could have done differently - lets say more adult and less kiddish - which would have improved the film.

The first would be the Great Goblin. everything about him was wrong from the cartoonish design, the voice and the way he acted.

The second would be the bird droppings on Radagast. Somebody compared him to Merlin and I greatly preferred the Merlin in CAMELOT to this character. I could even take the over the top bunnies since the character redeemed himself with an act of bravery by going into Dol Guldur - but why the bird droppings? Its just silly.

I had not trouble with the humor at Bag End with the dwarves. Even enjoyed it.

I dearly hope Jackson uses these months to clean up the next two films - dial down the kiddie and silly stuff and ramp up the adult and atmospheric moments.

Post by **Elentári** » Tue Jan 01, 2013 12:21 am

sauronsfinger wrote:I dearly hope Jackson uses these months to clean up the next two films - dial down the kiddie and silly stuff and ramp up the adult and atmospheric moments.

I think this will happen naturally, as the story takes a darker turn, though no doubt we will still get the PJ brand of humour for the Dwarves as they stumble through Mirkwood, but as long as it's no worse than we got in TTT I dare say I can live with it! Hopefully Dol Guldur, plus Thranduil and grim-faced Bard will balance that out!

Tue Jan 01, 2013 2:22 am

Sadly, it will likely mean more Jackson humor and less Tolkien humour. The latter was the best part of the first film (or at least among it).

Post by **Folca** » Tue Jan 01, 2013 9:38 am

Just saw it. Alot of trepidation based on PJ's previous desecration of LOTR, I had no doubt he would simply trample The Hobbit under the arrogance born of his previous success.

Sadly, all of my fears were validated, and then trumped. Won't see it again in theaters, and won't purchase it until it is on the seven dollar rack at WalMart. The action scenes were childishly over the top, the stone giants ridiculous, and the characterization of Radagast as some vacant headed goof was wretched. Radagast should have been modeled more after a druid than a doper.

However, the movie was visually impressive. I liked Thorin's characterization. Bilbo was terrific. The riddle scene was excellent.

The soundtract was by far the best part of the movie, likely because it had less to do with PJ than the rest of the movie.

Post by **Sunsilver** » Tue Jan 01, 2013 9:38 am

Elentári wrote:This may not be the right place for this, but here is the review of AUJ by Janet Brennan Croft, the Tolkien Scholar who was asked to check over the script in that capacity, by PJ:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mythsoc/message/23750

Yes, that is my name in the credits as Tolkien Scholar! Basically I advised on the source of all material in the script and whether they had rights to it or not. I did make comments (many quite snarky, I'm afraid) and suggestions about certain other things, but I don't know how far up they got, though some of the continuity problems I noted did seem to get fixed, at least. They did keep in one little thing I warned them about; I notice several people have caught it. The movie does have a number of differences from the last script I read. I'm doing similar work on some of the games that will be coming out.

Visually, I thought much of it was stunning. Erebor and Dale were gorgeous, as was the expanded view of Rivendell. (And Kili was pretty darn pleasant to look at, too, I must say.) The 48 frames per second or whatever it was actually made viewing from the third row much less nauseating, for some reason. Fights and flights were tediously long, as expected. Stupid jokes were stupid. Anticipation of later events remains one of my main problems with Jackson (for example, we've already seen spiders attack Rhosgobel; how startling will they be in northern Mirkwood? Bilbo has already bloodied his sword; his battle with the spiders will lose its significance for character development). And as Andy pointed out, the whole Witch-king/ Morgul blade thing is non-canconical, AND contradicts the prophecy that allows Éowyn and Sam to kill him. Oh, and the horse make-up -- they did something to make the poor ponies extra-shaggy, didn't they?

But the emphasis on the theme of home was, I thought, a very good bit of scriptwriting. I liked Martin Freeman as Bilbo very much. I'm glad they didn't make him too young, like Frodo.

Still, seeing Erebor from the Carrock would be like standing on the highest overpass in Amarillo and seeing Sandia Peak in Albuquerque.

More another time, praps yesss. I wasn't totally appalled; I will probably see it again; but now I know, as I guessed, that the scenes of meaningless hacking and slashing are long enough for a bathroom break.

Janet

Janet Brennan Croft
Editor of Mythlore http://www.mythsoc.org/mythlore.html

Wow! That Jackson would use a Tolkien scholar to vet the films is awesome! It almost moves me to tears...

Too bad he didn't pay more attention to her....

Post by **kzer_za** » Tue Jan 01, 2013 3:26 pm

I don't think there was that much humor that went against Tolkien. Yes, there were times when PJ indulged his worst excesses, but there seemed to be a lot less of it than TTT and RotK. Even if you look at just the jokes not in the book, there's a better ratio of good to bad than in LotR. I think having Freeman as the lead helps direct PJ's sense of humor in healthier directions. Also, I like The Great Goblin and his personality is basically how I imagined him in the book.

With that said, it's possible we'll get a bunch of bad comedy put back into the EE like RotK.