The Hobbit...are you going to see it?

@dodgerblue13 - I'd just like to point out that the appearance of the eagles was well explained in the book. They still functioned as a deus ex machina then, but they were at least a believable one. In the movie they just show up, pick everyone up, fly away, and drop them off without a word of explanation.

Also having Radagast discover the Necromancer was silly. The white council was well aware of his presence in the books (and had been for over a thousand years in fact), as they should have been considering they were supposed to be the most knowledgeable and wise protectors of middle earth. By the time of The Hobbit they had even known he was Sauron. The way they were depicted in the movie made those characters seem like they had no idea what they were doing.

And in the book Gandalf got the key and the map from Thrain who was prisoner in the dungeons of Dol Guldur and had gone insane, whereas in the movie Thrain just happened to give that stuff to Gandalf for no particular reason. In the books, the istari came to middle earth for the explicit purpose of countering Sauron. However in the movies, apparently Gandalf, Saruman, and their friends have no particular purpose in middle earth and have been screwing around for thousands of years with no idea that Sauron still exists.

I guess you're right that the movie would seem less disappointing when not compared to the book or the LOTR films, but if something like this had just been a standalone film that wasn't related to those other works I would not even consider watching it a second time.

@sune_gem - To be honest I don't see any reason to expect the next two movies to be better.

Saw it today excellent fim, really enjoyed it although I am a fan of LotR and Tolkien. Anyways for me there where no pacing problems, or boring scenes as critics have stated.

I would say If you enjoyed Fellowship of the Ring then you will like this too.

@dodgerblue13 - I'd just like to point out that the appearance of the eagles was well explained in the book. They still functioned as a deus ex machina then, but they were at least a believable one. In the movie they just show up, pick everyone up, fly away, and drop them off without a word of explanation.

Also having Radagast discover the Necromancer was silly. The white council was well aware of his presence in the books (and had been for over a thousand years in fact), as they should have been considering they were supposed to be the most knowledgeable and wise protectors of middle earth. By the time of The Hobbit they had even known he was Sauron. The way they were depicted in the movie made those characters seem like they had no idea what they were doing.

And in the book Gandalf got the key and the map from Thrain who was prisoner in the dungeons of Dol Guldur and had gone insane, whereas in the movie Thrain just happened to give that stuff to Gandalf for no particular reason. In the books, the istari came to middle earth for the explicit purpose of countering Sauron. However in the movies, apparently Gandalf, Saruman, and their friends have no particular purpose in middle earth and have been screwing around for thousands of years with no idea that Sauron still exists.

I guess you're right that the movie would seem less disappointing when not compared to the book or the LOTR films, but if something like this had just been a standalone film that wasn't related to those other works I would not even consider watching it a second time.

@sune_gem - To be honest I don't see any reason to expect the next two movies to be better.

Laihendi

For the people who saw it, does the making of The Hobbit into a trilogy jusitified? Does the film have too much filler just to make it into three parts. Are you intrested in seeing the two more films? Does the pacing seem right considering it's into three parts.

I haven't seen it yet but I'm curious.

For the people who saw it, does the making of The Hobbit into a trilogy jusitified? Does the film have too much filler just to make it into three parts. Are you intrested in seeing the two more films? Does the pacing seem right considering it's into three parts.

I haven't seen it yet but I'm curious.

muffincakes87

Whether or not it is justified doesn't really matter. Whether or not they manage to entertain and be good movies is what matters. The Unexpected Journey is very satisfying. Why bother attempting to judge the next two before they are released? Unexpected Journey doesn't have as much filler as many critics have exaggerted. Rather, the scenes that are not really filler just occasionally drag on a bit, but not terribly so. Yes, I am eager to see the next two parts.

The LotR movies dragged on in parts too. The difference is that some parts of the much longer novel was cut out. Whereas the shorter story The Hobbit has not had to cut out much. And remember that much of the "filler" material is actual material from the LotR appendices. It's not just stuff that PJ made up.

Laihendi

I saw it last night, thought it looked good, it was better. It was fantastic. Easily my favorite movie so far when compared to the Lord of the Rings. They did a real good job capturing the essence of not only the Novel it's named for, but the overall world of Middle Earth. I just Hope Peter Jackson can hold true wth the next two. The other movies are good, even with all the content missing from them. Which is understandable, I hope he doesn't change anything major with it, especially with the big battle at the end. Changes he made to Minas Tirath really irked me.

Hmm. False! They knew of his existence, but Gandalf was the one to figure out that the Necromancer was Sauron in the middle of the Hobbit. When he left them after Beorn's house, he went to Dol Goldur. I suspect much of the next movie will have to do with his battle with the Necromancer. Read the appendices in ROTK. And there are many reasons to expect more from the next two movies. The content will quite simply be much better. We have the whole deal with Mirkwood, Beorn (!), the battle of the five armies, the whole deal with Smaug, Gandalf's battle with the Necromancer, and more! They'll be excellent!brucewayne69

2060 - The power of Dol Guldur grows. The Wise fear that it may be Sauron taking shape again.

2063 - Gandalf goes to Dol Guldur. Sauron retreats and hides in the East.

2460 - Sauron returns with increased strength to Dol Guldur.

2463 - The White Council is formed.

2850 - Gandalf again enters Dol Guldur, and discovers that its master is indeed Sauron, who is gathering all the Rings and seeking for news of the One, and of Isildur's heir.

2851 - The White Council meets. Gandalf urges an attack on Dol Guldur. Saruman overrules him. Saruman begins to search near the Gladden Fields (for the ring).

2939 - Saruman discovers that Sauron's servants are searching the Anduin near the Gladden Fields, and that Sauron therefore learned of Isildur's end. He is alarmed but says nothing to the Council.

2941 - Thorin Oakenshield and Gandalf visit Bilbo in the Shire. Bilbo meets Smeagol-Gollum and finds the Ring. The White Council meets; Saruman agrees to an attack on Dol Guldur, since he now wishes to prevent Sauron from searching the River. Sauron having made his plans abandons Dol Guldur.

[QUOTE="brucewayne69"]Hmm. False! They knew of his existence, but Gandalf was the one to figure out that the Necromancer was Sauron in the middle of the Hobbit. When he left them after Beorn's house, he went to Dol Goldur. I suspect much of the next movie will have to do with his battle with the Necromancer. Read the appendices in ROTK. And there are many reasons to expect more from the next two movies. The content will quite simply be much better. We have the whole deal with Mirkwood, Beorn (!), the battle of the five armies, the whole deal with Smaug, Gandalf's battle with the Necromancer, and more! They'll be excellent!Laihendi

2060 - The power of Dol Guldur grows. The Wise fear that it may be Sauron taking shape again.

2063 - Gandalf goes to Dol Guldur. Sauron retreats and hides in the East.

2460 - Sauron returns with increased strength to Dol Guldur.

2463 - The White Council is formed.

2850 - Gandalf again enters Dol Guldur, and discovers that its master is indeed Sauron, who is gathering all the Rings and seeking for news of the One, and of Isildur's heir.

2851 - The White Council meets. Gandalf urges an attack on Dol Guldur. Saruman overrules him. Saruman begins to search near the Gladden Fields (for the ring).

2939 - Saruman discovers that Sauron's servants are searching the Anduin near the Gladden Fields, and that Sauron therefore learned of Isildur's end. He is alarmed but says nothing to the Council.

2941 - Thorin Oakenshield and Gandalf visit Bilbo in the Shire. Bilbo meets Smeagol-Gollum and finds the Ring. The White Council meets; Saruman agrees to an attack on Dol Guldur, since he now wishes to prevent Sauron from searching the River. Sauron having made his plans abandons Dol Guldur.

Really didn't care for it. Gollum and everything that came after was good, everything before that was stretched far too thin and was way too muddled to keep my interest. It had a severe lack of excitement or sense of adventure, and there were moments of the script where I honestly felt like the films creators put little to no thought in to what was going on. Really made the whole thing feel like what it is - a story worthy of a pair of two hour films unnecessarily expanded to three possibly nearly three hour films. On top of that, the high frame rate was more distracting than anything. Made most of the action sequences feel less cinematic and more videogame-ish. I really hope that the momentum that built towards the end of the film continues into its sequel or else this whole thing is going to just be more of a disappointment than this first film was.

Also...

[spoiler] ...why the hell didn't those eagles fly them to the mountain? After all the sh*t people gave to the LOTR trilogy about why the eagles didn't just fly the ring to Mordor, Jackson once again opens up the door for the same criticism here. [/spoiler]

Really didn't care for it. Gollum and everything that came after was good, everything before that was stretched far too thin and was way too muddled to keep my interest. It had a severe lack of excitement or sense of adventure, and there were moments of the script where I honestly felt like the films creators put little to no thought in to what was going on. Really made the whole thing feel like what it is - a story worthy of a pair of two hour films unnecessarily expanded to three possibly nearly three hour films. On top of that, the high frame rate was more distracting than anything. Made most of the action sequences feel less cinematic and more videogame-ish. I really hope that the momentum that built towards the end of the film continues into its sequel or else this whole thing is going to just be more of a disappointment than this first film was.

Also...

[spoiler] ...why the hell didn't those eagles fly them to the mountain? After all the sh*t people gave to the LOTR trilogy about why the eagles didn't just fly the ring to Mordor, Jackson once again opens up the door for the same criticism here. [/spoiler]

SaintLeonidas

[QUOTE="SaintLeonidas"]

Really didn't care for it. Gollum and everything that came after was good, everything before that was stretched far too thin and was way too muddled to keep my interest. It had a severe lack of excitement or sense of adventure, and there were moments of the script where I honestly felt like the films creators put little to no thought in to what was going on. Really made the whole thing feel like what it is - a story worthy of a pair of two hour films unnecessarily expanded to three possibly nearly three hour films. On top of that, the high frame rate was more distracting than anything. Made most of the action sequences feel less cinematic and more videogame-ish. I really hope that the momentum that built towards the end of the film continues into its sequel or else this whole thing is going to just be more of a disappointment than this first film was.

Also...

[spoiler] ...why the hell didn't those eagles fly them to the mountain? After all the sh*t people gave to the LOTR trilogy about why the eagles didn't just fly the ring to Mordor, Jackson once again opens up the door for the same criticism here. [/spoiler]

brucewayne69

[QUOTE="brucewayne69"][QUOTE="SaintLeonidas"]

Really didn't care for it. Gollum and everything that came after was good, everything before that was stretched far too thin and was way too muddled to keep my interest. It had a severe lack of excitement or sense of adventure, and there were moments of the script where I honestly felt like the films creators put little to no thought in to what was going on. Really made the whole thing feel like what it is - a story worthy of a pair of two hour films unnecessarily expanded to three possibly nearly three hour films. On top of that, the high frame rate was more distracting than anything. Made most of the action sequences feel less cinematic and more videogame-ish. I really hope that the momentum that built towards the end of the film continues into its sequel or else this whole thing is going to just be more of a disappointment than this first film was.

Also...

[spoiler] ...why the hell didn't those eagles fly them to the mountain? After all the sh*t people gave to the LOTR trilogy about why the eagles didn't just fly the ring to Mordor, Jackson once again opens up the door for the same criticism here. [/spoiler]

SaintLeonidas

I saw The Hobbit a few hours ago and I enjoyed it more than I thought I would. I went into the theater with more than a little skepticism. LoTR is my favorite movie franchise of all time, so The Hobbit had some high expectations to live up to. While I don't think it is quite at the same level as LoTR as a whole, I think it does the frachise justice and I actually enjoyed it more than The Fellowship of the Ring. The Hobbit does have some pacing issues in the first hour or so, but so did The Fellowship of the Ring and I can give that a pass considering it is setting up a trilogy of three hour movies. Once the film gets going I was completely enthralled. I thought they did a great job with the Dwarves and Bilbo, they felt very natual and I immediately accepted them as legitmate parts of the lore. There was a nice balance between humour, character interaction and action set peices. There was not nearly as much filler as some people have lead me to believe. My only real complaint was that Radagask (?) the Brown was kind of lame (he's only in the film for 5 minutes though, so no biggy) and Gandalf didn't feel like he belonged in the group as much as he did in the LoTR trilogy (kind of a weird complaint, I know). All in all I was quite impressed and I'm looking forward to the next two films.

[QUOTE="SaintLeonidas"][QUOTE="brucewayne69"] Yep. Jackson is to blame. He wrote the books, you know.brucewayne69

And yes, I have no idea what I'm talking about, a statement that makes about as much sense as your original reply.

It was good, a few complaints, but still a solid film. The mowing down of bodies, and seemingly brutal killings coupled with virtually no blood, and constant cut-aways got a bit annoying. I'm not someone who thinks that films need to be ultra violent, but there could have been a bit more grit in this one. I love LOTR and Middle Earth Lore, so I don't have too much of a complaint about certain things in the beginning being dragged out, but I can see where some might.

IMO, the CGI was overused and made everything seem a bit video-gamey, and the quite a few of the fight scenes just seemed a bit odd for this very reason, some even seemed too, perhaps, choreographed. Nonetheless it was an enjoyable film and had some pretty awesome parts. I expect the following two to be even better.

[QUOTE="brucewayne69"][QUOTE="SaintLeonidas"] Huh? Such a stupid comment. 'The Hobbit' story wasn't what was wrong with the film, what was wrong is how he adapted it, stretching it out for multiple films and putting far too much focus on the technical aspects. Even if there are faults in the actual story of the book, it is his and the screenwriters jobs to fill in the gaps, and make what ever changes necessary so that the transition from page to screen works. To say Jackson wouldn't be too blame is beyond moronic. SaintLeonidas

And yes, I have no idea what I'm talking about, a statement that makes about as much sense as your original reply.

No. I dont watch those kind of movies.

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]

The most disappointing movie I have ever seen. More disappointing than Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. More disappointing than Episode I even. I am absolutely disgusted. My reactions while watching this movie were denial, followed by anger, and finally sadness. The story was completely butchered. The orcs and trolls looked fake. The acting from whoever did the orc king was terrible. His was easily the worst performance I've seen in a major movie in years. Not even remotely convincing. Most of the movie felt like a stupid cartoon, and those who wrote the screenplay should be ashamed.

The dialogue was a bunch of sentimental kitsch. The business with Azog and Thorin had no business in this movie. It contributed nothing and distracted from the purpose of the journey. All it added was kitsch as well, thinly veiled as drama and heroism. I am stunned by how less realistic the orcs looked in this movie than in LOTR. It's like Jackson is another George Lucas, and decided CGI is the answer to everything. And the decision to depict Radagast as a blithering idiot is a disgrace. They completely soiled that character. I cannot even express how disgusted I am.

The movie was scattered with contrived superficial similarities to try to tie it in with the LOTR movies, such as the ring falling on Bilbo's finger. This movie is garbage compared to those. It is an insult to their legacy. And really contrivance and kitsch are the two pillars that this movie is built on. It's just one convenient coincidence after another in an attempt to keep the plot going. It's as if Jackson never even considered the possibility that the plot was fine in the book and didn't need him screwing it up with pointless fight scenes and pathetic attempts at creating drama/conflict.

And the prologue was just stupid. It was like something out of a mediocre video game. I'd say the worst line was when Bilbo blabbered about coming back out of sympathy for the dwarves having no home. What a joke. Bilbo didn't care about that at all in the book.

It's astounding that the people making these movies had the audacity to follow Return of the King, possibly the greatest film of all time, with this travesty after 9 years of anticipation. I am still going to watch it again at least 3 more times over winter break, but frankly that is more to see Elijah Wood than anything else. I have no complaints with the movie as it relates to him.

-Tish-

I saw it a few days ago, would have posted sooner if I had noticed this thread.

I really enjoyed the filmed. It's more light hearted than LOTR which was expected based on its trailers and the fact its based on a childrens book.

It is the best film i've seen this year, everyone should see it

i plan on seeing it sometime this week

2939 - Saruman discovers that Sauron's servants are searching the Anduin near the Gladden Fields, and that Sauron therefore learned of Isildur's end. He is alarmed but says nothing to the Council.

Laihendi

Unrelated: I always found that little tidbit amusing.