Peter Jackon's The Hobbit Trailer XMAS detailsMovies 

saw it 48fps 3d....

awesome movie, a little disappointing with the cgi...too much it was like a video game for me... i kept asking myself why dont they just make the whole movie cgi if theyre are going to do so much of it...

Also noticed in the beginning that the movie looked like it was 1.5x, a little sped up but I dont know if that was becuase I was adjusting to the 48fps...

but the movie did make up for it in some scene like the gollum scene OMFG awesomeness!

i loved that little cgi character goblin messenger on the zip line
 

Available on Blu-Ray March 19th, 2013. You might want to wait a few more months for the extended edition ;)
 
Bought this in 3d and WOW one of the best looking movies I have seen in 3d. I watched it in the theater in 2d and enjoyed the movie but dang its really beautiful in 3d!!
I was shocked to see that the movie is on (2) 3d blu ray discs. Half way through the movie in 3d I had to switch to the other 3d disc. Never had to do that with a blu ray movie before. Must me massive in size but well worth it. 👍
 
So, I'm off to see the Desolation of Smaug tonight at IMAX. Has anyone seen it yet?
 
Mark T
So, I'm off to see the Desolation of Smaug tonight at IMAX. Has anyone seen it yet?
Click to expand...

I saw it yesterday.

I'm not going to tell too much, but as a LOTR fan I was hugely disappointed. If you've read the book you will discover this movie shares very little with the actual story, and you will see characters in the movie that were entirely made up and never even appear in the book.

All the magic, evil, and mystery that the LOTR movies had, this movie has not. It has been corrupted by the plague that is commercial action movies and romance.

I could write an entire rant in this post, but I'd just like to warn all the LOTR fans not to get their hopes up. Personally for me this movie was a huge disappointment knowing it comes from someone as Peter Jackson.

What was good about the movie? Evangeline Lilly. My God, what a stunningly beautiful woman. I think Hollywood grows these women in some kind of special greenhouse or something.
 
I saw Desolation of Smaug last night, they chaned a lot from the book, I know the first was different in places too but this was very different in a lot of aspects. That said, as a fantasy film it was absolutely fantastic IMO and the pacing of the film was superb which may please those that thought the first was too slow. It's just a shame they changes so much, I don't mind have extra bits added as much but they changed a lot.

It did have Evangeline Lilly in it though so maybe all can be forgiven. Mmmmmmmm.
 
This is my review. drawing taken from "theonering.net", credit to them:
kirk.png
 
Bram Turismo
I saw it yesterday.

I'm not going to tell too much, but as a LOTR fan I was hugely disappointed. If you've read the book you will discover this movie shares very little with the actual story, and you will see characters in the movie that were entirely made up and never even appear in the book.

All the magic, evil, and mystery that the LOTR movies had, this movie has not. It has been corrupted by the plague that is commercial action movies and romance.

I could write an entire rant in this post, but I'd just like to warn all the LOTR fans not to get their hopes up. Personally for me this movie was a huge disappointment knowing it comes from someone as Peter Jackson.

What was good about the movie? Evangeline Lilly. My God, what a stunningly beautiful woman. I think Hollywood grows these women in some kind of special greenhouse or something.
Click to expand...
I agree with this post. Maybe I am setting my expectations too high after getting hooked on the LOTR. But I am just having a hard time getting into these Hobbit movies. The acting just seems so sub par at many points. Maybe its because I never read the books? The river scene was quite amazing but again, I am just having a hard time getting into these Hobbit movies. I never read the LOTR books yet I love the LOTR. Hmm oh well maybe the 3rd Hobbit will be better.

Dave A
It did have Evangeline Lilly in it though so maybe all can be forgiven. Mmmmmmmm.
Click to expand...
Yes very nice. Her character and storyline brought some serious warmth and charm to the movie. I always forget she has a real name. I just see "Kate" when I see her.
 
CAMAROBOY69
I agree with this post. Maybe I am setting my expectations too high after getting hooked on the LOTR. But I am just having a hard time getting into these Hobbit movies. The acting just seems so sub par at many points. Maybe its because I never read the books? The river scene was quite amazing but again, I am just having a hard time getting into these Hobbit movies. I never read the LOTR books yet I love the LOTR. Hmm oh well maybe the 3rd Hobbit will be better.
Click to expand...

The river scene had me facepalming to be honest. I was wondering if I was watching Tolkien francise or a children's adventure movie at that point. Can you possibly make dwarves look any more stereotypical? I mean, what happened to the kind of dwarves that Gimli was? Rough, harsh axemen!

I was also hugely let down that almost every singly ork was animated instead of actors wearing costumes. And how much studio work they've done instead of going on location.

Replace the hobbits with young wizards, and you've got a Harry Potter movie right here.

I watched The Fellowship of the Ring on Blu-Ray this weekend just to overcome the misery that was The Hobbit :lol:
 
What about big monstrous orcs walking from rooftop to rooftop in the decrepit lake town buildings with the lightness, the silentness and the graciousness of elves?

Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you ... the master of stealth! BOOOOOOLLLLGGGGGGGG!!!! :lol:


PS - Yes, the Fellowship of the Ring, good memories, I suppose properly (non CGI) physical Uruks would just break any roof just by trying to walk over them in their heavy boots and armour!
 
I saw it today and loved it.

I grew up reading Tolkiens works, especially The Hobbit. So to see it come to life on the big screen is pretty special.

With that said the way they shot the encounter with Beorn annoyed me a little. In the book it was amazing, with all the magical creatures, the stories he tells, the way Gandalf introduces the dwarves to Beorn. In the film it was like yeah here's some bear dude with a massive beard, he gave them some ponies and they rode off.


Its still a 9/10 from me though.
 
Saw this on monday, I recommend. They did gloss over some of the details to keep average viewers attention span intact, but still, a good movie. Smaug was just as manipulative and wicked as I thought he would be, and seeing Stephen Fry in there as well almost ruined my concentration. :lol:
 
Saw it yesterday in 3d, and I'll have to agree on the facepalm @ the river scene. It had several facepalm moments to be sincere, like the 3 minutes it takes the dragon to move when it's obvious he's going to be attacked and stuff. But it's still a solid movie, and the cliffhanger omfg.
 
Read this book as a kid and loved the LotR movies. Unexpected Journey dragged a bit, but this seemed to get the story moving with the Dol Guldur plot thread as well as the main quest line.

As far as the 'extra' content, most of it was in the Appendices Tolkien wrote, Peter Jackson is just adding that back in to the original story. More to the point, if Gandalf wandered away at the eaves of Mirkwood, as he does in the book, only to reappear at the finale with, "sorry, Necromancer problem down South," as he does in the book, then fans would be peeved at the lack of detail there.

I'm liking the way they're tying it into LotR a lot more. Sure, romance subplots and silly scenes take away from it a bit. I watched it in 3D, in IMax, and really both of those things ruined it for me.

Maybe it's my eyesight, which is admittedly on the blink - hehe! - but 3D blurred any fast-moving imagery quite irritatingly, and made the vast landscapes a little fuzzy and lacking in detail. It only got worse with focus shifting during such fights as well, and having to move my head around to see parts of the frame got annoying. I think that's it for 3D and me, IMax was okay when I watched Skyfall so I'll probably check that out some other time.
 
3D was the only option available when I watched it earlier, and it did little more than give me a headache and make me feel lethargic as usual. I can only recall one scene where it had any purpose, and even then it wasn't justified.

Visual discomfort aside, the movie was fine. I took the opportunity to watch the first part the night before, and while I knew it would never match the almost superlative nature of the LotR trilogy, it wasn't as disappointing as I'd expected. DoS felt a bit crowded with all the added subplots and action scenes that seemed almost endless, but I'll say it was just as good as the first movie.

And if you also weren't expected Fry the show up halfway through like myself, it does come as an odd surprise.
 
Last edited:
I solidly enjoyed the LOTR series - credible, detailed, relatively accurate, and entertaining.

That good work doesn't give Peter Jackson permission to screw over The Hobbit the way he has. There are Roger Moore Bond movies that are closer to the actual book. If you are going to tackle iconic works of Western literature, Peter, then you should at least pretend like you've read the book.

I hated the first Hobbit movie. Hated it completely. A bunch of people talked me into believing the second one was better - it wasn't. It was just as horrid and brain-dead. I won't even get started on the stupid moments for fear of giving spoilers. The only thing I can say for the second one is that at least it didn't have a stupid deus ex machina ending that could have cut out the middle 90 minutes of the movie, unlike the first one.

It boggles my mind that these movies are at least 40 minutes too long, when there is easily am hour of filler in each one. Brutally bad. I won't be paying money to see the third one. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
 
Most likely everyone has just seen it, but here's the final trailer for the upcoming movie of the year!
 
OMG. This has all it needs to be a great movie, I just hope PJ and the screenwriters got it right this time (I agree with Duke about the two previous movies, but I'm preparing myself for the shame of being fooled thrice ... I will pay money to see this third movie, can't avoid it! :drool:
 
The 3rd is better mostly but is still fleshed out with scenes that could easily have been lost. For example the whole Tauriel/Kili love story is pointless but it is a better film than the first 2, there is less of the frankly laughable barrels bouncing down a river with Legolas playing sonic the hedgehog type scenes and it feels more.....gritty I guess.

It is shorter than the other 2 at 2 1/4 hours, with a lot more action (one action scene is 45 minutes long in it's entirety) so there is more happening in less time. I'd say it's definitely worth a watch, if only to see the end of the trilogy but also because it's just a solid film.


Also here's a bit of trivia I only found out the other day, Sean Connery was firm favourite for the role of Gandalf in the original LOTR trilogy. They offered him $10,000,000 per film and 15% of the gross takings of the films to try and get him on board. Totalled up it would have earned him $480,000,000, but he turned it down because he didn't have any interest in J.R.R Tolkiens books and therefore no interest in doing the film. Fool!
 
This one's good, but it does definitely drag towards the end. The fights with the two orc leaders take way too long and detract from the main battle which is ended in 10 seconds by the eagles anyway. The end was inconclusive for me, and the battle just ends and little is said of the outcome.
 
Just came back from watching it in 2D. One word is all it takes to describe it.

EPIC!

I didn't see any of the LOTR movies in the theater, but I imagine this is what it must've felt like. As far as being a 3rd and final installment of a franchise, it does a much better job than LOTR 3 did, in my opinion.
 


Just wanted to remind everyone that this clip was pretty much the first thing that circulated about this movie, and it couldn't have been more misleading about the tone and quality of the film. Have a good day. 👍

(it's still a good clip)
 

Latest Posts

Back