Movie: The Hobbit

[Penner]

Guillermo Del Toro Will Not Be Directing The Hobbit (http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=9437:guillermo-del-toro-will-not-be-directing-the-hobbit&catid=41:news&Itemid=71)

God damnit.... MGM you fuckers, get your shit together.

[Animeniax]

Why doesn't Peter Jackson direct the Hobbit movie? Though I haven't seen the 2nd and 3rd movies, I hear he did a pretty good job of it.

I contend the trilogy would have been even more successful if they had released the Hobbit prequel first.

[Penner]

Yeah, it would be awesome if he just directed the movie(s) himself but apparently he's too busy... i'm guessing that after he finished the LOTR trilogy he was probably in such high demand that his movie schedule must be filled for a couple of years :P

It would be best if he did it himself tho.. most of the cast and crew already know each other and they know the way he directs and what he wants them to do and whatnot, that alone would save a bunch of time.

[Penner]

Peter Jackson negotiating to direct 'The Hobbit' films! (http://www.deadline.com/2010/06/urgent-peter-jackson-negotiating-to-direct-the-hobbit-films/)

[Animeniax]

Two part movie? Now they're just milking the franchise.

[Munsu]

Two part movie? Now they're just milking the franchise.

This can't be solely a "The Hobbit" adaptation right? I mean the book is only about 300 pages long...

[XanBcoo]

Two part movie? Now they're just milking the franchise.

Spoken exactly like someone who hasn't seen the 2nd and 3rd Lord of the Rings movies.

These Hobbit movies will contain more original subplots than the entirety of Tolkien's work itself. Jackson will find a way to fill 2 movies.

[Animeniax]

These Hobbit movies will contain more original subplots than the entirety of Tolkien's work itself. Jackson will find a way to fill 2 movies.

I and others railed against the entire Arwen/Strider love story bs subplot when it was announced in advance of the movie. Liv Tyler personally had to go online to address the hate because the uproar was so uproarious.

[Assassin]

stryder and arwen werent getting it on in the books?

[Animeniax]

It was only hinted at in the books and not as elaborately detailed as in the movies, and it's spellt "Strider".

[XanBcoo]

stryder and arwen werent getting it on in the books?

Arwen is mentioned like twice throughout the series. Her and Aragorn's story is briefly recounted in the Appendices of the books, but it is done so in a non-fiction style.

I think the worst offense in the movies was Aragorn's fall into the river and journey across the desert distraction story in The Two Towers that went absolutely nowhere. I don't know why Jackson wrote that in.

That said, cramming The Hobbit into one movie would probably be doing so at the expense of cutting out a lot of things. As long as Jackson is faithful to the story and doesn't cut out Beorn or something in favor of whatever fanciful thing he can dream up, I honestly don't mind.

[depthcharge]

I love the LOTR trilogy. The Hobbits might interest me especially if it is done Kiwi styled. Hooch hoooch.

[Animeniax]

I love the LOTR trilogy. The Hobbits might interest me especially if it is done Kiwi styled. Hooch hoooch.

Do you love the books trilogy or the movie trilogy? There's a big difference.

I'm a book fan myself, though the ending was anticlimactic.

[depthcharge]

Fan of the movie trilogy, special extended edition with the extras.

I tried reading the book after watching the movie and the chronology of the story made me confused.

[Penner]

Same here, movie fan by default because i never read books, ive never liked it :P

I really hope the Hobbit movies are as long as the extended LOTR ones :D

[Animeniax]

I made sure to read the books before the movies came out, which was why the first movie was such a disappointment.

[LunaticCat]

Peter Jackson to direct the Hobbit! (http://www.rttnews.com/Content/EntertainmentNews.aspx?Section=2&Id=1349649&SM=1)

[Assassin]

Yes! Hes the only one capable of doing it justice.

[Penner]

Indeed he is, this is great news.

[XanBcoo]

I think Del Torro would have been a much better pick. I'm actually disappointed that we'll just get a prequel to the Lord of the Rings movies, rather than a look at what a creative director can do with the same source material.

[LunaticCat]

I think Del Torro would have been a much better pick. I'm actually disappointed that we'll just get a prequel to the Lord of the Rings movies, rather than a look at what a creative director can do with the same source material.

Jackson was producer and co-author, so I guess it would have been that way anyway.

[XanBcoo]

Trailer's out:

http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/wb/thehobbit/

[Assassin]

maannnn i cant wait for that! i was watching thw two towers and return of the king last night. I cant believe its been 10 years since they came out. It'll be nice to see middle earth with fancy new cgi again.

I wonder how closely they will stick to the story.....its been a while since i read it, but it wasnt as detailed as lotr, so they shouldnt have any reason to leave anything out (im particularly looking forward to the tree spiders and shit)

[XanBcoo]

It's being split into two movies: An Unexpected Journey, and There and Back Again.

Jackson is using material from the LOTR appendices to flesh out the story a bit, while focusing more on Gandalf's excursions since he keeps disappearing for half of the book.

[Assassin]

that will be nice to see.....i watched the special extended version of ROTK, it was nice to see some stuff they had cut out, like how the palentia ends up in the water from inside of isengard, or how sam managed to sneak into baradur without any orcs seeing him.

man, im gonna go read The Hobbit again, just for fun.

[XanBcoo]

Oh also, here's a picture of the dwarves in their entire company:

http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/4094/dwarves.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/689/dwarves.jpg/)

I like that they made Gloin (second to the left from the center) look so similar to his son Gimli.

[Kraco]

The trailer looked promising indeed. After the LOTR movies, I trust Jackson to handle even extra material well, so I won't be worried about divergences from the book. In fact I'm even looking forward to it, not in the sense I wouldn't like the novel, not at all, but it'll be interesting to see since things work differently in a movie compared to a book. Plus based on that trailer he might intend to make the movies more epic than the original story.

[Penner]

Here's a massive new banner:

(Click here to view (http://img840.imageshack.us/img840/2886/hobbitscroll6000.jpg), it's 6000x808 wide res :P)

[Penner]

The Hobbit is officially confirmed to be three movies instead of two.

Then there's this:

"According to Jackson, the third film would make extensive use of the appendices that Tolkien wrote, to expand the story of Middle-Earth, and published in the back of The Return of the King. Martin Freeman and Sir Ian McKellen have already been contacted about appearing in a third film."

[Kraco]

You won't catch me complaining about this change. One more movie to definitely look forward to! I also thought the LOTR movies were quite long, despite being cut and edited to the absolutely maximum (or minimum length in other words), so it's better Jackson didn't feel forced to make more mammoth movies that will see less serious people crawling out of the theaters and giving bad reviews just because they couldn't bear sitting long enough.

[Animeniax]

I don't know that the Hobbit has enough source material to be 3 movies long, even with the material from the appendices. It means Jackson will add new elements, like a love story (ugh). People gave Liv Tyler a lot of shit back before the LoTR movies came out for the addition of story to give her character more screen time.

[Penner]

Actually, i read that they really wanted to make three movies instead of two because they had already filmed way more material than they could fit into the two originally planned movies, so now the cost and time to make a third movie is seriously reduced because they already have a ton of stuff for it filmed.

[Animeniax]

That's understandable, but was all the material filmed true to the story or was it a lot of added story from the director/screenwriter?

[Kraco]

There will be spoilers (possibly):







It was a fine movie. Three hours was over before I knew it. Even though there were definitely some very humorous parts and some very "fantastic" (fairy tailish), just like in the book that was basically a children's book, it was far more epic in shape, resembling LotR. At least in my opinion. Of course I wouldn't have expected anything else from Jackson, and the fact it's going to be three movies already suggested as much. I'm very happy because of this.

I only learned to recognize a few of the dwarves during those three hours, but it pretty much couldn't be helped. If you throw thirteen dwarves in during the first moments of the movie, all at once practically speaking, there's no way avoiding it. In fact I doubt I will recognize half of them by the time I've seen all the movies.

There was plenty added to the movie compared to the book, but so far I liked everything added. That extra stuff contributed greatly to the more serious general atmosphere and epicness, plus it will make these movies tie better in with LotR.

[UChessmaster]

I can probably name 2 of the dwarves, pretty good movie, although i`m so not a fan of night fights :/

[Paper]

^ no one cares about you liking or disliking night fights .... it was a good solid movie

[UChessmaster]

Wow fanboy alert, i didn`t attacked the movie or anything, i just gave my opinion, i can have those right?

...wait, who the hell are you again?

[Inazuma]

I think Dredd is better than the Hobbit, hell I enjoyed it more. Maybe because of the lack of hype around it

[Kraco]

During Smaug's attack on Erebor, I was thinking that if the dragons in Skyrim had been that terrible, the game would have been more epic.

[Paper]

Wow fanboy alert, i didn`t attacked the movie or anything, i just gave my opinion, i can have those right?

...wait, who the hell are you again?



you knowing me or not knowing me is Irrelevant, look at my profile and you will see my join date...... if you needed more clarification on who you addressing ask me, assumption gets you know were ...referring me as a fan boy :), .The movie was ok but you saying you don't like night fights holds little to no weight regarding everything else that the movie had shown or try to portray ... you opinions does matter that is why we are "discussing" but meaningless troll responses will get recycled and thus being called out. In the kingdom of the blind the one eye man is left King... the phrase couldn't been said anymore clearer have a good day Mr. masters

[Y]

you knowing me or not knowing me is Irrelevant, look at my profile and you will see my join date...... if you needed more clarification on who you addressing ask me, assumption gets you know were ...referring me as a fan boy :), .The movie was ok but you saying you don't like night fights holds little to no weight regarding everything else that the movie had shown or try to portray ... you opinions does matter that is why we are "discussing" but meaningless troll responses will get recycled and thus being called out. In the kingdom of the blind the one eye man is left King... the phrase couldn't been said anymore clearer have a good day Mr. masters

Ahahaha what the fuck is wrong with you.

[UChessmaster]

you knowing me or not knowing me is Irrelevant, look at my profile and you will see my join date...... if you needed more clarification on who you addressing ask me, assumption gets you know were ...referring me as a fan boy :), .The movie was ok but you saying you don't like night fights holds little to no weight regarding everything else that the movie had shown or try to portray ... you opinions does matter that is why we are "discussing" but meaningless troll responses will get recycled and thus being called out. In the kingdom of the blind the one eye man is left King... the phrase couldn't been said anymore clearer have a good day Mr. masters

That`s funny cause i gave my opinion on something that happened on the movie and you acted like a douchebag claiming that no one cares, if no one cares why did you answered then? i`m a troll now, cool, tell me more about assumptions please.

[Paper]

That`s funny cause i gave my opinion on something that happened on the movie and you acted like a douchebag claiming that no one cares, if no one cares why did you answered then? i`m a troll now, cool, tell me more about assumptions please.

whatever you say Trollmaster

[Animeniax]

I think he's saying your complaint about night fights is trifling and has almost zero to do with whether or not it's a good or bad movie.

[UChessmaster]

whatever you say Trollmaster

What a magnificent, well thought answer, now do a your mom joke. You can call me a troll all you want kid, it won`t make it so.


I think he's saying your complaint about night fights is trifling and has almost zero to do with whether or not it's a good or bad movie.

I didn`t said it was a bad movie because i didn`t liked the night fight though, as a matter of fact i said that i liked it, it was a simple side observation that encouraged him to be a dick somehow.

[Idealistic]

This movie was alright. It's definitely not on the level of any of the LOTR films, but it was enjoyable nontheless. Excited for part 2. I really liked how they added all these other creatures not seen before in the LOTR films.

[Paper]

I think he's saying your complaint about night fights is trifling and has almost zero to do with whether or not it's a good or bad movie.

I couldn't say it better myself....

@uchessmaster... Mr.Master what response did you wanted from me? If you wanted me to say sorry for my prior post... I am not .... I believe your upset because I called you out on your post, which in fact had little to do with nothing... I choose not to response prior and just saying "whatever", because I'm grown .... Obviously I hurt your internet feelings with my response and you want to be a arrogant and make it bigger then what its actually... its a forum dude you not gonna like everyone and I didn't come to gotwoot to win hearts just state facts ... I hope you have a better day and happy new year try to relax do some yoga i heard its relaxing you need some soothing :rolleyes:

[UChessmaster]

So i went from trolling to upset, my feelings are hurt, i`m arrogant and i need to relax, speaking of assumptions... Damn man, you know so much about me.

Yeah you`re a big boy alright, i want to be just like you when i grow up.

How about this, let`s stop going off topic, i`ll stop arguing this entirely, if you have anything to say feel free to send me a message so i can give my ignore option some use, or you can keep arguing here and show us what a beacon of overwhelming maturity you are to all of us.

On topic: Was the gollum on the prequel book or was he added because of his popularity?, i heard this movie used some 48 fps thing and i heard some complains about it but i didn`t even noticed, did anyone else had issues with it?

[Animeniax]

Gollum was the 2nd biggest character of the Hobbit book. Some would say he was the biggest because Bilbo fades into obscurity in the trilogy.

[UChessmaster]

That`s cool, more Gollum is always appreciated.

[Paper]

So i went from trolling to upset, my feelings are hurt, i`m arrogant and i need to relax, speaking of assumptions... Damn man, you know so much about me.

Yeah you`re a big boy alright, i want to be just like you when i grow up.

How about this, let`s stop going off topic, i`ll stop arguing this entirely, if you have anything to say feel free to send me a message so i can give my ignore option some use, or you can keep arguing here and show us what a beacon of overwhelming maturity you are to all of us.

On topic: Was the gollum on the prequel book or was he added because of his popularity?, i heard this movie used some 48 fps thing and i heard some complains about it but i didn`t even noticed, did anyone else had issues with it?

I was never arguing per say just stating facts.... when your older you see life differently ... Not everything is an argument...sometimes just a simple debate :) trollmaster...moving along to more important discussion gollum is good.

[Kagemane_no_Jutsu]

I couldn't say it better myself....

I laughed.

Cuz tru.



Anyway I liked this one... never been a huge fan of LOTR but always enjoyed it for the most part. Honestly I think I enjoyed this one more than the first LOTR. Prolly because Martin Freeman > Elijah Wood.... tho I like em both. I don't know I'd have to watch LOTR again its been such a while but just the whole backstory about the Dwarves, the Heart of the Mountain, the dragon, Thorin Oakenshield how he got his name... etc.... theres just a lot of interesting mythology but most of all the way in which its laid upon you. That could not have been if this was simply 2 movies.

In LOTR I always felt like I understood the backstory, but still I was left feeling empty about it. This was either a much more enticing story, or like I said it was just the way it was told.

[Kraco]

That`s cool, more Gollum is always appreciated.

I have read the book a few times, over the years, counting both in English and Finnish, and "Riddles in the Dark" is the only chapter name that stuck in my mind. And that's good ol' Gollum's chapter.

Still, in my opinion Gollum is not so uber important as a character but as a living example of the utter corruption the Ring causes. That was of much lesser importance in the Hobbit than it was in the LotR, where Frodo needed to stare at the wretched creature for most of the journey, seeing his own fate in its miserable form, should his will fail.

[Animeniax]

In LOTR I always felt like I understood the backstory, but still I was left feeling empty about it. This was either a much more enticing story, or like I said it was just the way it was told.

Has Peter Jackson ever explained why they decided to make the prequel movie after the main trilogy? I think it was a mistake, though the trilogy did great anyway. It could have been that much better if people understood the back story and origins of everything from the Hobbit, instead of the 10-20 min quick explanation from the first trilogy movie.


I have read the book a few times, over the years, counting both in English and Finnish, and "Riddles in the Dark" is the only chapter name that stuck in my mind. And that's good ol' Gollum's chapter.

Still, in my opinion Gollum is not so uber important as a character but as a living example of the utter corruption the Ring causes. That was of much lesser importance in the Hobbit than it was in the LotR, where Frodo needed to stare at the wretched creature for most of the journey, seeing his own fate in its miserable form, should his will fail.Same here, the riddles chapter is what I remember best from the Hobbit, followed by Bilbo being roused from his quiet life and thrust into a quest to save the world. But I think you proved it yourself, Gollum is an important character because he is everything that Bilbo/Frodo are not and must avoid becoming. They have their main mission, but more importantly they are on a mission of self-discovery, the failure of which is exemplified by Gollum.

[UChessmaster]

Has anyone seen desolation yet? I freaking loved it.

[darkshadow]

Has anyone seen desolation yet? I freaking loved it.
http://www.imgjoe.com/x/empty.jpg

Saw The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug HFR IMAX 3D,

Right of the bat I'll say that I really enjoyed this.
As mentioned, I saw this in HFR, and while I had to get used to the framerate for the first 30 minutes again, this is seriously the only way to watch the movie; the general smoothness and blur free action setpieces just adds so much to the experience, especially in 3D.

The perfect example of this was a rather excellent "barrel" sequence partway through; the choreography during this scene made it both silly and totally awesome at the same time while the HFR made it look silky smooth.
Also when they finally get to the titular dragon, everything is just pure eyecandy.

Speaking of Smaug, all the performances were spot on again; the main cast was as strong as before and the wood elves and humans are a very welcome addition, Thranduil being close to the best one, if it wasn't for Smaug.
Not only is the dragon just a visual treat, his personality and voice just perfect his onscreen presence; the entire sequence of Bilbo and Smaug interacting is fantastic.

Now even though the movie's colossal length of 161 minutes didn't feel like a drag at all, the actual pacing could've been better; at a certain point there is just a bit too much jumping between characters.
Also the way it ends might leave people a bit miffed, though personally I really liked it; Cumberbatch's delivery of Smaug's last line was just great.

I realise there are people that really disapprove of the Hobbit movies (for some reason) and even go as far as not even watching them, I say give them a chance.
In part because we get a lot of good (and bad) sci-fi, but good fantasy seems to be few and far between.

So go check this out, and definitely watch it in HFR, it smooths out the experience and there is no way to ever watch it like that at home.
I'll definitely go see this again ;D.

[Kraco]

Yeah, I liked it as well, additions included, just like the first movie. This was somewhat more steady ride than the first as well, with the giants and singing goblins missing. More similar to the LotR movies with the more down to earth atmosphere. Naturally all of it looked splendid, as expected.

Smaug was certainly one of the most devastating dragons ever depicted in a movie. I was very happy with him, save one thing: I didn't like his voice. There was nothing wrong with the lines, but the tone wasn't evil enough. He sounded like some gentlemanly villain, not like a huge, pillaging dragon.

[Animeniax]

Smaug was certainly one of the most devastating dragons ever depicted in a movie. I was very happy with him, save one thing: I didn't like his voice. There was nothing wrong with the lines, but the tone wasn't evil enough. He sounded like some gentlemanly villain, not like a huge, pillaging dragon.

You nailed it, Smaug is voiced by just such a person, a gentlemanly villain. It's the same manner as Khan from ST:Into Darkness. Though what kind of voice would you expect from a dragon? Something more whiny and snake-like? I've always preferred the depiction of dragons as cultured, wise, and noble, even if used for "evil" purposes. A deep, rumbling voice suits them more.

[Kraco]

No, not such a big difference. Just a small one. I liked the dragon voices in Skyrim more, for example, and they aren't so different (certainly not whiny and hissing like snakes), but there is some small difference, even if I can't describe it.