EPT[Movie] The Hobbit Trilogy - Page 76
| Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
| ||
|
zeo
Serbia6336 Posts
Too many 'Legolas sliding down the steps on a shied' scenes in general. Still a better movie than all the crap being put out these days. What has there got left to put into the third movie anyway? Two and a half hours of Smaug drama? | ||
|
qotsager
Germany585 Posts
On December 14 2013 09:19 zeo wrote: Watched the movie yesterday. I don't know how I feel about Legolas and that female elf being written into the story. Read an interview with the actress who plays Tauriel and she says that there are too many men in the Hobbit, and after a while you get sick of all the men onscreen so they put in a female character to make the story more interesting. Too many 'Legolas sliding down the steps on a shied' scenes in general. Still a better movie than all the crap being put out these days. What has there got left to put into the third movie anyway? Two and a half hours of Smaug drama? the final battle. you think minas tirith was epic and totally over the top? peter jackson has got some plans  | ||
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
The dragon was stupendous. Finally, someone got a dragon right in a movie. It was frightening, cunning, filled with malice, yet enormous and awe-inspiring. When it breathed fire, you could almost feel the flames, and realized it was some of the hottest flame you'll ever see. I loved every moment of CumberDragon. The spiders were Jackson specials, as always. Perfect for scaring poor arachnophobes like me. I also liked that they had all that fun with the barrel-ride. It was over the top, but in a good way (unlike the goblin caves in the previous film). I also loved the little touches, such as bringing in the bees "bigger than hornets" from the book, or the dialogue between the spiders. An enormous amount to enjoy. | ||
|
zeo
Serbia6336 Posts
| ||
|
Mothra
United States1448 Posts
| ||
|
Guitar Picker
33 Posts
On December 14 2013 11:01 Mothra wrote: I'm disappointed to hear that this movie continues the all action zero plot of the last. Peter Jackson did a good job with LotR, why are these Hobbit movies like amusement park rides? $$$. And guess what? Despite your bitchiness and claim of disappointment, you're going to go watch it. Enjoy. | ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
I want to make clear that I remember almost nothing about the Hobbit book and approach this from a common sense point of view and have no idea if these parts are directly from the source material. /rant + Show Spoiler + First and foremost is the obvious: just like the first one this movie has major tonal problems. It tries to be child friendly and comedic with slapstick scenes like those with the barrels or when they are running from Smaug (it felt like Benny Hill music should have been playing) juxtaposed to the serious things like Gandalf's fight with Sauron and the impending doom of Smaug. It just doesn't feel right. Second, Bilbo doesn't feel like the main character in this movie. It feels like this movie has 4 or 5 protagonists and Bilbo is just along for the ride. Third, a lot of stupid fucking scenes that make no god damn sense and break all immersion. Thankfully there isn't anything as bad as Goblin Mountain in the first movie (seriously one of the most embarrassing things every put to screen), but there are things that are just hard to watch. To list a few: - Smaug clearly states that he can smell dwarfs from a distance and can even hear the breathing of nearby people yet he literally walks DIRECTLY OVER THEM and doesn't here their brisk walk in full heavy armor. - The scene where they split up to try and distract Smaug. This scene was hard to watch... are we supposed to believe that Smaug is like that dog in Up who is so easily distracted that he can't focus on one group at a time? He is about to kill one group but sees another and suddenly stops and switches targets? He easily could have gotten Thorin but decided that he saw a squirrel, err, another group of dwarfs and couldn't help himself but go after them. - Frankly the entire part of the dwarfs trying to beat Smaug is poorly done (though his interactions with bilbo are great). I know movies like this have a lot of "oh wow he just survived by like 1inch or 1second" but when this continues to happen for 15 straight minutes, it begins to become harder and harder to suspend disbelief. - Orcs are apparently gods of stealth. The group chasing them is able to literally sneak up to the front entrance of the Elves city and not a single person sees them. They then are able to sneak around to the back and ambush a group of elvish guards without any previous warning that they were there. So elves are only good at tracking/detection when it fits the plot? The orcs also sneak into the water city with absolute ease and stealth as well. - The part where the one dwarf is being healed by the elvish chick and she starts glowing was a joke and got laughs. I don't remember if the dwarf-elf love subplot was in the book but it didn't feel like it fit in this movie at all and was just a distraction. - When they break out there are no guards at the wood-elf prison which is shown to be literally 100m, if not less, from the throne itself. This makes even less sense since in earlier scenes there are shown to be guards there (just not when the breakout happens ofc). Also, they are so fucking loud when they break out yet there is not one elf, with their good hearing, in distance to hear anything? - The part during the barrel escape where the fat one magically takes out like a dozen orcs with physic defying bounces transitioning into an absurd scene where he does a whirlwind attack killing like 5 orcs while having the barrel still on his head. The last part of my rant needed to be saved for last because it was so terrible it almost ruined the movie for me: Tauriel. Her character was FUCKING INFURIATING (and apparently she isn't even in the book?!?!?!?!). The problems are numerous: - She is the worst captain of the guard ever. She lets orcs just walk freely in their land and literally walk up to their gates. - She acts solely on emotion. We see her try and kill an orc before the interrogation is done because of anger and the entire point of her going after the dwarfs for love was forced and asinine She is a fucking important person in the kingdom during a time of need and she leaves her post to chase a man she's known for 5 fucking minutes? - She abandons Legolas to help somebody she's known for 5 minutes. This is wrong for 2 reasons: 1 she's abandoning the crown prince of the kingdom and 2. the movie states she's known Legolas' family for SIX HUNDRED FUCKING YEARS. You're telling me she rejects 600 years of bonding, friendship and duty to save some fucking dwarf she's known for FIVE FUCKING MINUTES? What is this bullshit? She isn't doing female leads any favors by playing this cheesy shit. Legolas almost dies because she stays behind to heal a nobody. - I'll say it again.... she shits in the face of 600 years of history and duty to jeopardize the kingdom and her prince b/c she had a superficial crush on a tall dwarf. /rant Having said that, the scenes with Gandalf fighting the necromancer and Bilbo talking with Smaug are very well done and fun to watch. | ||
|
Mothra
United States1448 Posts
On December 14 2013 12:25 Guitar Picker wrote: $$$. And guess what? Despite your bitchiness and claim of disappointment, you're going to go watch it. Enjoy. Uh, the LotR trilogy didn't make good $$$? That's news to me. Good job though trying to cover up idiotic answer with insults out of nowhere. | ||
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
| ||
|
Dunmer
United Kingdom568 Posts
Ive a feeling people are just looking for things to hate about this movie, even though most of them have no problem when it happens in the LoTR's. | ||
|
ETisME
12680 Posts
definitly an improvement (or maybe because of the dragon??) but overall I am just a little too tired of Peter Jackson movies' CGI. I don't know if it's just me but the movies try so hard to present every locations as grand/magnificent/haunting as possible. It can be cool if it won't all CGI based and every single moment has some level of CGI applied to it. it's not about the quality of the CGI, I am just tired of seeing grande scenery again and again and again. | ||
|
Yoav
United States1874 Posts
You could really see that this was stretched out like crazy to make the third movie. This should have been acts 1 and 2 or the second one. (Typical movies, including Hobbit 1, have around 5 acts. This had... 0? Without a protagonist or driving action it's hard to say.) | ||
|
SpikeStarcraft
Germany2095 Posts
But we can still talk about a good action/plot ratio. And i think 75/25 in favor of action is just out of balance. I liked the hobbit because its like a fun and relaxed journey through middle-earth. The whole point is that its a tedious journey. If you stretch it to 3 movies then theres the danger of the plot being too slow. Then you fill in a bit of action and have like a 50/50 ratio. I would be fine with that. But when you have a very small amount of plot to begin with and then you even cut parts out and speed the remainder of plot up just to have even more mindless action then im a bit sad about it. The whole strength of the 3 movie concept was that you dont have to leave stuff out and that you can add awesome stuff that fits in and gives you more backstory. Its still a great movie and i would recommend it to anyone. Strongest points are the quiet parts for example the dialogue with bilbo and smaug. | ||
|
Dunmer
United Kingdom568 Posts
I did enjoy it but the CGI levels are a bit much, I'd prefer the original approach of mostly doubles for height problems and clever camera angles like when they are all in Bilbo's house. | ||
|
qotsager
Germany585 Posts
On December 15 2013 00:01 Dunmer wrote: Frodo wasnt the main character in the LoTR's either or aragorn or gandalf or anybody, they are a few main characters in. Both movies yet people seem to complain only about the hobbit doing it. I see a trend where both movies have these events or bits that people complain about in the hobbit but dont mention the lord of the rings doing. The barrel scene being ridicoulus with bombur? Gimli jumps onto a punch of pike wielding orcs in helms deep, oh and their pikes are pointed up. Seems like a legit idea to me? Tauriel and the dwarve kili I think is this one having some kind of love interest and its distracting? Aragorn and the maiden of rohan is the same thing really, at least his love with arwen was relevant to the plot. Ive a feeling people are just looking for things to hate about this movie, even though most of them have no problem when it happens in the LoTR's. firstly, about the protagonist, the lord of the rings is narrated from the view of many different characters, which is fine, jackson did what was in the books. the hobbit however is literally just about bilbo. so jackson introducing that many viewpoints felt a bit like him stretching the story to fill this movie with content. secondly, the slapstick. gimli is the "silly" member of the fellowship when it comes to fighting, the one rolling around in the mud and hitting orcs in the groin. however the gags and funny bits he introduced were merely to distract the audience from the otherwise very dark and creepy movie, for example helms deep kills of a whole bunch of people, has protagonists injured, while i was not at any point worried for the hobbits during the barrel sequence. were you? even kili (or fili?) being hit by that morgul arrow (something i considered very rare, but it seems like simple henchmen get to use those now) didn't really touch me. because i don't care about the guy, and because the overall atmosphere makes you feel pretty save. tauriel was not distracting to me, but oh so unnecessary. what for? so she could run after them, have some ridiculous over the top fighting scenes (also more legolas, yay) and save kili (or fili, one of the pretty dwarves). it doesn't add to the movie. in the lord of the rings there was eowyn, fighting for her fathers attention and respect, in love with aragorn who did not love her. (it also added to aragorn because he stayed true to arwen. it was sad and dramatic in general, you know?) eowyn was a sad character with a personal happy ending whom i really liked in the books and in the movies. tauriel, on the other hand, owns some orcs and fancies a dwarf, therefor ignores her kings orders and goes own some more orcs. i was unable to get involved with that character. yes, i am obviously looking for things to dislike about the hobbit, because my expectations were oh so high and jackson shattered them so utterly with his first movie. and in my opinion you cannot compare the hobbit and the lord of the rings movies without the hobbit looking really bad. | ||
|
fartosis77
Belgium461 Posts
| ||
|
Potling
Norway298 Posts
I hope this guy reviews the Hobbit films. | ||
|
Parlortricks
United States111 Posts
| ||
|
Derez
Netherlands6068 Posts
| ||
| ||
