[Movie] The Hobbit Trilogy - Page 85
Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
Eliezar
United States481 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
Archeon
3249 Posts
On November 23 2014 20:29 Steveling wrote: Why can't someone make an outstanding middle earth mmo? Q_Q I think because they try to recreate the lord of the rings instead of the hobbit. Lotr was incredibly successful but an epos just isnt suited for mmo gameplay. The hobbit on the other hand, which is more of a roadmovie (the book, not the movies) would be something they could use as inspiration. Opinions on the last hobbit movie? Better than the second one? Worse than the first one? Is Jackson trying to recreate the return of the king, or is it finally over trying to make a funny and eventful roadmovie about stealing a dragon's treasure into a pathos with evil overlords? | ||
Falling
Canada11212 Posts
I think because they try to recreate the lord of the rings instead of the hobbit. Sort of. Or rather they were trying to bridge the tonal difference between the two stories and include a lot of back filling that Tolkien came up to better coordinate/ explain the two stories. They were not always successful, but it was interesting idea. Honestly, the LotR's films, particularly Two Towers and Return of the King are radically different in tone from the books. The final film can not possibly be a road movie because they have already arrived and it is unlikely they will spend much of the film travelling home. Colbert interviews Smaug. Pretty funny stuff. Turns out the dragon is a fiscal conservative. | ||
Archeon
3249 Posts
On December 13 2014 13:28 Falling wrote: Sort of. Or rather they were trying to bridge the tonal difference between the two stories and include a lot of back filling that Tolkien came up to better coordinate/ explain the two stories. They were not always successful, but it was interesting idea. Honestly, the LotR's films, particularly Two Towers and Return of the King are radically different in tone from the books. The final film can not possibly be a road movie because they have already arrived and it is unlikely they will spend much of the film travelling home. Colbert interviews Smaug. Pretty funny stuff. Turns out the dragon is a fiscal conservative. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaRoqslM4W0 Idk they still can give the characters more space and make it a bit less action-packed. Actually the few scenes i really liked from the first and second hobbit movies were the scenes where noone is running or fighting. I liked the dwarfs' introduction for example. I like Smaug's introduction and Bilbo solving the puzzle with the entrance to Smaug's roost. I liked the guessing contest with Gollum even though it was one big Gollum presentation. I liked how Thranduil is characterized. I can even live with the romance scene between the dwarf and the elf and that tells a lot. Simply because it tries to give an impression of how the race (elves) thinks, because it gives a background. If they just gave their characters a little bit more space and cut down the (daft) action scenes a bit i think the movies could have turned out really good. But 3/4 of the time something is going down. It's as if Jackson was scared to have two minutes without action and that really ruins the movies. I guess hoping that the finale is going to cut down on the action is futile? That interview was actually hilarious. | ||
Falling
Canada11212 Posts
If they just gave their characters a little bit more space and cut down the (daft) action scenes a bit i think the movies could have turned out really good. But 3/4 of the time something is going down. It's as if Jackson was scared to have two minutes without action and that really ruins the movies. I could certainly live with that. I know I tend to defend The Hobbit adaptations a fair amount- especially if it has to do with coordinating LotR's lore. But it there is one thing that bothers me, it's the over the top action. I didn't particularly care for shield surfing Legolas, cliff-jumping Aragorn, or Oliphaunt slaying Legolas... unfortunately The Hobbit films decided to up the ante that sort of shenanigans. I'd be fine with less film and less battles and more space for characters. | ||
Sermokala
United States13677 Posts
On December 13 2014 12:38 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: The movies sucked because Peter Jackson didn't want to direct in the first place. So much this. The guy who was suppose to do it backed out 2 weeks before production so they came to him and told him he had to do it. He said no. They brought up a semi trailer full of cash, he said no. Mickey mouse said "I can do this all day just give me a number..haha" his first speech to the cast and crew is halarious. Hes trying as hard as possible to tell people "listen guys its a lot of money lets just do it." | ||
Falling
Canada11212 Posts
| ||
SmoKim
Denmark10301 Posts
1) Smaug <3 I love Smaug. Love the design, love the voice, love the personality. The burning of the city was epic, brutal, violent, horrifiyng. + Show Spoiler + And it was awesome how he died. In the book his death is just stupid, one guy, who gets whispered in the ear by a stupid bird, then kills a giant dragon with a little arrow = bullshit. Here, it was just as much Smaugs own arrogance that killed him - how he chose to land and stand still, instead of Bard making some retarded Legolas shot, hiting him mid-air (we got enough of that in this and the other movies) 2) The War This was obviously a war movie, and it did that really well. + Show Spoiler + I like how Evil Orc boss actually acted as a general, using strategy, trying to win the war and not just charge in like morons. 3) Concequences Unlike The Two Towers and Return of The King, there was consequences. There was actually some hard sacrifices made + Show Spoiler + (3 main characters died), Even the love story (that was unececary to begin with, obviously) atleast was a tragedy, [Note: Imo all the over-the-top stuff (Fucking Legolas...) and that wierd coward guy - the only reason that was in, was to make the movie less of a downer. It was forced humor, because they knew that It was so serious (and for many that is a big big Flaw, with good reason, that is a legimate critic). - I don't know, but that was what i was thinking when i facepalmed at certain parts.] 4) General movie stuff Great acting, great action, great directing, great music, great visuals (so glad i saw it in 2D, hate all that 3D HD shit). for a Blockbuster it is easily one of the better movie(s) the last couple of years. I prefer this over crap like Transformers and the legions of (epic) action movies that i can't even remember, because you forget them as soon as they are released. The overall movie quality was far better than most stuff we see. Obivously the movies had ALOT of flaws - CGI hell, more action than character (never good!), some goofy moments who felt out of place, + Show Spoiler + NOT ENOUGH BEORN (seriously wtf PJ?) Oakenstone never came back also: Peter Jackson confirmed Starcraft 2 fan, or atleast Zerg fan (hello Nydus worm). And apparently also a BIG God of War fan (fucking Legolas!) | ||
RebirthOfLeGenD
USA5860 Posts
| ||
Daray
6006 Posts
| ||
icystorage
Jollibee19343 Posts
| ||
Hoenicker
243 Posts
| ||
weikor
Austria580 Posts
Its just these crazy action / stunt scenes, which even in a magic world dont make sense. It needs to be kept believeable, and i dont really care for the fact that he tried to give 12 year olds some cool shit. Theres a part where legolas jumps off a stone tower approximately 20 meters, onto a troll thing, rides it around in a circle, gets the troll to run into the tower, knocking it over and forming a bridge by wedging it in between the mountain. Just common sense dictates theres SO much wrong with that scene. Its hard to watch. Theres just so much of - "well if that was really his plan, hes a complete idiot", but works out because its in the script. | ||
Hoenicker
243 Posts
On December 15 2014 18:31 weikor wrote: I have to say, the more you are a fan of LotR, the less you will care about the gaping holes in this movie. Its not bad if youre a fan, and I didnt hate watching it. I wouldnt watch it again though. Its just these crazy action / stunt scenes, which even in a magic world dont make sense. It needs to be kept believeable, and i dont really care for the fact that he tried to give 12 year olds some cool shit. Theres a part where legolas jumps off a stone tower approximately 20 meters, onto a troll thing, rides it around in a circle, gets the troll to run into the tower, knocking it over and forming a bridge by wedging it in between the mountain. Just common sense dictates theres SO much wrong with that scene. Its hard to watch. Theres just so much of - "well if that was really his plan, hes a complete idiot", but works out because its in the script. not to speak of the moment when he manages to warp the fabric of time/space and actually uses falling bricks to walk up a collapsing bridge. Just stupid. | ||
SmoKim
Denmark10301 Posts
On December 15 2014 23:15 Hoenicker wrote: not to speak of the moment when he manages to warp the fabric of time/space and actually uses falling bricks to walk up a collapsing bridge. Just stupid. EASILY the dumbest part. As if the Oliphant kill wasnt OP enough | ||
Laurens
Belgium4513 Posts
On December 15 2014 23:15 Hoenicker wrote: not to speak of the moment when he manages to warp the fabric of time/space and actually uses falling bricks to walk up a collapsing bridge. Just stupid. Hey man, don't you know elves are really light? | ||
Paperplane
Netherlands1823 Posts
| ||
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
On December 13 2014 14:24 Sermokala wrote: So much this. The guy who was suppose to do it backed out 2 weeks before production so they came to him and told him he had to do it. He said no. They brought up a semi trailer full of cash, he said no. Mickey mouse said "I can do this all day just give me a number..haha" his first speech to the cast and crew is halarious. Hes trying as hard as possible to tell people "listen guys its a lot of money lets just do it." This is brilliant | ||
SK.Testie
Canada11084 Posts
| ||
| ||