Review floodgates oPening in 90 minutes 
THE HOBBIT (2012/2013): News, Rumors, Pics Till Release
- Thread starter Skywalker
- Start date
Stephen Colbert is hosting a Hobbit week on his show (Sir Ian, Martin Freeman, and Peter Jackson).
Ouch, IGN has given it a 7.9. That's especially harsh considering they've got a bad habit of OVER-rating everything.
http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/12/04/the-hobbit-an-unexpected-journey-review
http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/12/04/the-hobbit-an-unexpected-journey-review
I thought the exact same thing and was equally surprised when I reread the book. In fact, there was a lot of things I forgot about like how many animals that speak in the novel (not just the eagles and spiders, but also all of Beorn animal servants).
Precisely. During my reread, I specifically looked out for instances of exposition or dialogue being glossed over and there's a lot of that and not just the Battle of the Five Armies or traveling through Mirkwood. A lot of conversation between important characters such as Beorn, The Master of Lakewood, Bard, Thranduil, even Elrond, are glossed over that can easily be expanded upon. Additionally, Thorin, Balin, and Bombur have the vast majority of the dialogue amongst the dwarves, some of whom don't speak at all (or doing anything other than being part of the Company).
Awesome. I'll be sure to watch each of those episodes online.
Those reviews are all just so-so so far. I wonder how much Armond White is going to hate this one.
Mister Fandango
Fleet Captain
Probably because it's going to be just like Lord of the Rings was in its storytelling, but people are going in with rose-colored glasses under the horribly incorrect notion that LotR was a bad ass action thrill ride from start to finish. Which it wasn't. A great deal of it was actually pretty dull and drawn-out, especially with the first installment, which is exactly where the majority of the negativity in the reviews are coming from about the Hobbit.
I find it interesting that a critique of the film is that it too closely follows the structure of, say, Fellowship:
But that neglects the fact that Tolkien's LOTR trilogy is, mostly, an expanded version of his Hobbit story. In any case, more worrisome to me are the comments about pacing, particularly during the opening sections of the film. I do wonder if the reviewers allowed themselves to simply enjoy the scenes set in Bag End, as opposed to wanting to see the adventure happening sooner. I seem to recall similar critiques about FOTR and how the Hobbiton scenes were its weakest. Personally, I thoroughly enjoyed them and if the Bag End scenes strike a similar tone, then chances are I'll have to disagree with those critiques.
Link
But that neglects the fact that Tolkien's LOTR trilogy is, mostly, an expanded version of his Hobbit story. In any case, more worrisome to me are the comments about pacing, particularly during the opening sections of the film. I do wonder if the reviewers allowed themselves to simply enjoy the scenes set in Bag End, as opposed to wanting to see the adventure happening sooner. I seem to recall similar critiques about FOTR and how the Hobbiton scenes were its weakest. Personally, I thoroughly enjoyed them and if the Bag End scenes strike a similar tone, then chances are I'll have to disagree with those critiques.
73% @RottenTomatoes at the moment. What worries me is the fact that none of the critics seem to be particularly blown away by it. Even the ones who are counted as "fresh" call it "unexciting", "not as good as you hoped", "unable to recapture the greatness of LOTR" etc. ComingSoon.net even went as far as to compare it with The Phantom Menace.
BTW:
I nearly pissed myself!
BTW:
I nearly pissed myself!
Last edited:
It's quite possible that AUJ won't be as good as any of the LOTR films ... but it'd have to miss the mark by a pretty wide margin before it fell into even average territory (at least for me).
It's kinda like meeting up with old friends after a decade has passed. No way will it live up to the "glory years" but it can be fun to reconnect - and exciting to look forward to.
It's kinda like meeting up with old friends after a decade has passed. No way will it live up to the "glory years" but it can be fun to reconnect - and exciting to look forward to.
Well OF COURSE it won't be as good as LOTR. It's the prelude to that story. It's the setup. It's not as big as important. That's why they made LOTR first and not the Hobbit. What I hope it's going to be is a nostalgic return to the LOTR franchise that's an enjoyable romp. It's not going to be about the fate of Middle Earth or anything. It's not going to have huge insane massive battles like LOTR did.
The book itself was initially a standalone story. LOTR wasn't published until 1954, 17 years later.
It IS going to have the battle of the five armies, which is going to be pretty fucking grandiose, you can be sure of that.
^ Awesome! I enjoyed the humor. Seeing Radagast was fun (despite his lack of lines in the clip). Freeman seems very comfortable as Bilbo.
IMO battle of Helm's Deep was ten times more thrilling than the clusterfuck that was battle of the Pelennor Fields.
Similar threads
