I thought it was great. And yes I have read the book. I learned a long time ago to stop comparing books to movies/shows, as someone will always be disappointed with the changes. As for the splitting it into three movies, as someone else mentioned Jackson wants to include more back story and history from the other books, since these will be the last movies ever made. I love this idea, seeing how The Silmarillion and other works will never be put on screen, it would be neat to include some of that in the back story of these movies.
The HOBBIT......don't bother
- Thread starter cheezydemon3
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk:
joshualoomis
Well-Known Member
well, i saw the movie yesterday. i've loved LOTR since i first read it as a child, and i return to it often as an adult (my wife thinks i'm a little nuts). i'm currently teaching the hobbit and my two ninth grade classes will be finishing the book next week before christmas break begins. perfect timing for them, but this movie is so far removed from the book that i suspect most of my students will come back to school with a thousand questions and plenty of disappointment.
if this movie was titled, say, "tolkien's middle earth: the hobbit" then i think it would sit easier with fans. but the movie is simply not "the hobbit." it's more; more from tolkien's universe and more from jackson's imagination.
the entire use of azog and radagast to drive the plot was pretty ridiculous. more violence and more cgi. azog was completely cgi, where in the past jackson has used people in orc-costume, and this seriously detracted from azog's character. and i don't know whose idea it was to have bird crap running down radagast's face as part of his costume (he has a bird's nest under his hat), but that was disgusting and unnecessary. the entire character of radagast was shown to be a goofball, which was annoying considering he is one of the five wizards.
probably the biggest letdown was the lack of development in bilbo's character. they developed frodo and sam so well in the LOTR that it was surprising to see such a shallow hobbit for nearly three hours of the movie named after him.
the dwarves do consume plenty of cask ale at bilbo's home, however (the wine is for gandalf), and then pass into a much-too-lengthy belching contest. that scene, and the sneezing troll, are for the kids, i suppose.
i wasn't disappointed because i knew it was going to include more than what's found within the pages of the novel, but i also wasn't pleasantly surprised by any of it. the gollum riddle game scene was fun to watch. as was most of ian mckellen's performance.
so i have mixed feelings. enjoy, or do not enjoy, the movie. i'm off to keg an imperial red ale...
if this movie was titled, say, "tolkien's middle earth: the hobbit" then i think it would sit easier with fans. but the movie is simply not "the hobbit." it's more; more from tolkien's universe and more from jackson's imagination.
the entire use of azog and radagast to drive the plot was pretty ridiculous. more violence and more cgi. azog was completely cgi, where in the past jackson has used people in orc-costume, and this seriously detracted from azog's character. and i don't know whose idea it was to have bird crap running down radagast's face as part of his costume (he has a bird's nest under his hat), but that was disgusting and unnecessary. the entire character of radagast was shown to be a goofball, which was annoying considering he is one of the five wizards.
probably the biggest letdown was the lack of development in bilbo's character. they developed frodo and sam so well in the LOTR that it was surprising to see such a shallow hobbit for nearly three hours of the movie named after him.
the dwarves do consume plenty of cask ale at bilbo's home, however (the wine is for gandalf), and then pass into a much-too-lengthy belching contest. that scene, and the sneezing troll, are for the kids, i suppose.
i wasn't disappointed because i knew it was going to include more than what's found within the pages of the novel, but i also wasn't pleasantly surprised by any of it. the gollum riddle game scene was fun to watch. as was most of ian mckellen's performance.
so i have mixed feelings. enjoy, or do not enjoy, the movie. i'm off to keg an imperial red ale...
OP
OP
cheezydemon3
Well-Known Member
I get it. You won't form an opinion without seeing it. That is fine, you just seemed to criticize someone who was reading the disappointment and assuming the worst.
If there was a 53 minute packing scene, I evidently slept through it, because I recall very few 5 minute areas without serious action commencing.
It was exhausting.
The book is about those very things. The movie wasn't.
tchamber
Well-Known Member
See this is why I don't read reviews. I saw this Friday night and loved it. Yes I have read all the books, yes I have read all of the Annexes etc. Yes PJ put a lot of extra stuff into the film, and I don't care. I was entertained, and that's all that matters.
It's The Onion. It's satire. Don't take it seriously.
![Craft A Brew - Safale S-04 Dry Yeast - Fermentis - English Ale Dry Yeast - For English and American Ales and Hard Apple Ciders - Ingredients for Home Brewing - Beer Making Supplies - [1 Pack]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41fVGNh6JfL._SL500_.jpg)
landshark
HMFIC
Well, I read the book yesterday just to catch up. I had read the LOTR series and the Silmarillion (Best book ever IMO), but for some reason never the Hobbit. Not as good literature I don't think. But, as Cheezy points, Radagast is only mentioned to Beorn as Gandalf introduces himself. Although, Radagast is actually in the LOTR series in a minor roll.
I want to see Tom Bombadil!
I'll probably see the movie this coming week. I'm a sucker for LOTR stuff.
I want to see Tom Bombadil!
I'll probably see the movie this coming week. I'm a sucker for LOTR stuff.
OP
OP
cheezydemon3
Well-Known Member
Sorry, I was a chinese press analyst in a former life
Look, this isn't the debate forum. I just wanted to let other people who are very literal, like me, know to take the movie with a grain of salt or not bother entirely.
I'm not saying that the movie sucked, just that it wasn't a good version of the Hobbit.
Kinda wish I'd done the latter.
Darwin18
Well-Known Member
Well your thread title says "Don't bother"...
This is going to be our Christmas Eve before Christmas Eve dinner movie. I'm not particularly attached to the book and really just hope to entertained. Would it be nice if Peter Jackson stuck to the book? Yes, absolutely. I'm not going to go in there with a copy of the Hobbit and cross reference every scene.
This is going to be our Christmas Eve before Christmas Eve dinner movie. I'm not particularly attached to the book and really just hope to entertained. Would it be nice if Peter Jackson stuck to the book? Yes, absolutely. I'm not going to go in there with a copy of the Hobbit and cross reference every scene.
OP
OP
cheezydemon3
Well-Known Member
Right, but it was directed at people like me, who have read the book more than twice and remember 90% of every detail in it.
Honestly, your plan sounds fine. the problem, if there is one, is that it is an effing violent movie. I wouldn't really want my 10 year old to see it.
I've read the book more than a few times. I'm currently reading it again to my 13 yo daughter. We have 2 chapters left.
I thought the film was good. Yes, it's not a word for word recreation of the book. Yes there are "extra things" in there that aren't in the book.
Remember that most of the extra stuff is stuff that was in the appendices of LOTR, The Silmarillion, or The Unfinished Tales. Jackson put them in there to complete the story, else people will ask "Where is Gandalf off to now???"
The parts I disliked the most are the extreme action scenes. Stuff that was made to look super unrealistic because that's what we moviegoers expect from films these days. Unrealism.
However, all in all I thought the movie looked very much like the LOTR films. Now I saw it in 2D because we can't get the 48fps High Frame Rate near where I live and my wife is averse to 3D films. I'll probably go back and watch again in 3D at some point, and I really hope to see it in HFR because I'd love to see that technology advance to the point where it's looks real.
Personally, though I'm glad PJ added some stuff from the extra material. It helped to add some background information and to also tie the books together. After all, they are related. It's just not as apparent when you don't read the extra material. I also think the film would have appealed to me if he had just stuck with the book. I think the movie makers underestimate people's tolerance for films without extreme action.
I thought the film was good. Yes, it's not a word for word recreation of the book. Yes there are "extra things" in there that aren't in the book.
Remember that most of the extra stuff is stuff that was in the appendices of LOTR, The Silmarillion, or The Unfinished Tales. Jackson put them in there to complete the story, else people will ask "Where is Gandalf off to now???"
The parts I disliked the most are the extreme action scenes. Stuff that was made to look super unrealistic because that's what we moviegoers expect from films these days. Unrealism.
However, all in all I thought the movie looked very much like the LOTR films. Now I saw it in 2D because we can't get the 48fps High Frame Rate near where I live and my wife is averse to 3D films. I'll probably go back and watch again in 3D at some point, and I really hope to see it in HFR because I'd love to see that technology advance to the point where it's looks real.
Personally, though I'm glad PJ added some stuff from the extra material. It helped to add some background information and to also tie the books together. After all, they are related. It's just not as apparent when you don't read the extra material. I also think the film would have appealed to me if he had just stuck with the book. I think the movie makers underestimate people's tolerance for films without extreme action.
I have read the Hobbit more times than I can count, I have read LoTR even more, and I have read the Similrillion a couple times. I would classify myself just shy of LoTR nerd. I remember almost every detail and still I loved this movie. My only qualm with it was the troll scene. I understand why they gave azog a large roll and can live with it, stories need an antagonist and when the only antagonist really shows himself towards the end of the Hobbit they thought they needed to add one that perseveres through the movies. Could you imagine this movie without azog? People would have been claiming the movie had no plot and that the journey goes nowhere. With regards to Radagast, yeah it was a bit disappointing that they made him a little crazy, but IIRC he is supposed to be a bit odd and out of touch with civilization.
The Hobbit is a great book, but unfortunately it's a bit dull for a movie by today's standards (seeing as it's a children's story), and there is so much stuff that happens that Tolkien alludes to but leaves out. I was excited to find out that they were going to work in the information from the appendices and the unfinished tales, since it would add much more background to Gandalf and the LoTR trilogy. But I am disappointed that it is 3 movies. I can see 2, but 3 is just too many.
And as a side note, people need to chill with movies. Just relax and enjoy the entertainment. If you don't like it, just shut up and let others make their own opinion. Not everyone is looking for literary mumbo-jumbo in their movies, some of us like to see sh*t blow up and battle scenes. Yes some movies are better than others and those generally are the ones with better character development and plot, but RDWHAHB.
OP
OP
cheezydemon3
Well-Known Member
I think that this is where I really got disgusted. They split it into 3 movies so as to get every detail......I guess they meant every detail of violence and ridiculous action.
Radagast's rally 500 hundered with his ridiculous rabbits was akin to Jar Jar as far as I am concerned.
If I had realized that it was meant to contain a ton of other sh!t, then I might not have been so harsh, but I find that idea ridiculous too. Why cram a bunch of other crap into an already rich and complete story?
It is SO busy, and misses some of my most cherished parts.
Eff off Peter Jackson.
Darwin18
Well-Known Member
That's the benefit of being married without children. I get to see the movies I want without worrying if the subject matter is too violent or mature, and my wife smuggles in outside snacks/soda in her purse. A win win!
Rich and complete by itself, yes. Rich and complete when combined with LoTR, not at all. I love the book, but it is centered on the company without regard to what else is happening (Gandalf disappears and reappears with little information as to why). Every time I read the Hobbit I try to see if I can figure out what Gandalf was doing, and from that standpoint it is lacking severely. The only reason we know what else was happening is because luckily Tolkien was writing a history of middle earth and has mentioned what was going on in other works and appendices.
FYI, they have been saying for a LONG time that they were adding in a bunch of other stuff. When I first heard they were splitting it into 2 movies, it was accompanied with: "They are including the stuff with the necromancer from the appendices." The fact that they were splitting it into multiple movies should have sparked many questions as to why, and all of the answers would have pointed towards the extra information. Also based on the LoTR movies, it goes without saying that the Hobbit movies are going to be more violent than the book.
Bummer. This was my intro into the books. I saw the Fellowship of the Ring in German (obviously in Germany) in 2002 and had previously never heard of the series or Tolkien before that. I really enjoyed the LOTR series movies, but got lost trying to read them. As stated, the Hobbit was fast paced and kept my interest. It seemed the LOTR books drug on trying to build the scenes to the point where I got lost.
I was excited about this movie, but I'm disappointed at the reviews thus far.
I was excited about this movie, but I'm disappointed at the reviews thus far.
Sometimes you just have to take a deep breath and let it go. You can ask yourself what kind of longbottom leaf they were smoking when they decided to do this, but it won't do any good.
Same with the treetops scene. No need for the leader of the Orcs to show up. But the movie needs the main bad guy (I suppose), so there he is. In any event it doesn't really change the bottom line of the story. I'm still waiting to see Bilbo's love interest. I mean, every movie has to have a love interest, right? Well, maybe it is Galadriel and Gandalf. I know she was with Some other elves, but you know they only mate for a few hundred years before moving apart and doing other thing and finding other loves. Maybe she wants to find out if it's true that wizard's staffs have a large knob on the end.
OP
OP
cheezydemon3
Well-Known Member
Actually I heard that Frodo develops a gay relationship with Thorin.
Peter Jackson in his wisdom is promoting tolerance as well as creative plot additions.
Galadriel sure did seem sweet on Gandalf!!!!! Don't know about his staff, but I think there is something on page 3,463 of the Silmarillion, chapter 2.
Actually Gandalf's sheepishness was irritating too. While he was yet to come into his own, he was surely the biggest bad-ass to go on the trip. Was Saruman in the last homely house?????
I don't recall that at all, and anything in the silmarillion wouldn't have over-rode the events described in the Hobbit. One more fail (unless my memory is faulty).
Really, not having Gandalf mimic the troll's voices was the most obvious departure from the actual story with no plausable explanation......except possibly for the aforementioned lack of character development for bilbo. A poor trade if that was the reason, and another detraction from Galdalf's bad assedness.
OP
OP
cheezydemon3
Well-Known Member
When Bilbo finds the dwarves after getting the ring and losing his buttons, Balin is NOT standing watch, and Bilbo does NOT sneak among them and remove the ring. WHY NOT?? No extra budget required.
Just saw it tonight. Not sure what the hate is about. Sure it is not entirely accurate but I thought it was a terrific three hours.
It is about as accurate to the Tolkien universe as can be and it is as close to the book as possible why still trying to incorporate everything they want to.
I would highly recommend to anyone thirteen or older. (There was a surprising number of beheadings)
It is about as accurate to the Tolkien universe as can be and it is as close to the book as possible why still trying to incorporate everything they want to.
I would highly recommend to anyone thirteen or older. (There was a surprising number of beheadings)
Did we see the same movie? That is exactly what Bilbo did.
Discrepancy! Hold on while I open the book on my smartphone for clarification...
bchurch
Well-Known Member
I will still go and see it despite your warning, I will just keep my expectations low so I won't be too disappointed. For the record, I liked starship troopers. Ok, I liked Denise Richards in a space age flight uniform ;b
Excerpt from the book, wherein Gandalf and Dori are discussing the fact that the Dwarves "lost" Bilbo and Gandalf is quite upset about it.
Gandalf answered angrily: "I brought him, and I don't bring things that are of no use. Either you help me look for him, or I go and leave you here to get out of the mess as best you can yourselves. If we can only find him again, you will thank me before all is over. Whatever did you want to go and drop him for, Dori?"
"You would have dropped him," said Dori, "if a goblin had suddenly grabbed your leg form behind in the dark, tripped up your feet, and kicked you in the back!"
"Then why didn't you pick him up again?"
"Good heavens! Can you ask! Goblins fighting and biting in the dark, everybody falling over bodies and hitting on another! you nearly chopped off my head with Glamdring, and Thorin was stabbing here and there and everywhere with Orcrist. All of a sudden you gave one of your blinding flashes, and we saw the goblins running back yelping. you shouted 'follow me everybody!' and everybody ought to have followed. We thought everybody had. There was no time to count, as you know white well, till after we had dashed though the gate-guards, out of the lower door, and helter-skelter down here. And here we are - without the burglar, confusticate him!"
"And here's the burglar!" said Bilbo stepping down into the middle of them, and slipping off the ring.
Bless me, how they jumped! Then they shouted with surprise and delight. Gandalf was as astonished as any of them, but probably more pleased than all the others. He called to Balin and told him what he thought of a look-out man you let people walk right into them like that without warning.
Gandalf answered angrily: "I brought him, and I don't bring things that are of no use. Either you help me look for him, or I go and leave you here to get out of the mess as best you can yourselves. If we can only find him again, you will thank me before all is over. Whatever did you want to go and drop him for, Dori?"
"You would have dropped him," said Dori, "if a goblin had suddenly grabbed your leg form behind in the dark, tripped up your feet, and kicked you in the back!"
"Then why didn't you pick him up again?"
"Good heavens! Can you ask! Goblins fighting and biting in the dark, everybody falling over bodies and hitting on another! you nearly chopped off my head with Glamdring, and Thorin was stabbing here and there and everywhere with Orcrist. All of a sudden you gave one of your blinding flashes, and we saw the goblins running back yelping. you shouted 'follow me everybody!' and everybody ought to have followed. We thought everybody had. There was no time to count, as you know white well, till after we had dashed though the gate-guards, out of the lower door, and helter-skelter down here. And here we are - without the burglar, confusticate him!"
"And here's the burglar!" said Bilbo stepping down into the middle of them, and slipping off the ring.
Bless me, how they jumped! Then they shouted with surprise and delight. Gandalf was as astonished as any of them, but probably more pleased than all the others. He called to Balin and told him what he thought of a look-out man you let people walk right into them like that without warning.
OP
OP
cheezydemon3
Well-Known Member
It is right before that Homer, when Balin is keeping watch and Bilbo is creeping, not prancing down the path.
Bilbo pops up and is looking into Balin's eyes, but the dwarf of supernatural observation powers does not see him because of the ring.
It is a little subtle, but in the film, Bilbo loses his buttons NOT on the door to the outside, but actually before leaping over Gollum.
Bilbo then runs out the door and down the path. No one is standing watch, and the group has a not unlike the book conversation and Bilbo takes off the ring and walks among them.
surprising them that he made it at all, NOT startling them that he got past Balin and appeared before their very eyes.
Subtle? Maybe. Inexplicable that they should leave that detail out but spend 15 minutes on Radagast's rabbits? YES.
This is all from memory. Read the book maybe 5 years ago. I am not infallable, but pretty fracking close to it.
Bilbo pops up and is looking into Balin's eyes, but the dwarf of supernatural observation powers does not see him because of the ring.
It is a little subtle, but in the film, Bilbo loses his buttons NOT on the door to the outside, but actually before leaping over Gollum.
Bilbo then runs out the door and down the path. No one is standing watch, and the group has a not unlike the book conversation and Bilbo takes off the ring and walks among them.
surprising them that he made it at all, NOT startling them that he got past Balin and appeared before their very eyes.
Subtle? Maybe. Inexplicable that they should leave that detail out but spend 15 minutes on Radagast's rabbits? YES.
This is all from memory. Read the book maybe 5 years ago. I am not infallable, but pretty fracking close to it.
Yes, I see. Well that is small potatoes IMO. I am unsure WHY Bilbo couldn't have lost his buttons at the lower door trying to escape Gollum after leaping over him. But it hardly makes a difference when you consider the story as a whole. Things like that are mildly annoying, but easy to overlook.
I hate it less when they include things that didn't happen in the book, but may well COULD have, than when they flat out change things for no good reason.
landshark
HMFIC
Tickets purchased for Saturday. We'll see how bad it is. I think of the 4 going to see it I'm the only one who has read all the books, so I doubt my movie-going peers will notice what I'm complaining about.
They tried it with Déagol and Sméagol. Sadly, it ends in death. Some underlaying message has to be there.
They tried it with Déagol and Sméagol. Sadly, it ends in death. Some underlaying message has to be there.
EllisTX
Well-Known Member
Yeah, Jackson crapped all over the book. I'll still watch the next few but I'll be pissed about it.
I was mostly just annoyed through the majority of the movie but the last 15 minutes or so of the movie had steam coming out of my ears. So pissed
I was mostly just annoyed through the majority of the movie but the last 15 minutes or so of the movie had steam coming out of my ears. So pissed
OP
OP
cheezydemon3
Well-Known Member
Yeah, Jackson crapped all over the book. I'll still watch the next few but I'll be pissed about it.
I was mostly just annoyed through the majority of the movie but the last 15 minutes or so of the movie had steam coming out of my ears. So pissed
I am beginning to think that only those of us who REALLY appreciate the book were so disapointed.
I hated 90% of it.
The head goblin was really off, the goblins didn't creep in from a crack in the back of the cave and bind everyone, etc.
Things not in the book that were added? Bilbo deciding to abandon the quest in the cave, Thorin's emotions both good and bad about bilbo, The mountain Giants psychotically trying to behead each other, the travelers finding themselves on the giant's knees, Saruman and Galadriel in The Last Homely respectively jumping Gandalf's sh!t and making sexual advances on him. Bilbo saving Thorin from Azog (or any orc for that matter) in the tree top scene. (Thorin charging the Azog/Orcs for that matter) Radagast and his rabbits, and his mushroom fetish, and the bird poop, and the scene with the necromancer, and giving Gandalf some sword "Not from the land of the Living" etc. etc.
