Originally posted by Dolos
The Hobbit and Avatar's 3D is different from any other film's 3D.Watch the Hobbit in 3D if you want to know what I mean. If more filmmakers design 3D films because they want them to be more appealing rather than to bring in more profit, you would quickly realize why 3D exists casually in theaters these days.
However, as Gandalf would say, much "has turned to greed and ambition."
A strange point to make. It seems as if you're saying that the 3d in The Hobbit is more about making the film more appealing than about greed for money at the box office yet the last time any film was more blatantly about making profit was when they split Kill Bill into two separate films in the UK so they could charge film goers twice but keeping it as a single film elsewhere. If making The Hobbit 3 films isn't entirely about greed then I don't know what is.
Originally posted by Robtard
Yes.The Hobbit:
An Unexpected Journey 2012
The Desolation of Smaug 2013
There and Back Agan 2014
Honestly, I think I can wait on this then. The Hobbit doesn't have so much going on that it need to be a three-parter, and I'm just going to get annoyed having to do the "to be continued" thing this year and then next. I thought this was just going to be one long film and was looking forward to getting my Smaug on. Guess they weren't showing him in the previews for a different reason.
Originally posted by Ascendancy
Honestly, I think I can wait on this then. The Hobbit doesn't have so much going on that it need to be a three-parter, and I'm just going to get annoyed having to do the "to be continued" thing this year and then next. I thought this was just going to be one long film and was looking forward to getting my Smaug on. Guess they weren't showing him in the previews for a different reason.
You only see Smaug in small segments, a leg, an eye etc in The Hobbit. The second film will be Smaugtastic though.
IMHO peter jackson does not like the source material. I went into this having already looked up all the shit he changed, s oi wasnt thrown for a loop.
I've been reading the Hobbit since i was 5, and peter jackson seemed to have only glanceed at a copy and maybe wrote down some semi important if not good dialouge. Those little moments of banter or amusing lines didn't save this movie.
Jackson has wrote himself into a corner with what is supposed to happen in the second movie. If Smaug is desolated as the title promises, that leaves us withonly talking for the entire 3rd movie until the battle. Which was not long at all in the book.
I think PJ is going to expand more on this necromancer and azog side plots. Both of which only take away from what was otherwise a fantastic adventure tale. Now it seems to be what people who havent read or heard of the hobbit are expting, just some prequel to LOTR. It was actualyl written first lol. PJ is treating it as his own personal scrpit.
This movie dissapointed from a story telling , directorial, and source material aspect. Nevermind the 48 fps, the fact that so many scenes were so dark and hard to focus on was bad enough. When he directed the trilogy(a much darker series to be sure) it was bright and colorful even in Mordor.
You start off slow even for an epic "dragon scene" with elves for some strange reason passing by the lonely mountain with an army just as smaug attacks. Just so thorin can hate elves, as he also conveniently saw them up on a hill as just before they left, and made eye contact with the king.
While my rantings may not disuade you from seeing the hobbit, i dont mind because honestly im going to see them all because i have too. If PJ ruins even more of the magical moments from the book, then he has simply robbed hobbit fans of a descent movie adaptation for however long it is until someone decides to remake it(knowing hollywood i have at least a couple decades to wait).
In Conclusion i just want to voice my opinion that it does not bode well for other epic monets in the book when a short scene involving gandalf lobbing magical pine cone grenades that sparked red, blue, and green. Which lit afire the orcs with magical sparks from the explosions in order to give bilbo and dori more time to climb. Turns into some smoldering pine cones that dont actually kill any orcs, and then sends thorin in to fight an orc that was never there in the books. Who inexplicable crossed the mountains as fast as they did cutting straight through it. In order to have bilbo with no combat experience start blocking seasoned orcs like a baus. Then the eagle was nice enough to pick up thorins sword that he dropped after getting KOed. It just blew my mind how stupid the whole scene was.
Originally posted by omgchos
IMHO peter jackson does not like the source material. I went into this having already looked up all the shit he changed, s oi wasnt thrown for a loop.I've been reading the Hobbit since i was 5, and peter jackson seemed to have only glanceed at a copy and maybe wrote down some semi important if not good dialouge. Those little moments of banter or amusing lines didn't save this movie.
Jackson has wrote himself into a corner with what is supposed to happen in the second movie. If Smaug is desolated as the title promises, that leaves us withonly talking for the entire 3rd movie until the battle. Which was not long at all in the book.
I think PJ is going to expand more on this necromancer and azog side plots. Both of which only take away from what was otherwise a fantastic adventure tale. Now it seems to be what people who havent read or heard of the hobbit are expting, just some prequel to LOTR. It was actualyl written first lol. PJ is treating it as his own personal scrpit.
This movie dissapointed from a story telling , directorial, and source material aspect. Nevermind the 48 fps, the fact that so many scenes were so dark and hard to focus on was bad enough. When he directed the trilogy(a much darker series to be sure) it was bright and colorful even in Mordor.
You start off slow even for an epic "dragon scene" with elves for some strange reason passing by the lonely mountain with an army just as smaug attacks. Just so thorin can hate elves, as he also conveniently saw them up on a hill as just before they left, and made eye contact with the king.
While my rantings may not disuade you from seeing the hobbit, i dont mind because honestly im going to see them all because i have too. If PJ ruins even more of the magical moments from the book, then he has simply robbed hobbit fans of a descent movie adaptation for however long it is until someone decides to remake it(knowing hollywood i have at least a couple decades to wait).
In Conclusion i just want to voice my opinion that it does not bode well for other epic monets in the book when a short scene involving gandalf lobbing magical pine cone grenades that sparked red, blue, and green. Which lit afire the orcs with magical sparks from the explosions in order to give bilbo and dori more time to climb. Turns into some smoldering pine cones that dont actually kill any orcs, and then sends thorin in to fight an orc that was never there in the books. Who inexplicable crossed the mountains as fast as they did cutting straight through it. In order to have bilbo with no combat experience start blocking seasoned orcs like a baus. Then the eagle was nice enough to pick up thorins sword that he dropped after getting KOed. It just blew my mind how stupid the whole scene was.
This fool be crazy.
Legit complaints about The Hobbit:
"Overall, I like Lord of the Rings. However, I do feel that Tolkien kind of rips off Harry Potter in many ways. There are several parallels, such as elves, dwarfs, wizards, goblins, trolls, magic (especially invisibility), etc. Sauron is referred to as “Dark Lord” just like Voldemort is. There is also the elder white-haired bearded wizard who serves as a mentor, Gandalf, who is reminiscent of Dumbledore. Some of the character names are similar, such as Wormtongue as opposed to Wormtail, too. There is even a gigantic spider (Shelob) at the end of “The Two Towers” that reminds one of Aragog from Chamber of Secrets. I even noticed that the plots of both series begin with the protagonists’ birthday. Now I see that Tolkien, this unoriginal bastard, is coming out with The Hobbit in December. This would be fine, but why didn’t he just write this book first to begin with? I still like Lord of the Rings, though–don’t get me wrong–but I wonder if Tolkien has ever said in interviews whether he borrowed elements from Harry Potter. I’ll be watching the extended DVDs later this week and I think he’s featured on the commentary track, so I look forward to that." - brian___007
Originally posted by Robtard
Legit complaints about The Hobbit:"Overall, I like Lord of the Rings. However, I do feel that Tolkien kind of rips off Harry Potter in many ways. There are several parallels, such as elves, dwarfs, wizards, goblins, trolls, magic (especially invisibility), etc. Sauron is referred to as “Dark Lord” just like Voldemort is. There is also the elder white-haired bearded wizard who serves as a mentor, Gandalf, who is reminiscent of Dumbledore. Some of the character names are similar, such as Wormtongue as opposed to Wormtail, too. There is even a gigantic spider (Shelob) at the end of “The Two Towers” that reminds one of Aragog from Chamber of Secrets. I even noticed that the plots of both series begin with the protagonists’ birthday. Now I see that Tolkien, this unoriginal bastard, is coming out with The Hobbit in December. This would be fine, but why didn’t he just write this book first to begin with? I still like Lord of the Rings, though–don’t get me wrong–but I wonder if Tolkien has ever said in interviews whether he borrowed elements from Harry Potter. I’ll be watching the extended DVDs later this week and I think he’s featured on the commentary track, so I look forward to that." - brian___007
😆
Originally posted by Robtard
Legit complaints about The Hobbit:"Overall, I like Lord of the Rings. However, I do feel that Tolkien kind of rips off Harry Potter in many ways. There are several parallels, such as elves, dwarfs, wizards, goblins, trolls, magic (especially invisibility), etc. Sauron is referred to as “Dark Lord” just like Voldemort is. There is also the elder white-haired bearded wizard who serves as a mentor, Gandalf, who is reminiscent of Dumbledore. Some of the character names are similar, such as Wormtongue as opposed to Wormtail, too. There is even a gigantic spider (Shelob) at the end of “The Two Towers” that reminds one of Aragog from Chamber of Secrets. I even noticed that the plots of both series begin with the protagonists’ birthday. Now I see that Tolkien, this unoriginal bastard, is coming out with The Hobbit in December. This would be fine, but why didn’t he just write this book first to begin with? I still like Lord of the Rings, though–don’t get me wrong–but I wonder if Tolkien has ever said in interviews whether he borrowed elements from Harry Potter. I’ll be watching the extended DVDs later this week and I think he’s featured on the commentary track, so I look forward to that." - brian___007
Originally posted by RobtardLOTR a rep-off of Harry Potter? That's just stupid! LOTR was written way before Harry Potter. If anything; it's Harry Potter that's ripped off LOTR!
Legit complaints about The Hobbit:"Overall, I like Lord of the Rings. However, I do feel that Tolkien kind of rips off Harry Potter in many ways. There are several parallels, such as elves, dwarfs, wizards, goblins, trolls, magic (especially invisibility), etc. Sauron is referred to as “Dark Lord” just like Voldemort is. There is also the elder white-haired bearded wizard who serves as a mentor, Gandalf, who is reminiscent of Dumbledore. Some of the character names are similar, such as Wormtongue as opposed to Wormtail, too. There is even a gigantic spider (Shelob) at the end of “The Two Towers” that reminds one of Aragog from Chamber of Secrets. I even noticed that the plots of both series begin with the protagonists’ birthday. Now I see that Tolkien, this unoriginal bastard, is coming out with The Hobbit in December. This would be fine, but why didn’t he just write this book first to begin with? I still like Lord of the Rings, though–don’t get me wrong–but I wonder if Tolkien has ever said in interviews whether he borrowed elements from Harry Potter. I’ll be watching the extended DVDs later this week and I think he’s featured on the commentary track, so I look forward to that." - brian___007