Rate The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

[The Josh]

I know a lot of people I've seen it with (just randoms) had no idea it's actually in The Hobbit.

 

[screamingmetal]

It was more of a introduction movie as well. I honestly think this will be the weakest of the three movies. I'm sure we're in for bigger surprises in the next one!

I'm sure it'll get better, I'm just not sure what they'll do in the third movie.

 

[screamingmetal]

Yeah, I don't have a problem with chips or golf whatsoever. Chips were referenced in the first movie, and if you didn't know that "chips" mean french fries in England, well, I don't know what to tell ya.

But I suppose I can see the golf thing throwing people off. I liked the reference, since I must have read it in the Hobbit or Appendices or whatever - I knew Tolkien came up with it originally.

There's also the reference to Potatoes in The Two Towers. Potatoes were introduced to Europe in the late 16 century, something similar to modern golf was around 50+ years before that, possibly even much earlier.
I just chock it up to this being a fantasy movie that doesn't take place at any time in history.

 

[King Darkness]

I liked it quite a bit but it wasn't a perfect movie.

The different more lighthearted tone was for me, more welcome then the heavier somewhat more adult feeling of the LOTR movies. However, I felt that there wasn't really a purpose to the movie other then deciphering the map and getting out of trouble on their travels, if it had more of a goal for the first movie, I would've liked it more.

The movie was basically dwarves aimlessly running for 3 hours. You could get drunk enough to pass out 2 hours in if you play a drinking game to take a shot every time Gandalf said "RUN!"

I didn't much enjoy the bumbling nature of the dwarves either. Felt kinda like a 3 stooges movie sometimes.

LotR trilogy is second only to SW in my book. All time classic. This isn't even in my top five movies of the year.

 

[DPrime]

It's the classic quest story - adventures along the way, etc. I don't see a problem with that.

Ah, modern cinema has made us all so... impatient, I suppose.

I'm starting to be okay with the parts I thought were kind of dorky (Radagast, the Goblin King's death, etc). They weren't Jar Jar level, by any means, and the book had quite a few silly moments, too.

Overall, I'm starting to think maybe this is a 9... or at least an 8.5. I find myself thinking about it a lot after viewing, which I only do after movies I really, really like.

Still not LOTR or the Godfather or anything, by any means.

There's also the reference to Potatoes in The Two Towers. Potatoes were introduced to Europe in the late 16 century, something similar to modern golf was around 50+ years before that, possibly even much earlier.
I just chock it up to this being a fantasy movie that doesn't take place at any time in history.

Interesting... I didn't know potatoes were introduced from the new world.

I was actually thinking of Two Towers when I wrote that. I guess I meant "the first trilogy", not movie. Maybe it was in Fellowship as well, can't remember - but that line by Samwise was pretty classic.

Tolkien hinted at this taking place sometime before recorded history. For all we know some kind of tuber similar enough to potatoes and some game similar enough to golf so that we would translate them as such existed back then. Remember, they're not actually speaking English in Middle Earth.

 

[The Josh]

The Hobbit is very episodic in nature and they do literally go from one tight spot to another. There are a lot of people who like Tolkien's work that love The Lord of the Rings and just kind of like The Hobbit, because of the difference between the two. Like I've said before if you like the book you probably will like the movie. If you've never read the book you probably expect it to be The Lord of the Rings redux which it will never be.

 

[Gates70]

The movie was basically dwarves aimlessly running for 3 hours. You could get drunk enough to pass out 2 hours in if you play a drinking game to take a shot every time Gandalf said "RUN!"

I didn't much enjoy the bumbling nature of the dwarves either. Felt kinda like a 3 stooges movie sometimes.

LotR trilogy is second only to SW in my book. All time classic. This isn't even in my top five movies of the year.

Be careful what you say in this thread or you'll get tarred and feathered

CNN called this one of the worst movies of 2012 https://www.cnn.com/2012/12/28/showbiz/movies/10-worst-movies-2012/?hpt=hp_t3

 

[Khev]

CNN called this one of the worst movies of 2012 https://www.cnn.com/2012/12/28/showbiz/movies/10-worst-movies-2012/?hpt=hp_t3

And the critics continue to utterly embarrass themselves. I remember when FOTR came out that people complained about the first half of that movie being boring too.

 

[The Josh]

CNN is hurting both on its website hits and raitings. This smells of the star magazine using bat boy to get old ladies to buy a magazine.

 

[intothevoid]

If you've never read the book you probably expect it to be The Lord of the Rings redux which it will never be.

And that's the fault of WB and PJ and whoever was responsible for the marketing strategy of The Hobbit. The trailers have the same tone as the LOTR films.

It's backfired badly for them in terms of its critical reception.

 

[Khev]

And that's the fault of WB and PJ and whoever was responsible for the marketing strategy of The Hobbit. The trailers have the same tone as the LOTR films.

It's backfired badly for them in terms of its critical reception.

PJ/Middle Earth is yesterday's news to critics. I think they're all to eager to show how hip they are by having moved on and flogging this film as if its the next TPM or KOTCS. I have a feeling that when this new trilogy is said and done they're going to feel like a bunch of idiots.

The Hobbit seems to be the next King Kong, PJ's last film that was criminally overlooked and underrated.

 

[intothevoid]

It goes both ways. Whilst I don't think it's a bad film as the majority of critics would have you believe, I don't think it's anywhere near the level of the original 3. Like I said, marketing for The Hobbit has a large part of the blame IMO. The film is almost nothing like what the trailers suggest.

 

[Khev]

It goes both ways. Whilst I don't think it's a bad film as the majority of critics would have you believe, I don't think it's anywhere near the level of the original 3. Like I said, marketing for The Hobbit has a large part of the blame IMO. The film is almost nothing like what the trailers suggest.

I disagree. The trailers were upfront about dwarves singing, Bilbo's less than heroic antics and guys riding bunny sleds. I got exactly what I was prepared to see. If anything I was surprised at all the decapitations and dismemberings that were absolutely LOTR-style violence. Bilbo and Gollum's exchange could have been at home in any LOTR film, and the trailers hinted at that too.

I think this one is all on the critics.

 

[intothevoid]

We'll have to agree to disagree then.

 

[Khev]

We'll have to agree to disagree then.

No, I think you should agree with me straight up. If not then we should just agree that I don't agree with your notion that we should agree to disagree.

 

[The Josh]

And that's the fault of WB and PJ and whoever was responsible for the marketing strategy of The Hobbit. The trailers have the same tone as the LOTR films.

It's backfired badly for them in terms of its critical reception.

I don't think they gave off the same tone but they did say it was by the same director. That in and of itself probably plays into what some expected.

PJ/Middle Earth is yesterday's news to critics. I think they're all to eager to show how hip they are by having moved on and flogging this film as if its the next TPM or KOTCS. I have a feeling that when this new trilogy is said and done they're going to feel like a bunch of idiots.

The Hobbit seems to be the next King Kong, PJ's last film that was criminally overlooked and underrated.

I agree 110%. The Hobbit is as good as I could have hoped for.

 

[The Josh]

I disagree. The trailers were upfront about dwarves singing, Bilbo's less than heroic antics and guys riding bunny sleds. I got exactly what I was prepared to see. If anything I was surprised at all the decapitations and dismemberings that were absolutely LOTR-style violence. Bilbo and Gollum's exchange could have been at home in any LOTR film, and the trailers hinted at that too.

I think this one is all on the critics.

Totally agreed. I think the trailers and TV spots ( I have almost all of them saved) gave the tone of what we got. They showed some seriousness and some of the joking. I don't feel and I've watched them all multiple times sold exactly what they gave us.

 

[Anzik]

Critics would complain about an orgasm. I pay no attention to them. A movie is to entertain you. If it does and does so artistically its a bonus.

 

[intothevoid]

I never watched any of the TV spots so i'm just going by the main 2 theatrical trailers

 

[DiFabio]

The marketing misrepresented the actual film? I think the reviews and criticism misinterpret the actual film.


I knew when the Great Goblin fell on the dwarves in the trailer and Dwalin (or Thorin, not sure) said, "YOU'VE GOT TO BE JOKING", that we were in for something a little different. The trailers showed that there was some humor and lightheartedness to be found.


Seems to me like people have a problem that, "this isn't Lord of the Rings". I don't see why, the Hobbit is different thematically and in tone.


If I had one gripe, it would be that it TRIES TOO hard to be connected to LOTR. If they trimmed the fat and excess scenes, got rid of the not so subtle references and story lines directly linked to LOTR and made it a film primarily focused on the adventures of Bilbo Baggins and Thorin's company, I think it would have been even better. No, "this ring has potential to be evil", no Witchking reference, no morgul blade, no, "I slipped and the ring fell onto my finger", no foreshadowing. Just it's own thing with Bilbo Baggin's story.


Other than that, the only thing I truly disliked was the CGI and action scenes, both of which did nothing for me. Everything else was gold, from Bilbo's arc, to Thorin, to Gollum and Riddles in the Dark, etc. I think with Desolation of Smaug and There and Back Again, this new series as potential. We ain't seen nothing yet.