• Welcome to The Audio Annex! If you have any trouble logging in or signing up, please contact 'admin - at - theaudioannex.com'. Enjoy!
  • HTTPS (secure web browser connection) has been enabled - just add "https://" to the start of the URL in your address bar, e.g. "https://theaudioannex.com/forum/"
  • Congratulations! If you're seeing this notice, it means you're connected to the new server. Go ahead and post as usual, enjoy!
  • I've just upgraded the forum software to Xenforo 2.0. Please let me know if you have any problems with it. I'm still working on installing styles... coming soon.

Hobbit late 2013 ?

Huey said:
Again, I haven't seen the movie, so I may be way off base with my thoughts. I just remember reading the Hobbit first, and then the LOTR series, and always felt that while the stories were intertwined, you can tell Tolkien wrote them in a different frame of mind from one to the other. I can only hope that Jackson remained true to Tolkiens vision, but stretching a short story into a trilogy, I'm guessing he didn't.
Click to expand...

The Hobbit was first published in 1937-38 primarily as a children's book. The LOTR trilogy was published in the three volumes over a period in 1954-57 a volume each year. It is not clear from waht I have read that when writing The Hobbit Tolkien had in mind the writing of the trilogy.

The Hobbit was written in the '30s while LOTR was largely written during WWII accounting for the different tones in the two, some say the dark tone of LOTR was a direct reflection of the war.

Had Jackson been true to The Hobbit I imagine it would have been a fun 2-3 hour single movie. As it it is it seems he bowed to the commercial pressure of die hard LOTR fans to produce a similar movie with The Hobbit. From Bats and Razz's comments seem like it was the wrong choice.
 
Regardless of books being a different story.. This is made as a prequel for sure. Same characters, look, even the LOR score was used. Jackson is banking on LOR here to make this work.
 
I'm going to see it in 3D in about an hour. Had I read this first, I probably would have ordered my tickets for a 2D screening, but that ship has sailed. I read the book a very long time ago. It will be interesting to see what I think of the movie. I heard that Jackson incorporated a bunch of other material from Tolkien's writings that occupy the same time period as the main story of the Hobbit in order to make it into a true prequel for LOTR. It is possible that the last two movies will move a lot faster, having set the stage in the first. I'm going to withhold judgment until I see it. I'll report back later.
 
I haven't looked into it but I'm willing to give the film another chance if I can find it in 2D here locally. I saw a midnight preview after going to an abysmal Eagles game after a VERY long day.
 
Razz said:
Regardless of books being a different story.. This is made as a prequel for sure. Same characters, look, even the LOR score was used. Jackson is banking on LOR here to make this work.
Click to expand...
Oh though they are a different story in today's world the book The Hobbit is definitely a prequel to the book LOTR. Sorry if my post made it sound like the two were not related.
 
^^ I mentioned it in my first post about seeing the movie Friday at midnight, it's very distracting and I'd prefer seeing it again in a lower FR if possible.
 
My family went to see it this afternoon and we all loved it. I thought it was pretty true to the story and also incorporated some key information about what was going on in Dol Guldur with the Necromancer. That is important stuff, because the Necromancer is Sauron. That entire side line is telling the story of Sauron's return and is pretty important if these films are to be treated as a prequel. I honestly didn't think that it was boring or too slow or bad in any way.
 
I saw it today in RealD 3D, first off I liked it. Though I do agree that it could been edited down to a shorter movie or less movies overall. And I do agree with a lot of the criticism of Bats and Razz, just not as strongly. The 48fps and 3D part was somewhat distracting at times, I too would like to see it in 2d.

Still I enjoyed it, maybe it was because I had lowered expectations after reading Bats was disappointed with it. Which is the only part I read before seeing it, and seeing the scores on Rotten Tomatoes.
 
If you guys recall Peter took a ton of crap for releasing LOTR to theaters without including all the scenes he shot and later included in the EE version for home viewers. He also took a ton of crap for leaving out portions of the book when he did such an amazing job with the stuff he included which most directors would have cut out.

As such, I think Peter is trying to "get it right" and recreate the entire written book with all the glorious detail and fanfare the art form has made available to him.
 
Jan, Matthew, one his friends, and I watched this last night and we loved it!! We saw it in IMAX 3D and I thought the 3D was very good. There weren't a lot of things jumping off the screen at us, but there was a ton of added depth into the screen which really put you there I thought.

I didn't find this to be slow, either. I knew that PJ was going to add material from the other "references" that Tolkien wrote, just as he did in the LOTR trilogy. Granted some of the additional charecters may have been included more as cameos from the LOTR series but the information they presented was relevant to the story.

The only "gripe" I had was when (SLIGHT SPOILER) the orcs were chasing the party around in the daytime. That was one of the big indicators of Sauron's influence (and thus Sauromon's creation of the Urakai) in the Fellowship (60 years after this movie).

John
 
Just a quickie note... I saw the movie last night.

I went in with the preconceived notion that PJ didn't get it "right" this time. Well, I do think it missed hitting the bullseye like I think LOTR did, but I really enjoyed the movie. I did think it may have been a little too long, but I didn't think it was WAY too long. What I was surprised about was how much I had forgotten about the book.

However, I do hate when they have a movie like this parsed out over three different years. Seems like something this can be done over a year or 1.5 years... three years feels just a little sadistic.
 
I just sat down in the IMAX theater at the Bob Bullock Texas museum in Austin to watch this movie in 3D. Wish me luck.
 
My GF's brother and his GF are here for the holidays and they both live in New Zealand, they said it has just been crazy lately with the premiere of the movie. Lit bit of info they actually rewrote the tax laws to accomidate the movie when they heard that they were considering filming the movie in Scotland because it cost them too much money to film in New Zealand so their Prime Minister rushed through a bill to lower the tax laws just so they would continue to film there. It appears when the LOTR came out so many people saw the beautiful countryside that it brought a ton of tourism and they didn't want to lose all that money to Scotland. Anyway I thought that was interesting how a production crew can get the entire government to change laws.
 
What and amazing movie! I completely loved it in every possible way. The image was amazing, the acting spot on, the writing brilliant, and the sound incredible. Even the 3D (IMAX 3D) was incredible.

I cannot see how anyone who enjoyed the LOTR movies or who read any of the books could not love this movie.
 
MatthewB said:
My GF's brother and his GF are here for the holidays and they both live in New Zealand, they said it has just been crazy lately with the premiere of the movie. Lit bit of info they actually rewrote the tax laws to accomidate the movie when they heard that they were considering filming the movie in Scotland because it cost them too much money to film in New Zealand so their Prime Minister rushed through a bill to lower the tax laws just so they would continue to film there. It appears when the LOTR came out so many people saw the beautiful countryside that it brought a ton of tourism and they didn't want to lose all that money to Scotland. Anyway I thought that was interesting how a production crew can get the entire government to change laws.
Click to expand...
This happens a lot, Matt. Ogden reduced specific taxes to attract filming of an HBO series here (I saw them filming on 25th street several times, but not being much of a TV watcher I never saw the show; was it Deadwood? :shhh: ).
Midwest towns fall over each other to cut local tax breaks to attract the next new Walmart. The behemoth moves in, all the local businesses (and their tax revenues) dry up, and eventually the local governments are wondering why they can no longer afford infrastructure, schooling, police and fire departments.
Meanwhile, the six heirs to the Sam Walton fortune now have as much wealth as the bottom 42% of all Americans! Think about that for a minute; they run a department store.
Sorry, I waded into politics again; but, no opinions involved, just facts. ;)
 
MatthewB said:
Anyway I thought that was interesting how a production crew can get the entire government to change laws.
Click to expand...
Money talk is ... well, you know how it is.

Now, as for the socialism... :violence-torch:
 
Botch said:
The behemoth moves in, all the local businesses (and their tax revenues) dry up, and eventually the local governments are wondering why they can no longer afford infrastructure, schooling, police and fire departments.
Meanwhile, the six heirs to the Sam Walton fortune now have as much wealth as the bottom 42% of all Americans! Think about that for a minute; they run a department store.
Click to expand...
When California tax increased, corporates moved out which increased the unemployment rate in Ca.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top