*laughs* I disagree with you on almost every single point. To each his own I guess.

Interesting. I did not find The Hobbit nearly as dark as LotR. I found the battle scenes shorter and less gory [than LotR], and I was not disappointed in the scenes with Gollum.

I've seen it in 3D twice, and I have to say that it lived up to expectations. There were a few parts that dragged, but on the whole it moved along well and kept my attention. The dwarves were awesome! The acting was excellent as well, particularly Martin Freeman (Bilbo) and Richard Armitage (Thorin). They nailed it. The music was good, though not quite as epic as LOTR, but I absolutely LOVE the end song. I thought the scene with Gollum was one of the best, and I really like the way they blended the movie with LOTR at the beginning. It felt like it fit perfectly. I didn't mind the extra material they added, either, since most of it was hinted at in the book or dealt with in other areas of Tolkien's writings.

I saw it in High Frame Rate 3D. It was AWESOME!!!!
I also must add that I feel incredibly proud to live in Middle Earth. Just sayin.

I don't have time to write about all my favourite parts as I have just realised it's 6.30pm and I haven't cooked dinner!! Ooops....

I wasn't disappointed in the acting, that was superb. Andy Serkis and Martin Freeman were excellent. I just didn't like how the writers portrayed the scene. Bilbo falling down the cliff and landing with little to no injuries, while the goblin is nearly killed? Gollum carrying the ring around in a pocket of his loincloth? Gollum doesn't even return to his island to look for the ring (which would be the most logical place to look because that's where he spends the most time). Still, I suppose the last can be forgiven because that would only drag the scene out more. I think the best part of the Gollum scene was when Bilbo spared him and leapt over him (though I thought the kick to the face was unneeded).

That is one of the things that I didn't like much about the LotR movies. I understand what you mean.

Ah, that makes more sense, then.

*nods* Yes, I agree -- especially on the Radagast count.

Especially on the Radagast count...

I went and saw it again last night with the whole family. It was even better than the first time. (And easier to watch in 2D)

I personally thought they hit a perfect balance between "light" and "dark" It wasn't as heavy as LOTR but it wasn't as tonally different as the books are to each other.

Words cannot describe how happy this movie made me. I got to see it at midnight and everything (first midnight movie too!). Have always been bummed that I could never see LOTR in theaters, but this was amazing.

I thought it was really well done. I'm sure I could nitpick things, but I've not read the book in a while, and I realize that movie adaptions can never be identical. Everything was beautiful, the acting was great, and when Thorin started singing... *dies*

It annoyed me to no end to read reviews... so many people saying the movie was too long, or didn't make sense. Or course it was a long movie, are you not familiar with LOTR? The timing was still perfect, I never found it long and drawn out. And it made perfect sense! I think people's mistake is assuming this one is just something you can walk into and fully appreciate. Yes, some people enjoy the Hobbit without ever reading the books or watching the LOTR movies. But in my opinion this was made for the already-established fanbase. I love that this has the potential to draw new fans in, but it seems a thing largely for the ones who already love Tolkien.

Yay, I'm not the only one!

I watched this again last night, and was just struck how amazing it was!

It was funny, Lycanis posted on FB a link to a You Tube video where the dwarves where tossing Bilbo's kitchenware around, and I laughed and showed it Kathy. She was like Let's go borrow it from the rental shop! (We were in alone together.) So we made a night of it, and we both really enjoyed the film again. Kathy even said it's a film she'd buy, and she disliked the Lord of the Rings and won't watch them again. I just love it, it's so funny. It was fun to watch it at home, and work out who all the different dwarves were. It was hard to remember them from the first time watching.

I thought the storm giants were awesome.

Something he doesn't like.

I do understand what he means though. It actually annoys me when I say I dislike a change they made to the book, and someone rebuffs it with 'hey, it's a movie now, movies and books are different, they have to change things.' I don't mind changes, really, I don't. And I understand the concept of adaptation. I just, as often as not, dislike the changes that they made.

I hope to watch the Hobbit soon. * excited *

This. I really do get that they kind of need to change things and such. Sometimes I even like some of the changes. But a lot of the time, the changes aren't in the spirit of the book and don't seem to fit to me, or just bug me for reasons I can't articulate well, or whatever.

And, IMO, they did most of it poorly. And honestly, I doubt it was quite so necessary as all that. But the giants... over the top. Azog is dead; they could have had it be his son or something, though, instead. I didn't mind the white council too much, but Radagast was over the top, and the Necromancer was a bit iffy. But one of the things I really didn't like? Saying that the Morgul blade should be in the Witch-King's tomb. He didn't die, people! He got away when Angmar fell, and that's actually when the whole 'no man can kill him' (actually, it's will, but anyway) prophecy shows up.

* blinks * They had the witch-king die in The Hobbit? 0.0

Not as such. But they gave (me, at least) the very strong impression that he was dead, and had died in the fall of Angmar. That's what I remember, anyway. It's said when the morgul blade is shown at the council, I believe. But I could be wrong.

Is the Witch King Sauron?

Unless I'm mistaken, I think that the storm giants WERE in the original Hobbit They exaggerated what they did some. But the scene with them running from storm giants throwing rocks at each other was in the book, I believe...



Yeah, I didn't get that part either.

Oh, no. He's the head Ringwraith, IIRC.

Yes, giants throwing rocks back and forth was in the book. It's kind of cool that they took a single sentence or something like that and made something out of it, but the way they did it... I didn't mind a whole lot, but I thought it was over the top.


Yeah, the Witch-King of Angmar is the top Ringwraith. Killed by Eowyn, with help from Merry. Definitely not during the fall of Angmar, which is what that part confused me. We'll see, I guess. Or maybe they won't make much out of it at all and we won't, which is fine too.

*nods * That's one of the things that Jackson does best. He fills things out. Essentially taking skeletal remains from the book and adding flesh. I thought it was cool he chose to include this, but I did think it was a little much.

*nods* I was half-surprised that Jackson included the stone giants, but yes, I think both the giants and Radaghast were a bit much. Overall (with the exception of everything Azog and minor things that cropped up everywhere) I loved what Jackson did with the movie.
As a book-purist, I generally detest any deviation from the book; however, if there is any time I would not mind deviation, it would be with the Necromancer/White Council storyline because it was a major part of the Hobbit story: it just never appears in the foreground of the book. That being said, I was very upset at how Jackson revealed the Necromancer. He left little question about the the Necromancer's true identity: something that should be unknown until Gandalf personally investigates.

Aside from his hiccups (Balrogs with wings, elves at Helm's Deep and nearly including Arwen there as well, Azog, the goblin king, etc.), Jackson does an excellent job with Tolkien's stories and the wealth of lore that is found outside of the stories themselves.

The Deselation of Smaug trailer is out! Any of you seen it?

Saw the trailer.

...
...
...

LEGOlas!!! Whoo! Yay!

New Elf that didn't exist before! Uhm...Not sure how I feel about that.

Tauriel, Captain of Tharanduil's Guard, you mean? The one with red hair with Legolas?

Eh... I count at least two things that don't seem to fit as they should...

This. So much this. Also, what's with the elves shooting at them? Really? What happened to stealth? Bah!

Well, we'll see, I guess... It may not be as bad as it looks.

Yes, that one.

My sister (The one who's read the books) said she wasn't in the books, at least.

My brother (The one who reads the wiki and any reference books without source-citing) said she was made up.

And I believe the wiki said that she was an original character.

You can tell Legolas looks different than in the LOTR Trilogy (Just like Gandalf), but you could attribute that to them looking younger than looking older.

The writer said she added her in, so she is not in the LOTR books; and she says she is aware that some people will dislike her as she is not Tolkien's creation.

I'm not sure what I think; I will have to wait until I see her in the film, I guess.

She feels like a fanfic Mary-Sue to me.

Yeah... Legolas at least semi-fits into the universe, but she kind of feels misplaced in the trailer and a bit out of sync with the rest of the universe (as well as seeming kinda bland/overshadowed by Legolas). Hopefully the movie depicts her more interesting than the trailer...

Ok, before I stick my nose in such a delicate topic, I must state my grounds on the first Hobbit movie and hope y'all won't hate me forever.
I was extremely disappointed. Now don't get me wrong, the very beginning when Frodo and Bilbo were talking in Bag End was adorable. The "Good Morning" back-and-forth between Gandalf and Bilbo was good too. But I felt that the rest of the Hobbit was not in sync with the "feel" of Middle-earth that PJ sets up in FotR, TTT, and RotK. I despised Azog, (and, duh, if you stick rusted metal in an open wound it'll get infected and you'll DIE!!) And I didn't like the Goblin-King either. He was just gross. (Did anybody else notice the size proportions were off for the orcs? They were Uruk sized). Although, I must admit, despite the deviation, I enjoyed the cropping up of the Morgul-blade. probably because "A Knife in the Dark" was my favorite scene in FotR… speaking of, what was with the big battle at the end using the Weathertop soundtrack with different lyrics?!!!
I also didn't like Radagast. Period. (Was that bird doo on his face? Does PJ even understand biology??)
*sigh* I'M SO SAD! I REALLY WANTED TO LIKE THIS MOVIE!!! o.o

OK: now for the trailer:
YAY LEGOLAS!!!!!!!!
Were those Giant Spiders? Yayyayyay! (I honestly hope PJ makes them talk!)
The barrels are OPEN??? Whaaaaat??
Oh boy...another point of conflict with the HWers! (I'm quite the instigator...Sorry!) I like Tauriel! I mean, I was insulted to the point of not watching it when I found out they added another "she-elf", but after seeing the trailer, I think she's cool. I love her costume. Scratch that. I love anything to do with the Elves!! Thranduil was totally awesome for the four seconds he was on-screen...
And...finally! The big reveal of Smaug's head! Ta-daaaaaa!! Hehe he looks awesome.

I hope nobody minds my barging into this thread....I'm a huge Tolkien fan and when I saw this conversation I think I almost died with excitement!

Yay! I get to come in here and disagree with people and likely get my head taken off! XD

For those disappointed for deviations from the original story, I have two words which I will further explain: Prince Caspian. Most of you know, but for those of you who don't--Prince Caspian, the movie, was a good movie, a fantastic film, but an extremely poor adaptation of the book. (My two biggest disappointments being Peter's alter in character from 'We're here to put you on your throne' to 'That's my throne, go away'; and the fact that they completely ignored pretty much the only description of a character Lewis ever gave, but that's another topic.) I will still watch the movie on occasion, though I prefer the other two.

Anyone who has read a book and then watched a movie which was based on the book knows at least a bit of heartache.

For the Hobbit, the first movie, Jackson seemed to, for lack of better words 'epic-ify' everything. It was a lot more...well, more bloody and gross than it should have been.He took the sweet little children's novel and is now making it as big as the original trilogy. (Another point I dislike: if you can make The Hobbit into three films, can't you at least give a little more attention to the Trilogy which is ever so much bigger???)

A lot of the elements 'added' in seem to be ones which were already present, just not at the forefront: Radagast, for example. He's mentioned in the book, and honestly, I kind of liked his character. As for the goblin king, he was suitably disgusting. I liked him about as much as I did reading the book.

In the trailer, yeah...so the barrels are open. Just remember that we don't know when that is exactly happening and without that context, how can we say how far from the original it is? And, so what if they add in more characters? You do realize that in a movie world, one HAS to show more characters than perhaps the writer talks about? And since Jackson is making it into THREE movies, then he probably just needs the added filler and plot. XD (Okay, that was a low blow...)

And Legolas. He's a Mirkwood elf so he should be in Mirkwood. He's an elf, so he was alive at the time. My problem with Legolas in the movie is different. My view of the Mirkwood elves was that they were somehow lesser than the other elves. They are portrayed by Tolkien as rather bumblingly sly characters, more like your traditional sprite than a stately Tolkien elf like those living in Rivendell.

All said, I liked the movie. Not as well as the book, and probably not as well as the Trilogy movies, but I did like it and am very much looking forward to the next installments. (Especially Smaug and Bard.)

Question: Shouldn't we be seeing previews of Beorn? I mean, he's there before they get to Mirkwood, right? I'm getting worried, but maybe I'm just missing it.

Very good points, Caeli.

My problem with the barrels being open is mostly what that suggests about how they're going to do it. Basically, there's no reason for the barrels to be open if that part goes at all like in the book. Therefore, the barrels being open suggests that they're about to, ah, 'epic-ify' that part, because apparently it wasn't interesting enough...

Just a quick thought: astute readers of the Hobbit (the book) will notice that it sometimes makes fun typical storytelling tropes/cliches.

When I watch the Hobbit (the movie) I don't feel that PJ is trying to make things more epic (The existence of Radagast, or most of the dwarves, for that matter, prevents that impression.) but that he is being satirical.

Anybody who's read the Hobbit knows that making feel in sync with the LOTR books is impossible (a problem that Tolkien was very aware of). Likewise, the Silmarillion doesn't feel very in sync to LOTR or the Hobbit. The problem between the three is a matter of scope. The Silmarillion is about thousands of years worth of history. LOTR is about a dramatic (though specific) battle between good and evil. The Hobbit is about...Bilbo.

What's really wrong here is everyone's expectations. We all thought that the Hobbit movie would be like the LOTR movies. Instead, Peter Jackson adhered to the style of mocking common tropes, albeit in a more modern and movie palatable way.

As for the criticism that the movie was nothing like the book...the LOTR movies are nothing like the books. At all. There are major changes that often don't even make sense (Haldir and the elves at Helm's Deep? What?) but make for good film. There are even major deviations from the plot (Aragorn doesn't want to be king, Faramir wants to keep the Ring, Gollum starts to become good then becomes evil again, Frodo is young, Arwen is all over the place, Saruman's motivations/allegiances are unclear and he never takes over the Shire. Etc.)

The Hobbit is meant to be funny. And in my mind, that includes the obvious silliness of Azog, the Goblin King, and Radagast.

*Note: The Orcs' apparent size can be explained in a number of ways. A), they are mostly seen with dwarves, who are much smaller than men, and Orcs. B), They are Gundabad Orcs (not book canon, but apparently PJ canon). C), The size of Orcs can vary and although Uruks are the most common, there are other large-sized groups of Orcs.

Um at 0:40 some people think that that creature is Beorn.

Over all about the Hobbit, Unexpected Journey, I like all of it, including the new characters the PJ added.

Thoughts on the trailer:
It looks like the barrels are open so that the dwarves can have a fight scene with Azog and his orcs while they are fleeing across the water (as it would be kind of boring to have who knows how long of Bilbo being tossed about by the waves).
Anybody else notice how... fake Smaug looks? All the other CGI looks great, but Smaug looks kind of fake.

Yea, when you're reading the books you can visualise Bilbo etc tossed on the water, whereas in the film if they had been closed it would have been rather boring. I can understand why they had to do that.

I thought that about Smaug as well! I wasn't so impressed with how he looked.

Yeah, Smaug looked fake to me, and I usually don't notice things as being CGI. I don't know what's up with that.

I concur with the long post by Caeli on page 5!
And thank you, Neil of Erk, for clearing up the size thing. That was bugging me.
Hmm...I did think Smaug was CG-ish...But no more so than any other CGI being I saw in Hobbit.
Ah...That's a good point....the Hobbit as reading material does vary greatly from Lord of the Rings and Sil. Funny how it was written by the same author with such a different feel. there's no movie-watching smiley, but this is just as good.
Possible glimpse of Beorn?? I must inspect this!!! *leaves unceremoniously to go watch trailer for third time*

I am really hoping Smaug looks that un-terrifying just because his head is bathed in shadows, and that in the movie he'll look as good as he did in other images I've seen of him, like his eye in The Unexpected Journey, or in this picture.

Because, yeah. The Smaug in the trailer looked really fake and boring. Not what I wanted to see from this pen-ultimate dragon... If he continues to look like that in the movie, I'll be really disappointed...