Jump to content
Jay

An Unexpected Journey SPOILERS ALLOWED Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

Seems it's as I predicted months ago.. instead of two sharply edited theatrical movies with the fat trimmed away for the extended cuts... they instead threw all the fat back in and found new split points to make 3 films. No wonder those extended edition DVD listings vanished overnight... there won't be any footage to put back in!

Sigh.

This is how I feel as well. They should have made a tight 2 hour 15 minute theatrical cut and saved some stuff for slower paced home viewing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it might be more of a Matrix situation, where the second film will actually be bloated, and the third film will be comparitively short. I think the May release date of film 3 kind of indicates it's much shorter, much lighter on effects, and much further along at this point in time than ROTK was when FOTR was released.

All adds to that feeling that this was a really grubby, greedy exercise by PJ and the studios.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.youtube.com/user/ScreenslamBluray/videos?flow=grid&view=0

6 clips. The rather amusing trailer gag with Bilbo fainting is pretty much ruined in the film. Getting very worried now about all the reviews saying how the film takes an eternity to leave Bag End. I remember yawning my way through the endless montage of "travelling to Skull Island" scenes in Kong, looks like PJ has completely forgotten what a tight edit is since ROTK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://m.guardian.co.uk/film/2012/dec/04/the-hobbit-unexpected-journey-critics-reviewers

Reading that roundup is very disconcerting. Such reserved reactions were nowhere to be seen ten years ago when Fellowship debuted. The film is clearly dangerously flawed, which is as depressing as it was always thought it might be. When a critic tries to buck up the mood of a review with "but it's still a decent movie" then it's time to be worried. The last time they did that was with Indiana Jones 4.

"Spending nearly three hours of screen time to visually represent every comma, period and semicolon in the first six chapters of the perennially popular 19-chapter book, Jackson and his colleagues have created a purist's delight, something the millions of die-hard fans of his Lord of the Rings trilogy will gorge upon," writes Todd McCarthy of the Hollywood Reporter. "In pure movie terms, however, it's also a bit of a slog, with an inordinate amount of exposition and lack of strong forward movement."

This was far and away my biggest concern all along - knowing the now super successful Sir Peter Jackson. It's the very same reason I favour the theatricals over the EEs. A movie made for die-hards might be a wet dream come true for some, but for a person who is first and foremost looking for superior film, this is a nightmare.

Doom mongering much? Bloody right I am; this is the prequel to the best movie trilogy ever made.

I take it all back: I'm seriously considering sticking with 24fps, if this is indeed a movie which goes out of its way to be difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow it takes 40 minutes for them to leave Bag End. PJ really shot word for word the whole opening then. Although it takes Frodo quite a while to leave Bag End in FotR too.

The reviews are rather unkind to put it mildly although all hurry to complement the continuity of production as an asset.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Bag End part of LOTR didn't drag for me at all. I hope it hppens again.

Actually I agree with that. The exposition never felt overlong to me.

Now I dread the opening of this new film though. All the reviews gave me shudders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

40mins before the journey even begins is stupid. In fact it's just bad mannered!

King Kong all over again. How long was it before they reached the island in that?

Ouch. If there was one person I didn't expect to say something like that, it was you.

seriously, lee. you're starting to sound like bloodboal at his crankiest on steroids. you haven't seen the thing yet.

but I'm also a bit worried right now. I'll avoid this thread like the plague from now on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't Kong take about 70 minutes until they actually set foot on the island? Or met the natives?

Something awful like that. God that film pissed me off. If ever there were a case study for how NOT to edit a movie, that was it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose I'm the only person on the planet who actually really enjoyed King Kong and was never bothered by the pacing. I've even watched it since then and still found it quite enjoyable.

You're not the only one. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Hobbit: an expected masterpiece in a distracting frame

I only read this part:

Nope — never got used to it. I couldn’t help but think, ‘Why does this look like some highly produced BBC TV drama?‘ In fact, about every 10 minutes or so (or maybe whenever something was particularly bright on screen) I found myself being literally drawn out of Middle-earth and back into the present — the theater. And therein lies the issue. I was constantly taken out of the story and performance because my brain was distracted by the ‘bells and whistles’ on screen. I was jolted out of the content of the film and noticed the tech behind it. That is unfortunate.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is a great movie that is saddled with this unnecessary mission to advance the future of film. So here’s my slightly controversial suggestion: Watch this film first in good ole fashioned 24fps. Then, for your second viewing, go and see it in HFR. This way your initial experience won’t be compromised by the tech and second-time-round you may actually be able to enjoy the high frame rate as well!

I tried to convince the person I'm going with to change our tickets to 2D 24fps ones instead. "NO! we've got the best seats blablabla I trust PJ blablabla".

seriously considering changing my ticket and go alone instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may not seem it most of the time Alice, but LotR in book and movie form are dear to me - indeed for nearly ten years I regarded Fellowship as my all time favourite movie. If I come across cranky here it's because I'm deeply frustrated about the fact that Jackson has apparently not learned a single thing from his King Kong criticism and actually let his rampant self belief taint the upto now hallowed film franchise with his unmistakable and undisciplined swagger. I'm just a bit gutted, that's all. I wanted these to be perfect, again.

Obviously I haven't seen the film so the final judgement on it remains to be found out for myself, but history has taught me that cautious reviews which are seemingly all in agreement are almost certainly an accurate representation of what to expect. :(

And never, EVER compare me to that excitable grouchy halfwit again! :stick:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the May release date of film 3 kind of indicates it's much shorter, much lighter on effects, and much further along at this point in time than ROTK was when FOTR was released.

No way, Film 3 is the Battle of Five Armies movie! It will have the MOST special effects!

The May release date is really dumb. The first 5 movies in the saga were all Decemember releases. Why make the 6th one May? Dumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Hobbit: an expected masterpiece in a distracting frame

I only read this part:

Nope — never got used to it. I couldn’t help but think, ‘Why does this look like some highly produced BBC TV drama?‘ In fact, about every 10 minutes or so (or maybe whenever something was particularly bright on screen) I found myself being literally drawn out of Middle-earth and back into the present — the theater. And therein lies the issue. I was constantly taken out of the story and performance because my brain was distracted by the ‘bells and whistles’ on screen. I was jolted out of the content of the film and noticed the tech behind it. That is unfortunate.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is a great movie that is saddled with this unnecessary mission to advance the future of film. So here’s my slightly controversial suggestion: Watch this film first in good ole fashioned 24fps. Then, for your second viewing, go and see it in HFR. This way your initial experience won’t be compromised by the tech and second-time-round you may actually be able to enjoy the high frame rate as well!

I tried to convince the person I'm going with to change our tickets to 2D 24fps ones instead. "NO! we've got the best seats blablabla I trust PJ blablabla".

seriously considering changing my ticket and go alone instead.

I can't believe the sudden complete U-turn I've made about this myself. 24fps is definitely how I'll be seeing it after reading that OneRing.net review. I want to maximise my chances of enjoying the film and so it makes perfect sense in light of the widespread reports that 48fps just gets in the way far too much. Who knows I may end up loving it and go a second time but in 48fps just to see for myself. That first viewing being under the very best conditions is vital now though.

What a difference a day makes!

Ooo what a drama!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was only referring to the ones I have seen. The first and third the only ones which left any sort of lasting impression, moreso with the latter. But yeah, I got to a point in the series arc where I realised I just didn't care what the eventual outcome might be - a distinct lack of urgency throughout the adaptations probably being the main culprit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was only referring to the ones I have seen. The first and third the only ones which left any sort of lasting impression, moreso with the latter. But yeah, I got to a point in the series arc where I realised I just didn't care what the eventual outcome might be - a distinct lack of urgency throughout the adaptations probably being the main culprit.

I at least made it through the Lotr though the thing called two towers almost stopped me dead cold. it was not good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't quite understand why everyone seems so surprised now about the fact that the film doesn't leave Hobbiton until 40 minutes in or that the film may feel slow in places. In danger of repeating myself, I'll say again that this is one third of one book stretched to a 3 hour film!

FOTR tells the journey from Hobbiton to Emyn Muil, and An Unexpected Journey covers half of that, from Hobbiton to the Misty Mountains, with the same running time. Of course it feels slower.

Also, if you take the part of the book that was used for AUJ, Bag End is a huge part of it. I thought it was understood that in the process of stretching it to three movies, you need to put more or less every paragraph on film, even if you take creative liberties with it, to fill those films. So, I don't really understand why someone would criticise the film for, what was the quote from that review, filming every colon, dot and semicolon.

Now, how skillful that is presented is a whole other question. But I wouldn't criticise the film for including pretty much everything from the book, which would be great IMO.

Also, the track list from the OST already told us that there would be a lot of screentime spent before the company leaves for Erebor. The music until they leave fills half of the first disc.

Again, it wouldn't surprise me if the movie felt slow, I just don't think anyone could possibly be surprised by that.

I am also really shocked that people let their former anticipation turn into the opposite, ranging from fear, dissapointment and even intense hate, just because a couple of reviews were released. I'm not going to read any of them, I won't go into this film with a preconceived mindset like some sadly do now.

And I most certainly won't overthink seeing the film in HFR 3D first, simply because some reviewer found it not that great. Why would I let a reviewer wield that much power over me?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it a little odd that the main criticism seems to be the length and that it feels bloated because of the stretch to three films yet the things people are picking up on to complain about are not the stuff that has been added from other Tolkien writings. People are complaining about the material from The Hobbit that would/should have been there in the first place.

That's not to say it's been well edited but I'm reserving judgment until I've actually seen the thing. Reviews be dammed, I'm still looking forward to it :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Special attention must be given to the musical score of the film, both for original pieces (such as “Misty Mountains,” the haunting yet stirring theme for the Dwarves) and incorporation of the themes from Lord of the Rings. The musical cues go a long way to reinforce the connection I mentioned above. While the Misty Mountains theme pervades the film, there are also ties to the Shire, the Ring and even a heroic bit of music that I won’t spoil here, but will come as a welcome surprise.

I wonder what part he's talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose I'm the only person on the planet who actually really enjoyed King Kong and was never bothered by the pacing. I've even watched it since then and still found it quite enjoyable.

You're not the only one. ;)

That makes three of us.

Four. Again, my butt doesn't hurt for sitting down 15 more minutes. I was young and impressionable, and for a few days I considered it my favourite film ever.

There's some moments I would take out, but because they seem unfinished or they don't seem to be up to par with the awesomeness of the rest. That's it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may not seem it most of the time Alice, but LotR in book and movie form are dear to me - indeed for nearly ten years I regarded Fellowship as my all time favourite movie. If I come across cranky here it's because I'm deeply frustrated about the fact that Jackson has apparently not learned a single thing from his King Kong criticism and actually let his rampant self belief taint the upto now hallowed film franchise with his unmistakable and undisciplined swagger. I'm just a bit gutted, that's all. I wanted these to be perfect, again.

Obviously I haven't seen the film so the final judgement on it remains to be found out for myself, but history has taught me that cautious reviews which are seemingly all in agreement are almost certainly an accurate representation of what to expect. :(

And never, EVER compare me to that excitable grouchy halfwit again! :stick:

I know I know, I was just surprised to see you this frustrated and cranky... especially after you being so calm about other news in the non-spoiler hobbit thread.

and on the other hand, bloodboal has been the most calm and reasonable poster in this thread so far. who would've thought! I'm happily surprised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a decent, nicely written review; but strangely lacking in criticisms or significant misgivings - the film was after all awarded four stars and not five. So where was the balance? Again, was it just the 48fps they took issue with?

I'm really beginning to believe that technology is the root of all the negativity here, to the point that it's literally having a knock-on effect on other, unrelated aspects of the movie - perhaps out of sheer viewer discomfort. It could certainly explain complaints of bad pacing, for example.

Truly, I'd urge anyone to stick with 24fps in this instance. Save that brand new sensory shock for another movie, one you care much less about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Truly, I'd urge anyone to stick with 24fps in this instance. Save that brand new sensory shock for another movie, one you care much less about.

Christ, you haven't even seen the film, but you already urge everyone not to see it in 48 fps?! What the hell, man?

Would people please not panick like a flock of hens?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...