Jump to content
Jay

An Unexpected Journey SPOILERS ALLOWED Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

The Hobbit feels no more like real life to me then those films Roald.

I don't mind 3D, but it's never made me feel I was actually there.

The concerns about color grading were not needed. The film looks good, and not overly colourful. The Shire looks great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No it isn't. It's chronological, like the LOTR OSTs,

None of the LOTR OSTs are chronological

Filling and Killing

Fili and Kili

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bullshit. That does not correlate with your initial reaction post in the early hours! So why the back-peddle? Pride?

That first review was an agreement between me and someone else of the MB, who will remain anonymous unless she reveals herself.

I don't get 3D headaches and while the motion issues were noticeable, I wasn't bothered

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No it isn't. It's chronological, like the LOTR OSTs,

None of the LOTR OSTs are chronological

Fotr is!

No it isn't. 0:31-0:43 of "Amon Hen" is from a cue that takes place before the cue presented from 0:00-0:31.

(0:00-0:31 is Aragorn and Frodo's discussion with Frodo holding the ring in his hand, 0:31-0:43 is from when Boromir tries to take the ring from Frodo which takes place before that)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bullshit. That does not correlate with your initial reaction post in the early hours! So why the back-peddle? Pride?

That first review was an agreement between me and someone else of the MB, who will remain anonymous unless she reveals herself.

I don't get 3D headaches and while the motion issues were noticeable, I wasn't bothered

You weren't bothered by significant visual flaws? Well it is true you've always been an inconsistent moviegoer, but I never had you down as someone who turns a blind eye to such fundamental filmic details when it's convenient to do so. At least on the outside.

I'd be happy for anyone who said they enjoyed the new technology, in fact I'd be decidedly encouraged by it! But to say one thing immediately after and then something else entirely a little later on under the guise of a little joke, well I think you're telling porky pies to yourself as well as everyone else ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The film is not objectively bad. I enjoyed it!

You can't say "The film is not objectively bad", if it's followed by your personal opinion on the film!

Why? People asked you if you were getting nervous with the negative reactions, and I just said I enjoyed it - meaning that not everybody had negative reactions to it. So it's not an objectively bad film. It's all personal opinions...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inconsistent?

I've always maintained that if I enjoy a film, I'm willing to forgive its flaws. (I'm hard on the prequels because they are boring shite)

The 3D was great, the HFR has issues, but I knew that going in.

I'm more worried about the internal issues the film does have. Since I probably won't see this film in HFR again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just saw the film. Wow!

"Wow" as in "It was bloody awesome", or as in "It was bloody awful"?

The film is not objectively bad. I enjoyed it!

You can't say "The film is not objectively bad", if it's followed by your personal opinion on the film!

Why? People asked you if you were getting nervous with the negative reactions, and I just said I enjoyed it - meaning that not everybody had negative reactions to it. So it's not an objectively bad film. It's all personal opinions...

???

You're confusing me! "Objective" means it's "not subjective", hence it has nothing to do with personal opinions! How can someone say something is "not objectively bad" by using his personal opinion to justify that? Am I missing something? Is there an extended cut of your post?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inconsistent?

I've always maintained that if I enjoy a film, I'm willing to forgive its flaws. (I'm hard on the prequels because they are boring shite)

The 3D was great, the HFR has issues, but I knew that going in.

I'm more worried about the internal issues the film does have. Since I probably won't see this film in HFR again

In this instance I'd have side with Cremers. If a movie's visual finish jarred me out of the experience - especially at regular intervals - I could not rate it highly. It'd be impossible for me to do so. On that basis, it seems your definition of what constitutes as "flaws" are very different to my own. Script issues and pacing are one thing, but actual uncanny visual byproduct is a whole new ball game. Flaws you say? Hmm.

I'll tell you what I think about actual potential flaws tomorrow after seeing it without unwanted visual quirks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it seems your definition of what constitutes as "flaws" are very different to my own. Script issues and pacing are one thing, but actual uncanny visual byproduct is a whole new ball game. Flaws you say? Hmm.

Well, maybe it's because I don't consider either 3D or HFR as an actual part of the film. I mean when I buy this film on Blu, it won't have any of that so whatever problems those aspects might have will no longer bother me.

If I see it in 2D and there are still visual aspects that feel wrong, then I will certainly be more critical.

For example. Weta can't do CGI fire. not with ROTK, and not today. It looks fake.

That bothered me more then the HFR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it seems your definition of what constitutes as "flaws" are very different to my own. Script issues and pacing are one thing, but actual uncanny visual byproduct is a whole new ball game. Flaws you say? Hmm.

I mean when I buy this film on Blu, it won't have any of that so whatever problems those aspects might have will no longer bother me.

If I see it in 2D and there are still visual aspects that feel wrong, then I will certainly be more critical.

But that's obvious and hardly requiring pointing out! I'm seeing it in 24fps for that very purpose. Removing HFR from the equation being the natural thing to do.

Why wait for the Blu...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I just meant that a film can't be objectively good or bad. It has to do with the individual viewer.

Ah, now I get it! And I agree with you, so it's all good!

(Y)

I'm not terribly good at expressing myself in writing. I don't have the patience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I just meant that a film can't be objectively good or bad. It has to do with the individual viewer.

Ah, now I get it! And I agree with you, so it's all good!

(Y)

I'm not terribly good at expressing myself in writing. I don't have the patience.

Then what the fuck are you doing on a forum?!?

Hey, you have a point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I just meant that a film can't be objectively good or bad. It has to do with the individual viewer.

Ah, now I get it! And I agree with you, so it's all good!

(Y)

I'm not terribly good at expressing myself in writing. I don't have the patience.

Then what the fuck are you doing on a forum?!?

Hey, you have a point.

Don't listen to BlueBalls!

Karol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were a bunch of beheadings in the EEs of the LOTR films, I was actually surprised by how many I saw when I saw all 3 on the big screen on Sunday. And don't forget the orcs catapulting heads into Minas Tirith!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beheadings are cool. They're hip. It's a new trend. Kids can talk about it with their friends at school: "Remember that moment when Thorin beheads two goblins with one blow? That was awesome!".

Still can't believe it took the 4th film to actually show a Dwarf beheading an Orc. In the book it's all Gimli, Gloin's son talk about!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

first of all, I'm not a big fan of 3D but I was persuade into buying 3D 48fps tickets. huge mistake. I actually don't remember much details from the first minutes of the film because I was so damn distracted by the 48fps and I couldn't stop thinking about how bad and unnatural it all looked. I read something about that it's supposed to take 10 minutes to get used to... well, I never got used to it and I absolutely hated it. I actually felt quite nauseated afterwards (and I still do), and I'm pretty sure it's a consequence of the 48fps... and possibly of swallowing sadness and disappointment heheheh.

So glad I bought tickets for the 2D version. The idea that it takes "10 minutes to get used to" will certainly not apply to me. It's going to take years, if not an eternity.

I will watch it in normal framerate and 3D first. I actually like the 3D experience so it won't diminish the film for me but the HFR should not be in the way of enjoining the film for the first viewing. After christmas i will watch it again in vienna in glorious HFR and hope that i like it.

I really want this technology to break through and i hope all the problems with it will start to dissappear over the coming years. The directors, the CGI, makeup and set departements need to get used to this new technology and i applaud Peter Jackson that he took the risk to lead the cinema into a hopefully even better future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well now I have seen the film, in 2D. A perfectly fine experience and I even liked the film, although it is a bit uneven on the whole.

It is certainly that. But there is much to enjoy.

Based on last night I have to say that this material does NOT warrant 3 long movies!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed. Even this movie felt like stretching the material too far.

Here comes some Tolkien fan nit picky commentary:

Jackson and his team have really padded the film up with certain curiosities mined from the Appendices etc. and these are the places where the film somewhat falters I think as it does when they mix their own inventions in. Trying to tell such a long and involved backstory to these Dwarves and the history of Middle Earth is partly succesful but somehow the deviations from Tolkien's text and storylines feel unnecessary. Some of the dialogue for these invented scenes is a bit stilted or odd (Saruman's quips about Radagast's love of mushrooms etc.) or come off as obsessive need to make the movie more comedic. Radagast himself is one such element, a rather superfluous character that could have been handled with a tad more decorum. The Dwarves themselves offer similar humor, which gets a bit stale after a bit.

The explanations about Nazgûl (Witch King's) tomb in the White Council was rather forced, the writers trying to grasp at their own inventions to make the mystery more palpable and coming up with Morgul Blades and Greenwood becoming Mirkwood. In this they compress time and space of Tolkien's history in such a way it feels rushed, packing two millenia of events into mere decades. I understand the need to hold the audiences' hand and guide those unfamiliar through the history that is so dense and try to simplify it but in the end I feel they only pull off the Dwarven history part with some semblance of dignity and cohesion. On the other hand I felt that the Azog subplot is completely unnecessary as his son Bolg would have provided a much more obvious antagonist throughout, avenging his father and holding grudge all these years against Thorin and the Dwarves. I wonder what they are reserving him for in the next installments.

Martin Freeman is terrific as Bilbo, a perfect younger version of the character, whose comedic timing and humane performance capture Bilbo wonderfully. Richard Armitage really embodies some of Thorin's main characteristics in a great way even if his beard is too short. ;)

Ian McKellen is his raspy good old Gandalf like he had never left the role, now more of a mentor, guide and grumpy grandfather keeping people together and in line. Alas most of the Dwarves become, despite efforts to distinguish them from each other with outlandish looks and behaviour, a rather amorphous mass, a part of the scenery really with only Balin, Dwalin, Fili and Kili standing out, and of course Jason Nesbitt, whose Bofur is one of the more prominent members of the group.

More thoughts coming soon.

P.S. Gandalf never goes to Dol Guldur in this film, not in a flashback nor actually investigating. This is something I think reserved for part 2 of the trilogy. Shame that we didn't get to see his encounter with Thrain in this film though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, how odd. I definitely assumed we would see him meeting Thrain and getting the map and key in this film.

So wait, are you saying the shots in the trailers of Gandalf investigating a place that looks like Dol Guldur is NOT in the this film, and they were scenes from a future film added to trailers from this film - or are you saying that place he is shown investigating is NOT Dol Goldur?

I guess he'll investigate Dol Doldur during Film 2 after he leaves the party after Beorn. Maybe while in Mirkwood he senses something about Dol Goldur since it is close by

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Martin Freeman is terrific as Bilbo, a perfect younger version of the character, whose comedic timing and humane performance capture Bilbo wonderfully.

Agreed. His brilliance and perfect timing saved many otherwise awkward scenes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, how odd. I definitely assumed we would see him meeting Thrain and getting the map and key in this film.

So wait, are you saying the shots in the trailers of Gandalf investigating a place that looks like Dol Guldur is NOT in the this film, and they were scenes from a future film added to trailers from this film - or are you saying that place he is shown investigating is NOT Dol Goldur?

I guess he'll investigate Dol Doldur during Film 2 after he leaves the party after Beorn. Maybe while in Mirkwood he senses something about Dol Goldur since it is close by

I meant that he still might go to investigate Dol Guldur in film two, which of course would not have anything to do with Thrain anymore.

I am thinking he could divulge his encounter with Thrain to Thorin at some point at the beginining of film two or it could be part of the Extended cut of the first film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant that he still might go to investigate Dol Guldur in film two, which of course would not have anything to do with Thrain anymore.

I am thinking he could divulge his encounter with Thrain to Thorin at some point at the beginining of film two or it could be part of the Extended cut of the first film.

What I'm asking is - in the trailer and tv spots, we see Gandalf walking around a kind of greyish place that we all assumed was Dol Guldur. I'm asking, are those shots in this movie, meaning we were wrong and that place is NOT Dol Goldur, but some other place that he walks through in Film 1 - OR, are those shots not even in Film 1 (and therefore, it probably is Dol Guldur like we thought)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I'm asking is - in the trailer and tv spots, we see Gandalf walking around a kind of greyish place that we all assumed was Dol Guldur. I'm asking, are those shots in this movie, meaning we were wrong and that place is NOT Dol Goldur, but some other place that he walks through in Film 1 - OR, are those shots not even in Film 1 (and therefore, it probably is Dol Guldur like we thought)

Nope nothing like that is in the film. I always assumed those trailer images were from Dol Guldur and in the film the place certainly looks similar to those surroundings when Radgy visits the place. Also there are the shots of a ragged Dwarf (or something else) attacking Gandalf in that place, which I assumed was Thrain.

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...