Brónach 1,330 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 AUJ doesn't belong in my collection but then again, I have worse films...
KK 3,313 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 Reading this thread gets more depressing every time I open it...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,387 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 It's the universal question....
KK 3,313 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 Why?6 months ago, there was only praise and excitement for PJ. As the date grew closer, people grew more excited and were even willing to forgive the possible faults of the film.After the film came out, there were still guys like Quint and Stefan who gave it 5 stars.Now, and with each passing day, the film and the once-loved director get more hate. Of course its not without reason. But it's a shame it had to come to this.
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,387 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 I never give anything above 4 stars.And I would still give it that. I love the film.
Quintus 6,496 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 Jackson still has a long way to fall before he comes in for Lucas levels of vitriol though, K.K.
Incanus 5,890 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 Oh shush KK! There is no actual hatred for the film or the director but of course there is a lot of criticism. And some are just not as impressed by this new film as they were with LotR. Some of the allure might have worn off since the film continues with "more of the same" to some extent and this might also factor into the commentary here.
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,387 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 Jackson still has a long way to fall before he comes in for Lucas levels of vitriol though, K.K. He was even forgiven for releasing "Special Edition" versions of thew LOTR films. Something for which the Neckless One is still hated.
Brónach 1,330 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 At this rate, by the end of the third film PJ might have to do a splatter to regain fans.
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,387 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 Oh shush KK! There is no actual hatred for the film or the director but of course there is a lot of criticism. And some are just not as impressed by this new film as they were with LotR. Some of the allure might have worn off since the film continues with "more of the same" to some extent and this might also factor into the commentary here.The first part of the book really doesnt have much that Tolkien would not later revist in FOTR. The latter parts are a bit more interesting I suppose.
Brónach 1,330 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 They didn't exactly put a lot of effort to solve that and make it fresh.
KK 3,313 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 Oh shush KK! There is no actual hatred for the film or the director but of course there is a lot of criticism. And some are just not as impressed by this new film as they were with LotR. Some of the allure might have worn off since the film continues with "more of the same" to some extent and this might also factor into the commentary here.Well obviously. And keep in mind, none of this has to do with what I think of the film. I was one of the disappointed remember? There was such surety when anticipating this film that I just didn't see it and its post-release reaction to be like this. Jackson still has a long way to fall before he comes in for Lucas levels of vitriol though, K.K. I wonder if he can accomplish just that with 2 more films...
Brónach 1,330 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 Make a list of all possible downfalls together and you might be able to make an educated guess.I know a girl who went mad because they made it in three films and has completely refused to see it so far.
Quintus 6,496 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 The most annoying and frustrating thing about the movie is that it's easily fixable, by a grizzled and disciplined editor. The scenes which make it up are often really good and well done, there's tons to like about the main meat of the work. It just all falls apart at the seams, which feel stitched together in haste, bereft of care and refinement. A really good adventure movie with heart is buried away in there somewhere, by a director too in love with his own indecisive version of the story.Jackson effectively suffocated his own movie, and the original Tolkien core. KK 1
Quintus 6,496 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 Let's face it: learning what we did about the production in the aftermath; the movie actually comes off as feeling like it was written on the fly. It's amazing and saddening how good a lot of it still managed to be.
Brónach 1,330 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 The Necromancer subplot does feel improvised.
Pieter Boelen 1,032 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 So... would they be able to improve on things for the Extended Edition?
KK 3,313 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 I just hope the next two films are much more well-planned and that Jackson learns to deal with his time more efficiently.
Jay 46,244 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 So... would they be able to improve on things for the Extended Edition?Of course they COULD. Whether or not they WILL is unknown at this point
Brónach 1,330 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 So... would they be able to improve on things for the Extended Edition?I don't PJ is thinking on removing things for the extended edition.I see two options: pick the three films in extended version and boil it down to a single film or two, or reorganize it as a miniseries that misses the point by being too complicated on purpose.Sadly not all problems go away by taking stuff away from the film.
Quintus 6,496 Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 So... would they be able to improve on things for the Extended Edition?Jackson will add more blubber, it's his way. Starting to understand why the chap struggles to keep the weight off.
gkgyver 1,647 Posted April 22, 2013 Posted April 22, 2013 You may or may not (okay, maybe not) remember the music I did some time ago after the trailer was released, for the imaginary scene of the company leaving Rivendell.Well, the last few days, I matched it up to the current film sequence, added some bits in the middle, and here is the result:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uycXUZZ5GpM&feature=youtu.be
Barnald 437 Posted April 23, 2013 Posted April 23, 2013 "One that Can Summon the Spirits of the Dead, Necromancer Has Come!"Let the speculation begin!They just survived. Orcs can live relatively long lives. Not everyone perishes from battle wounds.
JamieC 13 Posted April 29, 2013 Posted April 29, 2013 For what it's worth, and very briefly, here's what I thought of the movie The Hobbit. I finally had the chance to watch it at home a few days ago. I enjoyed the film and for the non-reader of the book (which, we might assume, will surely comprise the majority of the movie's audience, whether at the point of theatrical release or for home viewing) I thought that it was especially well pitched. I have only read The Hobbit once but I am very accepting of changes (minor or major to a source text). Adaptation is not transliteration, after all.I thought that the moments of 'silliness' worked well and that they successfully counterpointed the more sombre elements. What really appealed to me, though, was the film's rich visualisation of the natural world. There was a real sense of representing the glory of nature and Radagast was a well-achieved conduit for this. One other aspect I really took to was the emphasis on telling looks and glances between characters that peppered the film. So much more is said with a non-verbal reaction, I think, than with speech.Certainly, once the journey began the film had a relentlessness about it that was akin to that of Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. The first forty minutes were well paced, I thought, and, within the larger, not yet completed, context of the remaining films, will really take on that quality of a prologue.James
Rachael Foley 10,162 Posted May 10, 2013 Posted May 10, 2013 Certainly fits in with what little we have seen of him in AUJ....
gkgyver 1,647 Posted May 10, 2013 Posted May 10, 2013 I like it a lot! One of few new designs in the new trilogy that don't look silly.
Jay 46,244 Posted May 10, 2013 Posted May 10, 2013 Did no one read the article? That's not Smaug, it's a dragon Weta Workshop made for "Jane And The Dragon"
Barnald 437 Posted May 10, 2013 Posted May 10, 2013 It's not Smaug. Someone called 'Defiant' posted this on TheOneRing.net forums:This dragon is a sculpture created by artist David Meng, who used to work at Weta Workshop. It is a piece of his personal work, commissioned by Sir Richard Taylor and was completed years ago. It is not Smaug, nor is it the dragon from Jane and the Dragon, which it looks nothing like. You can see a piciture of a miniature version of this sculpture in the book, Weta, The Collector's Guide on page 6, complete with David Meng's credit. The roxy cinema routinely hosts exhibitions of art, being it sculpture, costuming, paintings etc, that have nothing to do with the movies they are playing at the cinema. This is one of those. According to someone I spoke to from the Roxy cinema there used to be a Gandalf statue standing where the dragon sits now except some kids broke it on the weekend so they had to take it out for repair. The dragon has taken his place while the Wizard is being repaired.
Jay 46,244 Posted May 13, 2013 Posted May 13, 2013 Benedict Comberbatch talks about playing Smaug:http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2013/05/13/enter-the-dragon-tolkien-style/
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now