The Hobbit Film Trilogy Thread

[gkgyver 1,645]

I find it funny how PJ pronounces Smaug in the commentary. Like Shmaaug or something.

[Quintus 5,399]

I'm only really into discovering how movies I like are made

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

And even if it's shit you're all buying the blu-ray.

Probably. The Appendices alone are worth it.

I'll do the same as I did with AUJ, and skip buying the theatrical version and wait till the EE drops in price a bit.

I'm only really into discovering how movies I like are made

Ditto. And I remember by the time they got to doing all the ROTK docu stuff how familiar it all felt. Not sure I feel like wading through 9 hours of extra's for AUJ.

[Quintus 5,399]

I actually got emotional during the final doc on the RotK disc. Simpler times.

Years later sitting through hours and hours of Peter Jackson gang banging and bukkakeing all over The Hobbit would be torture.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

True, that was a good one, but all the stuff about "bigatures" Gollum CGI etc etc was old news.

[Barnald 365]

The new Bolg design looks a lot like one of the original Azog busts they knocked up. If you've seen that feature on the EE you'll know the one I mean.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

prosthetics are so 2003

[KK 3,307]

And even if it's shit you're all buying the blu-ray.

Probably. The Appendices alone are worth it.

I'll do the same as I did with AUJ, and skip buying the theatrical version and wait till the EE drops in price a bit.

I'm only really into discovering how movies I like are made

Ditto. And I remember by the time they got to doing all the ROTK docu stuff how familiar it all felt. Not sure I feel like wading through 9 hours of extra's for AUJ.

The RotK appendices made me emotional too Quint, when I first saw them.

And I had my doubts going into this one, but having done so, it's just as fascinating as the old LotR ones (with more green screens this time around though). Although the film was flawed, the appendices still make it clear that there was passion and dedication behind the whole thing. I enjoyed the appendices more than the film itself .

[Barnald 365]

I liked the old Bolg but this new one looks good as well at first glance. I suppose the resemblance to Azog is clearer, and at least they kept the bear paw, which hints at a Beorn feud.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Bloodball, I have to tell you my sister finally saw AUJ yesterday and she liked the Bunnies of Doom!

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

I like that shot of Gandalf doin' staff stuff.

[SafeUnderHill 205]

[Barnald 365]

Azog looks really good in that TV spot.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Yes she is, but to my pleasant surprise she really enjoyed the film.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

You know, I think my excitement for DOS is actually surpassed by my excitement for seeing the Interstellar trailer in front of it.

If I come to any of you who will see the movie before Friday asking for details of that trailer like a crazed drug addict, just ignore me.

[Bilbo 3,709]

You know, I think my excitement for DOS is actually surpassed by my excitement for seeing the Interstellar trailer in front of it.

If I come to any of you who will see the movie before Friday asking for details of that trailer like a crazed drug addict, just ignore me.

I'm hoping they don't include it tomorrow night then

Nah, if they show it I'll try to remember some details for you!

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

Don't tempt me, Bilbo!

[Jay 37,374]

Cool new spots, seems like now that all the special effects are done they can include new stuff in commercials instead of just what they pushed front for the trailers.

In that first commercial, I assumed it was narrated by Necromancer based on what he was saying, which made me worried he was going to sound top similar to Smaug, but then you realize it is Smaug talking after all. Which is kinda weird, why would he be telling Bilbo about a darkness covering all lands? He's just supposed to be a dragon who cares about his own treasure and not much else. In the film world are they trying to say he's already in league with Sauron?

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Jay 37,374]

So then why does Smaug talk about a darkness covering all lands? Hasn't he been hiding Inside Erebor for over a hundred years? Why would he know anything about the outside world, or the plans of anyone in it?

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Jay 37,374]

You swear a lot. Why is that? It isn't very becoming.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Alvar lacks class....

[Glóin the Dark 1,223]

So then why does Smaug talk about a darkness covering all lands? Hasn't he been hiding Inside Erebor for over a hundred years? Why would he know anything about the outside world, or the plans of anyone in it?

I was wondering that myself. I think he must go out in disguise.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

But what he lacks in class, he makes up for in edge. You could cut yourself on some of his posts.

[Matt C 455]

And even if it's shit you're all buying the blu-ray.

Probably. The Appendices alone are worth it.

I'll do the same as I did with AUJ, and skip buying the theatrical version and wait till the EE drops in price a bit.

I'm only really into discovering how movies I like are made

Ditto. And I remember by the time they got to doing all the ROTK docu stuff how familiar it all felt. Not sure I feel like wading through 9 hours of extra's for AUJ.

The theatrical cut of AUJ was plenty long enough for me. The thing about the LOTR trilogy -- even if FOTR and ROTK played much better in their theatrical cuts -- the additions didn't really mar the experience. I wanted to learn more about the massive undertaking Jackson started back in 1999 and finished in 2003. It's just not the same with The Hobbit prequels.

Jackson lost his sense of story pacing back with King Kong, and he never wants to kill his darlings anymore (i.e. drop superfluous scenes or character beats for the sake of dramatic pacing). I frankly don't want to endure the 15 minutes' worth of additions, there's far enough padding in the theatrical as it is.

[Glóin the Dark 1,223]

I find it funny how PJ pronounces Smaug in the commentary. Like Shmaaug or something.

Yeah...he also consistently says "Shméagol".

Anyone heard him mention Robin Smallburrow?

And even if it's shit you're all buying the blu-ray.

Probably. The Appendices alone are worth it.

I'll do the same as I did with AUJ, and skip buying the theatrical version and wait till the EE drops in price a bit.

I'm only really into discovering how movies I like are made

Ditto. And I remember by the time they got to doing all the ROTK docu stuff how familiar it all felt. Not sure I feel like wading through 9 hours of extra's for AUJ.

The theatrical cut of AUJ was plenty long enough for me. The thing about the LOTR trilogy -- even if FOTR and ROTK played much better in their theatrical cuts -- the additions didn't really mar the experience. I wanted to learn more about the massive undertaking Jackson started back in 1999 and finished in 2003. It's just not the same with The Hobbit prequels.

Jackson lost his sense of story pacing back with King Kong, and he never wants to kill his darlings anymore (i.e. drop superfluous scenes or character beats for the sake of dramatic pacing). I frankly don't want to endure the 15 minutes' worth of additions, there's far enough padding in the theatrical as it is.

I've always found the extended edition of The Fellowship of the Ring to be vastly better than the theatrical one. Same with The Two Towers if you overlook the contemptible cut away to Fangorn following the "Where Is the Horse and the Rider?" monologue...

[Jay 37,374]

The oddest cut in the TTT EE is the sudden stopping of Ewowyn's song to a closeup of a flower

[Glóin the Dark 1,223]

The oddest cut in the TTT EE is the sudden stopping of Ewowyn's song to a closeup of a flower

That one's disconcerting, right enough - though not necessarily in a bad way.

[Jay 37,374]

Hiya gang.

Just like last year, with the The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey FILM Discussion Thread, we are creating a new thread so people who have seen the film can discuss it (or people who are reading spoilers can discuss them openly), which leaves this current thread clean for those wishing to avoid spoilers until they've seen the film.

So, spoiler-filled discussion of the film there, anticipation of the film including new commercials, trailers, posters, promos, ticket purchasing, etc talk here.

Enjoy!

[gkgyver 1,645]

Can't wait until Wednesday.

[Muad'Dib 1,802]

So then why does Smaug talk about a darkness covering all lands? Hasn't he been hiding Inside Erebor for over a hundred years? Why would he know anything about the outside world, or the plans of anyone in it?

Maybe it's just for the trailer?

[Matt C 455]

I've always found the extended edition of The Fellowship of the Ring to be vastly better than the theatrical one. Same with The Two Towers if you overlook the contemptible cut away to Fangorn following the "Where Is the Horse and the Rider?" monologue...

I love the EE of The Two Towers. The added character beats and story additions make the story more complete (such as Faramir's backstory and anything with Eowyn), while the theatrical cut seemed rushed by comparison. I like some of the additions to Fellowship and King (I don't see them as essential as TTT was), but most of the additions to the latter grind the film to a halt. Awesome additions, but slows the pacing down.

An Unexpected Journey in its original theatrical cut already feels like a EE. Most of the songs, the Shire scenes (the drawn-out Frodo cameo) and even the fighting mountain sequence seem superfluous.

[Jay 37,374]

I think in the original 2 film structure, they would have been flown to the eagle's carroc about 2 hours into film 1... So there's roughly 45 MINUTES of stuff at one point deemed unessential in the theatrical AUJ... And an hour in the EE!

[Matt C 455]

I don't think the pacing problems abated for Desolation of Smaug. Early consensus from some major critics say it flows better and gives better focus than AUJ, but with that 161 minute length -- there has to be more filler than necessary.

One critic who I respect immensely, MaryAnn Johanson, said the film "is a really good 90 minute movie. Alas it's 2 hours and 40 minutes long."

[KK 3,307]

I can't possibly imagine cramming all those major plot sequences (and I'm talking about the ones from the book alone) into a 90 minute movie....

[gkgyver 1,645]

I've always found the extended edition of The Fellowship of the Ring to be vastly better than the theatrical one. Same with The Two Towers if you overlook the contemptible cut away to Fangorn following the "Where Is the Horse and the Rider?" monologue...

I love the EE of The Two Towers. The added character beats and story additions make the story more complete (such as Faramir's backstory and anything with Eowyn), while the theatrical cut seemed rushed by comparison. I like some of the additions to Fellowship and King (I don't see them as essential as TTT was), but most of the additions to the latter grind the film to a halt. Awesome additions, but slows the pacing down.

An Unexpected Journey in its original theatrical cut already feels like a EE. Most of the songs, the Shire scenes (the drawn-out Frodo cameo) and even the fighting mountain sequence seem superfluous.

I find all 3 extended Ring films vastly superior to their theatrical counterparts. RotK is still amazing in extended form, they should have just left 5 minutes worth of picture or something like that out of the film.

The more I think about AUJ, or the Hobbit in general, the more I think it's a difficult thing to handle. If you include some additional stuff, and also things from the appendices, I somehow can't see the 2 films thing working within a reasonable running time. Cramming a huge part of DoS into AUJ would have meant either an extremely rushed film, with many sequences cut, or cut short, or a more relaxed pace with a running time of 3 hours plus.

All the stuff PJ is squeezing into these films is too much for two films, but too stretched for three.

I don't think the pacing problems abated for Desolation of Smaug. Early consensus from some major critics say it flows better and gives better focus than AUJ, but with that 161 minute length -- there has to be more filler than necessary.

One critic who I respect immensely, MaryAnn Johanson, said the film "is a really good 90 minute movie. Alas it's 2 hours and 40 minutes long."

It's probably time to rethink your respect ...

[Jay 37,374]

Oh, I think you could easily make two three hour films that tell the story of The Hobbit plus the attack on Dol Goldur. No question. That's the structure they should have stayed with...

[gkgyver 1,645]

I'm not sure. AUJ is around 160 minutes (no credits), and even though they messed a bit with the mythology, there is really not much stuff made up in AUJ that was not in the book or appendices. Obviously I haven't seen DoS yet, but even if you shave off 10 minutes from the current theatrical version of AUJ (which I wouldn't, you'd just need to exchange some bits for the additional Rivendell scenes, they make the film better), then Beorn, Mirkwood, the spiders, the barrels escape, the arrival in Laketown would all have to be included. Within 30 minutes? I doubt that. Mirkwood is too iconic to rush it. I would guess you'd need to make a movie slightly longer than RotK. And I think many parties involved would not have gone for that.

As PJ said, the theatrical RotK was already pushing it.

[Jay 37,374]

there is really not much stuff made up in AUJ that was not in the book or appendices.

good one!

[Incanus 5,716]

I think there is a quite a good film hidden inside the bloat of AUJ.

[gkgyver 1,645]

there is really not much stuff made up in AUJ that was not in the book or appendices.

good one!

I said yes, they toyed with mythology a bit, with changing Azog's story or things like that, but aside from some moments to introduce characters, like Radagast, or to get the audience back, with Bag End (even though Frodo could be cut), there is nothing purely fictitious that consumes substantial screen time.

[crocodile 8,020]

Stefan has got no sister, Radagast has no poo on his head and Han shot first.

I need to believe...

Karol

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Why is it so hard to believe i have a sibling?

[gkgyver 1,645]

With more female influence, you probably would have turned out ... differently, let's go with that.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

You swear a lot. Why is that? It isn't very becoming.

Because it makes everything sound cooler. Does it not? I mean, most people love movies like Reservoir Dogs, The Usual Suspects, Pulp Fiction... where the characters swear every two damn seconds.

I'm just trying to please the average moviegoing forum members.

I think in the original 2 film structure, they would have been flown to the eagle's carroc about 2 hours into film 1... So there's roughly 45 MINUTES of stuff at one point deemed unessential in the theatrical AUJ... And an hour in the EE!

So? You could easily cut an hour from AUJ without damaging the film at all.

I think there is a quite a good film hidden inside the bloat of AUJ.

Yes, I too think there is.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

With more female influence, you probably would have turned out ... differently, let's go with that.

Interesting, since I was raised by my mom on her own, have a sister and some of my best friends are female.

[gkgyver 1,645]

You swear a lot. Why is that? It isn't very becoming.

Because it makes everything sound cooler. Does it not? I mean, most people love movies like Reservoir Dogs, The Usual Suspects, Pulp Fiction... where the characters swear every two damn seconds.

I'm just trying to please the average moviegoing forum members.

I think in the original 2 film structure, they would have been flown to the eagle's carroc about 2 hours into film 1... So there's roughly 45 MINUTES of stuff at one point deemed unessential in the theatrical AUJ... And an hour in the EE!

So? You could easily cut an hour from AUJ without damaging the film at all.

'scuse me? What? Why don't you try it then?

Taking this discussion into a more general direction, what exactly are "unessential" parts in movies? Are they parts that don't drive the plot forward? Are they parts that give nice subtext but are not well done? If you want to keep strictly to the plot, you can probably zoom through AUJ in 90 minutes, but where is the journey in that? I mean, why don't you cut Ben-Hur in half, there was plenty of unessential stuff in there, no? I take Ben-Hur only as an example, don't come at me for it. Both AUJ and Ben-Hur are too long for their plots. The difference is just that Ben-Hur, despite it's enormous length, is incredibly well-executed. It's simply a story well-told.

And that is the problem - as I've said many times before, it's not the running time that hurts AUJ, it's not the content, it's just and purely how the content was portrayed and paced.