gkgyver 1,645 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Well, he is a LotR fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KK 3,307 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Hmm, popped in this thread once...regret it.It seems there's only been ill news for the Hobbit... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandor 797 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Seriously, who gives a shit about Blume's boss' opinion on the film?Seriously, who should give a shit about ANYONE's opinion on the film except their own? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 I wonder if the reasons they wanted a trilogy are more shown in films 2 and 3, leaving this one suffering the most.Which a less egotistical director would have realised two 2hr movies would be more than sufficient.Four hours is still PLENTY of time in which to tell the story of The Hobbit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alicebrallice 134 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Seriously, who gives a shit about Blume's boss' opinion on the film?oh admit it, you're starting to get seriously worried. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KK 3,307 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Seriously, who gives a shit about Blume's boss' opinion on the film?Seriously, who should give a shit about ANYONE's opinion on the film except their own?Indeed. I look forward to judging this thing for myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 People's bosses are the illuminati of the critique world, moving unnoticed behind the scenes, influencing the plebs without them even realising. If someone's boss uncloaks long enough to warn about a move in advance, it's bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUMENKOHL 1,068 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Seriously, who gives a shit about Blume's boss' opinion on the film?Humans. We are social creatures. Just because you sit in a lonely room by yourself and skin live bunnies by candlelight for pleasure doesn't mean the rest of us don't take other people's views into consideration. Am I gonna adopt his opinion? No. But I will use his opinion since we have a lot of common interest to maximize my own pleasure derived from the film by lowering my expectations, so I will feel my $14 AND 2 hours spent for the film is at least spent well, instead of being pissy about how the film does not meet my Herculean expectations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodBoal 7,538 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,336 Posted December 7, 2012 Author Share Posted December 7, 2012 I will feel my $14 AND 2 hours spent for the film is at least spent well3 hours Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Seriously, who gives a shit about Blume's boss' opinion on the film?Humans. We are social creatures. Just because you sit in a lonely room by yourself and skin live bunnies by candlelight for pleasure doesn't mean the rest of us don't take other people's views into consideration. Am I gonna adopt his opinion? No. But I will use his opinion since we have a lot of common interest to maximize my own pleasure derived from the film by lowering my expectations, so I will feel my $14 AND 2 hours spent for the film is at least spent well, instead of being pissy about how the film does not meet my Herculean expectations.Love it when another person without a dick on their head posts in here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodBoal 7,538 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Seriously, who gives a shit about Blume's boss' opinion on the film?Seriously, who should give a shit about ANYONE's opinion on the film except their own?Exactly.This is fake bullshit, a quaint and endlessly convenient ideology. Otherwise internet forums would cease to exist. People REALLY care about the views of others, delicate little souls that we are. Don't try to disguise that; because I'll know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUMENKOHL 1,068 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 3 hoursOh lord. I forgot how comical the length of this thing has gotten.The whole book could have fit into 3 hours... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alicebrallice 134 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Seriously, who gives a shit about Blume's boss' opinion on the film?oh admit it, you're starting to get seriously worried.Not in the slightest. Reviews never affected my expectations for a movie.For example, I read a lot of reviews on John Carter, saying the movie was pure shit and things like that, yet I still wanted to see it very much and knew I would like it. And I did.so you're saying your expectations for this movie are the same as they were, say, two weeks ago?sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gkgyver 1,645 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Mine are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodBoal 7,538 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 From the moment the movie was announced all those years ago, it was going to be nigh on impossible for it to live up to even the vaguest semblance of expectation for BloodBoal. That's because he's, you know, BloodBoal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUMENKOHL 1,068 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 When the Hobbit was initially announced by MGM in 2006, BloodBoal would have been 7 or 8 by my estimation. I don't know if he even knew what LotR was back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodBoal 7,538 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Heh heh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wojo 2,453 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 The whole book could have fit into 3 hours...I think you could read the book in 3 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksparrow900 32 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 has anyone seen any pictures of the Necromancer besides what's shown in the trailer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 No, and I'd hope they'd not show any either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
publicist 4,643 Posted December 8, 2012 Share Posted December 8, 2012 Is it time for my GET A LIFE entrance yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodBoal 7,538 Posted December 8, 2012 Share Posted December 8, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted December 8, 2012 Share Posted December 8, 2012 That's always been obvious to any intelligent person who knows these films and how theyre made. What McKellen doesn't acknowledge though is his boss' tenancy to get a bit carried away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
publicist 4,643 Posted December 8, 2012 Share Posted December 8, 2012 That would be like Shia LeBoeuf criticising Steven Spielberg for laying a turd with INDY IV. Oh wait... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted December 8, 2012 Share Posted December 8, 2012 You're saying The Hobbit is as awful as Indy IV? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
publicist 4,643 Posted December 8, 2012 Share Posted December 8, 2012 George Lucas wasn't near the set, so no, it only will be redundant as genre entry, but that is actually not a real detriment around christmas time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted December 8, 2012 Share Posted December 8, 2012 I think you're feeling a bit bored this morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
publicist 4,643 Posted December 8, 2012 Share Posted December 8, 2012 Not more than usual. It's a curious statement, though, when i glance at your last several posts in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted December 8, 2012 Share Posted December 8, 2012 Oh I'm always bored when posting here. That's why I post here. Except in this thread I'm a fan, not a troll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUMENKOHL 1,068 Posted December 8, 2012 Share Posted December 8, 2012 That would be like Shia LeBoeuf criticising Steven Spielberg for laying a turd with INDY IV. Oh wait...You don't diss the movie until after it's come out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
publicist 4,643 Posted December 8, 2012 Share Posted December 8, 2012 That would be like Shia LeBoeuf criticising Steven Spielberg for laying a turd with INDY IV.Oh wait...You don't diss the movie until after it's come out.Or your name is Peter O'Toole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jilal 569 Posted December 8, 2012 Share Posted December 8, 2012 Has it been conformed that the film starts with a prologue with flashbacks to Smaug's attack? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodBoal 7,538 Posted December 8, 2012 Share Posted December 8, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,336 Posted December 9, 2012 Author Share Posted December 9, 2012 Alexander how else could it possibly begin based on that music? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mark 3,630 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 I dunno, some top reviews aren't so positive. They say it's way too longCould this flop by alienating everyone but the hardcore LotR geeks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AI 0 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 People REALLY care about the views of others, delicate little souls that we are. Don't try to disguise that; because I'll know.That would explain why you are so desperately insecure.popping progeny that don't have a future doesn't help either. Hawhaw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 Hee hee, there's nobody on this board more unequipped to point fingers than our little resident sociopath. And even then; living under a rickety bridge is still no excuse for being three days too late with your harassment! Your comedy timing needs work as well. Oh where to start! Ren 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crumbs 14,306 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 I'm going to hazard a guess that Warner Brothers will be watching the box office figures for this film very closely. Between the bloated length controversy, the 48 FPS issues (it's very apparent now that the "limited" availability of the HFR version is an intentional decision by the studio, likely fuelled by the awful reactions to the test footage in April), and the general negativity that seems to pervade the film online, I'd say the edits of film 2 & 3 will definitely come under the microscope by the studio. I'm surprised WB weren't the least bit nervous from the beginning after the shit storm that happened at Universal after King Kong flopped (when Jackson begged them to indulge his longer cut despite his contract stipulating the theatrical cut be under 2:40.)Even PJ himself is treading delicately around the 48 FPS issue now that so many people have been scathing about it. Now it's just "all about choice for the filmmaker" rather than being the end-all be-all future of cinema itself. Way to talk yourself up PJ!I'm definitely keeping my expectations in check now. I'm kind of glad I won't go into it with the huge expectations I had with each successive LOTR sequel (though they delivered in droves). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gkgyver 1,645 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 Did King Kong flop? I honestly can't remember how well it did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 I remember well that it underwhelmed (after all the hype and expectation) but in the in end turned a profit. But yeah, it was in general regarded as a bit of a failure, which is a shame. If it hadn't taken an hour just to reach the island and had some of the dinosaurs been drawn with far less shoddy cgi I'd probably regard it as a five star adventure classic, because the good stuff in there is REALLY good, as genre movies go. As it is, I consider it a 4/5 seriously flawed gem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gkgyver 1,645 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 I remember liking it a lot, but being extremely pissed that Shore was rejected.But yes, you could easily cut 20 minutes from the film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUMENKOHL 1,068 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 If I were Jackson or any director or a movie studio I'd tell the public to go fuck themselves and stick to 48fps and transition every new film to 48 fps. There is nothing better about 24 fps other than 80 years of psychological conditioning. The love for it is essentially a manifestation of the Stockholm Syndrome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scallenger 483 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 I remember liking it a lot, but being extremely pissed that Shore was rejected.Speaking of which, when the hell is Shore releasing his work on Kong? I thought I heard a rumor he was planning on doing so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KK 3,307 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 I remember liking it a lot, but being extremely pissed that Shore was rejected.But yes, you could easily cut 20 minutes from the film.I actually loved the movie, and its a real shame its release turned out the way it did. Sure it drags in the beginning, but I still really enjoyed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 If I were Jackson or any director or a movie studio I'd tell the public to go fuck themselves and stick to 48fps and transition every new film to 48 fps. There is nothing better about 24 fps other than 80 years of psychological conditioning. The love for it is essentially a manifestation of the Stockholm Syndrome.Definitely agree with the fundamental point, but how do you or directors for that matter address the widely reported byproduct effects it has on the production itself? Because I sincerely doubt that aspect is related to petty fear of change Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gkgyver 1,645 Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 I remember liking it a lot, but being extremely pissed that Shore was rejected.Speaking of which, when the hell is Shore releasing his work on Kong? I thought I heard a rumor he was planning on doing so?Who knows, maybe one day.If I were Jackson or any director or a movie studio I'd tell the public to go fuck themselves and stick to 48fps and transition every new film to 48 fps.There is nothing better about 24 fps other than 80 years of psychological conditioning. The love for it is essentially a manifestation of the Stockholm Syndrome.Something I can 100% agree with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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