The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)'s comments - page 4

Do you want to let us know what you think? Just login, after which you will be redirected back here and you can leave your comments.

poderyempresas

(removed by mod: please post in English)

11 years 5 months ago

to derpiarty: so if its different story, why we need a same actors, or same director? lotr is a cult epic movie with all movie stuff. in my opinion they had to create a completely different format. it was just a dissapointment for me, when i heard golf joke from gandalf. if they were trying a animation series, it could be fine. because they are totally different stories. now its look like a funny lotr parody.

i dint read the hobbit, and i didnt realize it is a fairy tale book before the movie, i was expecting serious book like silmarillion or lotr. but if they wanted to create a fairy tale for kids, why we seen lots of wars, or violant scenes( of course it wasnt like saw series, but still has some scenes too violant for kids) i didnt understand productors vision, they wanted the lotr fans and kids. its stupid approach. ''they are totally different stories'' i guess they were worriying too much about create a money from the lotr series.

11 years 5 months ago

Dr Pandhattan

Here's my review: http://www.kameronmcbride.com/2012/12/the-hobbit-unexpected-journey-review.html

11 years 5 months ago

Maxahlia

Quite honestly, I don't care how good or bad this objectively speaking is. It works for me and I have no complaints about the changes in the story or the stretching of it (mainly because it means more things for me to see).

I have always been unsure if I prefer Lord of the Rings or The Hobbit as a book (but to be honest, Roverandom is a constant challenger for both), and dwarves are pretty much my favourite of the mythical races, so... Maybe I am unable to be anything but excited beyond reason.

Who cares though. I love this. Oh yeah, the acting was superb. I was especially impressed Ken Stott who has the loveliest, most emotional eyes, and Aidan Turner whose expressions are priceless.

11 years 5 months ago

thefilmstage

A truly bad movie.

11 years 5 months ago

RoastMutton10

Think it's another one of those films where it's gonna take a couple of viewings (and maybe the extended edition) to really appreciate it now that 9 years worth of expectations have been calmed. The next two films, after all of this film's building up, should be much better.

11 years 5 months ago

jaana

What a fantastic film! I wasn't expecting it to be this good, but by the time the music started playing and I saw the scenery of Hobbiton... I fucking cried ok. And that's when I knew it would be one of those movies that climb up my list of favourites. Absolutely amazing story telling, wonderful music and a great job done by the cast. An instant favourite! Can't wait for the next one.

11 years 5 months ago

rgatto

I can't belive no one filmed in 48fps before! Amazing images and fluid movements.
Long film but I was not bored for even a single minute, the proof is that I couldn't find a gap for toilette. Had to run!

11 years 5 months ago

Scratch47

Simply put, this film needs both the benefit of hindsight and the presence of its two forthcoming companions. My expectations were warped by all manner of media bickering and I wanted to set it straight for myself.
On the plus side, it's visually rich, often astonishing. The acting is good, McKellen, Armitage, Freeman. The production values are just world class.What we see is immersive and powerful.
On the frustrating side, there's comparatively little that actually happens. Jackson instead attempts a completely full translation, under the pretense of creating (at least in the first half) a leisurely postcard that still retains epic ambition. It's a grand, noble gesture and one that's fulfilled in the form of a film that often moves in chapters, but comes at the expense of Fellowship's powerful drive. They try to imitate that work somewhat here, say, the repetition of the 'mini-boss battle' of the final goblin-orc mountain showdown. Here we have a film that both drags and lurches, then tries to bite off more than it can chew with too many characters, and that largely undercuts the emotional connection of FOTR, no matter how much gravitas Richard Armitage brings to the table.
Between this and the sky-high hype, I was put into a state of ennui where a lot of the time I was wondering why I was supposed to care. (However, I have no doubt that there will be further character development and payoff of all the threads contained within the next two films, and so I largely forego judgement until Christmas '15 when the final part comes out).
Secondly, this film is tonally torn between being its own, lighter creature, and a setup for the more serious LOTR trilogy. I appreciate either element very much; Tolkien is very much part of my family history and it's quite refreshing to see Middle Earth in a calmer time, as well as take in how darker threads are being sewn in, but these two halves don't really make a whole. This shouldn't be Rings: The Prequel, and so I'm thankful that it's more easy-going than that in the end.
So it slugs in the first half with long book-like exposition and rockets in the second with cartoonish action. The story simply isn't expansive enough to justify THIS much length and material. Yet the cameraderie of the rag-tag gang of dwarves on what essentially looks like a suicide mission comes through and reaches a crux by the end.
There are also great moments: the prologue, Galadriel's scene with Gandalf, Gollum's cave (who looks utterly real and comes across as disgusting and worthy of pity like nothing seen before) and Bilbo's big speech. I enjoyed Radagast the Brown (yep!) and the hints of the Necromancer. Didn't see it in IMAX, or 48fps, or high def soap opera as some called it, just 3D 24. Overall, solid and quite spectacular, but an uneven start and perhaps intentionally so. Will see again in two weeks with expectations readjusted.

11 years 5 months ago