Welcome Guest 

Register

Author Topic:
LinweSingollo
Movies & Casting Mod, Resident Hobbit & Frodo's Footstool
Posts: 3292
Send Message
Avatar
Post The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 03, 2013 06:14
For posting your reviews of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey.

It should go without saying: Here Be Spoilers.
"To the Hobbits. May they outlast the Sarumans and see spring again in the trees." J.R.R. Tolkien
~nólemë~
Fan Creations Admin & Creations Forum Moderator
Posts: 10423
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 03, 2013 04:00
Updated review after the second watching. I've warmed up to TH some, but still view it rather as a well-done movie: I still can't see it as a representation of the book.

Acting (top-down)

- Andy Serkis's performance as Gollum and Christopher Lee’s as Saruman – no surprise there. Perfect, as usual.
- Brett McKenzie's Lindir - a huge pleasant surprise for me; especially his voice. I hope to see more of him in the upcoming movie(s), I believe he's got big potential as an Elf.
- Dwarves – another pleasant surprise. Those with the most screentime gave their characters reasonable depth and temperament. Hopefully the rest will get their chance later on. The performances of Ken Scott, Richard Armitage, Peter Hambleton and John Callen stood out for me as the best (so far), Adam Brown's seemed the weakest to me.
- Cate Blanchett as Galadriel - spoke and moved gracefully. I had a small issue with her facial expressions in the Council scene, but a pleasing performance nonetheless.
- Hugo Weaving as Elrond - plays his standard. Not an overly mind-blowing performance, but a very nice one still.
- Sylvester McCoy's Radagast - a quality performance. Pity that the makeup and characterisation spoiled the experience for me in his case.
- Ian McKellen - I was slightly underwhelmed, as I found his Gandalf more detached and serene than in LotR, even in the scenes where I expected him to ooze warmth and humour.
- Martin Freeman as Bilbo – possibly the weakest performance for me, unfortunately. I missed more mimics, voice acting and credibility; mostly I could just see the actor performing, not the character.

Language

- the contemporarisation bothered me a lot. I get that one or two modern terms were Tolkien's own (golf), but they added quite a bunch of their own innovations - plumbing, allergy, 'academic' interest etc. Those sound more like unresearched fanfiction to me than a representation of an ancient world.
- nonsensical names - 'Sebastian' is a name from our world, not from (the final version of) Middle-earth. 'Bungo' the pony - I get we sometimes give animals human names, but still, Bilbo's father's name? Any pony name from LotR would have made more sense.
- 'Thrane' and 'Dane' in place of the correct 'Thraa-in' and 'Daa-in' (especially Azog's "Train" is kind of comical in this respect). With all due respect, I believe PJ's language team is mistaken in preferring modern-English pronunciation for these Old Norse names.
- I'm afraid the point of some Dwarves slipping into substandard English ("me" for "my", "them" for "those" etc.) was lost on me.

- Interesting to hear re-created Orcish and Dwarvish, though. Especially the Dwarvish was a great addition, and sent chills down my spine when spoken. I hope to hear more of it in the upcoming movies.

Visual effects/ CGI

For me, the most memorable and awe-inspiring were the visuals of Gollum (so life-like!), Smaug, Dale and Erebor. I loved them all. As far as the other CGI goes, The Hobbit didn't stand out for me among other CGI-packed movies. With Orcs and goblins, there were actually a few times when I felt real masks would work better for me than CGI.

Music

- I loved: The Misty Mountains song (the one the Dwarves sang, the end credits one sounded more modern to me, ergo less likeable). The dish-tossing song. The Rivendell flute and harp music. The LotR spinoffs when appropriate (Shire, Rivendell, I wouldn't mind them with the Eagles and the Misty Mountains).

- I disliked: LotR music in inappropriate scenes- Lórien theme for Rivendell orc-hunters, Nazgul theme for Azog vs. Thorin, and worst of all - the 'destruction of the Ring/coronation/Crossroads' RotK theme for the final hug. I find it absolutely outrageous to thus equate the sacrifice of the Ringbearers and the battle for Middle-earth to a bunch of Dwarves journeying home, and a hobbit saving their leader's life. Probably the biggest letdown of this movie, the music in this scene, as far as I am concerned.

Characterisations & appearances

- Bilbo - too flat for my liking. I missed more contrasts, friendliness, hospitality, cheerfulness, and in places politeness (he seems to take forever before deigning to greet Gandalf). I failed to see when the desire for adventure actually awoke in Bilbo. I appreciate they gave him some heroic moments though, and wish they'd been half as generous with Frodo in LotR.

- Gandalf- I'm not happy about how his character was treated. While more grave than in the book (but a shadow of the vivacious, warm, quick to laugh wizard from LotR, too), he was at the same time made into a clueless grandpa who has to be comforted by the mighty Galadriel and is not taken seriously by either Saruman and Elrond. At least they let Gandalf kill the Great Goblin.

- Dwarves - most 'memorable' for being boorish and disgusting, alas; but apart from that, they were okay. I welcomed and liked most of the 'fleshing out', such as Thorin's and Balin's backstory. The Weasley-twin-ish characterisation of the two young brothers didn't bother me as much as I'd feared. However, I disliked the lack of basic manners that the company shows in Bag End and Rivendell; I freely admit to bristling to see Dwarves merrily wasting food (what a modern thing to do!), scraping their shoes on furniture, leaving Bag End and Rivendell without a word of thanks as if they were entitled to free feasts and lodgings, and to top it all, burning furniture in Rivendell. But perhaps making the viewer want to slap the Dwarves at times was the moviemakers' intention?...
- The newly added Dwarf humour was okay ('furnace with wings') or at least tolerable ('parasites'). The Elf-Dwarf humour worked best for me.
- appearances... The normal-looking ones (Balin, Gloin, Oin, Thror) were pleasant to watch. As for the others- as long as I don't think 'Tolkien's Dwarves', they're okay or at least bearable. Only like that, I'm not bothered by hammers-in-head, shaven or stubbly chins, tattoos, and the leading Corsair-Rohir-Gondorian trio.

- Thranduil - I'm not a fan so far. He's made into a villain, not offering as much as material help to the survivors of the dragon's attack. If he merely refused to let them into his realm, I would get it; but not giving them even a crumb of bread, not tending a single injury? I wonder if anything they do in movies 2 and 3 will redeem him in my eyes. Book-Thranduil, despite being a survivor of Doriath, treats the Dwarves with relative kindness. I hope the movie-makers explain his extreme aversion towards Dwarves in movie 2, and don't just make him a cold-hearted clone of Lucius Malfoy. Would a copyright be really needed to show flashback images of Doriath being sacked by Dwarves, and young Thranduil's family fleeing for their lives - if no Silmarillion names were mentioned?
- In the looks department, he loses it with me too. I find the combination of platinum hair and jet-black thick eyebrows creepy (why is it always the dark-haired males who play blonde Elves in PJ's movies?), and in combination with the odd crown and steed he seemed rather bizarre to me.

- Elrond - nice to see the benevolent side of him when he rides into the Rivendell courtyard: a big thank-you to the team for having him actually smile ("as kind as summer" - finally!). But why did he leave at all? He's supposed to be staying in the valley and protecting it through Vilya; as a Ringbearer he has no business risking his life in minor skirmishes. In the meantime, Saruman and Galadriel are waiting for him to return and start the White Council, which is far more important than several orcs and wargs. It would have made more sense to have Elladan, Elrohir or Lindir lead the orc-hunters. And what's with Elrond's near-scorn for Gandalf?

- Radagast - not as much a butchered character (though his dignity and sanity each suffered a big blow), as a completely useless one. His over-the-top appearance doesn't help at all. He would have made sense as a minor opinion contributor in the Council - with birds and sickly hedgehogs in his lap for all I care - but in the movie plot, he served no purpose. They could have given his share of clumsy comic relief to some of the Dwarves and to Bilbo, and his Dol Guldur story could have been Gandalf's own flashback. The Rhosgobel rabbit joke was a funny one, and I did snicker, but it was for me not enough justification to have Radagast in the story at all.

- Eagles - are reduced to deus-ex-machina devices. I don't mind them not talking, but I'd have preferred if it was shown that the Eagles actually live in the Misty Mountains, which explains their sudden appearance (and subsequent departure back for their eyries). From the movies, it would seem that they are just an emergency service that pops up whenever Gandalf finds a 999-moth.

- Orcs - are what I expect Orcs to act like. The cruel, taunting talk of their leaders went down with me very well. Plus-value marks also for them fearing Glamdring and Orcrist, and shunning them: Big step into 'Tolkienesque' from LotR's Shelob giving the Phial of Galadriel a hearty kick. The only thing I didn't care for was the silly remark of the Great Goblin when Gandalf disposes of him; so in-the-face intended to be funny that it's actually not funny at all, just forced.
As far as their appearance is concerned, I'd have preferred if they were a bit blurry, lurking in the shadows, and treading softly (bookverse orc slippers, anyone?). It may not be original, but for me way creepier than orcs so uniquely ugly and disfigured that they're actually a bit ridiculous. That's mostly true for the Great Goblin. Azog's a bit better because he's more humanlike, but it irks me that he eerily resembles Voldemort.

- Trolls - I was glad the team had them speak, made them look humanlike, and gave them a measure of intelligence. Definitely one of the scenes where I could enjoy Tolkien's universe, even with the pony twist to it, and the stomach-churning bogies.

- Gollum - I was surprised he was more aggressive than in the book, especially given he had just eaten. He was well-done in terms of characterisation, though, and profitted well from having probably the most book-identical scenes out of all the characters. Pursuing Bilbo in the tunnels with those lamplike eyes, he was spookier than all the wargs with Azog put together.

- Smaug - what I've seen of him looks great, and his eye was scary. The team did a good job on making Smaug look like a real life menace instead of a generic fantasy dragon.

- Stone giants - visually good, but rocks-come-alive just don't creep me out.

- Wargs - they looked better than in LotR. They had weird rodent-like snouts, but they were no hyena museum exhibits anymore, good.

- Necromancer - was the closest to eek-worthy until he opened his mouth which seemed kind of cheap. The shot of a silent, faceless approaching figure just before that was scary enough.


Logic & realism

... could use some more work; a beta watcher perhaps. Random nags:
1. What happened to the river Bruinen? If the Dwarves were attacked beyond the Ford, which appears to be the case, how did the enemies get across without setting off a flood?
2. Too many unlikely falls in the movie, without as much as a sprained ankle. Especially when the bridge falls with the company as Gandalf kills the Great Goblin. Orcs die in such tumbles, but the Company barely have a few scratches. The quick recovery of Thorin in the final scene also seemed way too unrealistic; I get he has his pride, so he'd naturally try to stand upright and without leaning on anyone, but the extent of injuries from warg teeth and a mace looked too grave for that to be possible.
3. Why would Thorin, the Elf-hater that he is in the movie, call his beloved home 'Erebor'- a Sindarin name?
4. How did Bilbo know which way the Dwarves went from Bag End, and how did he know he could still catch up with them? They could have been long gone. Maybe this will be explained in the extended edition?
5. If Gandalf didn't leave Rivendell with the Dwarves, how did he find them in the Orc tunnels? I hope this too is explained in the extended version.
6. How did Radagast's sled get across the Anduin and the Misty Mountains?
7. The nonsense about the Witch-king and his death, and the Dúnedain wielding tomb-sealing powers that would put LotR's Tom Bombadil to shame.



Plot & the rest

- Major likes -

1. scenes: Erebor prologue, Dwarves' singing, Thorin's backstory, the riddle game, Bilbo's pity. I also loved the Eagles, and wish they had more screentime. The ending of the troll scene (Gandalf splitting the stone) was impressive.

2. characters: The team made the 13 Dwarves relatable for me, to an extent (read: until they got rude and crude). Made me more sympathetic to their cause, and made me feel a sliver of admiration for them during the fight scenes. Also the portrayal of the Elves that makes them consistent with LotR: that was one change from the book that I really appreciated.

3. Less gore than in LotR. Pleasant surprise there.

- Major issues -

1. The amount of screentime that Azog got. I felt his importance overshadowed that of Smaug and Necromancer, which annoyed me. I could see the sense in having him survive, and thus two orcs - Azog and Bolg - probably blending into one in the upcoming movies. But his omnipresence from almost the very beginning gave off the impression that he's the main villain in the trilogy, and in combination with his appearance, this reminded me all too much of the HP franchise.

2. Overlong/redundant/empty scenes, plotlines (e.g. Radagast) and dialogues (e.g. the White Council). Open, 'dangling' story arcs (White Council, Radagast) where no conclusion whatsoever was reached by the end of the movie.

3. Too many borrowed scenes from LotR. I initially smiled at Gandalf bumping into Bilbo's chandellier, but when more LotR-borrowings followed, I was starting to grow irritated. Too much of these just feels like they didn't have enough original TH moments.

4. The Elf-Dwarf feud is unexplained. There are mentions of it in both TH and LotR books, so I believe it could be doable to make a believable *and* canonical background to explain the mutual grudge, and especially why Thranduil behaved so appallingly in the beginning of the movie.
---------- Image "If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." J.R.R. Tolkien - The Hobbit
Erucenindë
Head Of Oromë
Posts: 3311
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 03, 2013 06:43
Wow Noleme a book! haha!

I have to say that I agree with most everything you pointed out here. Except for the Martin Freeman thing; I really enjoyed him as Bilbo.



Language

My number one complaint. Out of all things that took me by (an unpleasant) surprise, I was never as shocked as when I heard someone utter 'b...s' in one of the Bag End scenes. I had a vague impression there was a word referring to a behind somewhere later on. I felt like someone splashed a bucket of cold water into my face when I heard such language. Totally un-Middle-earthish; not even orcs spoke like that in the books. With a single word, PJ managed to rip me out of Tolkien's high world, and land me in a crude contemporary movie. The expletives were the worst thing about the movie for me, hands down.

Too many modern expressions, too - trolls making *grog*, Radagast *addicted to mushrooms*, Bilbo suffering from *allergy*, a rather recent affliction. These sound more like fanfic to me, than an attempt at recreating an ancient world. And thank you for reminding me of 'Sebastian', Gwen - nothing screams 'sloppy fanfic' as much as giving a character of Middle-earth a name from our world. Yes, there are a few monosyllabic names such as 'Tom' or 'Sam' in Tolkienverse, which are shared with the real world. But never one so long as 'Sebastian'. Even 'Sam' is a clipping of 'Samwise', not 'Samuel'. Serious disappointment in the language team there.


:O That was really in there? I nearly fell off my chair when I thought I heard the actual cuss word, but I wasn't sure I really heard it. That totally turned me off. It made the movie cheap. PJ went through all of LOTR without that, he certainly did not need to add it then!
Lindarielwen
Council Member
Posts: 24157
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 03, 2013 09:08
b...s(?) What is that?
My destiny is riding again, rolling in the rain, unwinding in the wind. My destiny is fighting again, secretly unwinding..what it was I was supposed to say...to say to you today.
~nólemë~
Fan Creations Admin & Creations Forum Moderator
Posts: 10423
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 04, 2013 05:45
@ Lindarielwen - the dots stand for a word for a lower body part which I'm sure would not be publishable on our forums. Alas that it made its way into the Tolkien movies.
---------- Image "If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." J.R.R. Tolkien - The Hobbit
Ilandir
Council Member
Posts: 475
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 05, 2013 12:17
I wholeheartedly respect other people's opinions but cannot understand this current 'trend' of comparing Martin Freeman's Bilbo to that of Billy Boyd's Pippin. It's simply ludicrous!

It doesn't meant that because Bilbo's character is often comedic then Freeman's performance is automatically like Boyd's. Sure, a few comparable glimpses in facial expressions may be spotted, but there's a very wide gap between the two characters and their portrayal in the films.

At the same time, comparing Freeman's performance to that of Ian Holm isn't of much relevance. Sure, they're supposed to be portraying the same character after all but this is a very different Bilbo in 'The Hobbit' than in LoTR.

He hasn't yet 'changed' or 'matured' in 'The Hobbit' and Freeman brings that very unique essence of the English gentleman within a hobbit - unwilling to go on any adventures, but at the same time, retaining some Took-ish qualities that eventually emerge as the journey goes along.

Ian Holm's Bilbo is of a class on its own and as Freeman himself stated in many interviews, he wasn't trying to copy Holm's performance - it's simply his own interpretation and (to me) a brilliant one - occasionally, spot on at portraying a younger Holm rather than Bilbo!
RodwenAravilui5136
Council Member
Posts: 817
Send Message
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 05, 2013 02:22
I loved the movie. I did not hear any bad language, but one inappropriate remark. For kids at least. The music was great. I love how they brought back some of the themes from the first trilogy. I like the things that they added, but I think that if you did not read the book previously, it might get a bit confusing. Perfect for people who expected more from J.R.R. Tolien. I cannot wait to watch the next one. I will surely not be unsatisfied. Neither will you
-Rodwen Aravilui Malidir
"While you're doing fine, there's some people and I, who have a really tough time getting through this life so excuse us while we sing to the sky." -Twenty One Pilots
~nólemë~
Fan Creations Admin & Creations Forum Moderator
Posts: 10423
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 05, 2013 04:39
Easy, Ilandir, it's all a matter of taste after all. For me, Freeman's acting and looks didn't work, and I liked both better in Ian Holm; nothing more. Let's have a freedom of opinion without resorting to negative evaluations of differing opinions, shall we? Comparing actors was really not the point of my review.
---------- Image "If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." J.R.R. Tolkien - The Hobbit
Ilandir
Council Member
Posts: 475
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 06, 2013 12:20
Let's have a freedom of opinion without resorting to negative evaluations of differing opinions, shall we?

Have I done otherwise in my post? My first line clearly pointed out how much I respect other's opinions. I was just offering my own opinion on yours. No hard feelings!
Lindarielwen
Council Member
Posts: 24157
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 06, 2013 03:16
Now, now, play nice!
My destiny is riding again, rolling in the rain, unwinding in the wind. My destiny is fighting again, secretly unwinding..what it was I was supposed to say...to say to you today.
tarcolan
Movies Moderator and General Dogsbody
Posts: 6046
Send Message
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 06, 2013 03:30
Quite right, this bickering is ludicrous! I think the b word must have been a reference to golf, meaning goblin heads. So not rude at all.
starofdunedain
Council Member
Posts: 1747
Send Message
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 06, 2013 06:19
The scene in question was:
(when one of the dwarves commented his doily had holes in it)
Bilbo:It's crochet!
Bofur?:Croquet? You need balls for that.
(sorry can't remember which dwarf it was exactly.)
Not a crude reference unless you want to take it that way, (I think it's more of a crochet/croquet joke) though I understand the mishearing. I thought I heard the crude reference the first time but the second time I saw it I understood what they said.
~nólemë~
Fan Creations Admin & Creations Forum Moderator
Posts: 10423
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 06, 2013 01:44
Thanks for explaining that, Starof! A non-native speaker, I automatically recognized the structure as a crude way of saying 'need courage', and didn't register the harmless context; I'm happy to know I was mistaken, and that I intended to rework the review after a second watching anyway. I went ahead and made the necessary corrections in my review and also tamed it somewhat, so apologies to all that reacted to the original version.
---------- Image "If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." J.R.R. Tolkien - The Hobbit
calenmarwen
Realm Leader of Lórien
Posts: 4470
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 08, 2013 05:39
Yes, it was Bofur. Most of that conversation was ... interesting.

I have to say noleme, that as soon as I saw the trailers I worried about Martin Freeman as Bilbo, so I agree with you there. However when I actually watched the film, he wasn't as bad as I'd thought (hardly a compliment), mostly because the takes used for the scenes in the trailer weren't those used in the film.
I thought Elrond was very well done, and was impressed that Weaving managed to act him younger and more good-humoured. The actor to watch for me though, was Armitage's Thorin, I really loved his portrayal.
And finally someone who agrees with me about poor Thranduil. I still don't like what they did to Faramir, although I can understand the reasons, I can only hope we get more explanation for the King of the Wood Elves. Yes you want to protect your people so don't take them into battle with a dragon, but for goodness sake help the poor folk coming out of that mountain, after all he does it after Esgaroth is attcked later. And what is with that Moose?

I'd also like to say I'm glad someone else mentioned the reuse of music. It was nice to hear some familiar themes again, Rivendell for instance, but the use of others such as the Fellowship Theme seemed oddly out of place to me. That music belongs to the nine walkers, not the 13 dwarves + 1 hobbit fellowship.

I'm kind of puzzled why Azog is the main BadGuy and not Bolg. Azog killed Thror so we have continuity, but since Thorin kills neither of them ... does this mean we'll get an epic scene where Dain kills Azog at the Battle of Five Armies rather than Beon's destruction of Bolg?
"There is more in you of good than you know ..."
Ilandir
Council Member
Posts: 475
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 08, 2013 11:21
Yes you want to protect your people so don't take them into battle with a dragon, but for goodness sake help the poor folk coming out of that mountain, after all he does it after Esgaroth is attcked later.


True, it doesn't make sense realistically. But film-wise, it adds that flare of the Romanticism element found within art.

Plus, it is a good way to explain Thorin's sense of enmity towards Thranduil when we come to the Mirkwood scenes.
calenmarwen
Realm Leader of Lórien
Posts: 4470
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 08, 2013 11:48
This is true. But I still feel sorry for him being portrayed at the BadGuy. Still they would have found the amnosity hard to explain otherwise in the film I guess.
"There is more in you of good than you know ..."
Erucenindë
Head Of Oromë
Posts: 3311
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 09, 2013 02:57
Quote from starofdunedain on January 6, 2013, 16:19
The scene in question was:
(when one of the dwarves commented his doily had holes in it)
Bilbo:It's crochet!
Bofur?:Croquet? You need balls for that.
(sorry can't remember which dwarf it was exactly.)
Not a crude reference unless you want to take it that way, (I think it's more of a crochet/croquet joke) though I understand the mishearing. I thought I heard the crude reference the first time but the second time I saw it I understood what they said.


I believe this scene was referencing crochet/croquet, but it was also meant to take on the other more crude meaning. Something that means one thing but also means another.
Cillendor
Council Member
Posts: 424
Send Message
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 09, 2013 01:04
The crochet/croquet line was definitely meant to be a crude joke. At first I thought it seemed unbefiting for Tolkien's world, but then the Dwarves are often described as being uncouth and lacking a skill with words. Galadriel's praise of Gimli's words toward her exemplify this very well. If anyone in Middle-earth would make a potty joke like that, it would be a Dwarf.

Quote from calenmarwen on January 9, 2013, 09:48
This is true. But I still feel sorry for him being portrayed at the BadGuy. Still they would have found the amnosity hard to explain otherwise in the film I guess.


Exactly. Jackson doesn't have rights to anything The Silmarillion, and the only real explanation for the feud between the Elves and Dwarves is found there in the betrayal and murder of Thingol. I think Jackson could have easily shown that story in a brief flashback had he been allowed, but it was bold enough for him to include a few minor details from Unfinished Tales. Had he used something from The Silmarillion, there certainly would have been a lawsuit.
BerethEdhellen
RPG Moderator & Mistress of the Sea
Posts: 3098
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 09, 2013 11:27
I think the use of the word used in the crochet/croquet scene was a double entendre, meant to be taken as the need for a ball in croquet but easily taken as a joke as well.
Life is good! Live it to the fullest. Love well those near and dear. "You cannot step into the same river twice, for the waters are ever flowing on ....." Heraclitus I Aear cân ven na mar
calenmarwen
Realm Leader of Lórien
Posts: 4470
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 10, 2013 05:37
Its hard to know if Bofur meant it to be a joke, or he genuinely misunderstood Bilbo and its double entendre was meant as a joke just for the audience.
"There is more in you of good than you know ..."
Ilandir
Council Member
Posts: 475
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 10, 2013 10:53
Can't believe we're discussing the meaning of one word out of a three-hour film ... :S
~nólemë~
Fan Creations Admin & Creations Forum Moderator
Posts: 10423
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 11, 2013 03:16
^ Well, there's always a chance to post a review. I for one am thankful for the feedback on the little pun. As a non-native speaker, I would otherwise have to resort to asking around through PMs.

does this mean we'll get an epic scene where Dain kills Azog at the Battle of Five Armies rather than Beon's destruction of Bolg?


My guess would be a final Thorin-Azog combat in which both kill each other, or fall into an abyss or something. I refuse to believe that after they almost let Thorin get killed by Azog in part 1, they'd be as cruel as to have him lose again in Five Armies, and have Dain finish the Orc off. O_O It would probably be realistic, and likely closer to what happened in the book, but I'm far from sure they'll do a Dain-Azog combat.

The actor to watch for me though, was Armitage's Thorin, I really loved his portrayal.


Agreement. Half a year ago I'd have thought 'over my dead body', but after having seen the movie, I'm slowly warming up to the character. I choose to ignore his Mannish looks, and concentrate on the performance, which was superb, and the characterisation. For me, he's the most intriguing character in the movie.

Regarding the elf-dwarf animosity, it's spoken about in several places in LotR and once in TH, so unless direct names or detailed events are used, I don't see a problem with the copyright for giving a vague explanation of the Elf-Dwarf grudge.
---------- Image "If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." J.R.R. Tolkien - The Hobbit
Lindarielwen
Council Member
Posts: 24157
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 11, 2013 05:13
Ilandir, I agree with you. I have seen The Hobbit twice, both times in the high resolution 3D. I loved every minute of it. I am glad I did not see it as a movie critic but as a fan who simply was lost in the majesty of it. I am glad I did not spend three hours picking the movie apart and finding things to complain about. I am glad I watched it for the pure joy of watching it.
My destiny is riding again, rolling in the rain, unwinding in the wind. My destiny is fighting again, secretly unwinding..what it was I was supposed to say...to say to you today.
calenmarwen
Realm Leader of Lórien
Posts: 4470
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 14, 2013 05:30


does this mean we'll get an epic scene where Dain kills Azog at the Battle of Five Armies rather than Beon's destruction of Bolg?


My guess would be a final Thorin-Azog combat in which both kill each other, or fall into an abyss or something. I refuse to believe that after they almost let Thorin get killed by Azog in part 1, they'd be as cruel as to have him lose again in Five Armies, and have Dain finish the Orc off. O_O It would probably be realistic, and likely closer to what happened in the book, but I'm far from sure they'll do a Dain-Azog combat.



Yes, if after all that Azog just killed Thorin at the end I'd be so upset. (I will anyway, but I'm really looking forward to some fantastic acting I can logically weep at and hope Armitage gives us a shining moment)
Maybe ... actually no, I'll just wait and see I think!
"There is more in you of good than you know ..."
AinarielPalantir
Maiden of Nienna and Éomer`s Loyal Puppy
Posts: 555
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 19, 2013 03:46
Well, this is not really a review but some thoughts about the movie

I've seen the Hobbit twice (2D and 3D HFR) and all in all I like it. I can't say it's too long since I was like "it's ending already?" when it ended There's only one scene I would get rid off, the stone giants fighting. It seems to be there only so that Thorin can express his disappointment towards Bilbo. But somehow it's a very unnecessary scene. It's true that the plot itself is not going forward very much in this part (scinematically) but I like that there's so much from the books here and (almost)everything is important for the upcoming events.

On the other hand they have brought so much stuff to the movie that's not in the book that I'm really looking forward to how they tie all this together in the end.

Azog in a such a big role is understandable scinematically since they probably needed a good ending for the first part and only the wolves and burning trees wouldn't have been very dramatic. But even if it's understandable I don't like him or he being there. This was one of the biggest irritations during my first watch.

The "borrowed" scenes from LotR are probably important for the flow between LotR and the Hobbit but I didn't like Gandalf's "black moment" with the dwarves or the Rohirrim elf-doubles on horses in Rivendell.

And I totally agree with ~nólemë~ about the music. I already said a few words about that in the "what did you not like" thread and I was almost sure I'm the only one who's bothered by it The first time when I saw the end where Thorin embraces Bilbo and they play the special music from the big ending of RotK I was greatly disturbed. I don't want the same music to remind me from two big scenes! Also I thought that when there's a character that's not in LotR (Thorin) and a scene that's not even in the book (Thorin attacking Azog) it really deserves it's own special music and not one borrowed from the Nazgul... And since they created such a great theme for the Dwarves (The Misty Mountain Cold <3) I was hoping there would have been more great new music.

All these borrowed things do bring that feeling of continuity to the movies but there's so much of it that it makes me think that they have been too lazy to invent something new. That's probably not how it is but still.

Oh well. Despite of all these negative things I did like the movie. It's not phenomenal and I can't name any especially good scenes - it's just generally good
Lindarielwen
Council Member
Posts: 24157
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The Hobbit :AUJ ~ Post Your Reviews Here
on: January 19, 2013 08:23
I have been steadfast in proclaiming my love for The Hobbit and that has not changed, but AnarielPalantir, you have reminded me of something. When the music played as the scene went to the Coronation of Aragorn in ROTK, the emotion I felt made me cry. That music should not have been played when Thorin and Bilbo shared a moment. It belongs only in ROTK as the camera sweeps over Minas Tirith. That being said, I loved The Hobbit so much and I greatly look forward to seeing the next two films.
My destiny is riding again, rolling in the rain, unwinding in the wind. My destiny is fighting again, secretly unwinding..what it was I was supposed to say...to say to you today.
Members Online
Print Friendly, PDF & Email