friendofnarnia Posted December 21, 2014 Share Posted December 21, 2014 The Hobbit is ultimately just about Bilbo's journey, so none of that really matters enough to be perfectly wrapped up on screen. Would I have liked it to, yeah, but it didn't bother me much that it wasn't. The Hobbit book? Yes. But this final movie was about so much more than Bilbo. The main plot points were left hanging. I think the worst is not letting us know what happened with the gold since that was the whole conflict of the first half of the film. Did people get their share of the gold? Was the sickness that was over the goal magically gone? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted December 21, 2014 Share Posted December 21, 2014 Interesting to me that those of us who disliked the first two seem to like this one more and the opposite holds true as well. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted December 21, 2014 Share Posted December 21, 2014 The interesting thing about the Hobbit novel is that the main character is someone who for 90% of other fantasy writers would be a supporting player or co-lead, with the biggest focus being on the tragic figure of Thorin. Which makes the film depiction a bit difficult since while Bilbo is the main character, his biggest moments and plot achievements are more secondary to the actual important and big things going on. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted December 21, 2014 Share Posted December 21, 2014 (edited) Saw this on Wednesday. I enjoyed it more than the other two because it didn't drag and the battle was pretty fun, but thinking back, the film as a whole was good, and nothing more. Tauriel getting more screentime would have made it way better. There were some truly daft sequences such as the legolas slow-mo on the falling rocks. Just, what the fuck? That is laughably bad. The film looked like a videogame about 50% of the time, and it felt like one too. Seriously, where is the rawness of LoTR? I know the Hobbit is more 'kid-friendly', but that is no excuse for how lousy some of the battle scenes came across. It tried to capture the awe and bleakness of Minis Tirith/Helms Deep when the enemy swarmed in and all hope seemed lost. But that just didn't work. Lack of build up and poor character development on the most part is to blame. It was nice to be in Middle Earth one final time, it's such an incredible universe, and I LOVED the ending. Gave me a tingling sensation, so I'll give it that. I'll stick with LoTR, though. I don't really feel the need to watch the prequels again any time soon. B- Edited December 21, 2014 by Heretic 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rorschach Posted December 21, 2014 Share Posted December 21, 2014 The Hobbit book? Yes. But this final movie was about so much more than Bilbo. The main plot points were left hanging. I think the worst is not letting us know what happened with the gold since that was the whole conflict of the first half of the film. Did people get their share of the gold? Was the sickness that was over the goal magically gone? Robin, to the extended edition! *Bat symbol transition* Also, AUJ- B+ DOS- A- BotFA- B+/A- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
friendofnarnia Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 (edited) Yeah, for the first time I'm anxiously awaiting the extended edition of a Hobbit film. I really feel like there was a lot of stuff near the end that was left on the editing floor that will hopefully be included. Edited December 22, 2014 by friendofnarnia 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 (edited) There's gotta be a lot of unused Battle footage, since characters like Gandalf, Thranduil, Bard, Dain, Dwalin (who was about 10 feet from Bilbo when Bilbo got knocked out), etc just totally vanish so we can focus on the mano a mano showdowns with Thorin/Legolas/Tauriel/Kili/Azog/Bolg. Plus Radagast and Beorn showing up for 5 seconds each and then never appearing again. Edited December 22, 2014 by 4815162342 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessie Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 (edited) the first 20 minutes were pretty bad, the dragon looked terrible (aside from the close ups when he was speaking) and the destruction of the city just looked like something from a video game. A dragon reigning hell on a city should not be boring to watch, it should have looked awesome. To be fair during the first half an hour I was wondering whether it would be a good idea to make up on some lost sleep in the cinema because it really did start off that bad, but to be fair, it got better and better. I still couldn't give a shit about any characters so when Thorins brother died (I had no idea it was his brother), I really couldn't give a shit, same with the other guy who wanted a bit of that girl from lost. We barely know anything about these characters so the emotional aspect of it all fell completely flat. I had no idea why Bilbo was so upset by his death, Thorin was an asshole to him throughout the entire franchise then actually tried throwing him off the gate to his death yet he's still upset lol. The action was pretty great, I like how PJ just went all out with it, he has a very creative imagination and the Legolas fight on the falling pillar was great even if it did defy the laws of gravity. The trolls were hilarious, literally couldn't stop laughing at them, one of the trolls sole purpose was to run head first into a wall and knock himself out, could not stop laughing. The eagles did their part of course, yet another cop out just to get some great imagery into the final act. Overall I have the same problem with this as I did with the others, even though more felt at stake with this one there was no tension because I quite frankly wanted the dwarfs to lose. They were assholes after all and every emotional point fell flat. It's hard for a franchise to not have a single character to care about after film 3 but this film really managed that. For me Peter Jacksons direction is what made this watchable for me, the battle scenes are well done and you could tell Jackson was just having some fun, experimenting different action scenes and they were a treat to watch. An honorable mention to Martin freeman as well, he is by far the best character in this series imo, also that shorter runtime s certainly made this more enjoyable. C+ Edited December 22, 2014 by jessie 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 when Thorins brother died (I had no idea it was his brother), It was Thorin's nephews, which the films had said several times 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leyla Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 (edited) The Hobbit book? Yes. But this final movie was about so much more than Bilbo. The main plot points were left hanging. I think the worst is not letting us know what happened with the gold since that was the whole conflict of the first half of the film. Did people get their share of the gold? Was the sickness that was over the goal magically gone? now that you wrote about it I started to contemplate that yeah gold was quite important seriously though I feel like the satisfaction from the film's character arcs depend on what/who you personally prefer I care for Thorin/Bilbo/Lego/Thranduil the most so I felt the movie pretty much was complete (more Balin would have been better) & the loose ends of other characters & the battle outcome just werent that crucial to ruin the experience Super pumped for the SEE as well ofc especially after that interview & the pic of the funerals Edited December 22, 2014 by Lady of Lorien 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessie Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 It was Thorin's nephews, which the films had said several times Regardless, there was no emotional impact 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessie Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 Btw is it me or does anyone thing Bilbo could have used that ring for better use? Maybe go invisible, kill the main orc leader and just walk off? I would have got a lot of shit done if I had that ring. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 the first 20 minutes were pretty bad, the dragon looked terrible (aside from the close ups when he was speaking) and the destruction of the city just looked like something from a video game. A dragon reigning hell on a city should not be boring to watch, it should have looked awesome. To be fair during the first half an hour I was wondering whether it would be a good idea to make up on some lost sleep in the cinema because it really did start off that bad, but to be fair, it got better and better. I still couldn't give a shit about any characters so when Thorins brother died (I had no idea it was his brother), I really couldn't give a shit, same with the other guy who wanted a bit of that girl from lost. We barely know anything about these characters so the emotional aspect of it all fell completely flat. I had no idea why Bilbo was so upset by his death, Thorin was an asshole to him throughout the entire franchise then actually tried throwing him off the gate to his death yet he's still upset lol. The action was pretty great, I like how PJ just went all out with it, he has a very creative imagination and the Legolas fight on the falling pillar was great even if it did defy the laws of gravity. The trolls were hilarious, literally couldn't stop laughing at them, one of the trolls sole purpose was to run head first into a wall and knock himself out, could not stop laughing. The eagles did their part of course, yet another cop out just to get some great imagery into the final act. Overall I have the same problem with this as I did with the others, even though more felt at stake with this one there was no tension because I quite frankly wanted the dwarfs to lose. They were assholes after all and every emotional point fell flat. It's hard for a franchise to not have a single character to care about after film 3 but this film really managed that. For me Peter Jacksons direction is what made this watchable for me, the battle scenes are well done and you could tell Jackson was just having some fun, experimenting different action scenes and they were a treat to watch. An honorable mention to Martin freeman as well, he is by far the best character in this series imo, also that shorter runtime s certainly made this more enjoyable. C+ I think you feel EXACTLY the same way I do. I just gave it a slightly higher grade. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 They never really say what happens to the gold. So what happens? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessie Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 They never really say what happens to the gold. So what happens? I don't know, there was a lot of it. I would have actually paid people to take it there was that much of it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 They never really say what happens to the gold. So what happens? In the book the Laketown refugees get some gold to rebuild and The Master steals a bunch of that and flees. The Dwarves keep the rest pretty much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 In the book the Laketown refugees get some gold to rebuild and The Master steals a bunch of that and flees. The Dwarves keep the rest pretty much. Pretty sad that there needed to be any theft since anyone with that much gold should just give kilos of it away. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmasterclay Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 I liked it quite a bit more than the first two, so when baumer said that those who hated the first two liked this one and vice versa, I think it was quite accurate. I'd give the first a 3/10, the second a 6/10, and this one probably an 8/10. It's still certainly no Rings, and I still didn't care much for any characters, but it moved along alot better and it just looked alot less fake and felt less stretched out than the others. Freeman is a treasure and he does a wonderful job making you care about something in this world. It's just better filmmaking than the last two. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessie Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 Yeah i don't understand why the dwarfs have to be so damn greedy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Panda Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 (edited) Yeah i don't understand why the dwarfs have to be so damn greedy. In Tolkiens novels all the races are defined by specific archetypes, greed being one of those for a dwarf. The dwarves greed is what brought smaug in the first place. Edited December 22, 2014 by The Panda 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...