Conquer Club

I finally had a chance to go see the Hobbit. I was so worried that by the time I got a night off, it would be out of the theatres, but it has managed to stick around just long enough!

I was pleasantly surprised. After how bad the first one was, I was expecting the worst, but they actually did good things with it. The plot alterations they made were for the better, not worse (the Hobbit really did need a female presence somewhere along the way!) and while the battles were a bit overdone, they weren't quite so ridiculously overdone as that endless 600 hour escape from the goblin caves in the first Hobbit movie.

What's more, they sold us Seniors tickets, even though I'm still quite a few years short of being a Senior, lol!

did you have sex at the theater? or after it?

nietzsche wrote:did you have sex at the theater? or after it?

Your obsession with my sex life is unhealthy!

The LOTR was 3 books and three 3 hour movies. The Hobbit is one 300 page book and three 3 hour movies.....WTF?

Did they use Styrofoam packing peanuts as filler?

my biggest problem with the Hobbit was Legolas... I'd point out specifics, but I'd be here ranting longer than the movie took...

fadedpsychosis wrote:my biggest problem with the Hobbit was Legolas... I'd point out specifics, but I'd be here ranting longer than the movie took...

Rant! Rant! Rant!

Yes throw Legolas under the wagon.

I think this is where I am less picky about movies than some people. I go to movies for entertainment. If you exclude documentaries, that is what they are there for. I like my movies to have a solid plot, good acting and all of that but I am not upset if it gets buried in action as long as it's not stale action. The escape from the goblin cave was fun to watch as they had a lot of things in it that you don't see in a normal action sequence (the boulder scene, using the ladder as a combat tool/bridge, etc.) and the final fight against the orcs was a bit generic in some respects but the atmosphere around it was good in my opinion. Overall, the Hobbit Part 1 was probably the 2nd weakest of the 5 movies (Return of the King will always be the worst because the pacing sucked and they should have edited out at least some of the last 30 minutes) but by no means did I hate it.

As for Desolation of Smaug, I really enjoyed it. The fight between the Smaug and the dwarves did make me wonder how none of them died but then I remember that it's a Peter Jackson movie adaptation of a book by J.R.R. Tolkien. You don't die unless your name is Boromir, you are completely irrelevant to the plot or you do die but your death gets put off until the end of the final movie so you can be around to help everybody.

My problem with the Hobbit movies is that they're over dramatizing everyfuckingthing. They're trying to recreate LOTR but everything about El Hobbit is on such a smaller level that it doesn't work in the slightest.

alright then... from the top

first off, Legolas never had a part in the Hobbit. The best that could be said is that he IS the son of Thranduil (the elven king of that area) so he was most likely present... but not once was he mentioned until he shows up at Elrond's place in LotR.

2nd, in a book that showcased the fighting prowess of dwarves, he's appearing and making them look like fat useless fools (the combination of which words cannot be said to all apply at once to any one of the 12 dwarves present, though one or more do often apply) the most badass moment for the dwarves happens in a fight scene that never took place in the books (and was in fact a of a few paragraphs that roughly said "the dwarves got in the barrels and went downstream, then all got out at the lake")

3rd (and this is a problem I had with the LotR movies too), orcs are not pansies. yes Legolas was quite capable of felling multiple orcs (as he did in helm's deep) but even in a massive battle that went on for hours, one in which he had to prove himself a hero, Legolas only killed 42 (or 43 by some counts). In this movie he seems to casually go through as many as that while hopping along a river bank and trying to catch dwarves... lets do a bit of math here: 42 in a battle that went on all night, literally from sunset to sunrise... so 42 orcs in lets say 8 hours, or a little over 5 per hour... here he kills at least 5 in the first minute...
also on this note: orcs are pretty strong, and while elves are skilled they are not the most hardy of the races... yet when a powerful orc catches him in a bear hug that would have shattered the ribs on any man caught in its grip, the worst he gets is a bloody nose???


there's more in this vein, but these are the biggest issues I have.

fadedpsychosis wrote:alright then... from the top

first off, Legolas never had a part in the Hobbit. The best that could be said is that he IS the son of Thranduil (the elven king of that area) so he was most likely present... but not once was he mentioned until he shows up at Elrond's place in LotR.

It's true that we never meet Legolas in the book, but according to the timeline he was definitely around during that time. So I don't have any problem with that; it makes sense that he should have been in the book.

As for your other criticisms, I agree. The dwarves are too bumbling, the elves are too superhuman. Legolas is too prominent. Fights are not only drawn out endlessly, but fights that were never in the book have been added, and of course Legolas has to be at almost every one. All valid criticisms, and yet I found that it wasn't as flawed as the first movie.

For the first time, I found that Jackson's alterations to the plot actually enhanced, rather than diminished, Tolkien's work. I've already noted in my OP that I think the addition of a female character and a love subplot was something that brings balance to the movie. The whole political-revolution-in-Lake-Town subplot, while not canon Tolkien, is definitely building on an undercurrent that was already there in the book. The scenes in Dol Goldur are likewise building correctly on things that in the books were only mentioned in passing.

Overall, not the movie I would have made if it was up to me, but given the constraints of what it takes to be successful in Hollywood, I think it's a reasonably good job.

So the Hobbit is only 2 movies in total, not 3?

I have only seen the first one.

nietzsche wrote:did you have sex at the theater? or after it?

Isn't it obvious what "seeing the Hobbit" really means?

notyou2 wrote:So the Hobbit is only 2 movies in total, not 3?

I have only seen the first one.

No, there will be a third.

We still haven't seen the destruction of Lake Town and the Battle of Five Armies.

Seems to me that Peter is simply milking it.

Dukasaur wrote:

notyou2 wrote:So the Hobbit is only 2 movies in total, not 3?

I have only seen the first one.

No, there will be a third.

We still haven't seen the destruction of Lake Town and the Battle of Five Armies.

I still haven't seen (in the book) this epic river battle scene.

Dukasaur wrote:It's true that we never meet Legolas in the book, but according to the timeline he was definitely around during that time. So I don't have any problem with that; it makes sense that he should have been in the book.

oh I agree, and said already that he was likely there... if the movie had gone with the book's original scene of there being a party in the woods as what drew the dwarves off the path (instead of "path? who cares what the wizard says, we do what we want!") I would have been perfectly happy to see Legolas joining in as a cameo (and in fact would have expected it)... but throwing him in the action as much as they did? er, no.

Dukasaur wrote:As for your other criticisms, I agree. The dwarves are too bumbling, the elves are too superhuman. Legolas is too prominent. Fights are not only drawn out endlessly, but fights that were never in the book have been added, and of course Legolas has to be at almost every one. All valid criticisms, and yet I found that it wasn't as flawed as the first movie.

For the first time, I found that Jackson's alterations to the plot actually enhanced, rather than diminished, Tolkien's work. I've already noted in my OP that I think the addition of a female character and a love subplot was something that brings balance to the movie. The whole political-revolution-in-Lake-Town subplot, while not canon Tolkien, is definitely building on an undercurrent that was already there in the book. The scenes in Dol Goldur are likewise building correctly on things that in the books were only mentioned in passing.

Overall, not the movie I would have made if it was up to me, but given the constraints of what it takes to be successful in Hollywood, I think it's a reasonably good job.

the love subplot doesn't bother me too much other than it was pretty cliche and predictable, and I too enjoyed the Lake Town politics angle... the fighting... yeah, lets just say the first one got me a bit riled too with the fight scenes, especially the white orc and the goblin king... but they didn't quite strike a nerve like the pretty boy hopping about playing immortal

I saw it around Christmas so I've pretty much forgot it now, lol.

Gillipig wrote:I saw it around Christmas so I've pretty much forgot it now, lol.

Cut back on the dope Gilli

notyou2 wrote:

Gillipig wrote:I saw it around Christmas so I've pretty much forgot it now, lol.

Cut back on the dope Gilli

It's because of my Alzheimers actually.

Gillipig wrote:

notyou2 wrote:

Gillipig wrote:I saw it around Christmas so I've pretty much forgot it now, lol.

Cut back on the dope Gilli

It's because of my Alzheimers actually.

That sucks

My apologies for my lame humour and sorry to read about your illness.

notyou2 wrote:

Gillipig wrote:

notyou2 wrote:

Gillipig wrote:I saw it around Christmas so I've pretty much forgot it now, lol.

Cut back on the dope Gilli

It's because of my Alzheimers actually.

That sucks

My apologies for my lame humour and sorry to read about your illness.

I think there's a former redheaded member of CC who can recommend a good clinic.

Dukasaur wrote:

notyou2 wrote:

Gillipig wrote:

notyou2 wrote:

Gillipig wrote:I saw it around Christmas so I've pretty much forgot it now, lol.

Cut back on the dope Gilli

It's because of my Alzheimers actually.

That sucks

My apologies for my lame humour and sorry to read about your illness.

I think there's a former redheaded member of CC who can recommend a good clinic.

She died.

notyou2 wrote:

Dukasaur wrote:

notyou2 wrote:

Gillipig wrote:

notyou2 wrote:

Gillipig wrote:I saw it around Christmas so I've pretty much forgot it now, lol.

Cut back on the dope Gilli

It's because of my Alzheimers actually.

That sucks

My apologies for my lame humour and sorry to read about your illness.

I think there's a former redheaded member of CC who can recommend a good clinic.

She died.

Hmmm. Maybe the clinic wasn't that good, after all...