Be a Supporter!

"The Hobbit" Review

  • 595 Views
  • 13 Replies
New Topic Respond to this Topic
IronicMaiden
IronicMaiden
  • Member since: Dec. 5, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 05
Blank Slate
"The Hobbit" Review 2012-12-19 17:00:22 Reply

So, I saw the fuckin' Hobbit yesterday. It was a pain in the ass, had to walk a mile through pouring rain to get to the theater, then, three hours later it was still raining. Had to walk home in it too.

First, I should probably say that I'm one of those pretentious Tolkien nuts, and that I will try to judge the movie on its own merits. However, this is an adaptation and there will be points where I can't help but compare it to the book.

The first problem I had was two minutes into the movie. The way Bilbo begins the book is a bit odd. First, he tells the story of how the dwarves lost their kingdom, and then he quotes the beginning of the actual book. I think this would have worked a lot better, had he started with what Tolkien wrote; and then once the dwarves had entered the story had them tell how Smaug took the mountain.

Then, after a long while we get to the part with the trolls. Now, in the book, Gandalf uses his powers to project his voice and change it to sound like one of the trolls, prompting an argument that lasts until daylight. I would not have had much of a problem with them changing it, only what they changed it to was so horrible. At first, I thought Bilbo was going to start the argument. I was thinking it actually might be a good idea doing it that way, to show the audience how clever Bilbo can be in a tough spot. But no, he makes them argue with him, not amongst themselves, and then Gandalf comes and saves the day. This part works a lot better if you give the credit to just one of them, not both.

I don't really know what to think about Peter Jackson's depiction of Radagast the brown. I feel as if I should be outraged and offended, but really I'm just taken aback by the whole thing. It feels as if they're making the Mayar (The wizards) to be lesser beings than they are, when really they're the third most powerful race in Tolkien's universe. I don't think the wizards (Gandalf especially) should have had any comic relief parts. They work better as mysterious figures that hold unknown amounts of power, who say cryptic things and have unclear motives. I don't say that because that's how Tolkien did it, I'm saying it because it's true, they really do work better that way. How they had Gandalf act like a nervous school boy around Galadriel, and as her subordinate; it sort of degrades Gandalf. Not only is he a superior being, he is much more solemn and stoic (or at least, should be.)

Now, for the part in which the wargs chase them up the tree and the eagles must come save them. Them coming down from the tree and fighting the orcs ruins a lot of the tension. I know I said I wouldn't compare to the book too much, but I'm sorry, I must do it again here. The way the book did it was better. They're up the tree, the wargs below. They're throwing flaming pinecones as a last resort, and now the tree's on fire. They are fucked. There is no hope left. Then at the last minute, the eagles come and save them. Very epic, in my opinion. In the movie, all that happens, but the eagles don't save them at the last minute. Thorin walks from the tree and fights the pale orc. Oh no! He is defeated! Now he will die for sure! Oh wait, Bilbo's comin' to save him. Oh, now he's defeated too. Looks like they'll both be killed. Nope, all the dwarves have jumped into the fray now. And now they've been defeated as well. Oh look! Eagles!

See what I'm trying to say here? In the book, it's short and sweet. In the movie it just feels drawn out and messy.

I'm sort of on the fence about adding this whole pale orc thing. It could be cool, and while the dragon is motivation enough for Thorin adding that other rival may not be such a bad idea. On the other hand, it's such a huge change. I think I'll wait to the second movie to form an organized opinion.

Oh, and a few little nit-picks that don't really matter much.

Galadriel wouldn't come if Saruman called. She fucking hates Saruman. And it doesn't make any sense to call her because once again, she is inferior to Gandalf. In the books, the dwarves all have beards so long they can tuck them into their belts. Some of the acting in the beginning seemed a bit cheesy to me, although I may just be crazy when it comes to that.

Now for some things I actually liked!

The effects. Holy fucking christ, the CGI in this movie was stunning. Seriously, it's like a micro version of Avatar. Even if this movie had just been utter shit, I would still have been blown away by the effects.

The songs the dwarves sing at the beginning, especially "That's what Bilbo Baggins hates." I just feel they did a really good job on these, and they pretty much took them right out of the book for once. It was really a wonderful portrayal, and actually very similar to how I imagined them while reading the books.

Gollum. If they only got one thing right in this movie, it was Gollum's part. Following the above, his effects were awe inspiring, his emotions showed perfectly. When he started to cry, I almost wanted to cry with him, the poor fellow. I actually can't remember if the part with Bilbo about to kill Gollum is in the book or not, but either way I'm glad it was in the movie. It was a very moving scene.

The part at the very end with Smaug. That was so freakin' bad ass. In the theater I swear I could feel that growl reverberating in my chest.

TL;DR: In conclusion, this movie could have been a lot worse. It was certainly better than I expected it to be. It had some faults, and a few very redeeming qualities. All in all, I give this movie a 6.5 out of 10; and I will certainly be going to see the second one.

BasedBubbus
BasedBubbus
  • Member since: Jul. 8, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 06
Musician
Response to "The Hobbit" Review 2012-12-19 17:01:49 Reply

i dont know which is longer
this post or the movie


I'm a single father and a multimillionaire.

BBS Signature
Nor
Nor
  • Member since: Mar. 4, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 11
Reader
Response to "The Hobbit" Review 2012-12-19 17:02:50 Reply

The main thing wrong was that smigel shouldn't have looked that messed up yet.


わたしのぺにす

BBS Signature
HipnikDragomir
HipnikDragomir
  • Member since: Dec. 2, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 19
Melancholy
Response to "The Hobbit" Review 2012-12-19 17:14:38 Reply

There are already two threads about the movie. Post in one of those.


This is my signature. It is a nice signature.

BBS Signature
Auz
Auz
  • Member since: Feb. 23, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 57
Movie Buff
Response to "The Hobbit" Review 2012-12-19 18:22:07 Reply

At 12/19/12 05:00 PM, IronicMaiden wrote: So, I saw the fuckin' Hobbit yesterday. It was a pain in the ass, had to walk a mile through pouring rain to get to the theater, then, three hours later it was still raining. Had to walk home in it too.

First, I should probably say that I'm one of those pretentious Tolkien nuts, and that I will try to judge the movie on its own merits. However, this is an adaptation and there will be points where I can't help but compare it to the book.

The first problem I had was two minutes into the movie. The way Bilbo begins the book is a bit odd. First, he tells the story of how the dwarves lost their kingdom, and then he quotes the beginning of the actual book. I think this would have worked a lot better, had he started with what Tolkien wrote; and then once the dwarves had entered the story had them tell how Smaug took the mountain.

I didn't mind that much, but the way you describe it would've made more sense, I agree.

Then, after a long while we get to the part with the trolls. Now, in the book, Gandalf uses his powers to project his voice and change it to sound like one of the trolls, prompting an argument that lasts until daylight. I would not have had much of a problem with them changing it, only what they changed it to was so horrible. At first, I thought Bilbo was going to start the argument. I was thinking it actually might be a good idea doing it that way, to show the audience how clever Bilbo can be in a tough spot. But no, he makes them argue with him, not amongst themselves, and then Gandalf comes and saves the day. This part works a lot better if you give the credit to just one of them, not both.

I was expecting that too. I expected that Bilbo was indeed going to make them argue amongst themselves (perhaps with some riddle or something) and I was a bit disappointed that he was clumsily buying time.

Still, not a biggie to me.

I don't really know what to think about Peter Jackson's depiction of Radagast the brown. I feel as if I should be outraged and offended, but really I'm just taken aback by the whole thing. It feels as if they're making the Mayar (The wizards) to be lesser beings than they are, when really they're the third most powerful race in Tolkien's universe. I don't think the wizards (Gandalf especially) should have had any comic relief parts. They work better as mysterious figures that hold unknown amounts of power, who say cryptic things and have unclear motives. I don't say that because that's how Tolkien did it, I'm saying it because it's true, they really do work better that way. How they had Gandalf act like a nervous school boy around Galadriel, and as her subordinate; it sort of degrades Gandalf. Not only is he a superior being, he is much more solemn and stoic (or at least, should be.)

I did think that Gandalf acted a bit odd sometimes in the film. He definitely seemed different than he did in the Lord of the Rings films and I remember in the book he was quite vague sometimes. Just running off and coming back whenever he pleased. You never really got to know what he was doing and why.

So I agree, Gandalf seemed to be different than he was in the book. Once again, it's not something that really bothered me.

Now, for the part in which the wargs chase them up the tree and the eagles must come save them. Them coming down from the tree and fighting the orcs ruins a lot of the tension. I know I said I wouldn't compare to the book too much, but I'm sorry, I must do it again here. The way the book did it was better. They're up the tree, the wargs below. They're throwing flaming pinecones as a last resort, and now the tree's on fire. They are fucked. There is no hope left. Then at the last minute, the eagles come and save them. Very epic, in my opinion. In the movie, all that happens, but the eagles don't save them at the last minute. Thorin walks from the tree and fights the pale orc. Oh no! He is defeated! Now he will die for sure! Oh wait, Bilbo's comin' to save him. Oh, now he's defeated too. Looks like they'll both be killed. Nope, all the dwarves have jumped into the fray now. And now they've been defeated as well. Oh look! Eagles!

I totally agree that this scene was odd. I get that they wanted to do this climactic battle between Thorin and the pale orc at the end, but what confused me a bit was how the dwarves were first clinging on to their lives and could barely hang on and then they were suddenly up and ready to fight. It seemed like something was cut there.

See what I'm trying to say here? In the book, it's short and sweet. In the movie it just feels drawn out and messy.

I'm sort of on the fence about adding this whole pale orc thing. It could be cool, and while the dragon is motivation enough for Thorin adding that other rival may not be such a bad idea. On the other hand, it's such a huge change. I think I'll wait to the second movie to form an organized opinion.

I'm just hoping he won't take the wind out of Smaug's sails. Smaug should remain the main villain in my opinion.

Oh, and a few little nit-picks that don't really matter much.

Galadriel wouldn't come if Saruman called. She fucking hates Saruman. And it doesn't make any sense to call her because once again, she is inferior to Gandalf. In the books, the dwarves all have beards so long they can tuck them into their belts. Some of the acting in the beginning seemed a bit cheesy to me, although I may just be crazy when it comes to that.

Now for some things I actually liked!

The effects. Holy fucking christ, the CGI in this movie was stunning. Seriously, it's like a micro version of Avatar. Even if this movie had just been utter shit, I would still have been blown away by the effects.

The songs the dwarves sing at the beginning, especially "That's what Bilbo Baggins hates." I just feel they did a really good job on these, and they pretty much took them right out of the book for once. It was really a wonderful portrayal, and actually very similar to how I imagined them while reading the books.

Yeah, this really helps to capture the spirit of the book if you ask me.

Gollum. If they only got one thing right in this movie, it was Gollum's part. Following the above, his effects were awe inspiring, his emotions showed perfectly. When he started to cry, I almost wanted to cry with him, the poor fellow. I actually can't remember if the part with Bilbo about to kill Gollum is in the book or not, but either way I'm glad it was in the movie. It was a very moving scene.

I loved the scenes with Gollum too. I thought that scene where Bilbo gets the opportunity to kill Gollum was very moving and I also loved the riddle scene. I was afraid they would cut that and only do one-and-a-half riddle or something, but they took the time to work that out properly. Big thumbs up to the screenplay writers there.

The part at the very end with Smaug. That was so freakin' bad ass. In the theater I swear I could feel that growl reverberating in my chest.

TL;DR: In conclusion, this movie could have been a lot worse. It was certainly better than I expected it to be. It had some faults, and a few very redeeming qualities. All in all, I give this movie a 6.5 out of 10; and I will certainly be going to see the second one.

Well I think you did bring up a lot of good points here. The things you criticize the film for didn't bother me nearly as much as they bothered you though. As a standalone film it would've been excellent if you ask me. I gave it 9 out of 10 on IMDB.


[Forum, Portal and Icon Mod]
Wi/Ht? #36 // Steam: Auz
The Top 100 Reviewers List (Last updated: 10 August 2014)

BBS Signature
IronicMaiden
IronicMaiden
  • Member since: Dec. 5, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 05
Blank Slate
Response to "The Hobbit" Review 2012-12-20 17:31:30 Reply

At 12/19/12 05:02 PM, Nor wrote: The main thing wrong was that smigel shouldn't have looked that messed up yet.

Actually, they used this to do a pretty cool (although subtle,) thing with Gollum.

When Bilbo first sees him, Gollum is a bit more flesh colored. When he figures out that Bilbo stole the ring though, he becomes paler and his wrinkles get more pronounced. So they did acknowledge there was some sort of process for the ring ruining people gradually.

rsetienne
rsetienne
  • Member since: Jun. 11, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 05
Animator
Response to "The Hobbit" Review 2012-12-20 17:51:11 Reply

Dude this is the worst review i have ever seen, you make no valid point and you compared pretty much everything to the book, be more open minded. You believe you understand the book better than people who studied the book for years with actual professional writers? Well i watched that movie, twice ( in HFR 3D and IMAX 3D ) and the only problem it might have had was that the first hour of it was dragged out. BTW i have never read the book. So yah, my review of your review is that, its the shittiest review ever.


Washing* yea i can't spell too

Loki
Loki
  • Member since: Oct. 18, 2003
  • Online!
Forum Stats
Member
Level 52
Writer
Response to "The Hobbit" Review 2012-12-20 18:03:23 Reply

FYI, "Tolkien nut", Istari do not remember their Maiar selves, and if they do, only slight fragments, like an old dream in another life. When they were sent to Middle-Earth, they did so in a new form. It was also made clear that Radagast was somewhat more of a... special character, in the Unfinished Tales.

Also, for the warg - tree scene, the only thing really missing was the 15 birds song.

Loki
Loki
  • Member since: Oct. 18, 2003
  • Online!
Forum Stats
Member
Level 52
Writer
Response to "The Hobbit" Review 2012-12-20 18:05:28 Reply

At 12/20/12 06:03 PM, FBIpolux wrote: FYI, "Tolkien nut", Istari do not remember their Maiar selves, and if they do, only slight fragments, like an old dream in another life. When they were sent to Middle-Earth, they did so in a new form. It was also made clear that Radagast was somewhat more of a... special character, in the Unfinished Tales.

Also, for the warg - tree scene, the only thing really missing was the 15 birds song.

My post sounds harsh now that I read it;

Sorry, it was a good critic. Other than the two points i pointed out.

IronicMaiden
IronicMaiden
  • Member since: Dec. 5, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 05
Blank Slate
Response to "The Hobbit" Review 2012-12-20 18:15:18 Reply

At 12/20/12 06:05 PM, FBIpolux wrote: My post sounds harsh now that I read it;

Sorry, it was a good critic. Other than the two points i pointed out.

Totally alright by me. I looked into it and you are correct, after all.

Tremulos
Tremulos
  • Member since: Dec. 9, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 19
Musician
Response to "The Hobbit" Review 2012-12-20 19:11:29 Reply

My experience with the movie was practically identical. I disliked the way that they portrayed Radagast; of course he is described as an oddity amongst the wizards in the books, but bird poop in the hair? What the hell? I was also disappointed by the changes made in many of the scenes, particularly the ones you mentioned. I really didn't like the Pale Orc add-in, even if Azog is mentioned in the book.

However, despite my wishes that the movie would follow the book closely in plot and character (I really wish they hadn't gone and made Thorin a young handsome not-even-fat man/dwarf/model, instead of the eldest and most respected dwarf in the group that he's supposed to be), I admit that most of the changes made were in generally good taste and really make it work better as a movie. Overall it's probably more enjoyable for more people than it would have been if they had made it more accurate.


It made more sense in my head.

BBS Signature
pizzahumper1
pizzahumper1
  • Member since: Dec. 12, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Gamer
Response to "The Hobbit" Review 2012-12-20 19:22:41 Reply

I thought the movie over all was pretty good.
WHAT REALLY P*SSED ME OFF WAS THE FACT IT WAS COUNTIED!!!!!!!!!
WHAT THE H*LL!!!!
i would give it a 8.5/10

Loki
Loki
  • Member since: Oct. 18, 2003
  • Online!
Forum Stats
Member
Level 52
Writer
Response to "The Hobbit" Review 2012-12-20 20:39:13 Reply

At 12/20/12 06:27 PM, Austerity wrote: I very much enjoyed Radagast's part. It wasn't in the book but I am very glad they included him in the movie. It partially makes up for leaving out Tom Bombadil in Fellowship. In fact, they should include Bombadil in either the second or third Hobbit movie, since they're adding people like Radagast and Galadriel who were not in the book.

Radagast was in the Hobbit story. Just not in the book. Also in the Unfinished Tales. He pretty much warns Gandalf about the apparition of Sauron (Necromancer) in Mirkwood, leading to the forming of the White Council (Galadriel, Saruman, Elrond, Gandalf, Celeborn, Glorfindel, Radagast and a few other Elvish lords). Though this is supposed to have happened years before The Hobbit.

Meh. I was kinda expecting the movie to start with that, tbh. With Gandalf finding Thrain's key in Dol Guldur, which sets in motion Thorin's quest. Especially since in the Trailer, you can clearly see Gandalf walking alone in an old dungeon, going down stairs.

Also, Galadriel can speak with Elrond and Gandalf from anywhere; they are the bearers of the 3 rings, which means they are linked at all time. Even if she wasn't supposed to be in Rivendell at that time, she could have been anyway.