The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

[Taco-Calamitous]

So I totally saw that last night in an advanced screening. Waited outside the base theater for like 2 and a half hours. People were cutting and gaggling at the front of the line and I was gettin' angry, but I got in! Then I waited for another hour and a half inside the theater... yay, Saturday afternoon gone! Good thing I had Stephen King's The Stand to read and some homework to do.

But yeah. It was a lot of fun. Not as good as the movies in the LotR trilogy-no really inspiring lines or dramatic scenes-but it was fun. A fun fantasy adventure movie, and an alright adaptation of the book (although it only gets about a 3rd of the way through, and pads the shit out of that first third.) The feel is a lot lighter, and there's more humor, although it still feels like it belongs with the first trilogy. Martin Freeman was really good as Bilbo Baggins. Bilbo felt like an older Merry or Pippin from the movies, which is maybe a little more comical than he should be, but *shrug* Thorin's a brooding bad ass for teenie boppers to swoon over (as are Kili and Fili) and I also like how they portrayed Balin (he was my favorite in the books.) Radagast is pretty weird, and he introduces a sub plot that wasn't in the books (he wasn't really in the books at all himself, so he's pretty much an invented character by P.J.) The music is great. I'll probably want the sound track. If I felt like being negative, I'd probably complain about the changes. Also, the ending (everyone yelled "NO!!" when it ended a third of the way through the book) but I don't feel like being negative, so screw that.

Go see it, have fun. It's probably my favorite movie so far this year. I'm probably biased. Anyhoo...

Wuv, Yer Mom

[Andromeda]

I'm guessing that the people that complained about the ending didn't know that the movie had been split up into three movies. Though you'd think that people going to see an advanced screening would be in the know enough to realized this fact. And if they did know, how can they complain about a fact that they were already aware of before hand.

I believe I heard Peter Jackson was pulling in additional content from other sources. I'm not so versed in the lore I know everything, but it's likely that the included character wasn't something Jackson made up, but something that appeared in another book.

[Taco-Calamitous]

I dunno if they knew what they were getting into; I think they just wanted to go to a free screening of an upcoming blockbuster, heh. Saw my instructor there. When I told him on Monday morning he was like "My wife made me go. I didn't understand any of it," lol. But yeah; some of the extra stuff was pulled from other sources. Some of it was embelleshment, and a bit of it was Peter Jackson's invention. Anyhoo...

Wuv, Yer Mom

[Alpha]

Radagast was in the book, kinda. It's been awhile since I read it, but isn't he the reason Gandalf is missing from the entourage for large chunks of the book? Jackson's pulling in stuff from the appendices (and the Silmarillion?) to make up content, but I really think it should just be one film though. However it's hard to blame Jackson--it was going to be two films way back when Del Toro was going to direct.

I haven't seen it yet, but I went to the red carpet (five minute walk from work...u mad?) and saw Peter Jackson, Martin Freeman (the second time now), Andy Serkis, James Cameron (ikr), William Kircher, James Nesbitt, Elijah Wood, Cate Blanchett and Hugo Weaving, among others. Sadly no Ian McKellen or Stephen Fry, but I saw the former a few months ago at a Flight of the Conchords concert where I briefly sat next to (and latter gave directions to) Billy Connolly (who's also in the Hobbit)... OK now I'm just showing off.

Despite all that, I'm still pissed off about some political stuff that went down during filming. The producers threatened to take filming to the UK in response to an actors' union demanding better conditions for contract workers. The government had a secret meeting with Hollywood big-wigs where BJs were shared and our employment legislation was re-written overnight to the favour of the film production remaining here, but not to the terms for contract actors. There's obviously a lot more detail**, but that's the gist of it, and it felt like we sold a little sovereignty and dignity for the sake of a few bucks and a red carpet. Corruption is hard to come by here, and that really gets my goat.

Attached are some photos I took during the red carpet. It's hard to take photos one-handed when you're climbing the metal cage around an inner-city tree, and have some dude pushing you. Shut up.

Also, Tele, did you see it in a cinema capable of showing 48 FPS? I've heard mixed reviews about 48 FPS, but I'm holding out so that I can see it in a cinema capable of using it. []Mike Ryan: 'The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey': How Is 48 Frames Per Second?]


** On the evening of 27 October, John Key [Prime Minister] announces that The Hobbit will be made in New Zealand and that legislation, which will only apply to the film industry, will be introduced under urgency to Parliament. The ERA [Employment Relations Act] will be amended so that a worker engaged in an independent contract is not able to go to court and claim employee rights and conditions. In addition, The Hobbit production will gain increased subsidies. In return, New Zealand will be promoted in all DVDs and other material used to publicise the films with every DVD and download of The Hobbit featuring a Jackson-directed video promoting New Zealand as a tourist and filmmaking destination. The movie will also premiere in New Zealand, with the Government planning a major tourism campaign to coincide with its launch. A memorandum of understanding with Warner Bros. is signed.
A Synopsis of the “Hobbit Dispute”, A.F Tyson, 2011, New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations 36(3): 5-13. Link.

Also note that anything you may have heard about animal mistreatment during filming is a crock of shit. The claims were made by two people who were fired during production, at a much latter date (very close to premiere), and backed by PETA (who is far more reliable than, say, the dozens of New Zealand-specific animal welfare organisations that exist, right?)

[ziroth]

If they keep my favorite parts from the book in it, like the dragon scene... Then Ill be more than satisfied with it

[Taco-Calamitous]

Radagast is briefly mentioned by I think Gandalf in Fellowship of the Ring, and then there's a mention of his vacant house at one point, iirc. According to some Tolkien know it all on either IMDB or TORn, or some other damn thing (I forget where I read it; it was a while ago).

Nah, I didn't get to see it in 48 fps. It's our base theater, and they usually show old movies and stuff. The sound and picture quality was kinda messed at the beginning, and I thought I mgiht not be able to enjoy the movie at first, but then it got better. Anyhoo...

Wuv, Yer Mom

[Mystyrion]

Radagast was in the book, kinda. It's been awhile since I read it, but isn't he the reason Gandalf is missing from the entourage for large chunks of the book? Jackson's pulling in stuff from the appendices (and the Silmarillion?) to make up content, but I really think it should just be one film though. However it's hard to blame Jackson--it was going to be two films way back when Del Toro was going to direct.

It was the appendices published in the back of The Return of the King. They don't have rights to use Silmarillon or The Unfinished Tales.

I don't agree with one film. I agree three is a bit extreme, but I would say that a very large number of the fans of the first trilogy appreciate the Extended versions a lot more than the regular cut.
Two 3 hour movies is where I think I would like it and it could still appeal to major audiences, as it was suppose to be in the first place. But I'm okay with a trilogy.