Welcome to Gaia! ::


Erailea
Honestly, I liked how the Dwarves played with Smaug. It made good note of his vain and arrogant nature, which (evil) dragons are rather known for. Yeah, Samug fell for some of their stunts, but they never actually hurt him. Slowed him down a bit and made him angry, but that's it, so the real joke was on the dwarves who thought they were winning.
I guess I'm just sore from the book is all gonk He was supposed to be calculating and terrifying, not basically tripping over himself if a dwarf so much as moons him.

Magnetic Dog

10,700 Points
  • Elocutionist 200
  • Beta Critic 0
  • Beta Contributor 0
I think it's a matter of separating the book from the flms in your mind. I found that easier to do with the LOTR films for some reason, with this one I was so annoyed at all the alterations I couldn''t enjoy it at all. I guess I'll just go see it again with the right mindset and I'm sure it'll turn out to be a decent flick.

Shadowy Bard

25,900 Points
  • Pieversity 200
  • Survivor 150
  • Megathread 100
I so nobody bothered by the fact that every time someone was saved this ridiculous loud music would play? It was awful.
Also the fact that Thorin threatened Bilbo and he didn't react that much to it. emotion_donotwant
xyinparadise
I so nobody bothered by the fact that every time someone was saved this ridiculous loud music would play? It was awful.
Also the fact that Thorin threatened Bilbo and he didn't react that much to it. emotion_donotwant
I didn't notice the music much in the film, but I saw someone else talking about how bad it was, and how unmemorable it was, and that they should have spent more time composing better music.
Ugh, Thorin, I hated him in the film. emotion_facepalm

Shadowy Bard

25,900 Points
  • Pieversity 200
  • Survivor 150
  • Megathread 100
satan pizza
xyinparadise
Is so nobody bothered by the fact that every time someone was saved this ridiculous loud music would play? It was awful.
Also the fact that Thorin threatened Bilbo and he didn't react that much to it. emotion_donotwant
I didn't notice the music much in the film, but I saw someone else talking about how bad it was, and how unmemorable it was, and that they should have spent more time composing better music.
Ugh, Thorin, I hated him in the film. emotion_facepalm


I normally pay a lot of attention to soundtracks and the first movie had some great music. When I finished watching this one I couldn't remember anything other than how obnoxious it was.

Thorin was a d**k in the book. But in the movie I dislike him more. >.< He is pretty though. XD

Member

One of the things that bothered me all ready in the first movie is that the dwarves are pretty. Was that really necessary? I felt like they did the same thing in the Tintin movie, they made his character less like the original and more of a pretty boy.

Dapper Sex Symbol

12,900 Points
  • PAAANNNTTTSSS 100
  • Battle: Rogue 100
  • Conventioneer 300
Honestly, the only thing this thread proves is that you can't please everybody.

I mean really? We have nothing better to do than eviscerate every tiny detail of what was an incredible movie overall?

Oh, the wizard scene was a tiny bit too long. Oh no, Legolas did some more badass things. Oh no, Tauriel fell for Kili and she has red hair.

No matter what, people will be disappointed. Yeah sure, Legolas was in it, but then again, he WAS an elf from the Woodland Realm, why not? Gimli fell for Galadriel, why can't Kili fall for an elf? Legolas did get a bloody nose at least in his battle with an orc, so it did show us that elves aren't invincible. And besides, Thorin did save his life at one point and I think Tauriel did too. Tauriel also had her life saved by dwarves and Legolas.

And you're really complaining about the wizard light versus darkness thing dragging on too long?! I say it wasn't long enough. I would have preferred more variety, yes, but Gandalf is the Grey for a reason. He is not all-powerful and can only do so much when facing the Necromancer himself. At least the scene was in the movie. I've always wondered about the whole expelling of Sauron from Dol Guldurr as it was never explained in the book other than Gandalf mentioning to Bilbo that he went there and did that with the help of the Wizard's Council.

The numbers don't lie. The majority of people do not share your opinions. These movies are only going to breed more and more devoted fans to the movies and the books. Its not scaring anyone away except for the ultra-uber-nitpicky people, and even then it won't scare you away completely. I do not believe in the least that any of you regret seeing the movie. Just stop over-thinking it to death.

I thought the movie was great and I can't wait for the next. At least they are taking the time to make three movies to include so much more than what they could have had. In the LotR movie trilogy, there were far more parts left-out/added-in than from the books themselves. With The Hobbit trilogy, there is far more here that is in the book. Including the added in stuff like the Azog/Thorin storyline and Kili/Tauriel.

I guarantee that more than half of you will be some of the first ones in line to buy the movie when it comes out on DVD/BluRay.

Witty Shapeshifter

14,800 Points
  • Elocutionist 200
  • Partygoer 500
  • Threadmaster 200
Gabriel Noah Alexander



WARNING WARNING WALL'O'TEXT WARNING WARNING

No, you can't please everyone, but if anything this thread proves the incredible amount of dedication and devotion that Tolkien's works have carried/ gained through Jackson's films.

The Tolkien family didn't like what Jackson did, they didn't want anyone to have access to the series for film/ tv/ etc rights. Had they not become public domain, they never would have allowed him to create the films in the first place.
The Silmarillion was one of the last published works released by JRR, and Jackson has already said, repeatedly mind you, that he will NOT make a film/ etc out of it, the Tolkien family, aside from I believe it is his son or grandson, are not going to hand over the rights, because they do NOT like the films, and it won't go PD for a long while.

So it will not have a film, and given Jackson's success, I don't see anyone else touching it.

- - -

I love Jackson's take on the entire realm of Middle Earth. I don't think anyone could have done it better, given the immense scope of it all. The minute details, the casting, the added/ subtracted details, it all shows that he is a massive fan, as is Philippa Boyens.

But the thing is, The Hobbit has taken a bit of a different style as compared to the first Trilogy.
There is a lot more CGI.
There is a LOT more original material being woven into the already large story.

With the intense love that so many people, myself included, have for both the written and silver screen styles of LoTR and The Hobbit, there is going to be immense criticism, from both sides.

The books can be pretty dry reading.
The movies, at times, are somewhat over embellished.

Again, on Tauriel/ Kili, etc.
(Brace yourselves...)

Tauriel was a very risky move on Jackson/Boyen's part, and thus, there is immense criticism on her character.

There weren't characters completely invented to fill a "need for a female protaganist" in the first trilogy, we had Arwen (emebllished), Eowyn, and Galadriel.
In the Hobbit, they added Tauriel, a complete invention of Jackson and Boyens. And while I am HIGHLY critical of her, the fact is that to those who are keen to the details of the written works, she's all wrong, while those who wanted to see a female on screen, got what they wanted.

Comparing it to the relationship between Gimli and Galadriel, it's different. VERY different.
Gimli and Legolas hated each other at first, remember. They had to warm up to each other.
("I will be dead before I see the ring in the hands of an elf..." -Gimli; Council of Elrond)
Plus, Gimli is a younger generation of dwarf, Gloin's son.
A younger generation that was not directly involved with the loss of Erebor/ other events that led to the distaste between the elves and dwarves. (The Nauglaphring included, I probably butchered the spelling...)

Kili is Thorin's nephew, and third in line for the throne of Erebor, behind Fili. Thorin harbored very strong ill will towards the elves after the Sack of Smaug, and would have raised Kili and Fili in that light, intentionally or not, whenever they were with him rather than their mother Dis, Thorin's sister.
In DoS, Kili was instantly taken by Tauriel, and it was some "Love at first sight" that most people wanted to be avoided completely.

Thorin/ Fili/ Kili were directly influenced by the actions/ lack there of from the elves.
Gimli was not.

Gimli had more of an opportunity to change his outlook, especially considering he faced Galadriel, who was said to be one of the fairest, wisest, and most powerful of the race, and a ring bearer at that, not a sylvan elf of Mirkwood.

Gimli also claimed Galadirel wise and beautiful.
He never truly claimed to be in love with her.
(Plus, Galadriel is married to Celebor, Gimli knew this.)

BUT THEN AGAIN...
A lot of people appreciated the addition, because they want more powerful and admirable women in the movies, that their daughters, sisters, etc, can look up to, much like Disney did with the creation of Merida. Yes, she gives them that. In that way, she served her purpose in that sense.
She's not half naked, she's not a delicate flower, she's not longing to be more beautiful/ a princess/ etc.

But in the end, it won't matter what anyone says, no side of this debate is going to be swayed. It's a hard line.


The same with Azog.
Raising the dead here. I already made my points on this.
It didn't bother me really, just would have preferred less CGI, same with Bolg.

As far as the Necromancer thing and the scenes with Gandalf and Rhadaghast, I have no problems with it, really, as long as they don't summon the Eagles again, I'm just confused as to exactly what Jackson is doing with it.
I have full confidence that he's going to sum it all up wonderfully in TaBA.

I also don't have a problem really with Legolas being in the film. I don't get the bashing towards it. He was still there, he was alive and capable, he just wasn't mentioned.
Embellished.

So, trust me, I am a HUGE fan of the films.
They're burned into my brain, frame per frame, line per line.
As are the books.

It is this dedication of both, that make me so critical of both.
It's not saying they are bad films, I don't get myself why people bash AUJ so much, but I know why they do it.
xyinparadise
satan pizza
xyinparadise
Is so nobody bothered by the fact that every time someone was saved this ridiculous loud music would play? It was awful.
Also the fact that Thorin threatened Bilbo and he didn't react that much to it. emotion_donotwant
I didn't notice the music much in the film, but I saw someone else talking about how bad it was, and how unmemorable it was, and that they should have spent more time composing better music.
Ugh, Thorin, I hated him in the film. emotion_facepalm


I normally pay a lot of attention to soundtracks and the first movie had some great music. When I finished watching this one I couldn't remember anything other than how obnoxious it was.

Thorin was a d**k in the book. But in the movie I dislike him more. >.< He is pretty though. XD
Yeah, I liked the soundtrack for the first movie. It was at least memorable, unlike DoS.
Yeahhh, but I could handle Thorin in the book. He didn't bug me as much for some reason, idk.

Dapper Hunter

2,700 Points
  • Dressed Up 200
  • Hygienic 200
  • Treasure Hunter 100
I Liked It.

Adorable Pumpkin

I loved the movie as a whole.
It wasn't slow and it had funny moments.

I do however didn't enjoy the red-headed elf. I can't spell names, btw.
I felt she was stuck in there... removing this character would have been okay with me.
Seeing that she was thrown in there and wasn't apart of the book, why did PJ do that?
It would be like throwing myself in there. A-HA!

No movie will always follow the book, page by page...
So, if you didn't like it, go make your own version, page by page. YouTube that s**t.

emotion_kirakira
I don't think people are giving this movie enough credit. All the hate towards it isn't needed in my opinion. As a fan of the books, cartoon movies, strips and EU (I know a lot of people hate on extended universes and non-canon, but if you manage to have an entire universe created based around your work, you're doing somethin' right), I quite enjoyed this movie. Yes, there were some parts to it I didn't care for, but it was a great movie over all. As someone mentioned, separate yourself from the book when watching this and enjoy it for what it is. A new version of The Hobbit, created by someone totally different. If you can't enjoy it then, leave it at that. Much like the hate going towards the She-elf. I personally don't think she was needed in this movie. But, she did her role and did it quite well. Besides, people want women these days in movies, among other forms of media. Plus, people loved her. Even people who hated the idea at first. So obviously, somethin was done right in some way.

Wilderness Waffles

24,900 Points
  • Conventioneer 300
  • Toy Drive Tycoon 400
  • Partygoer 500
I enjoyed the movie.
Its been ages since I read the book.

Desirable Lover

9,650 Points
  • Elocutionist 200
  • Ultimate Player 200
  • Brandisher 100
You mean it was stupid for a dragon.. A creature of greed, a creature HUNGRY for HORDES OF GOLD.... To sit and stare... at a statue as big as he was.... of the one thing he loves most....? K.
Honestly, I feel a bit the same about the Hobbit as how I felt about the three Lord of the Rings films. Liked the first film, found the second film to be kind of boring and my least favorite, and then liked the third film. So, I'm hoping the third part of the Hobbit will be the same and I'll like it better than the second as well.

But I guess I have to wait for part 3 to find out. ; . ;

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum