'the Hobbit' Film / Dvd - Is It Me?

[Mosaic]

Or is it actually really a very well made pile of nonsense? Endured the full three hours last night and it seemed, as they say. loosely based on an idea by JRR Tolkien. I'm quite prepared to accept this is one of my many bah-humbug reactions but I'd be interested to learn how others feel about this production.

[jno]

fantasy films are always going to be nonsense; orcs don't exist and so on. My main beef is it was far too long. There's just not three hours' worth of narrative in it (let alone nine hours once the whole lot is made). It's got nothing like the length or density of Lord of the Rings.

[jim360]

I watched it at the cinema. Couldn't quite make up my mind if it was a bad film, or just a good one made to look bad because I was comparing it with the Lord of the Rings Trilogy. Will need to watch again to make sure, my gut feeling is that it was alright but a shade overlong and the extended action sequences towards the end (Escape from Goblins to be caught be wolves!) were too tiring being so close to each other.

[AB Editor]

You're not alone - I've heard many reactions similarly disappointed. It's impressive that they've turned a very short, and sometimes simple, book into a trilogy... each part likely to be of three hour length.

Those who have loved it tend to suggest it wasn't long enough!

I've yet to see it, I've been put off by the length.

[jno]

maybe the "director's cut" DVD will involve slashing seven hours out of it instead of expanding it in the usual fashion?

[jim360]

Ha-ha!

[Mosaic]

Yes Jim - I grew weary of the phrase, 'Run!' They seemed to run all the way tothe Lonely Mountain, or was it the Lonesome Pine....
I was especially annoyed by the manipulation of the finding of the ring and the persona of Gollum in the riddles scene.
What was the Brown Wizard all about?

[Mosaic]

I also thought the envisioning of the Shire looked more like Tellytubby land than the rural English idyll implied by Tolkien.

[belrec]

As a lifelong tolkein fan and lover of both the hobbit and lotr books, i fail to see how they are going to stretch it out to 9 hours.

Dont get me wrong loved the interpretation of the lotr films but as jim360 says there is just not the depth in the hobbit for it.

will still probably see them all tho but not paying £8 at the cinema :-)

[Frank97]

I thought it was alright but not great. Having not read the books, is that really the end of the story or is there another film to come?

[jno]

I suspect it was the other way round and the tellytubbies designer was influenced by Tolkien in his vision of an old England for small people (it also looks vaguely like Nutwood Common in the Rupert stories); but personally I don't think I could have come up with a better design

[Sharingan]

It's much slower than Lord of The Rings and hard to take quite as seriously despite the risk to life and limb of all the characters. The highlight for me was Andy Serkis again as Golem, other than that I could take it or leave it.

[jim360]

There are apparently two more to come. I think it's possible to flesh it out, the plan is clearly to link the Hobbit and LOTR far more deeply than was originally the case. The Hobbit was written first, and then Tolkien expanded the world for LOTR.

The Brown Wizard is Radagast, who has a bit part in the Fellowship of the Ring and possibly the Hobbit too, though it's been a while since I read it. He's there to help link the two trilogies as they're going to focus a lot more on where Gandalf went while the Dwarves and Bilbo travelled through Mirkwood.

Whether or not this attempt to deepen the story will work we'll find out. I think that they may find it a stretch for a film, and yet bizarrely part of the reason for the length is that they've missed little if anything out and put stuff in! By contrast LOTR skipped absolutely loads -- many of Frodo's adventures travelling to Rivendell (Tom Bombadil), for example, and what happened after.

[ninja]

I watched it last night and was left a bit bemused by it. I cant honestly say if i liked it or not. Knowing it was part one of a trilogy helped as the ending seemed a good place to break. I think it will need another viewing to decide if I enjoyed it. It is extremely good to look at and certain parts are played extremely well, but as whole? I don't know...yet.