beschizza — 2013-10-01T10:20:58-04:00 — #1
asdadsas — 2013-10-01T10:53:00-04:00 — #2
The first installment was really a disappointment. Too much flash and not enough substance.
ryjkyj — 2013-10-01T11:06:04-04:00 — #3
I agree but I still liked it. It was still a fun movie to watch.
This next one should be even better though as we'll be treated to an actual three-dimensional representation of New Zealand's trade unions and worker's rights burning in the fire of Smaug.
revtrader — 2013-10-01T11:53:19-04:00 — #4
I think you meant "the next 10 exciting minutes with 190 filler minutes".
csmcdonald — 2013-10-01T12:21:39-04:00 — #5
I'm not sure a trailer is supposed to make me go "Eh, I'll wait for the Bluray" - too much padding, too much stuff not in the book, too dark and dreary looking when compared to the tone of the book.
martin_greve — 2013-10-01T12:29:17-04:00 — #6
I'm still hoping for the "director's cut" that will halve the playing time of these.
solstone — 2013-10-01T12:29:33-04:00 — #7
If they are still planning on this being 3 movies (3 loooong and dull and over-padded movies) then I am not going to bother to watch the next two. I gave the first one a shot, and was sorely disappointed. It made all the mistakes they had so successfully avoided with LOTR. The special effects were obvious and garish, often looking like video game cutscenes. Way too much CG, instead of the great mix of CG and handmade models, etc. And all the padding... ludicrous.
I hope when all 3 are done that Jackson releases a director's cut version that is one movie. That might be worth watching...
(Although I will likely watch if there are Rifftrax done for them, as Mike, Bill and Kevin are capable of making even the worst films enjoyable.)
mrmark — 2013-10-01T12:48:23-04:00 — #8
The next movie will be "The Dwarven Hoard and Out of Control Inflation in the Dwarf Economy"
andrew_tubbiolo — 2013-10-01T12:57:09-04:00 — #9
I like this version of the movie better.
crashproof — 2013-10-01T16:11:13-04:00 — #10
Just to be contrary: though I agree that the Hobbit shouldn't have been turned into 3 movies, and some of the (weirdly bloodless) CGI was not up to snuff at all, and I still don't think I like the extra-goofified Radagast...
I enjoyed the first movie. It more or less follows bits from appendices and whatnot, instead of being made up completely by PJ. And there was lots of stuff there to feed LOTR nerdery.
And while I'm had it, I don't like Breaking Bad and am tired of hearing about it, and your favorite band sucks. So there. /grump
brainspore — 2013-10-01T16:16:50-04:00 — #11
$150 million and they still can't find a set designer who knows what a safety handrail is.
ocker3 — 2013-10-02T10:08:24-04:00 — #12
My only complaint about the first Hobbit film was that some scenes seemed to play at 1.5 to 2x the expected speed, but it didn't feel like they were supposed to. I mean, it wasn't written, directed by or star Benny Hill...
drawnonglass — 2013-10-02T10:23:47-04:00 — #13
"Smowg"? Is that really right?
beschizza — 2013-10-06T10:20:59-04:00 — #14
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.