Yeah the dialogue there was fucking diabolical.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
I just saw the last Hobbit movie AKA The Hobbit: TBOTFA Spoiler Thread *SPOILERS*
- Thread starter Vashetti
- Start date
- Status
Yeah the dialogue there was fucking diabolical.
Edmond Dantès
Dantès the White
As far as the Legendarium is concerned, he had his own designs of dominion over Middle-earth. By aligning himself with Sauron he gained valuable time. Saruman intended to usurp Sauron eventually.
He was one of Aulë's Maiar, just as Sauron was before him, thus was well versed in ring forging. He went so far as to forge his own Ring, although it was far lesser in stature than the Rings of Power due to gaps in his knowledge in comparison to Sauron who also had the tutelage of the greatest of all the Ainu; Melkor.
Just watched it:
+ World-building - I think that's the one thing Jackson does well consistently
+ Certain character shots were really pretty (Bilbo+Gandalf sitting as well as several of their other scenes near the end, Thorin's monologue scene etc.)
+ Character building scenes (few as there were) worked
+ DolGoldur scenes worked for most part
- Jackson can't shoot battles - period. Somehow every single time he touches one it has no tension whatsoever. The only time he made one kind of work was TwoTowers and that only because it was so dark you couldn't see anything.
- Most of the second half of the movie
- Comic book one-liners - especially from Elrond/Saruman
- Comic book fights/deaths - over and over and over again
- The continued "hint hint nudge wink wink LOTR wink wink" - it's just fan-service, noone but fans will even get it so why beat people over the head with it?
Still preferred it to last two - if only for some of the high moments (the return to bag-end being one of those). Though I can't help but be reminded of SW prequels (battle-scenes being basically the same nonsensical no-tension CG fest that you just want to skip through).
+ World-building - I think that's the one thing Jackson does well consistently
+ Certain character shots were really pretty (Bilbo+Gandalf sitting as well as several of their other scenes near the end, Thorin's monologue scene etc.)
+ Character building scenes (few as there were) worked
+ DolGoldur scenes worked for most part
- Jackson can't shoot battles - period. Somehow every single time he touches one it has no tension whatsoever. The only time he made one kind of work was TwoTowers and that only because it was so dark you couldn't see anything.
- Most of the second half of the movie
- Comic book one-liners - especially from Elrond/Saruman
- Comic book fights/deaths - over and over and over again
- The continued "hint hint nudge wink wink LOTR wink wink" - it's just fan-service, noone but fans will even get it so why beat people over the head with it?
Still preferred it to last two - if only for some of the high moments (the return to bag-end being one of those). Though I can't help but be reminded of SW prequels (battle-scenes being basically the same nonsensical no-tension CG fest that you just want to skip through).
Patrick Bateman
Member
Shining Sunshine
Banned
I find myself watching LotR a bunch nowadays.
Peter Jackson really didn't have great setpieces for the last movie like Return of the King.
Pretty disappointing.
Peter Jackson really didn't have great setpieces for the last movie like Return of the King.
Pretty disappointing.
Just got back, its a good film and as a casual LOTR fan I really enjoyed it without getting caught up in how accurate it is. Not as good as the previous 2, I loved DOS, UJ was great too. No where near the original LOTR apart from Martin Freeman portrayal, he nailed Bilbo and was not only the highlight of the trilogy he was the best hobbit out of the 6 movies. Loved every scene he was in.
I really didn't care for the explicit Sauron reveal. To me it cheapens his return in LOTR.
Luckily the prologue in Fellowship effectively explains things leading up to that point.
Edit:
Freeman was excellent. As was Lee Pace and Richard Armitage(in the 3rd movie). Of course Ian McKellan will always be Gandalf.
Luckily the prologue in Fellowship effectively explains things leading up to that point.
Edit:
Freeman was excellent. As was Lee Pace and Richard Armitage(in the 3rd movie). Of course Ian McKellan will always be Gandalf.
Megalosaro
Banned
I thought whoever did Bard did a pretty good job. I found him pretty likeable.
GregLombardi
Member
I saw the film a few days ago. I wanted to let my opinion settle before writing my thoughts.
This 3rd Hobbit film was easily the worst of all 6, and possibly the worst Jackson film I have ever seen. It violated nearly every principle of Film 101, from lack of proper tension, to lack of proper character building and story continuity, etc.
Why did the stone cold Elf King suddenly find his emotion once again during the love scene with Tauriel and her dead dwarf?
Why was this film so incredibly awkwardly paced?
Others have already asked the same questions that popped into my mind, so I won't retread. I was incredibly disappointed. I'd give it a 6/10 and would feel that is generous.
I did feel there were some positives:
1. Legolas' absolutely insane stunts / antics
2. The battle with Sauron himself [Galadriel]
3. The love scene with the dead dwarf excluding the contradictory character of the Elf King was actually touching
4. The auction scene at the end.
Other than that....blech. I'll watch all 6 and hope it works together better than apart.
This 3rd Hobbit film was easily the worst of all 6, and possibly the worst Jackson film I have ever seen. It violated nearly every principle of Film 101, from lack of proper tension, to lack of proper character building and story continuity, etc.
Why did the stone cold Elf King suddenly find his emotion once again during the love scene with Tauriel and her dead dwarf?
Why was this film so incredibly awkwardly paced?
Others have already asked the same questions that popped into my mind, so I won't retread. I was incredibly disappointed. I'd give it a 6/10 and would feel that is generous.
I did feel there were some positives:
1. Legolas' absolutely insane stunts / antics
2. The battle with Sauron himself [Galadriel]
3. The love scene with the dead dwarf excluding the contradictory character of the Elf King was actually touching
4. The auction scene at the end.
Other than that....blech. I'll watch all 6 and hope it works together better than apart.
Just saw it. It was good but could have been better. Thought the soundtrack was kind of underwhelming. The dwarven theme battle theme was overused in the first movie but would have been quite epic in one or two scenes in this one. And the fight choreography is impressive as always, especially how elves are portrayed in battle. I love the way Legolas dances about the battlefield and the scene with his father crashing through the gates of the city and tearing through a pack of orcs was amazing.
Also, just how goddamn powerful is Galadriel? Does she outpower the wizards?
Also, just how goddamn powerful is Galadriel? Does she outpower the wizards?
Short answer is yes, but there's a lot more detail in the link. Spoilers if you ever plan to read The Silmarillion.
http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/g/galadriel.html
http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/g/galadriel.html
Thing with power in Tolkien-verse is that most of it comes down to contest of wills, which is why it's directly implied even lesser creatures can attain great power (Frodo was for instance, able to actually use the power of the ring himself, unlike the other bearers before him, so with the right training he could very well rise to power himself).ElyrionX said:
On top of that - Galadriel is one of the oldest people alive (she's been around since before the first age), and one of the elven ring-bearers - with her ring power being chiefly protection against evil.
The written canon never pits her against a Maiar directly - but there have been elven lords who fought, and even killed Balrogs, and one that gravely injured Morgoth himself, suggesting the powers aren't as absolute as all that.
Also note Sauron was able to bend Saruman's mind through Palantir use - but he was resisted by Aragorn, who was after all just a human.
ScottSullivan
Member
I thought that was really well done also. They bring in a lot of stuff from the apendicies and fellowship of the ring about Bilbo's extended family and hobbit.
The fucking spoons had me laughing because they spend like a page talking about that in FOTR
So is it out of the question to imagine that someone like Eonwe could defeat Tulkas?
I really don't care for Tulkas. >.>
Basileus777
Member
I saw this yesterday, and like the First Hobbit film (never saw the 2nd one), it felt like there was a core of a good film in there that was lost in Peter Jackson's self-indulgence. Cut 40 minutes off the run time and it'd be much better.
The Shogun
Banned
Saw this last night, and while I did have issues with it, I thought it was by far the best of The Hobbit films.
DonMigs85
Member
Read the Ars Technica review and you'll probably rethink your position.
Hasphat'sAnts
Member
The movie managed to disappoint even with my already modest expectations. Shame too since there's a good movie there if Peter Jackson actually had control over his material.
Just aimless and all over the place.
Agree in principle but might need more than that.
Should've been 90minutes.
Just aimless and all over the place.
Agree in principle but might need more than that.
Should've been 90minutes.
Just because you agree with that review doesn't mean reading it will change anyone else's minds.
Yupp. Engaging in civil discourse over art rarely sheds light on anything.
DonMigs85
Member
You never know - it may trigger sudden realizations.
Wait. What is this with Frodo and the ring of power? Didn't he only use it to turn invisible like Bilbo?
Hasphat'sAnts
Member
I think people would've cared more about Kili dying if he had, you know, more than 2 minutes of screen time to himself out of a movie with 144. At least Thorin's death is earned.
What a pointless and hollow side story.
What a pointless and hollow side story.
Technosteve
Banned
i thought the ring bilbo has transports the user to another realm
MR BLACKMAGIK
Member
I really didn't like how the movie was called "The Battle of the FIVE Armies". What five? Orcs, dwarves, and elves were the only armies I saw. A band of rag tag refugee humans are not an army. There were two separate orc armies, but they both fall under Orc in my book. A few grunt style goblins for one of the orc armies don't count separate to me either. I've also read some places that listed the eagles as an army. Don't make me laugh.
I liked the movie, I just couldn't get over that point.
I liked the movie, I just couldn't get over that point.
There were a lot of good individual pieces of a movie here but I agree that it lacked cohesion of any real sort. Also I think my wife commented on the drama the best: the drama was so, so overwrought it was just cringe worthy.
Favorite bits:
Even some parts I liked, like DolGoldur, had serious issues overall. The three of us that saw it, all fans of the books, had to pool what we noticed in that scene to figure out wtf happened, and there's still questions. We decided it was the Witch King, not Sauron himself, that was the big figure there, with Sauron's eye sort of behind him, although a lot of people in this thread keep saying Sauron so I'm not as sure anymore.
The fight between Thorin and Azog would have been better without the video-game-physics of Azog going under and popping back up, it just looked incredibly dumb and you knew it was going to happen as soon as he went under.
I mostly just hope there's a true fan edit of the three EE someday I can see, there's a lot of good film here and it just needs some love.
Edit: Just because the forces of a fantasy world don't conform to your idea of infantry units doesn't mean they aren't an army
It was the combined orc/goblins as one, humans another, dwarves, elves, and yes eagles. Essentially 4 groups allied against 1 group, but those 4 groups were still distinct and often fighting their own battles within the greater battle.
Favorite bits:
- The ending was great
- Bilbo chucking rocks at 100 MPH at orc heads was excellent
- Everyone giving up questioning how the hell Bilbo gets everywhere was amusing
- I guess almost every scene with Bilbo was ok in my book
Even some parts I liked, like DolGoldur, had serious issues overall. The three of us that saw it, all fans of the books, had to pool what we noticed in that scene to figure out wtf happened, and there's still questions. We decided it was the Witch King, not Sauron himself, that was the big figure there, with Sauron's eye sort of behind him, although a lot of people in this thread keep saying Sauron so I'm not as sure anymore.
The fight between Thorin and Azog would have been better without the video-game-physics of Azog going under and popping back up, it just looked incredibly dumb and you knew it was going to happen as soon as he went under.
I mostly just hope there's a true fan edit of the three EE someday I can see, there's a lot of good film here and it just needs some love.
Edit: Just because the forces of a fantasy world don't conform to your idea of infantry units doesn't mean they aren't an army
It was the combined orc/goblins as one, humans another, dwarves, elves, and yes eagles. Essentially 4 groups allied against 1 group, but those 4 groups were still distinct and often fighting their own battles within the greater battle.
Solidsoul
Banned
The Dwarves, Elves and Men are all fair armies. There is an entire town of people with hundreds going to battle, this easily counts as an army. Those three are for sure "Solid" armies.
In the book, the other two armies are Goblins and Wargs. But Tolkien states many times that Goblins and Orcs are the same thing, though Peter Jackson made Goblins something different. So it ends up being two different types of Orc that flesh out the last two armies. The eagles are not one and the Wargs don't get a spot in the battle. The 100 Goblins we see are just a mercenary group and do not count as an army in the film either.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
It was stupid in the books, but there are definitely five separate factions; eagles, dwarfs, humans, elves and orcs. Wargs were there own faction in the book iirc.
It was Sauron, with the nine Nazgul in front of him.
Did you not watch the previous Hobbit movies?
Then maybe you should read one of the 60% of reviews of the movie that are positive and experience your own sudden realizations.
Jibber Hack
Member
Saw this last night. I don't get the hate.
I feel that if we had these films first, the reception would be much warmer. It's clear that these films are bloated and could use a lot of trimming. I could have used a lot less Legolas and the death of Smaug should have been handled in the second movie. But there are a lot of great moments that were captured. The biggest failing of the films is that we just don't care as much about the relationships as we did in the LOTR trilogy. The only time I felt any emotion was at the conclusion of AUJ where the dwarves finally accept Bilbo into as a part of the company. That was the only moment where I felt that Thorin rivaled Aragorn as a man that warranted allegiance. In the next two films I never felt the same spark with any of the characters.
I will have to think long and hard about it, but I don't know what it is exactly that is to blame for this. Whether it's the acting, or the writing, or the direction.
As far as quality is concerned, I think that the films are fine. I cannot wait until I can watch them in order and really compare the films and my feelings watching them all together.
I feel that if we had these films first, the reception would be much warmer. It's clear that these films are bloated and could use a lot of trimming. I could have used a lot less Legolas and the death of Smaug should have been handled in the second movie. But there are a lot of great moments that were captured. The biggest failing of the films is that we just don't care as much about the relationships as we did in the LOTR trilogy. The only time I felt any emotion was at the conclusion of AUJ where the dwarves finally accept Bilbo into as a part of the company. That was the only moment where I felt that Thorin rivaled Aragorn as a man that warranted allegiance. In the next two films I never felt the same spark with any of the characters.
I will have to think long and hard about it, but I don't know what it is exactly that is to blame for this. Whether it's the acting, or the writing, or the direction.
As far as quality is concerned, I think that the films are fine. I cannot wait until I can watch them in order and really compare the films and my feelings watching them all together.
I'm not a huge expert on LotR stuff, but I think his 'real' name is Elessar which means 'hope' in elvish. So I think 'finding his real name' was a double entendre about finding out what Aragon's true place in everything is. At least, that's how I interpreted it.
That's a great note. Thanks.
Did he not only get that name when he was crowned King?
No, he's always Elessar.
DrForester
Kills Photobucket
Elessar is the name of the stone that Galadrial gives Aragorn, and he later takes the name at his coronation. Fulfilling Gandalf's prophecy when he first came to Middle Earth when he gave the stone to Galadrial, that she would pass it to someone who will also be called Elessar. The line of ownership is a bit odd. Galadrial gave the stone to her daughter, Celebrain, who would then give it to her daughter, Arwen. In the films, they just have Arwen give him the stone, but in the books, it was returned to Galadrial at some point before Fellowship.
Estel is elvish for "hope", and was the name given to Aragorn when he was fostered in Rivendell by Elrond, who wanted to keep his identity a secret.
AwakenedCloud
Member
This was my first experience with the Lord of the Rings universe, and I enjoyed it. I'm left with one single question. Is the rest of the series an Anime as well? Every action scene and romance scene seemed like it came straight out of Japan.
AwakenedCloud
Member
Ain't nobody got time for that. I struggle getting through a two hour movie. No way I'm touching that series unless they release abridged editions.
You've gotten into the wrong series.
Mister Wilhelm
Member
This was probably the worst of the three.
It reached Michael Bay levels of stupid in the action at times. I swear Peter Jackson is the only director I've ever seen that can make 45 straight minutes of fantasy warfare feel boring.
The battles were worse than than the LOTR trilogy by far.
It reached Michael Bay levels of stupid in the action at times. I swear Peter Jackson is the only director I've ever seen that can make 45 straight minutes of fantasy warfare feel boring.
The battles were worse than than the LOTR trilogy by far.
Saw it Christmas and loved it. Aside from the unneccessary Kili Tauriel thing, my one complaint would be tha Bilbo's parting from the Dwarves felt less emotional than it should have. Oh, and Smaug shouldve died last film.
But stuff like Thorin they nailed. Just wish the Eagles characters hadnt been cut.
But stuff like Thorin they nailed. Just wish the Eagles characters hadnt been cut.
WadiumArcadium
Member
You'd be denying yourself a great experience. Just watch it in bits if it's too long for you.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked