Angry Joe Discusses his Hobbit Experience. Is seeing it in 3D at 48fps really the ultimate viewing experience as Peter Jackson would have us believe? And does the film live up to its source material? Find out!
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
While doing this, one of the artists we were
working with had an idea of creating a new game where a little blue creature jumped
through his levels, similar to Q*bert. For example, there are numerous boss fights
in arcade games that makes it really enjoyable.
This is the “famous Game – Boy Advance emulator” and new games
are being supported all the time.
i fucking love the hobbit, but i dont really like that the guy making the movie is splitting it into three like the fucking lord of the rings. it’s just to build up hype.
I really love The Hobit, but the griffins are lazy as fuck! “yeah my wings are to tired so ill just drop you off on a highest point in middle-earth!” maybe the griffins have something against adventurers….
I just lost a little bit of respect for you for this review.
Shame on you.
its like sex for your eyes
When I saw it in 3D, half of the image seemed to be out of focus, like I was short-sighted, which I am but that’s not the point. The things that DID look good however, were awesome.
great enjoyed it
Actually the D box experience seems much more suited to a picture like ‘Rush’ or a ‘Fast and Furious’ film than something like the Hobbit. Even then we’re talking about a gimmick.
If Hollywood would just get back to the job of trying to make great movies all this stuff would be mute.
Jackson seems to be following firmly in the mold of George Lucas who went from a pretty innovative filmmaker and became this tech whore who is so enamored of what the toys can do that he’s put the storytelling on the backburner.
Jackson fortunately has time honored books as a template, but the urge to add stuff simply because it seems cool and we’ve got the means to actually do it now is slowly (or not so slowly ) creeping into his stuff.
It will be interesting to see what he does on his own once he’s mined the Tolkien stuff for all he can.
When I watched this I genuinely enjoyed it, mainly because of memories of the books. The one thing I didn’t like was that somehow the Albino Ork is still alive, because in the book he was decapitated. The rest of makes sense. Although the other thing that bothers me is that they might make it where they kill the dragon, even though it wasn’t killed until the War of the Ring to prevent it from being used by Sauron.
that’s what i cant stand is 3D like seriously I’m legally blind without my glasses. also i hate when people say oh get contacts seriously i cant my prescription cant be put into contacts true story. so when they put movies in 3D its like F you mate i can’t wear the damn things and when you don’t wear them the screen is like a blue red and green blurry pixelated screen that after 2 minuets of looking at gives you a fucking migraine. 3D can die fast and painfully not slowly because i don’t want it to live long enough to plague more movies!!
the movie itself its awesome i personally loved it except for one part that i wont spoil for everybody but I’m sure its clear which part I’m talking about. overall i liked it.
I enjoyed the Hobbit even though they seem to have derailed from the story of the book at times. There were several scenes I did enjoy very much but quite a few that I thought just could have been done very differently.
1) Bilbo was amazing. Yes, in the book he didn’t have as much of an active role in the action scenes. I personally liked the fact that he solved most of his problems with wit and luck. Thankfully, most of the this stays true in the movie (though there was the scene with the worg riders.) I believe they did the character justice giving him some action in the movie wasn’t a bad thing, but it did feel kinda cheesy.
2) The humor in the movie is excellent. A lot of people have a hard time reading Tolkien because his books can be painfully slow in places making it seem boring (especially since less and less people are into reading nowadays which is a real shame.) Some people think it was a little too humor heavy which, I think, at times made the more dramatic moments a little difficult to take seriously. However, if you look at the difference in scope between the Hobbit and LOTR books, this IS a comparatively minor adventure vs a journey to save the world. I think the humor is a nice addition, but it could be cut down so the serious scenes will have a little more weight. (Personally I can’t wait for the events in Murkwood…really looking forward to the next movie.)
3) Gandalf and Bilbo meet, Party at Bilbo’s, Bilbo and Gollum riddle match scenes were all SPECTACULAR. The troll scene comes close also but they definitely need more scenes like these.
1) The “Pale Orc” was shit. Not only does it feel like a bad cliche, but it’s completely CGI and (while smooth) looks completely unrealistic. The Uruk’hai and orcs from LOTR were all done with makeup and prosthetics and I don’t see why they couldn’t do the same here. Every scene that included him just wrenched me out of the immersion and, quite frankly, SPOILERS I’m seriously disappointed he lived long enough to be in the next movie.
2) The dwarves were SOOOOO bland. Only about three or four showed any semblance of emotion and they weren’t in enough scenes to showcase them. Let me give you a rundown of the dwarf band: Thorin the completely unlikable leader, Balin the wise “grandfatherly” character of the group, two really funny twins, Gimli’s dad Gloin (I think he had two lines the whole movie which is more than most), a gnarly looking bard who tells it like it is, a super fat one, a retard (not the funny, endearing kind), a deaf dwarf, and a handful of others with the collective personality of an Easter Island head. One of the major problems I remember from the books is simply…that I can’t remember ANYTHING about the dwarves! There weren’t nearly enough moments in the book where any of the dwarves stood out as individuals and I thought, what with Jackson splitting the book into three movies, they were going to remedy this and give each character a memorable personality and unique role in the group. Well, they attempted with some of them (though those were pretty bland with the exception of the twins), but the rest were barely given spoken dialogue nor did the majority do anything meaningful or memorable (unless you consider the fat one breaking a table “meaningful.”) They were simply used as filler that caused some form of mischief or another during rest scenes or swung weapons around during fight scenes. For God’s sake, if they do nothing else with future movies, at least make the dwarves actual characters and not filler roles! They’re part of the Goddamn party risking life and limb, throw them a fucking bone! Boromir died in the Fellowship, but he was still an interesting and enjoyable character compared to the dwarf with the black beard who showed up to Bilbo’s house first (whoever can recall his name without Googling it gets a cookie!)
Overall, a solid movie that was fun to experience but ultimately left me feeling a bit empty. LOTR was an epic tale of fellowship, friends, trust, and (of course) kick ass battle sequences. This just felt like a cheap knockoff. The realistic makeup and scenery of the first, while still present in some areas, just don’t seem to pop as much as they used too with the amount of CGI that went into this movie. I thought the scene with the rock giants was AWESOME but there was absolutely NO reason to resort to CGI for the pale orc and just made him feel even more cheap than his presence in the movie already felt. Not really an 8/10 for me, but I’m still looking forward to seeing the others.
I agree. Only real problem is that no dwarves die in the giant seen and the set-up ending.
Joe, are you thinking about reviewing the new Star Trek movie?
I agree with most of what you said about the movie and the gimmicks – damn I hate 3D – and I personally enjoyed the film. Sure I had a couple of favourites as well – Thorin, I loved him – so there is not much reason for me to comment…but I chose to do so, for this:
The eagles are sentient. They are basically people as far as intelligence goes and as far as arrogance well, they have most outmatched. The only reason the eagle King saves Gandalf and his band of merry dwarves when they’re in mortal peril is because Gandalf did the same for him. And he owes him a debt. But he would never be bothered with anything else/less. They aren’t messengers or carriers nor is the dwarves getting back their gold/mountain enough reason for them to risk anything.
So there you go. The eagles would never accept such treatment, for they are proud and stubborn and would consider it beneath them. Hope it answers the question.
Another note on the Eagles; the great eagles are the eyes and ears of Manwe, leader and greatest of the Valar. Besides the fact that that Gandalf saved the king of the eagles, it’s fitting that in a time of great need, that they would lend aid to a Maia. In particular, Gandalf, or Olorin as he was known to the Valar, is said to be of the people of Manwe and his wife Varda. So the Eagles have a vested interest in helping out. However, nothing about acting in the capacity of a taxi service is in their job description. Manwe would not expect the noble Eagles to in such a capacity and it would be in very poor taste for a Maia to ask such of them. They do the bidding of Manwe alone and as such have far more important things to attend to.
[...] The Hobbit 3D [...]
WOW u a bit generous8/10. It is a good movie i realy enjoyed it in most parts. But faaaaaaaaaaar away from an awesome movie.
1. Every emotional scene was SO CHEAP CHEESE and PREDICTABLE. It was lower level compared to some lame TV sieries.
2. Why oh HELL WHY WE NEED HOBITS and DWARFS?! WHEN every single conflict I MEAN EVERY as in ALL CONFLICTS were solved by GANDOLF and dwarfs were just holding him back. Why didnt dwarfs simply asked for Gandolf to go alone and win back their kingdom for them? Why this is not a GANDOLF ALONE movie. Because he is the only one who was doing something towards the goal. Felt like it was a movie about Gandolf and his children who always gets in troble and dady has to come rescue them.
3. Ending……probably the worst ending ever seen in all movies that supose to be good. Seriously i have seen beter endings in STEVEN SEGAL MOVIES Realy.
IT IS A GOOD MOVIE. you have to see it especialy if u are a fan. There are a ton of good stuff. BUT IT IS NOOOT AN AWESOME movie.
The Hobbit was okay but not great. I thought it was way over the top which made me feel like the characters were never in any real danger. What I loved about the book was that when bad things did happen, Bilbo usually survived because he was lucky. The movie felt more like a cartoon adaptation to the book than a true serious adaptation. I also felt splitting the book into three books was unnecessary. I think it would have been more enjoyable as a single 3 hour movie as an adventure movie in the same vein as Willow.
One movie of The Hobbit would not work at all. They would have to rush trough every scene. It happen so much in The Hobbit book that is so simply written, that they would either rush trough every scene or cut most of the cool scenes (like the Troll scene, spider scene etc). And there would be no time for character development! A boring Bilbo, with boring dwarfs (with kickass Gandalf) going on a journey that seems to have a pressed for time…? Good movie? No!
I disagree, Books much thicker and densely plotted than the Hobbit have been successfully adapted into a single film. Hell, today Lawrence of Arabia would clearly have been a trilogy — and it would not have been a better film for it.
This is in most cases an overt Hollywood money grab because they know the fanboys are going to buy it and even justify it. There is no way the hobbit should have been split up into three books considering LoTR got one book per film, and the story of LoTR was several times more epic than the Hobbit. It makes no logical sense.
This movie deserved a 7/10 or less, in my opinion. They absolutely ruined the plot of the book by sensationalizing EVERYTHING!!! In the book, they have to scour the mountains looking for a tiny pass, plagued by the sounds of stone giants fighting every night, somewhere nearby. It was tense, with a stressful tone.
In the movie, they’re thrown into an ACTUAL stone giant battle where there’s so much destruction around them that it’s laughably unrealistic that none of them die. Again and again they take scenes from the book and blow them WAY out of proportion by adding random danger.
Who decided that being stuck in a tree surrounded by wolves and goblins who were planning to burn you out wasn’t enough? “Hey guys, I don’t think this scene has enough danger. What if they were all in just ONE tree, and that tree was on the edge of a massive cliff?”
Also, in the book Bilbo didn’t use his sword until much later, and he never fought any humanoids. He wasn’t a fighter at all! But this movie has him tackling a Warg rider! It’s ridiculous. Now people will look at this movie and say “Well, it’s more of a fantastic story, you can’t expect it to be realistic.” But Tolkien worked very hard to make it believable, and they just threw his effort out the window.
Now, there are two scenes in the movie that are absolutely spot on, and these are the party in Bag End and the conversation with Gollum. The reason these are amazing scenes is because they are the ONLY scenes in the movie that are copied straight out of the book. The dialog with Gollum is almost verbatim, straight from the book for 10 minutes straight and you can tell that it’s higher quality writing than anything else in this movie. It’s just so frustrating to know that they COULD have made it so much better. Many people consider the Hobbit to be a better story than LOTR, but this movie can’t compete at all. All the animation, all the coreography and some of the acting is excellent, if they had just KEPT THE STORY it would have been awesome.
Thank you finally someone else who feels the same way I do, was thinking I was the only one who thought the movie had too MUCH action. Why wasn’t the book good enough for Jackson, I thought the reason for three movies was so they wouldn’t skip anything, NO it was so we can have over the top shit happen where there was a paragraph in the book and so we can screw around with orcs who weren’t even in the F**king book & seriously the last scene in the trees killed the movie for me; just contrived peter jackson bullshit, does not do Tolkien’s work justice.
Long Film???? It’s like 1 hour less that the originals, films that were long as hell and every minute was enjoyable, not many like that exist :S
even the trees fucking walk
Hobbit sucks like lord of the ring
Your a dumbass
you never been on the d box before? I’ve had lots of times in palm beach
I will watch the Movie with my little sister for sure now
We both loved Lord of the Rings (still do and watch it every half a year)
But I won’t look it in 3D. Its irritating and gives me headache….
Hey Anrgy Joe there’s a movie called Fast & Furies 6, and what it is it’s a racing, action movie with more racing, more action and it’s coming out in May 2013 you should check it out. Infact see the over 1,000,000 views trailer.
epic movie…completely loved the story…i actually watched the LOTR trilogy before going to watch this one…completely worth it…dont hate 3D but in some movies its like theres only a couple of scenes shot in 3D…