Jackson to do The Hobbit, after all?

[Incendiary_Lemon]

I’m an hour into the fan edit - it’s vastly improved, but you’ll notice a few continuity issues.

edit1,

I’m at 1:33 and I’ve experienced only two cringers. The plate throwing scene, and Beorn’s introduction. Dislike of those aside, it’s possible to actually enjoy this version of the Hobbit.

[Dave_Markell]

@Incendiary Lemon

I’ve enjoyed reading your comments, not to mention John’s and Desslock’s.

Thank you, o burning citrus. It’s been a fun thread.

The series was such a missed opportunity.

That it was.

[Dave_Markell]

Today’s bumping of this thread made me want a refresher on its history. Start to finish, it’s a great read, and there were some dead-on predictions about how the films would turn out. Desslock and that Dave Markell guy really nailed it, even when they thought there were going to just be two movies and no bridge film instead of three:

@Dave Markell

The Hobbit is well-suited to be a stand alone film. A single movie wouldn’t cram the storyline of the book at all, whereas two films will stretch it out. The content of the extra events also worries me now. There’s a great deal of material in Tolkien that could be used to make a “bridge film” faithful to the books. By contrast, the only event that occured offscreen during the course of The Hobbit is the White Council’s attack on Dol Guldur. I’m fearful that Jackson will decide that’s not enough and pad it with a bunch of bad “Gandalf falls off a cliff” scenes of his own invention, much like the the bad “Aragorn falls off a cliff” scenes we got in the LOTR trilogy.

@Desslock

My main concern with this movie isn’t the casting - it’s a fear that Jackson has gone Lucas.

He made a really solid Fellowship of the Ring, and directors cut of Two Towers - like Lucas and Star Wars/Empire.

Return of the King had some of the best stuff in the series, but all of it was filmed pre-release of Fellowship of the Ring – the stuff Jackson added in afterwards was all terrible (the bouncing on the bed scene, some of over-the-top Denethor stuff) and his cuts were nonsensical and damaged the film (removing Saruman’s fate, when he was the only “tangible” villain in the story; removing the confrontation between Gandalf as leader of the Minas Tirith forces and the Witch king, leader of the attackers).

…and then came King Kong, in which Jackson really continued his indulgences to the detriment of the film (and his edits for the theatrical version were, again, strange and weakened the film - like the swamp scene, which was perhaps the best creature scene in the movie). King Kong was just a bloated, self-indulgent mess that was far worse than the movie it was remaking.

So I’m really concerned that the Hobbit(s) will be a Star Wars-prequel level disappointment. Bah.

[AustinArlitt]

@Dave Markell

I love/hate seeing this thread bumped. It contains some of my all-time favorite QT3 discussions, but it’s also about the most disappointing films I’ve ever seen. Well, I saw two of them, anyway, and only paid for one. As a huge Tolkien nerd, I’ve been waiting for a great treatment of this book for more than 40 years. I’m still waiting.

I’m glad I’m not the only one who was so apathetic I didn’t even bother to see the third film.

[tomchick]

The third one is actually the best, and arguably worth seeing if you were bored out of your skull by the first two. It’s just wall-to-wall CG fighting sequences, some of them pretty cool.

-Tom

[Woolen_Horde]

@Tom Chick

The third one is actually the best, and arguably worth seeing if you were bored out of your skull by the first two. It’s just wall-to-wall CG fighting sequences, some of them pretty cool.

-Tom

Ugh, I finally saw the third one on Blu-Ray a couple months ago. Those “battle scenes” bored the hell out of me. The movie simply would not end.

[Incendiary_Lemon]

@Woolen Horde

Ugh, I finally saw the third one on Blu-Ray a couple months ago. Those “battle scenes” bored the hell out of me. The movie simply would not end.

Si.

Do you remember the lense flare era? It was the overtop feature of the week for a while there. Every game had to have it.

Eventually we realized that it was a bit silly and toned it down to something sensible. You don’t even notice it’s there anymore.

I feel that way about film CGI, the Hobbit being a good example of that.

We haven’t realized that restraint is a virtue yet.

@Austin Arlitt

I’m glad I’m not the only one who was so apathetic I didn’t even bother to see the third film.

I rented the Hobbit when it hit release, and even then I fast forwarded through a fair bit of it.

The fan edit certainly makes it much more watchable, but you do run into continuity issues. The bigger issue is that it remains a Jackson film with the swelling music and over the top directorial cues. More critically, those battle scenes at the end are a bit of a mess. If you like CGI - you’ll be entertained, but if you’ve grown weary of it. You’re going to tune out immediately.

When I hit that bit I started thinking about my laundry.

By the time I came back the movie was done, but that was fine with me.

[Profanicus]

@Incendiary Lemon

I feel that way about film CGI, the Hobbit being a good example of that.

We haven’t realized that restraint is a virtue yet.

I think we may have, finally and thankfully. The backlash has started, with a couple of recent examples trumpeting the return to more practical effects including Fury Road and The Force Awakens.

@Austin Arlitt

I’m glad I’m not the only one who was so apathetic I didn’t even bother to see the third film.

I haven’t seen the third film yet either, and I’m not sure I ever will.

[tomchick]

@Profanicus

I think we may have, finally and thankfully. The backlash has started, with a couple of recent examples trumpeting the return to more practical effects including Fury Road and The Force Awakens.

Wait, what? Practical effects in Force Awakens? Actually, I don’t think I want to know. I’ll wait and find out for myself. But at this point, I flat out don’t believe that they’re doing it with practical effects instead of CG.

But I do think people would be pretty surprised at how much CG was in Fury Road. Warner Bros. really sold this idea that it was all practical effects as part of the marketing, but that’s a lot of hooey. The thing about Fury Road is that the CG is just really well done.

-Tom

[AustinArlitt]

I think Star Wars is just like Fury Road, in that they actually built lots of physical props & sets (even that little BB-8 guy is a real droid who can roll out on set & everything), and then they layer the CG on top of that.

As opposed to the prequels, which were literally filmed with actors on green screens for the most part.

@Tom Chick

The third one is actually the best, and arguably worth seeing if you were bored out of your skull by the first two. It’s just wall-to-wall CG fighting sequences, some of them pretty cool.

-Tom

The only scenes I can even recall liking, or recall at all for that matter, were the unexpected party, the riddles in the cave, and the opening conversation with Smaug, which petered out (pun intended?) into boring action all too quickly.

I don’t think I can handle any more forgettable action.

[Profanicus]

@Tom Chick

Wait, what? Practical effects in Force Awakens? Actually, I don’t think I want to know. I’ll wait and find out for myself. But at this point, I flat out don’t believe that they’re doing it with practical effects instead of CG.

But I do think people would be pretty surprised at how much CG was in Fury Road. Warner Bros. really sold this idea that it was all practical effects as part of the marketing, but that’s a lot of hooey. The thing about Fury Road is that the CG is just really well done.

-Tom

I didn’t mean no CG and all practical, I meant ‘showing restraint’ - they’re absolutely still using a ton of CG in Force Awakens. :)

But they’re going on location, building actual sets, using puppetry, and enhancing with CG rather than doing everything digitally. And they’ve been trumpeting that increase in practical in the marketing, much like Fury Road did.

[Incendiary_Lemon]

@Profanicus

I think we may have, finally and thankfully. The backlash has started, with a couple of recent examples trumpeting the return to more practical effects including Fury Road…

They did a wonderful job grounding all of their effects. Anything that requires motion appears very real.

It gives one hope.

I haven’t seen the third film yet either, and I’m not sure I ever will.

I wouldn’t feel compelled.

[Soren_Hoglund]

@Incendiary Lemon

They did a wonderful job grounding all of their effects. Anything that requires motion appears very real.

That’s because it’s mostly “real”, i.e someone being thrown off an exploding car in a shot is usually a stuntman being thrown off an exploding car. They’ve used cg to erase the safety rigs, composited it into a shot with some other action, and more like as not replaced the background, but the actual motion is genuine, which is why it looks so good.

[Daagar]

Watched the whole 3 hour edited edition. Very well done, considering he had to scrap 5.5 hours worth of film to get it down to that length. It is very heavy on the first movie, then the following two are a whirlwind and the discontinuities really start to show. Not much you can really do about this, considering he was taking out huge swaths of plot lines. I’m not entirely sure someone could watch just this version and be satisfied, or even claim to know what just happened. But for anyone that really enjoys Martin Freeman as Bilbo but didn’t want to sit through all the other stuff again, this is how you do it. I think some things may have been more clear if he allowed himself to go to 3.5-4 hours.

The only omission I was disappointed about, apparently being part dwarf myself, was the opening of the first movie where they show Ironforge^H^H^H^H^H Erebor in all its glory before the destruction. I’m a sucker for that stuff.

[Alan_Dunkin]

Wait, so the scene in Fury Road with the sandstorm and tornadoes and exploding car and bodies flying around was CG? Wow. :p

I think Force Awakens will still have lot of CG, but will be a lot of restraint too. Well, compared to the SW prequels, anything is restraint. The Hobbit is probably a step below that, but…

Still the third movie is just not great. Worse, the battle sequences were incredibly disappointing and barely made sense. And the dwarf leader dude was all CG. What the heck was that for???

— Alan

[Telefrog]

Well there it is.

A PRODUCTION OF NEW LINE CINEMA AND METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER PICTURES, THE FINAL FILM IN THE EPIC THE HOBBIT TRILOGY, ARRIVES ON BLU-RAY™, DVD AND DIGITAL HD FROM WARNER BROS. HOME ENTERTAINMENT GROUP

BLU-RAY™ and DVD ARRIVE ON NOVEMBER 17

OWN IT EARLY On DIGITAL HD ON OCTOBER 20

EXTENDED EDITION FEATURES A 20-MINUTE LONGER CUT AND

MORE THAN NINE HOURS OF NEW SPECIAL FEATURES

The Hobbit Trilogy Extended Edition Also Available on Blu-ray 3D™, Blu-ray™, DVD and Digital HD

Burbank, CA, August 25, 2015 – The adventures of Bilbo Baggins come to an epic conclusion when “The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies” from Academy Award®-winning* filmmaker Peter Jackson, is released as an Extended Edition on Blu-ray, DVD and Digital HD from Warner Bros. Home Entertainment Group. A production of New Line Cinema and Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Pictures (MGM), the extended cut of the final film in The Hobbit Trilogy includes 20 minutes of extra footage and more than 9 hours of bonus features that will complete every Hobbit fan’s collection. The film, the third in a trilogy of films adapting the enduringly popular masterpiece The Hobbit, by J.R.R. Tolkien, will be available on Blu-ray and DVD on November 17 and will be available early on Digital HD on October 20.

In addition, The Hobbit Trilogy Extended Edition will also be available, featuring the extended editions of all three films in The Hobbit Trilogy – The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug and The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies.

The nine plus hours of new special features boasts audio commentary with Peter Jackson, the film’s director/producer/screenwriter, and Philippa Boyens, co-producer/screenwriter, as well as The Appendices, a multi-part documentary focusing on various aspects of the film and the Trilogy.

Rating: R

Run Time: 164 min

Blu-ray: $35.99 SRP

DVD: $34.99 SRP

[Dave_Markell]

Yay. 5

[Gedd]

Wow, R rating on this? I held off buying the theatrical versions because of the three sets of LotR DVDs/Blu-Rays I’ve got on the shelf, but now I’ve got to wait and see what the R rating is about. I’m not sure how logical that decision (releasing an R-rated Director’s Cut) is when this is so clearly targeted to kids.

[Telefrog]

Oh, I guess this is why we didn’t see Alfrid die in the theatrical release.

https://youtu.be/HfB4OK33LkY

Fucking terrible.

[rowe33]

I’m just glad this trilogy came out after the LotR or who knows how terrible that would have been.