Duck, it's the Film Curmudgeon! (Non-spoilery short overview of The Hobbit.)

[amanuensis1]

The Hobbit: Way, way, WAY too long. I was writhing. There's some genuinely charming stuff in there, but most scenes are five times as long as they should be, and every major scene is played out five times over. Pacing, Peter, PACING. The Hobbit is an entertaining, nicely-paced book. Why bog it down so badly with all that extra filler?

(Except The Riddle Game. The Riddle Game was fabulous. The movie should have been The Riddle Game plus one hour. And that's all it should have been.)

My suggestion: stay home, wait for someone to cobble together a heavily edited-down version. You won't, but if you did I think you'd be happier.

Peter, you've got a chance to correct this with the next two. Edit them down. Don't pull a Lucas on us.

(Nothing to do with the film content, but I absolutely hated the 48 fps release. It looked like videotape. Please do not let this be a trend that lasts, ugh.)

Comments

[ook.livejournal.com]

Next two? I thought The Hobbit was just going to be two films?

[golden-bastet.livejournal.com]

B-but - Martin Freeman.

Really: Martin Freeman.

Where is the Martin Freeman love? ;_;

[the_con_cept.livejournal.com]

Yeah, at best I'm hearing pretty lukewarm stuff about it. Very disappointing. On the other hand, Tolkien had a big problem with that himself, so at least it's true to its creator? *sigh* I will definitely wait. I can't afford it right now anyway. But yeah, I've heard terrible things about the 48 fps.

[rexluscus.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I was telling someone that this was going to be the only film where the special extended edition was actually shorter.

[timberwolfoz.livejournal.com]

I feel a little better about us not getting it until the 26th. A little. *mutters*

[atdelphi.livejournal.com]

Please do not let this be a trend that lasts, ugh.

*sighs* I'm still hoping that the larger 3D trend dies. I don't have sufficiently binocular vision to watch 3D, and of course my local theatre never runs the 2D version of these things.

[inamac.livejournal.com]

stay home, wait for someone to cobble together a heavily edited-down version.

That is my current strategy. Though it does mean waiting three years for the whole movie.

[pervert-bitch.livejournal.com]

LOL, I love The Hobbit, and I have already watched it twice... curiously I loved it only after the second time I saw it, the first time I just liked it a lot :P
And both times I watched it in 3P HFR :P

[bluestocking79.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that's consistent from what I've heard from pretty much everybody I know who's seen it. That includes a large number of Tolkien enthusiasts, too, and from several of them, the most damning thing they had to say was that it made them sad/disappointed as fans, because they love the material and could see that it COULD have been good, with much more disciplined pacing and editing. I'm sure I will see it, but I have to admit that I'm not looking forward to it the way I'd hoped. Then again, having tempered expectations might mean I end up enjoying it more?

Also, I have yet to hear a person have anything but loathing for the 48 fps release. I've heard a lot of feedback about it being ugly, fake-looking, and having that sickly, slick video-tape feel.

[amorettea.livejournal.com]

My favorite review was there is a great two hour film hiding in the 2 hour 46 minute running time. I don't know if our local theater has 48fps capacity but I rather hope not. As for 3-D, I have a friend who writes the code for a lot of 3-D films. He can't watch them, though. They induce migraines.

[ariadneelda.livejournal.com]

Haven't seen it yet (thanks for the non-spoilery overview!), but based on the fact that I loved the extended editions of LotR more than the theatrical releases, I probably won't mind the length of this one. I just enjoy having as much time as possible to spend in Middle-earth. :)

I'll be seeing it in 2D (it's easier to find a 2D screening here, and thank goodness for that cause I hate 3D) and since the 48 fps seems to be only in 3D, I won't get to see what that looks like. I'll be left with the curiosity. :)

Also, HIIIIII, Amy. :D Missed you. <3 *has been living under a rock*

[rina-riku.livejournal.com]

I am also one of those that enjoy the extended versions of the movies. I loved most of the Hobbit, except the intro. The intro was just too long, and it really should have started SPOILER!!!
SPOILER!!!SPOILER!!!SPOILER!!!SPOILER!!!SPOILER!!!SPOILER!!!SPOILER!!!SPOILER!!!SPOILER!!!SPOILER!!!SPOILER!!!SPOILER!!!SPOILER!!!SPOILER!!!SPOILER!!!SPOILER!!!



"In a hole in the ground there lived a Hobbit" instead of the silly flashback scene that it started as with the birthday party and everything. I also have the feeling they are going to end the second film with a flashback to that scene.

[goseaward.livejournal.com]

So I've seen it in both 3d 48fps and 2d 24fps, and...yeah, I think I preferred the 2d version. I will say that there were lots of places in the 48fps where the detail was easier to catch, because overall it looks much brighter than the 2d 24fps, but that was as easily bad as good when it came to some of the special effects. (The arkenstone looked cool in the 24fps and like a My Little Pony toy in the 48fps.)

(and of course most vhs-type video is at 30fps, so it's not surprising the higher frame rate reminded you of that!)

I feel like each scene individually was something I enjoyed, but watching them all end to end like that was too long, yeah. Maybe for home video release they should section it into 4 movies? :D?

[idlerat.livejournal.com]

ITA

I'd add that I was really bothered by the retreads of stuff from LotR. I'm weirdly fixated on the moment with Gandalf and the moth. That was so brilliant *the first time*. I mean, why? to do it in 3D? BFD. Why the reunion, chubby Elrond and wrinkly Galadriel? I mean, ILU, *in fan fiction*.

And I always hate 3D. I thought this 48fps would somehow magically be different, but everything still looked double, with no significant payoff.

/rat