The Movie/Film Thread

[TurtleFu]

Except for the fact that the movie makes it very, very clear that Hugo Stiglitz is very, very famous, even being featured in newspapers and taking photos NEXT TO HITLER, and he is a legend in the Gastapo, and there are Gastapo officers RIGHT THERE who don't recognize him.

[Glathannus]

So I just got back from seeing The Hobbit in a real IMAX theater (the kind that uses 70mm film), which wasn't 48 frames per second, but everything else about the presentation which could've been great, was indeed great.

I was a little disappointed that Bilbo did/saw barely anything in Rivendell, and that the adventuring party didn't have a chat with the eagles, but this movie was already like an extended edition with all the back-story and side-story they crammed in. This movie was so much better than Fellowship of the Ring, and if each film in the new trilogy will be better than the last, then I can hardly wait for the next ones.

Martin Freeman totally delivered on his role as Bilbo, and it's nice to see some more pre-white Gandalf from Ian McKellen. Also, Hugo Weaving as Elrond, acted a lot less like Agent Smith this time. Gollum was perfect. He wasn't overacted or overused, but actually none of the characters were. I already like all these dwarves better than Gimli in LotR.

I also think it was a smart move that they didn't show much of Smaug yet, because if you go back and look at Gollum in Fellowship of the Ring, the computer graphics for him weren't very good yet. The more that Peter Jackson delays showing off Smaug, the better the graphics will be by the time we finally get a fuller look at him.

[frecklegirl]

If it wasn't 48 FPS, that sounds pretty great to me...

~~~FUCK 48 FPS~~~

[deadgrandma]

I still have my doubts on The Hobbit. A 300 page book spread over 3 movies? Sounds filler-y...

[Nimh]

^^^ I know. The Hobbit is a great book, but the film adaptation shouldn't be like Branagh's Hamlet.

[TurtleFu]

Apparently Tolkien said he wished he had integrated the appendices in the books themselves, and that is what the Hobbit is doing. It includes a lot of apprendices info and fleshes out the book. It's not unnecessarily stretched out but it is slowly paced

[deadgrandma]

Originally Posted by TurtleFu

Apparently Tolkien said he wished he had integrated the appendices in the books themselves, and that is what the Hobbit is doing. It includes a lot of apprendices info and fleshes out the book. It's not unnecessarily stretched out but it is slowly paced

Uh oh... sacrificing movie flow for nerdy fan service is a sacrilegious no-no for me... Should leave all that shit for the DVD extended versions.

Still, I hope I'm wrong. I haven't seen the movie yet so I can't judge. Just trying to lower expectations as much as possible before I fork out for a ticket.

[Nimh]

Man, Django Unchained is awesome. Just a toe-tappin', foul-talkin', cracker-killin' masterpiece.

[TurtleFu]

Saw The Hobbit. Took too long to get the ball rolling, but once the adventure actually started it was a good ride. Felt a tiny bit unfocused. I enjoyed the blend of humor and adventure. I'm still worried about stretching the book into a trilogy.

Surprisingly, the stuff sourced from the appendices (DG: "nerdy fan service") was well incorporated and very enjoyable. The parts that felt indulgent to me were some of the fight scenes. One of them near the end (in the fortress) felt like watching a video game.

The movie has a very Inception-esque setup: The entire movie is told in flashback, which features other characters having flashbacks which features themselves telling a story within the flashback within the flashback.

Also, way too many deus ex machina's, but that's a source material problem.

[laceychu]

I enjoyed Django unchained. ^-^ I have always been a tarantino fan but went into it with even higher expectations because of the genre. His selection of ennio morricone is always a pleasure.