Whose Ready To Watch The Hobbit Part 2?
https://www.facebook.com/thehobbit2hd
http://thehobbitpart2.wordpress.com/
amazing Michael Shannon in the lead this is simply a film I had to OWN. This
Edited, Dec 11th 2013 7:48pm by Kaolian
- Forums
- Cross Site
- Out Of Topic
- Whose Ready To Watch The Hobbit Part 2?
Whose Ready To Watch The Hobbit Part 2?Follow
I thought I was, but maybe I'm not. 
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
I haven't even seen part 1 yet...
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
I haven't even seen part 1 yet...
Good. Don't.
"I have lost my way
But I hear a tale
About a heaven in Alberta
Where they've got all hell for a basement"
But I hear a tale
About a heaven in Alberta
Where they've got all hell for a basement"
Spammer wrote:
amazing Michael Shannon in the lead this is simply a film I had to OWN.
Yeah, no, Michael Shannon isn't in the movie. He's definitely not the lead. Also, you can't buy it yet...
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
Mazra wrote:
Also, you can't buy it yet...
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Iamadam wrote:
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
I haven't even seen part 1 yet...
Good. Don't.
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Iamadam wrote:
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
I haven't even seen part 1 yet...
Good. Don't.
Let's just say they took some liberties to extend a tiny book into 3 full length movies.
"I have lost my way
But I hear a tale
About a heaven in Alberta
Where they've got all hell for a basement"
But I hear a tale
About a heaven in Alberta
Where they've got all hell for a basement"
Why must everything be a trilogy?
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
Iamadam wrote:
Let's just say they took some liberties to extend a tiny book into 3 full length movies.
Dismiss this notion from your head.
It's a trilogy of movies about an epic fantasy story of war and dragons set in Tolkien's middle earth, directed by Peter Jackson, with lots of cool special effects and many dwarfs. How could it not be enjoyable?
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
someproteinguy wrote:
Why must everything be a trilogy?
It needs a start a middle and a finish, it's too long for a single, three is a nice agreeable quantity for things to come it.
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
Elinda wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
Why must everything be a trilogy?
It needs a start a middle and a finish, it's too long for a single, three is a nice agreeable quantity for things to come it.
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
Wait, it's going to be 3 movies? I thought it was 2.
I have no idea, I'm just going off of what was written here.
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
3 movies seems like a mighty stretch for a book that was shorter than any one of the LotR books.
They definitely take some liberties to stretch it out but I enjoyed the first movie. I mean, if you're looking for a faithful adaptation, don't bother watching it, but I thought it was worth the time and money to see it. I was entertained.
Edited, Dec 11th 2013 12:50pm by Spoonless
Edited, Dec 11th 2013 12:50pm by Spoonless
The LotR movies weren't a particularly faithful adaptation either although they did do the books justice. I'm just having some trouble imagining how The Hobbit could be stretched into 3 movies when it has maybe a quarter of the content that LotR has.
Spoonless wrote:
They definitely take some liberties to stretch it out but I enjoyed the first movie. I mean, if you're looking for a faithful adaptation, don't bother watching it, but I thought it was worth the time and money to see it. I was entertained.
Faithful adaption of the book by itself? Correct, it's not. Faithful adaption of the story in the book, plus all the surrounding stuff fleshed out in later books/appendixes, with a specific aim at providing a direct lead in to the existing LotR trilogy? It absolutely is. Ok. To be fair, Jackson has added some details that weren't in the original sources, but I haven't seen anything so far that contradicts or goes off the original storyline.
It's going to end out being a less direct translation than LotR was, but as some have already pointed out, you're going from one shortish book to a trilogy. That's a lot of extras. Honestly though, I like the direction they're going with this. They could have just told the story of the Hobbit, but that would have meant leaving out a whole hell of a lot of other stuff that would never be put into a film by itself. I mean, it's unlikely anyone will sign off on an "Adventures of young Aragorn" film dedicated to all the backstory bits that occur during/between the events in the Hobbit and the LotR. And that's about the only other ways you'd get all the stuff about the Necromancer and other plots surrounding the return of Sauron and the rise of Mordor which ultimately lead us up to where we are in LotR.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
TL;DR - If you enjoyed The Lord of the Rings, you'll probably also enjoy The Hobbit. It's more of the same stuff.
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
I can't wait, but I'm not doing crazy late night shiz. I'll probably go see it Saturday, and that is a maybe... I'm broke -.-
Can't wait to see how Legolos fits in it >.> and the continuation of the White Orc <.<
Can't wait to see how Legolos fits in it >.> and the continuation of the White Orc <.<
I'd rather watch 3 decent renditions of The Hobbit than 7+ craptacular installments of Harry Potter
There are no Harry Potter movies.
someproteinguy wrote:
Why must everything be a trilogy?
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Elinda wrote:
Iamadam wrote:
Let's just say they took some liberties to extend a tiny book into 3 full length movies.
Dismiss this notion from your head.
It's a trilogy of movies about an epic fantasy story of war and dragons set in Tolkien's middle earth, directed by Peter Jackson, with lots of cool special effects and many dwarfs. How could it not be enjoyable?
Well, it managed.
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
There are no Harry Potter movies.
They should do a reboot with Chris Columbus directing ALL of them. The first two movies are the best ones, but they could do with a new Harry Potter and Hermione. Can't act to save their lives.
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
I've only seen about half of the second movie and that was terrible already, if it gets worse after that I don't know why people kept watching.
Recent Visitors: 255
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (255)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- Out Of Topic
- Whose Ready To Watch The Hobbit Part 2?
© 2025 Fanbyte LLC