The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

[abyjohnmathew]

I am pretty sure that I am not the only one here who complaints about the film's unreasonable duration of 170 minutes. Tolkien's Hobbit was relatively sweet & short, an to adapt it for a 3 part franchise was way too risky and confusing. Seems like Hobbit became the sacrificial lamb for Peter Jackson's frustration to unexplore the entire middle earth of LOTR. Jackson already proved his talent in making decent amalgams of live action & CGI and Hobbit is no different. Well treated with technology, Hobbit would have been a minor classic if Jackson had kept an eye on the watch during the editing process.

We don't have 48fps theaters in our country. If anyone watched in 48fps, kindly say how the effects & 3D are in the latest technology. I am coming across divisive opinions so far !!

[dojj singh]

Gandalf was on the telly this morning saying that how he has seen it twice and was impressed by how good the picture was without the picture quality taking away from the actual film.

Along the way saying that the human eye "see's" in 60 fps and the next Avatar will push that envelope.

I am certainly going to watch it in 3D but if the cinema isn't 48 capable then why will it cost so much more?

[TheGuyver]

Watched The Hobbit this afternoon. Really enjoyed it. Only watched in 2D. The cinema was showing 48fps.

[jaykays hat]

I'm not a fan of 3D but this must be seen in 3D to see the full effect of the superb visuals. This was a welcome return to Middle Earth, a return that I enjoyed immensely. Although the film is 3 hours it didn't seem to drag. Freeman is very good as Bilbo and Sir Ian is on top form again.

[Firedragon76]

I thought it was too long and the non-book scene to please the fans of the trilogy was unnecessary.

I watched the 48fps version. Didn't get sick, but there was a scene at the beginning where I could only see different shades of gold and the first shots of The Shire were a bit dizzying. Apparently my eyes adjusted after a few minutes though because I only had the blurry experience once again, right after the break.

I thought the colours and resolution were crazy in a good way, but the 3D actually looked like it did in the 80s. The scenery shots looked as if someone had pushed different set pieces in front of one another, not natural at all. I know someone who watched it in 3D 48fps and then in 3D 24fps the next day and she said the 24fps-version looked a lot more natural.

The movie itself was underwhelming to me, to be honest. It was a nice movie to have watched once, but I don't have any desire to watch it again.

[fortunesfool]

Pointless, over-long and a headache inducing CGI blancmange.

Some fun to be had along the way but it's a movie about a bunch of dwarves traipsing for miles to reclaim their home from a dragon, while some people tag along.

That story DOES NOT require three, three hour movies.

LOTR's at least had a story, a heroic journey, a sense of good fighting against overwhelming evil. This is a road trip.

It's not all bad. The scenes with gollum are great, some fun to be had with the dwarves, and Sylvester McCoy is fun as Radaghast the Brown, but Jackson has lost his mind to CG. The set pieces are all, silly, retard physics, over-edited cartoons. The films big finale with the Goblin King etc is just relentless. It's never a good sign when you're repeating in your head 'Please be over soon, Please be over soon'.