Sunday, January 13, 2013

The Hobbit

When The Hobbit was released, I was kinda bummed I couldn't make it to the midnight premiere.. I usually like to dress up for those! So it's been on my to-do list to go see the movie .. Last night I finally got to!! The theater was still pretty packed, and it's funny to see mostly males rather than females (since I usually go to chick flicks) in the seats. I haven't read the book yet - that's on another to-do list - but I still really enjoyed the movie. I've been told they changed it up some compared to the book. I'd like to see it one more time in theaters and this will definitely be one I want to own! It had just enough humor, magic, action and great great music. My favorite part is the beautiful costumes.

Lady Galadriel's hair!!! Omg!! :P I am definitely going to cosplay her or Arwen soon.
She's so magical. I wish I was an elf!!

The song the dwarves sing at Bilbo's house gave me goosebumps, too.
Thorin was a truly emotional character.. I really enjoyed his performance throughout the whole movie.

This is "Song of The Lonely Mountain" performed by Neil Finn.
He's an outstanding singer from New Zealand. 
When this song played during the credits I couldn't leave until it was finished. 
There was no stinger after the credits, but I recommend staying for the music :)

And for a cool look at The Hobbit sets by Lego check out MTV Geek!

So today I'm going to listen to The Hobbit soundtrack on repeat, wear my elf crown around the house, and slay some orcs on EverQuest II ! :D

Have you seen The Hobbit yet? If so, what did you think?? And don't forget to read my review of The Hobbit menu from Denny's!

7 comments:

  1. Did you see it in 2d or 3d? I haven't seen it yet because of all the talk about the headache inducing frame rate of the movie. Did you get any of that when you saw it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I saw it in 2D. I did notice it was hard to see clearly during the battle scenes. No headaches for me, though!

      Delete
  2. Long post ahead... too much to say.

    I saw The Hobbit (An Unexpected Journey) twice... and would love to see it again... very few theaters have it in IMAX 3D HFR, but there's one near you... thought about a trip but probably won't find time :(

    I saw it in 2D the first time just to enjoy the movie for what it is. It's a bit slow in parts (especially in the beginning) and does suffer from story bloat, but once it gets moving, it's pretty exciting. I loved the The Lord of the Rings trilogy even though I had never read the books, and I was really excited by the extended editions of the movies. It's pretty easy for me to sit through 3 hours of any story Peter Jackson wants to tell about Middle Earth, so The Hobbit was pure enjoyment for me.

    All 2D formats are normal frame rate (24 frames per second). The 3D format comes in 2 flavors, the normal frame rate or the high frame rate (HFR, 48 frames per second). One benefit of the HFR is to allow more images and more light to reach the eyes, helping to minimize the darkening of movies that occurs with current 3D technology. It's also supposed to allow action to appear smoother to our eyes. In the real world, there is no frame rate, and our eyes perceive much higher rates of motion than we're used to seeing (and even more than the HFR can provide).

    One complaint regarding HFR is that it looks fake. Partly this is because our eyes are used to seeing motion appear less fluid on film. For reasons I don't fully understand, this also involves the props and sets appearing cheaper.

    Interestingly, the computer-generated effects have generally been the least-bothersome to most people. This Kotaku article explains this really well: http://kotaku.com/5970900/avatar-2-could-look-even-more-like-a-video-game-than-the-hobbit-does-but-that-might-not-be-a-bad-thing

    My experience seeing it in 3D HFR was good. Lady Frog did not enjoy it as much. The opening of the movie is primarily live-action, so the HFR stands out a bit more, and it does take some getting used to. I did enjoy that the movie appeared less dark than many 3D films do. The 3D was overall very well-done and primarily limited to giving depth to scenes rather than being gimmicky with things flying out of the screen at you. I enjoyed the 3D most in the broad, panoramic scenes of Rivendale and other parts of Middle Earth.

    In general, I think 3D can often seem very natural but can sometimes be quite jarring. I felt the same way about the HFR. Put together, most of the movie was fine. Some parts were distracting because of the 3D, some because of the HFR, and some because of both.

    If I watched The Hobbit again, I'm not sure what format I'd prefer. Although I'd like to see it in 3D again at some point (maybe at home and not in the theater), I still default to seeing movies in 2D, and The Hobbit is likely not going to be an exception to that rule. Especially when watching movies at home, wearing the 3D glasses is awkward when you're eating, getting up to go get a drink, or trying to see what the cat is chewing on.

    Overall, I enjoyed The Hobbit. I think it did a good job of getting our heroes out to the start of their quest. As an introduction movie, it may not have had as much action or excitement in it. I think the 2nd movie will be very exciting (and possibly the 3rd depending on how they break up the story and what extra material they add in), but I've also heard a lot people fear that the 2nd movie is where most of the boring bloat will be added. Either way, I can't wait until the next 2 come out and may have to find time to see The Hobbit again before they do.

    ReplyDelete
  3. And I'm not done yet...

    Until recently, I never read The Lord of the Rings. I read The Hobbit at some point after seeing the The Lord of the Rings movies and was not very impressed.

    I recently re-read The Hobbit in the months leading up to the film's release. I found it to be a more enjoyable read this time around. Although The Hobbit is a relatively light-hearted story with a fair bit of humor, its telling by J.R.R. Tolkien seemed somewhat dry to me.

    After completing The Hobbit for the second time, I began reading The Lord of the Rings. It was fairly exhausting, and I can't say that I enjoyed it much. There is no denying Tolkien's accomplishment in creating this fully fleshed-out fantasy world complete with races, languages, and a rich history. The impact his works had on the fantasy genre including books, movies, and especially video games is unparalleled. However, I do not think he was a very gifted writer, and his books are cumbersome to read. There were some things that I felt his books approached better, but in general, I believe that Peter Jackson's telling of the story of The Lord of the Rings is greatly superior.

    I encourage you to try reading The Hobbit, because it's always great to pick up a book! It's a pretty short book, so it's not too hard to get through. Maybe you'll love it.

    Without getting into any spoilers, Peter Jackson took a few liberties with the story (as he did with LotR) in the interest of balancing out his telling of it. I'm not too crazy about Azog in the movie (why he appears to be blatantly CGI when all the main orcs in LotR looked great as men in costumes; why the orcs are now talking in another language with really glaring subtitles), but I recognize why Peter Jackson's included him. (Tolkien wrote about him but did not include him in the telling of The Hobbit.) Again, I'm very excited for the next 2 movies.

    After completing The Lord of the Rings, I trudged through the 100+ pages of appendices at the end of Return of the King. Obviously, it was not meant to be enjoyed as narrative (I assume), and I was not expecting to consider it a great literary work. It did give a lot of interesting insight into the depth of Tolkien's world and some of the back story that gets left out along the way (some of which Peter Jackson is incorporating into The Hobbit to make it 3 movies).

    I just recently began reading The Silmarillion. I've always heard that it's the least enjoyable of all of Tolkien's books, but so far I'm enjoying it the most. We'll see how I feel at its completion, however.

    Ser Frog out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Great information on the difference in 2D and 3D, Ser Frog!! I definitely learned a lot :D I have only ever seen ONE movie in 3D. It was "Brave" .. I enjoyed it and was surprised how the 3D effects merely "enhanced" the scenery. I still haven't been to anything in IMAX.

      I think adding The Hobbit to my reading list will be a must. I have felt a bit lost ever since Harry Potter ended so I am constantly looking for new book ideas.

      Perhaps we should start a book club! Especially ones that turn into movies. Would be great to catch a movie together someday. :)

      Delete
    2. That sounds great!

      I hope you enjoy reading The Hobbit. Let me know your thoughts on it!

      I didn't see Brave in 3D... still really liked it though.

      Delete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...