The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012) (1 Viewer)

[Tim Glover]

Gave The Hobbit a second chance. Liked it much much more this time around. Still some fat needed to be taken out but overall I thoroughly enjoyed it. Characters grew on me & found it more charming too. Was hard on it after the first time; but I'm looking forward to part 2.

 

[SilverWook]

How many Russian Hobbits are there?

 

[Sean Bryan]

The theatrical Blu-ray hits the streets on March 19th! Extended Edition to be released later this year.

 

[Carlo_M]

The theatrical Blu-ray hits the streets on March 19th! Extended Edition to be released later this year.

Whoa, you mean they actually cut scenes from that movie?

 

[Sean Bryan]

Ha, yeah. But seriously though, Bilbo basically disappeared just before and during Rivendel. I think a film called 'The Hobbit" should have stayed more focused on Bilbo in several spots. I want to see him wandering Rivendel and looking at the shards of Narsil, like in the trailer. And I believe there is a missing conversation between Bilblo and Elrond. Basically, anything that adds more Bilbo and focuses more on Bilbo's reaction to the world outside of the Shire is fine by me. If the extended version feels too long to me, then someday I'll have to make a personal edit that keeps the extra Bilbo stuff and trims some of the theatrical fat.

 

[Coressel]

Then there's also the "skip" button on your remote.
I think I am going to behave myself and just wait for the complete Extended Cuts to come out in one big box set. I assume that will happen in 2015 or so.

 

[Malcolm R]

Finally caught up with this. Thought I was going to see the HFR version, but I guess I ended up seeing just regular 3D (I guess the theater had switched to a smaller room without the necessary hardware for HFR). I thought the 3D was quite well done, and it didn't seem to bother me as much as prior 3D films I'd seen, even though it's quite a bit longer. I usually get headaches, and often avoid 3D, but this didn't seem to bother me. There was quite a bit of motion blur at the beginning, especially the pan around Erebor, but it seemed to settle down after that. There was one point near the beginning when a shadow pops up in the extreme foreground that I thought was someone next to me in my aisle trying to get out, but was really on-screen. That was kind of freaky. I almost got up out of my seat to let him pass. I had a good time with the film. It's been years since I read the book, so I don't really recall what's from the book and what was added from other sources. I really loved returning to Middle-Earth. A few things that bugged me a little, but not enough to dislike the overall film:
[*] There seemed to be an awful lot of repetition in the chase scenes (the group sees/hears danger approaching; Gandalf advises "Run!", they run across the landscape/bridge/walkway away from their pursuers; repeat multiple times). It was like variations on the Fellowship Moria bridge sequence repeated over and over again.
[*] Why did they cast Bilbo so young as compared to LOTR? I know time has passed, but the opening scenes of Fellowship include Gandalf remarking, suspiciously, that Bilbo "hasn't aged a day" in 60 years (due to his possession of the ring). They probably couldn't have used Holm for Hobbit, but it seems like the actors should have been visibly closer in age, either by actual casting or by make-up FX. The difference in age between Freeman and Holm makes Gandalf's comment in Fellowship rather laughable when it's glaringly obvious that Bilbo has aged significantly.
[*] Why does Gandalf seem to have such reverence for Saruman? Whenever they meet, Saruman comes across as very arrogant and snarky, obviously looking down upon Gandalf and the other wizards, his words dripping with sarcasm and disdain. We know where he's headed, obviously from LOTR, but I just don't get why Gandalf seems to have such a high opinion of Saruman? (Though I'm not one who's easily impressed by rank/title, so maybe it's just a personal thing.)
[/list]

 

[Carlo_M]

[*] Why did they cast Bilbo so young as compared to LOTR? I know time has passed, but the opening scenes of Fellowship include Gandalf remarking, suspiciously, that Bilbo "hasn't aged a day" in 60 years (due to his possession of the ring). They probably couldn't have used Holm for Hobbit, but it seems like the actors should have been visibly closer in age, either by actual casting or by make-up FX. The difference in age between Freeman and Holm makes Gandalf's comment in Fellowship rather laughable when it's glaringly obvious that Bilbo has aged significantly.
[*] Why does Gandalf seem to have such reverence for Saruman? Whenever they meet, Saruman comes across as very arrogant and snarky, obviously looking down upon Gandalf and the other wizards, his words dripping with sarcasm and disdain. We know where he's headed, obviously from LOTR, but I just don't get why Gandalf seems to have such a high opinion of Saruman? (Though I'm not one who's easily impressed by rank/title, so maybe it's just a personal thing.)
[/list]

Ah young(er) Bilbo: the easy answer is that this is the age he *should* have been at the beginning of The Lord of the Rings. Hobbits in their fifties are much like humans in their thirties, so if anything Holm was too old in LoTR. My guess is that way back when, Martin Freeman was a relative unknown and how can you turn down having Holm play Bilbo? So this creates a continuity problem in the movie that doesn't exist in the book. That said, I hope PJ keeps all as it is and doesn't "pull a Lucas" and put in Freeman in the LoTR scenes (I'm dreading specifically replacing the Finding of the Ring sequence in Fellowship with The Hobbit version). Saruman is the head of their order, and the greatest of the Wizards. PJ's films actually overplay Saruman's snarkiness and willingness to bow to Sauron. Saruman in the books doesn't want to bow to Sauron's, but rather seeing Sauron's rise to power realizes that his best play to counter that force is to amass power of his own. Sure, he may have forged an uneasy alliance, but he was never Sauron's lackey (at least willingly). And Saruman doesn't begin that turn until the events of LoTR. Saruman is barely mentioned (if at all?) in The Hobbit novel. So at that point, Saruman should have Gandalf's complete trust and respect.

 

[TonyD]

HFR was only on an IMAX as far as I remember.

 

[Ruz-El]

the showing I saw was 3D HFR and not IMAX. I don't know if there was 2D HFR showings.

 

[Carlo_M]

I'm pretty sure I also saw a non-IMAX HFR presentation. I'm positive it was not IMAX, and I'm 99% sure it was HFR because it had that videogamey firstperson shooter high frame rate feel to it.

 

[TravisR]

I definitely saw it in non-IMAX HFR 3-D. I don't think there was any 2-D HFR presentation though.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Originally Posted by TravisR
I definitely saw it in non-IMAX HFR 3-D. I don't think there was any 2-D HFR presentation though.

Correct - the HFR showing were 3D only.

 

[Sean Bryan]

Why did they cast Bilbo so young as compared to LOTR? I know time has passed, but the opening scenes of Fellowship include Gandalf remarking, suspiciously, that Bilbo "hasn't aged a day" in 60 years (due to his possession of the ring).

That's not entirely correct. Yes In The Fellowship of the Ring Gandalf commented to Bilbo that he "hasn't aged a day". But the question is "since when". If you are assuming it is since 60 years ago you'd be incorrect. Why? Because Gandalf and FRODO know each other and have met before. Demonstrated in lines such as "It's wonderful to see you again Gandalf" and "I'm glad you're back"..."So am I dear boy, so am I". So if Gandalf and Frodo know each other and met before, the last time he saw Bilbo would not have been 60 years ago. Simple explanation is that in the history of the films, Gandalf had visited with Bilbo at least once after the events of The Hobbit, and it had to have been long enough afterwards for him to have met Frodo and for them to be on friendly terms with one another. He may have visited more than once, but it had to have been at least once. So even though it may not line up perfectly with the way things are portrayed in the books, it seems like over the 60 years since finding the ring Bilbo has aged, but not 60 years worth of aging. If its been 10, 15 or even 20 years since Gandalf last saw Bilbo he probably would have expected this 111 year old Hobbit to look older than the last time he saw him (5, 10, 20 years ago). But he looked much younger than expected, thus the comment.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Originally Posted by Sean Bryan
That's not entirely correct. Yes In The Fellowship of the Ring Gandalf commented to Bilbo that he "hasn't aged a day". But the question is "since when". If you are assuming it is since 60 years ago you'd be incorrect. Why? Because Gandalf and FRODO know each other and have met before. Demonstrated in lines such as "It's wonderful to see you again Gandalf" and "I'm glad you're back"..."So am I dear boy, so am I".
So if Gandalf and Frodo know each other and met before, the last time he saw Bilbo would not have been 60 years ago. Simple explanation is that in the history of the films, Gandalf had visited with Bilbo at least once after the events of The Hobbit, and it had to have been long enough afterwards for him to have met Frodo and for them to be on friendly terms with one another. He may have visited more than once, but it had to have been at least once.
So even though it may not line up perfectly with the way things are portrayed in the books, it seems like over the 60 years since finding the ring Bilbo has aged, but not 60 years worth of aging. If its been 10, 15 or even 20 years since Gandalf last saw Bilbo he probably would have expected this 111 year old Hobbit to look older than the last time he saw him (5, 10, 20 years ago). But he looked much younger than expected, thus the comment.

Great & sound logic.
Now explain why Bilbo is wondering where Frodo is when Gandalf arrives in FOTR when he just saw him leave to go wait for Gandalf earlier that day in AUJ. )

 

[Chuck Anstey]

The other thing that PJ skipped from the book that would have helped with Saruman would be that Saruman was no longer white but Saruman of many colors. That alone would have helped people understand his transition from one of the good guys to one who wanted power for himself. So when he appears in The Hobbit he would be white and therefore still good or at least had not revealed his plans to obtain the ring for himself. As far as Bilbo aging, regardless of the specific time frame he was only supposed to have appeared to have aged just a few years over that 60 years. Other Hobbits were murmuring among themselves that there was something odd with Bilbo never seeming to age and looking far younger than he was. Casting Ian Holm as Bilbo was a "Did you actually read the books or just the Cliff Notes?" type of thing. Given the movie time constraints he also had to completely skip over that Frodo received the ring when he was 30, the approximate equivalent of an 18 year old, and he still looked like he was 30 even 20 or so years later while his friends who were younger all now looked older.

 

[Sean Bryan]

Now explain why Bilbo is wondering where Frodo is when Gandalf arrives in FOTR when he just saw him leave to go wait for Gandalf earlier that day in AUJ. (My guess: senility )

Actually, absent mindedness combined with being absorbed in writing the "Concerning Hobbits" chapter and advanced age has been my first thought on that as well. He may be well preserved, but he's still 111 years old. I do think it was a bit sloppy on PJ's part to structure it like that since the observation of the inconsistency is clear to anyone familiar with Fellowship. But then again, the simple explanation given above is enough to make it not such a big deal.

 

[John Mansor]

As far as Bilbo aging, regardless of the specific time frame he was only supposed to have appeared to have aged just a few years over that 60 years. Other Hobbits were murmuring among themselves that there was something odd with Bilbo never seeming to age and looking far younger than he was. Casting Ian Holm as Bilbo was a "Did you actually read the books or just the Cliff Notes?" type of thing. Given the movie time constraints he also had to completely skip over that Frodo received the ring when he was 30, the approximate equivalent of an 18 year old, and he still looked like he was 30 even 20 or so years later while his friends who were younger all now looked older.

Maybe PJ can pull a Lucas and replace Bilbo with a younger version (a la Anakin) in the LOTR in a future release!!

 

[DaveF]

Originally Posted by Brandon Conway
Correct - the HFR showing were 3D only.

That's too bad. I wanted to see HFR 2D.

 

[ASanghqafyb]

That's too bad. I wanted to see HFR 2D.

HFR 3D is amazing, 30 minutes and eyes adapt, i see every detail in 3D projection. And after the movie i have headache too, this is side effect, but this techonology rocks.