Personally, I'm glad it's three films instead of one. I expect that if it had been one film, a lot of book elements would have been skipped all together, and it would have been a lot like "Voyage of the Dawn Treader" the movie, which means: very rushed. Have you ever seen the animated "The Hobbit" movie? They completely skipped Beorn's part, and we're told almost no backstory for the dwarves other than that they lost their powerful kingdom to Smaug.
 
There seems in my opinion to be a general decline in cinematography. Digitality is replacing everything. In my opinion, you generally don't need to enhance God's wondrous creation. Just capture it on film and only adjust when a special effect is needed. Fantasy worlds are more convincing when they look real, not like some far off video game world.

No kidding. New Zealand doesn't need enhancements; most of those shots in LotR were all REAL (except for maybe some scenes where they had to add in to make it match up).
 
I know. But why does the whole film look GRAY?! It lacks color. The Narnia films on the other hand had plenty of color, but it was vividly overkill (unrealistic blue bodies of water and clothes were too perfect, or something)
 
^ That's a good point, actually. Some of the colours did seem too bright in the Narnia films, making it feel automatically that it was more for children and families than maybe for an older individual, and toned down a lot from the darker LOTR,
 
Desolation has been released (in the US at least) on DVD and blu ray. Has anyone purchased it yet? If so which version did you buy and what features are included? I am still torn between going ahead and buying it, or waiting for the EE...I like the EE's because of all the extra bonus stuff, but sometimes I don't want to sit through a 4 hour movie!
 
Well, the title of the thir film has been changed to Battle of the Five Armies.

Also, the DOS EE will be 25 minutes longer, with new music composed by Howard Shore.
 
In my opinion, you generally don't need to enhance God's wondrous creation.

I understand your point, but The Hobbit is not the only film to "enhance" the colouring of the film, Even the LOTR films were colour graded, each of the films had a seperate Colour timing, FOTR was more green (not the sickly green tint over Teal and Orange from the EE Blu-ray), TTT was more red/brown, and ROTK more of a Yellow.
 
Well, the title of the thir film has been changed to Battle of the Five Armies.

Also, the DOS EE will be 25 minutes longer, with new music composed by Howard Shore.

I'm confused really behind Jackson's renaming of the 3rd film. I mean, I read his comments on the change and all, but it really confuses me. It's only 8 months out from release, why change it now?! Seems kind of ridiculous, IMO. There and Back Again, the title, was a nod to the book(s). Battle of the Five Armies frankly just ruins the plot of the 3rd film. I mean, not that nobody really knows what the 3rd film will be about, but I'm just remarking that it seems to be a plot spoiler.

I'm surprised about the EE length. It seems very short for Jackson. Even Fellowship was 30 minutes longer. I don't know about AUJ; I haven't looked at its run time. And I'd expect nothing less than new music. Seems like the only way to go, if you ask me. :)
 
The title "Battle of the Five Armies" was clearly chosen to attract non-fans. I mean, the masses always go for movies with violence, even if it is stupid violence. Us fans who have read the books know about the final battle in TH so "There and Back Again" would have sufficed.
 
I have to agree, I did like the 'poetic' nod to the book with 'There and Back Again' and it would have been familiar to viewers of LOTR, too. It would have neatly finished off the three films. The chosen film rather suggests that's pretty much what the final film is about... there should be a bit more to it. It's not something I'll get too annoyed about, though. :D
 
Well, 'There and Back Again' made sense when it was going to be two movies, and Bilbo would arrive and leave in the same film. However, it is three films now. Bilbo is already 'there,' so there's no reason for the original title.
 
I understand that Bilbo is already "there," but in my opinion, "There and Back Again" would still have made sense -- in that Bilbo still does need to go back again!

The original heart of the Hobbit was Bilbo's journey, not the dwarve's problems. I feel like the movies are trying to shift the focus from solely Bilbo to the dwarves. Don't get me wrong -- I love the movies, and I adore the dwarves. I just think it's straying a bit too far from source material, especially with the renaming of the final movie.
 
I agree with you there. In DoS, the moment when they made Blibo go into the tunnel was very "Oh, yeah. We have a Hobbit. Almost forgot."

I was simply stating why the title may have been changed.
 
Oh yeah, I totally understand! Like, that was the reasoning that Peter Jackson gave us, right? Because Bilbo was already there?
 
I understand that Bilbo is already "there," but in my opinion, "There and Back Again" would still have made sense -- in that Bilbo still does need to go back again!

The original heart of the Hobbit was Bilbo's journey, not the dwarve's problems. I feel like the movies are trying to shift the focus from solely Bilbo to the dwarves. Don't get me wrong -- I love the movies, and I adore the dwarves. I just think it's straying a bit too far from source material, especially with the renaming of the final movie.
Yes, I agree. But, then I also care much more about hobbit stories than dwarvish ones :p
 
I wasn't incredibly happy about the change of title, either--but if they can keep the Kili/Tauriel thing under control this time, I'll be happy.

What's really going to be interesting about this movie is the fans' reactions when the three most attractive dwarves all die. Fortunately, I like Bofur best. :p
 
Back
Top