The Hobbit: An Unexpected Disappointment

Ok, I saw the Hobbit last night, and decided to sleep on it before i commented. But what in the name of god was Peter Jackson thinking when he came up with his Radagast character design? I was really hoping for a more "Saint Francis of Assisi" kind of character, not a disney cartoon. This is really just one of several mind boggling film making decisions that were made. I also take issue with the Disney-esque spontaneous group song about Bilbo's plates. As my fiancee put it: "how do they all know the words?"
I think my main issue is that if you want the movie to be light hearted, with slapstick comdey, songs and other shit, thats absolutely fine, the Hobbit was a children's book. But if you want to tie this story into the larger, serious narrative about Sauron's return and the story from The Lord of the Rings, then do THAT. don't try to do both.
in conclusion; the movie was ok, but far from great, and the cool stuff (the 'riddles in the dark' part in particular) was heavily offset by the weird slapstick comic moments and other silliness.

 

So in other words, don't see this movie unless stoned off your ass?

 

Me and my brother theorized last night that Jackson was trying to become the new George Lucas, and is trying to create a Jar Jar Binks of his own. Maybe he'll make a prequel where Sauron starts out as a kid, and turns out to be Bilbo's dad. Sauron also loved racing when he was a kid, but his parents were killed under mysterious circumstances, and his evil teacher Snake turns out to be a good guy after all.

 

No, see, I would have been totally fine if it was just true to the bok, and had the silly stuff in it. but they tried to add this big dark overarching plot about Sauron (as the Necromancer, which i know is a thing that is canon) as well. The problem lay in trying to combine the silly slapstick children's book with the big dark serious plot, and it doesn't mesh well.

 

I really liked the movie, including Radagast. As for the plate song, well that was actually in the book so I'm not complaining. At least they didn't give the orcs a song during the burning tree part like Tolkien did in the book. That would have totally ruined the moment. Just imagine it What's-his-name the Defiler all of a sudden burst into song?

 

Hey ! I liked the orcs song.


[video=youtube;LLVgGADHg60]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=LLVgGADHg60[/video]

 

[video=youtube;8OiYDUEu3i8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=8OiYDUEu3i8[/video]


Far over the misty mountains cold.

 

My wife and I really enjoyed it.

 

Packed myself into a car filled with 5 dudes and drove 2 hours to see it in IMAX 3D. Only two of the group really seemed to like it...

 

All of my (11 person) group actually quite enjoyed it. I do agree the Radagast character was a bit of a mess up. I wouldn't of minded him at all, except for that one thing.

Spoiler

The shit face. I mean seriously....a big caked on pile of bird shit? I get the whole crazy hermit thing, but couldn't they have at least put that on the side or back of his head if they had to have it in there...not his FACE

 

This. So much this.

 

I saw it last night. My only issue really was just how fucking long the movie was and how it seemed to drag out. Other than that, as a direhard Tolkien fan, I was satisfied.

 

Uh you do realize the Hobbit takes places 40 years before LoTR.

 

Who are you talking to Fet?

 

60 years before.

And I saw it opening day. Not having read any of Tolkien's stuff I found it very enjoyable if a bit slow in some places. Looking forward to the other 2 movies.

 

I saw it today, and I thought it was pretty good. Can't wait for the next one!!!!

 

here is all 27 verses to misty mountain cold

[video=youtube;ME5urFBf0kk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=ME5urFBf0kk[/video]