Captainsolo1978
Jedi Master
The Hobbit opens here in NZ on the 12th!
latest film/ dvd you have seen
- Thread starter jayjedi
- Start date
JuniorChubb
Sith Lord
Watched the first Hobbit again the other night, love these films but a few parts here and there annoy me.
Really looking forward to the next one, might even get myself to the cinema.
Really looking forward to the next one, might even get myself to the cinema.
Stormtrooper37
Sith Lord
Can't wait for the next part of the Hobbit, really enjoyed the first part.
fuzzybuzzytoys
Sith Lord
Went to see Frozen with my little girl on Sunday. Really beautiful fim, nice story, funny and with amazing 3d effects. Loved it. Disney know how to do Princess movies, now fingers crossed for Star Wars!
monkey_roo
Sith Lord
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2011
- Messages
- 2,304
Watched a couple of films last night:
Kick-Ass 2 - it kicked ass... Great fun, not quite the mindless violence filled film it was painted as. There is a moral story in there and while the violence is OTT that is also part of the story. All in all a cracking follow up.
2 Guns - big, dumb and a lot of fun. If you want to watch two engaging actors having a blast (literally) then this is the one for you.
Now off to watch the hobbit extended edition ahead of tomorrow's trip to the cinema for part 2
Edit - the extended edition is well worth the watch, the extra 13+ mins change the pace and feel of the the film! scenes that felt a little clipped before are given so much more context, and the extra songs are off the pages anyway and just add a little texture. As with the LoTR's films the extended adds and I proves on the cinematic version, which was pretty good to start with.
Kick-Ass 2 - it kicked ass... Great fun, not quite the mindless violence filled film it was painted as. There is a moral story in there and while the violence is OTT that is also part of the story. All in all a cracking follow up.
2 Guns - big, dumb and a lot of fun. If you want to watch two engaging actors having a blast (literally) then this is the one for you.
Now off to watch the hobbit extended edition ahead of tomorrow's trip to the cinema for part 2
Edit - the extended edition is well worth the watch, the extra 13+ mins change the pace and feel of the the film! scenes that felt a little clipped before are given so much more context, and the extra songs are off the pages anyway and just add a little texture. As with the LoTR's films the extended adds and I proves on the cinematic version, which was pretty good to start with.
Off to see the Hobbit on Saturday night, will let you know what I think...........cos I know you'll all be dying to hear! :lol:
Saw Hunger games 2 (or whatever the **** it's called) last weekend. I wasn't a massive fan of the first one, it's not bad just very long and slow. The second one is the same, but longer and ehh slower and ehh it doesn't end so much as set the scene for the third one.
So, if you like your films to plod along slowly and not actually resolve anything............
PS, no one gets their tits out either. Always a disappointment!
Saw Hunger games 2 (or whatever the **** it's called) last weekend. I wasn't a massive fan of the first one, it's not bad just very long and slow. The second one is the same, but longer and ehh slower and ehh it doesn't end so much as set the scene for the third one.
So, if you like your films to plod along slowly and not actually resolve anything............
PS, no one gets their tits out either. Always a disappointment!
weasel said:
Yeah i really didn't like that. Very boring and what kind of an ending was that?? Lame.
I really liked the first Hobbit. Wasn't the biggest fan of the Bored of the Rings films. This was better for me. More entertaining, less detestable characters and takes itself a little/a lot less seriously. Looking forward to part 2.
I actually don't think Hunger Games was a bad film as such. The acting, directing, scenes etc were all solid enough, it's just sooo long given nothing happens. You could lob 60 mins out of it and have a better film! And if that's not an I
indictment I dunno what is.
indictment I dunno what is.
monkey_roo
Sith Lord
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2011
- Messages
- 2,304
The hobbit part 2 - in full IMAX 3D glory.
There isn't really much to say here, you can take or leave the 3D, it is very well done but doesn't add much. The acting is great, the writing excellent, the plot good (even in its stretch guise), the cinematography and direction are stunning.
Oh and for all you young men with an elf fantasy there is a new pretender to Liv Tyler's crown
There really is nothing to dislike here and after almost 3 hours when I left the cinema my first thought was damn, I have to wait another year to see how it ends...
There isn't really much to say here, you can take or leave the 3D, it is very well done but doesn't add much. The acting is great, the writing excellent, the plot good (even in its stretch guise), the cinematography and direction are stunning.
Oh and for all you young men with an elf fantasy there is a new pretender to Liv Tyler's crown
There really is nothing to dislike here and after almost 3 hours when I left the cinema my first thought was damn, I have to wait another year to see how it ends...
monkey_roo
Sith Lord
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2011
- Messages
- 2,304
^ ha! indeed! only there are significant threads of the film that have nothing to do with the book
grinchy
Sith Lord
I love films, just finished watching the hobbit on blu ray, love it, hope to see the next movie this week sometime, also watched bridgeon the river kwai, a classic movie which looks great on blu, as well as adywans version of star wars, a brilliant fan edit of the movie,
lastly for this week i watched dances with wolves, not everyones cup of tea but i like it and an ace soundtrack
lastly for this week i watched dances with wolves, not everyones cup of tea but i like it and an ace soundtrack
monkey_roo said:^ ha! indeed! only there are significant threads of the film that have nothing to do with the book
True. I think a fair bit they padded out from the appendices/appendixes. Tho Legolas and his bird make no appearance in the book. No idea why they felt they needed him in it, or why he needed a bird.
weasel said:monkey_roo said:^ ha! indeed! only there are significant threads of the film that have nothing to do with the book
True. I think a fair bit they padded out from the appendices/appendixes. Tho Legolas and his bird make no appearance in the book. No idea why they felt they needed him in it, or why he needed a bird.
Jackson using directorial privelage, which has credible logic, showing once again he is a fan of the books and as such would have reasoning behind the inclusion of Legolas
http://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/legolas-is-the-thread-between-lord-of-the-rings-and-the-hobbit/
grinchy said:
Hobbit is fantastic, has always been my fav book of all time.
The first instalment is fantastic can't wait to see the next one
Bridge is a classic, fantastic film
I thought Costner was great in Dances With Wolves, in a similar vein ( not as good as ) a Dustin Hoffman Film called Little Big Man...if you havnt seen that I would advise to watch it...great film
monkey_roo
Sith Lord
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2011
- Messages
- 2,304
The inclusion of Legolas and the creation of Tauriel are quite the master stroke.
I don't want to give anything away but both are very relevant to the story Jackson is telling and also allow for deeper connections to what he has already done.
I don't want to give anything away but both are very relevant to the story Jackson is telling and also allow for deeper connections to what he has already done.
The wonderful world of Tolkeins creation...genius 8)
Hmmmm.
I despise directors who decide to re-write or "improve" (ie ruin) stories that have been successful books. The list of altered scripts that have benefitted from the (unwarranted) re-write is minute. In fact I'm struggling to think of ONE!
I am legend and World War Z are two that instantly spring to mind as having been ruined by Hollywood directors ****ing about with them.
If the Titanic had been a story in a book and had been made for the first time now, I'd put a lot of money on the two main characters surviving.
Why **** about with things? Is it impossible to tell the story as it was? It's popular cos it's a good story, you're onto a winner, don't **** about with it!
Now you've started me on Hollywood re-writing the history of the Second World War. Oh look the American's captured the Enigma machine in 1941 (in U157)! Ehh NO! They didn't! The British captured it in 1941, when they were fighting on their own cos America was sitting at home deciding what to do while eating Pumpkin pie!
Hitler dies in a Paris Cinema in 1944 (Inglorious basterds)? Sorry, no! Would have been nice if he had, god knows how many millions of people would have survived the war, but it didn't happen like that. Those millions died, and changing it to make it look like a load of Yanks managed it some how is little other than an insult to the dead.
Sorry, rant over.
I just despite the re-writing of great books or stories to suit Hollywood's agenda. Leave it alone! If you wanna write a great story, how about trying something NEW and, here's a new word for Hollywood....ORIGINAL! Something other than Superman 57 the re-re-reboot or yet another comic book movie!
Will let you know what I think of the Hobbit and Legolas being in it, but as you might have guessed, I'm not a fan of what Jackson has done.
I despise directors who decide to re-write or "improve" (ie ruin) stories that have been successful books. The list of altered scripts that have benefitted from the (unwarranted) re-write is minute. In fact I'm struggling to think of ONE!
I am legend and World War Z are two that instantly spring to mind as having been ruined by Hollywood directors ****ing about with them.
If the Titanic had been a story in a book and had been made for the first time now, I'd put a lot of money on the two main characters surviving.
Why **** about with things? Is it impossible to tell the story as it was? It's popular cos it's a good story, you're onto a winner, don't **** about with it!
Now you've started me on Hollywood re-writing the history of the Second World War. Oh look the American's captured the Enigma machine in 1941 (in U157)! Ehh NO! They didn't! The British captured it in 1941, when they were fighting on their own cos America was sitting at home deciding what to do while eating Pumpkin pie!
Hitler dies in a Paris Cinema in 1944 (Inglorious basterds)? Sorry, no! Would have been nice if he had, god knows how many millions of people would have survived the war, but it didn't happen like that. Those millions died, and changing it to make it look like a load of Yanks managed it some how is little other than an insult to the dead.
Sorry, rant over.
I just despite the re-writing of great books or stories to suit Hollywood's agenda. Leave it alone! If you wanna write a great story, how about trying something NEW and, here's a new word for Hollywood....ORIGINAL! Something other than Superman 57 the re-re-reboot or yet another comic book movie!
Will let you know what I think of the Hobbit and Legolas being in it, but as you might have guessed, I'm not a fan of what Jackson has done.
Totally get what your saying bud, and agree in principle, rewrites, and unnecessary inclusions, but then we had omissions previously, for example Tom Bombadil.
Legolas father, Thranduil the king Is included in line with the books, so in a way it would be harder to explain legolas not being there than his inclusion.
Also serves to accomplish the link of legolas aversion to Dwarves, into the LOTR story and the relationship change toward Gimli
So all in all I think it works for me
Having said all that, the decision to provide this offering as a Trilogy, at least gives more for the filmgoer to watch, and needed threading to do this, so I fully understand both sides of the argument, for me, personally I am fine with it, but as always need to watch the film first
Legolas father, Thranduil the king Is included in line with the books, so in a way it would be harder to explain legolas not being there than his inclusion.
Also serves to accomplish the link of legolas aversion to Dwarves, into the LOTR story and the relationship change toward Gimli
So all in all I think it works for me
Having said all that, the decision to provide this offering as a Trilogy, at least gives more for the filmgoer to watch, and needed threading to do this, so I fully understand both sides of the argument, for me, personally I am fine with it, but as always need to watch the film first
Not sure how to rate that.
Very good film, great non stop action, no boring songs or any of that crap. On that level brilliant film, if you like the other hobbit/LOTR's you'll like this one. The ending is a bit crap, but then it's always going to be when you make one book into three films. Still not sure it needed Legolas and his bird (who would get it, all day long). If you didn't know they weren't in the book you wouldn't guess, but i'm still not convinced they needed to do it.
All in, great film, well worth a watch, you won't be disappointed. Though i still maintain it would have been as good without Jackson ****ing with it.
Very good film, great non stop action, no boring songs or any of that crap. On that level brilliant film, if you like the other hobbit/LOTR's you'll like this one. The ending is a bit crap, but then it's always going to be when you make one book into three films. Still not sure it needed Legolas and his bird (who would get it, all day long). If you didn't know they weren't in the book you wouldn't guess, but i'm still not convinced they needed to do it.
All in, great film, well worth a watch, you won't be disappointed. Though i still maintain it would have been as good without Jackson ****ing with it.
