The Hobbit

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Location
Beds
I did enjoy it! Having said that, I'm not sure I can identify the need of a trilogy.. Still, better than most films I watched the last 6 months. I find the book to be far superior IMO though.
 

Melonfish

Evil Genius in training.
Location
Warrington, UK
both my kids love the lord of the rings films, they're still a bit young to be reading the books through yet (but the eldest is almost there)
anyway we took them this weekend to see the hobbit, i'd been dying to go for a while myself and this is absolutely the first film they've ever sat through and watched without once needing the loo. i was astounded, both of them riveted to their seats!
i thoroughly enjoyed it and i like how they've padded out the story with what is mostly unsaid in the book but more implied. i thought it was clever and the characters were great, none of these insane creepy nasal things you got on the radio dramas :biggrin:
i can't be waiting another two years for this tho... i want the rest NOW!
:biggrin:
 
OP
OP
Andrew_Culture

Andrew_Culture

Internet Marketing bod
both my kids love the lord of the rings films, they're still a bit young to be reading the books through yet (but the eldest is almost there)
this is absolutely the first film they've ever sat through and watched without once needing the loo. i was astounded,

I thought I'd done well for only popping out twice, and that was with the salty popcorn desiccating me!
 

SpokeyDokey

68, & my GP says I will officially be old at 70!
Moderator
LOTR great set of books - one of only three I have ever read twice (the other being Shardick & Papillon).

I did try to read The Hobbit once but it was childish. The Silmarillion was junk too.

Sorry about any wrong spellings!
 

Melonfish

Evil Genius in training.
Location
Warrington, UK
I thought I'd done well for only popping out twice, and that was with the salty popcorn desiccating me!
i was totally gobsmacked when the film ended and i realised we'd been sat there for 2 hours and 40 mins! one of those films where time flies. interesting that its only 6 chapters of the book mind. looking forward to the rest.
since the film the kids have been mythering for the hobbit lego, so christmas money is out at the moment even if it is extortionate. my youngest also keeps asking me "what have you got in your pocketses daddy?"
 
OP
OP
Andrew_Culture

Andrew_Culture

Internet Marketing bod
i was totally gobsmacked when the film ended and i realised we'd been sat there for 2 hours and 40 mins! one of those films where time flies. interesting that its only 6 chapters of the book mind. looking forward to the rest.
since the film the kids have been mythering for the hobbit lego, so christmas money is out at the moment even if it is extortionate. my youngest also keeps asking me "what have you got in your pocketses daddy?"

There's Hobbit lego? How odd!

I can't wait for my daughter to start quoting things - I've practically taught her to talk using Simpsons quotes.
 

sep1988

Active Member
Location
Cornwall
I cant say it would be my cup of tea.. OH wants to see it but the thought of nearly 3 hours is not enticing me.. !
 
3 films just seems greedy. If it's 3 for the Hobbit, it should've been nine for LOTR's. I'll probably wait for it to come out on DVD but this time I won't wait for the extended version.
 

Fab Foodie

hanging-on in quiet desperation ...
Location
Kirton, Devon.
I thought it too long, 2 filums would have been enough .... it's very stretched-out, but I did manage a nice kip during the early bits and Mrs FF put out some zzzz a few times too. So ralaxing if nothing else. To be honest I reckon I could have read the book during the time I was sat in the cinema.
The lad liked-it.
Golum was fabulous, liked the rock-giants battle and Rivendel almost how I imagined it. The 3D just about worksd and is not overblown like Avabore - dances with smurfs ....
Passable entertainment dressed as daylight robbery.
 

Cubist

Still wavin'
Location
Ovver 'thill
Mixed feelings here. I read the Hobbit, very much enjoyed it, and then when I was a year or two older read the LOTR. Three times now.

The way I see it is this. The Hobbit needs padding out to make it into a money spinner like LOTR. If we just work with that then some of the padding could have been spurious. However, so far, the padding has been a background build up. It sets the historical background and context of Middle Earth, and sets the scene for LOTR. Don't forget, the book The Hobbit didn't do this because it wasn't necessarily a prequel to LOTR. So: so far the padding has not been frivolous or cynical as far as I can make out. In many ways it has to join up contexts and plot syntaxes for those who only watch the films.

It's far more light-hearted, possibly tongue in cheek, even camp-humourous. Nesbitt's one liner gives that away. After all I think Tolkien wrote a serious enough book, but it was a kids' book nevertheless. The Dwarves are funny as well as noble and fierce. The Elves are noble fierce and elegant, the goblins and Orcs revolting and evil. Thus the characters are true to the concept. Saruman and Galadriel show the beginnings of what is to come later in their personal quests and all set in amongst a good rollicking adventure.

I'm looking forward to the next instalment, not least because the LOTR trilogy was released just before my birthday, and we always go to the cinema then a curry. ^_^
 
Top Bottom