If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   Though it wouldn't seem humanly possible, The Hobbit is even more boring than the Lord of the Rings trilogy   (slate.com) divider line 283
    More: Sad, The Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit, Teletubbies, Philippa Boyens, Smaug, fantasy literature, Andy Serkis, Ian Holm  
•       •       •

9771 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 08 Dec 2012 at 2:57 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



283 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-08 11:30:43 AM  
More time in Middle Earth is exactly what The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey provides-so much more that the movie starts to feel like some Buddhist exercise in deliberately inflicted tedium.

look, just because you've got a 30 second attention span doesn't mean that the rest of us have that same problem. you want instant gratification and lots of flash bang in your face screaming action....go watch the evening news. then get distracted by a shiny object on your way to the bathroom. or whatever it is you subhumans do with your pathetic lives. But those of us who actually LIKE storybuilding are going to watch this movie and enjoy it. yes - we're going...to enjoy....a movie that you hate.

and there is NOTHING you can do about it. Not a gotdamn thing.

madding, isn't it?
 
2012-12-08 11:30:47 AM  
You liked Transformers, didn't you.
 
2012-12-08 11:40:25 AM  
Hmm, take a short light reading book and turn it into 3 movies? Yeah, they're going to have more than a bit of filler in them.
 
2012-12-08 11:44:19 AM  

ShawnDoc: Hmm, take a short light reading book and turn it into 3 movies? Yeah, they're going to have more than a bit of filler in them.


not necessarily. Tolikien's books always were a bit 'wordy'. Add in some of the material from the Simarillion to the Hobbit and you've got a six part epic that spans a 1000 years.
 
2012-12-08 11:44:27 AM  
Tolkien fans really are a bunch of pretentious pricks - so many more worthwhile fantasy/sci fi series deserve more attention. Instead we get a slightly edgier version of Narnia... in 48fps.
 
2012-12-08 11:44:27 AM  

Weaver95: and there is NOTHING you can do about it. Not a gotdamn thing.


Where there's a whip, there's a way.
 
2012-12-08 11:48:17 AM  
If The Hobbit is 'more' of whatever the LOTRs was, it's going to kick farking arse.
 
2012-12-08 11:48:43 AM  
I am shocked, shocked, that a lot of adults are finding this children's movie, based off of a children's book, to be below their standards. Shocked, I say.
 
2012-12-08 11:50:18 AM  

Elzar: Tolkien fans really are a bunch of pretentious pricks - so many more worthwhile fantasy/sci fi series deserve more attention. Instead we get a slightly edgier version of Narnia... in 48fps.


and we're STILL gonna enjoy the hell outta this movie...

muhahahahahahaha!
 
2012-12-08 11:50:41 AM  

ShawnDoc: Hmm, take a short light reading book and turn it into 3 movies? Yeah, they're going to have more than a bit of filler in them.


Yeah, I was kind of baffled when they made it three movies. Are they even going to leave The Shire in the 1st movie?
 
2012-12-08 12:18:05 PM  
I'm not a huge fan, but I found all the other movies enjoyable and well made. I guess geeks need warring factions to feel like they're part of something bigger, but honestly, the amount of passion and hard work that went into this project is irrefutable and frankly dazzling. I just can't find my yawn button when it comes to these films.

Plus, ian McKellen can do no wrong.
 
2012-12-08 12:22:53 PM  
I loved it the first time it was a movie.  Doubt I'm interested in 6 hours of Bilbo.  
 
When does Enders Game come out?  Or something based on the Wheel of Time? 
 
2012-12-08 12:24:19 PM  

I_C_Weener: When does Enders Game come out?


Isn't that next summer? I saw Harrison Ford all suited up.
 
2012-12-08 12:31:15 PM  

Weaver95: Elzar: Tolkien fans really are a bunch of pretentious pricks - so many more worthwhile fantasy/sci fi series deserve more attention. Instead we get a slightly edgier version of Narnia... in 48fps.

and we're STILL gonna enjoy the hell outta this movie...

muhahahahahahaha!


Until about halfway through the second movie when you run out screaming HOW DO I GET THE BOREDOM OUT OF MY HEAD?!

Seriously, did you read the Hobbit? It ain't that long.
 
2012-12-08 12:34:47 PM  
FTFA As someone with a lifelong resistance to fantasy literature (even as a kid, it was "This book has wizards in it? Next")

Yeah, your opinion is only relevant to people who also start from that perception.

The rest of us will probably love it. Make fun of nerds all you want to, but our favorite stories are the big moneymakers in theaters these days. (Maybe we're not the minority the writer of TFA thinks we are!)
 
2012-12-08 01:13:47 PM  
You'll have to excuse him. He's not "down" with the trilogy

thumbs.anyclip.com
 
2012-12-08 01:14:16 PM  
While it's obvious that subby is trolling, it makes sense that there will be some slow parts in the three movies made from one book, because of the nature of the beast.

At least they're not trying to squeeze a very long book and a sizeable chunk of another into a 100-minute movie, like a certain train wreck of ten years ago which shall remain nameless.
 
2012-12-08 01:15:14 PM  

I_C_Weener: I loved it the first time it was a movie.  Doubt I'm interested in 6 hours of Bilbo.  
 
When does Enders Game come out?  Or something based on the Wheel of Time?


The Eye of the World - 2017/2018/2020
The Great Hunt - 2022/2024/2026
The Dragon Reborn - 2029/2030/2032
The Shadow Rising - 2034/2037/2040
The Fires of Heaven - 2041/2045/2050
Lord of Chaos - Elected in 2052
The Eye of the World (Reboot) - 2055
 
2012-12-08 01:18:59 PM  

FriarReb98: it's obvious that subby is trolling


This is different. Good trolling usually involves some level of wit, humor, and/or nuance.

This is just being negative for the sake of being negative. It's not trolling. It's Music Tabbing.
 
2012-12-08 01:24:58 PM  
I sort of agree because it should have been a single movie. There is going to be a ton of filler -- maybe they'll show us a lot of little birds, like in The Thin Red Line.
 
2012-12-08 01:26:09 PM  
When they first announced they were making the movie I thought one 3hr film would do it justice. Then they decided to stretch it to two movies and I thought OK it's just going to be like LotR with the extended stuff in the theatrical release. When they pushed it out to 3 movies at likely well over 2hrs each I just went ahead and assumed there would be long boring stretches and terrible pacing.

I'm still going to see it and looking forward to it, but with tempered expectations.
 
2012-12-08 01:29:01 PM  

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: FriarReb98: it's obvious that subby is trolling

This is different. Good trolling usually involves some level of wit, humor, and/or nuance.

This is just being negative for the sake of being negative. It's not trolling. It's Music Tabbing.


The word "farkwittery" best descibes it, imho.
 
2012-12-08 01:30:30 PM  

MayoSlather: When they first announced they were making the movie I thought one 3hr film would do it justice. Then they decided to stretch it to two movies and I thought OK it's just going to be like LotR with the extended stuff in the theatrical release. When they pushed it out to 3 movies at likely well over 2hrs each I just went ahead and assumed there would be long boring stretches and terrible pacing.

I'm still going to see it and looking forward to it, but with tempered expectations.


I've heard they're including all kinds of background stuff in it. So I suppose stuff from the Silmarillion.
 
2012-12-08 01:31:02 PM  

SilentStrider: The word "farkwittery" best descibes it, imho.


I'll take that, aye.
 
2012-12-08 01:36:03 PM  

MayoSlather: When they first announced they were making the movie I thought one 3hr film would do it justice. Then they decided to stretch it to two movies and I thought OK it's just going to be like LotR with the extended stuff in the theatrical release. When they pushed it out to 3 movies at likely well over 2hrs each I just went ahead and assumed there would be long boring stretches and terrible pacing.

I'm still going to see it and looking forward to it, but with tempered expectations.


I was gonna say something, but you summed up my thoughts almost perfectly.
 
2012-12-08 01:46:58 PM  

Weaver95: More time in Middle Earth is exactly what The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey provides-so much more that the movie starts to feel like some Buddhist exercise in deliberately inflicted tedium.

look, just because you've got a 30 second attention span doesn't mean that the rest of us have that same problem. you want instant gratification and lots of flash bang in your face screaming action....go watch the evening news. then get distracted by a shiny object on your way to the bathroom. or whatever it is you subhumans do with your pathetic lives. But those of us who actually LIKE storybuilding are going to watch this movie and enjoy it. yes - we're going...to enjoy....a movie that you hate.

and there is NOTHING you can do about it. Not a gotdamn thing.

madding, isn't it?


This, motherfarkers.
 
2012-12-08 01:52:40 PM  

Weaver95: not necessarily. Tolikien's books always were a bit 'wordy'. Add in some of the material from the Simarillion to the Hobbit and you've got a six part epic that spans a 1000 years.


It's gotta be this. It's probably 50% storyline from the Hobbit, 30% the quest of Gandalf into Dol Guldur to find out whether Sauron is the real thing or not, and 20% utterly made-up shiat ala Aragorn's 'death' in the battle against the Wargs.
 
2012-12-08 01:52:50 PM  

Weaver95: More time in Middle Earth is exactly what The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey provides-so much more that the movie starts to feel like some Buddhist exercise in deliberately inflicted tedium.

look, just because you've got a 30 second attention span doesn't mean that the rest of us have that same problem. you want instant gratification and lots of flash bang in your face screaming action....go watch the evening news. then get distracted by a shiny object on your way to the bathroom. or whatever it is you subhumans do with your pathetic lives. But those of us who actually LIKE storybuilding are going to watch this movie and enjoy it. yes - we're going...to enjoy....a movie that you hate.

and there is NOTHING you can do about it. Not a gotdamn thing.

madding, isn't it?


Also, THANK you.
 
2012-12-08 01:57:23 PM  
I like how everyone keeps saying "1 book" as if that would be the relevant metric. As if 3 movies from 3 100 page books is perfectly acceptable, but 3 movies from 1 300 page book is maddening.
 
2012-12-08 02:00:45 PM  
I never read The Hobbit, so I'm looking forward to this. It gets to stand on its own without me filling in gaps.
 
2012-12-08 02:02:16 PM  

Weaver95: ShawnDoc: Hmm, take a short light reading book and turn it into 3 movies? Yeah, they're going to have more than a bit of filler in them.

not necessarily. Tolikien's books always were a bit 'wordy'. Add in some of the material from the Simarillion to the Hobbit and you've got a six part epic that spans a 1000 years.


The Hobbit was the one book he wasn't wordy. That and Children of Hurin. The problem, I think, stems from Jackson and co. Trying to make it epic.

Hobbits were always the readers view of a bigger world- Tolkien hinted at the past, massive epic events that happened elsewhere. Th example of Aragorn/ Arawen love story in LOTR or Saurons reappearance during the Hobbit- and Gandalf.

Tolkien was a geek himself; interested in languages and obsessed with creating a mythology for England. He would make a backstory out of poems, words and the like.

Except Tolkien only kept relevant information in the story-Everything else he threw in an index. For example- the Book describes Thorins dinner speech about Bilbo as "sarcastic". Tolkien actually had a backstory where Thorin yelled at Gandalf for picking an obvious idiot. He also had an explination of why Gandalf chose Bilbo- and why huge sent such a small group instead of a dwarf army.

But he never stopped to say why- because the Hibbit was based on Bilbo's diary. Everything was his point of view.

If the article is to believe: Jackson is starting out telling the backstory... Which is then repeated in the dinner. And he's including extra material: the White Council- The first appearance of Sauron and the battle that kept Gandalf away from the final leg of the journey,
 
Pud [TotalFark]
2012-12-08 02:08:54 PM  

I_C_Weener: I loved it the first time it was a movie.  Doubt I'm interested in 6 hours of Bilbo.  
 
When does Enders Game come out?  Or something based on the Wheel of Time?


I'm OK with multiple movies being made for a single book. I usually had read the book before seeing the movie, and they have to cut too much out in order to meet reasonable time constraints.

That said, could imagine how many movies they would need to make (not to mention the budgets) to cover the WoT series? I'm game for it, but I doubt there would not be enough others to cover the cost of the production.
 
2012-12-08 02:13:12 PM  
I'm a fan, and Peter Jackson can do no wrong.

I'm a fan, and Peter Jackson can do no wrong.

I...I think it's impossible for us to think different...I...uh....

I'm a fan, and Peter Jackson can do no wrong!
 
2012-12-08 02:19:08 PM  

impaler: I like how everyone keeps saying "1 book" as if that would be the relevant metric. As if 3 movies from 3 100 page books is perfectly acceptable, but 3 movies from 1 300 page book is maddening.


Let's put it into perspective for them. How about an entire media empire inspired by three movies based on a derivative meat-and-potatoes hero arc that can be summed up on a cocktail napkin?

ecx.images-amazon.com

And it's still mostly awesome.
 
2012-12-08 02:23:43 PM  

GAT_00: MayoSlather: When they first announced they were making the movie I thought one 3hr film would do it justice. Then they decided to stretch it to two movies and I thought OK it's just going to be like LotR with the extended stuff in the theatrical release. When they pushed it out to 3 movies at likely well over 2hrs each I just went ahead and assumed there would be long boring stretches and terrible pacing.

I'm still going to see it and looking forward to it, but with tempered expectations.

I've heard they're including all kinds of background stuff in it. So I suppose stuff from the Silmarillion.


They only have the rights to hobbit/LOTR. Tolkien estate aren't fans of Jackson's interpretation- Tolkien had written a lot of back story /deleted scenes which were collected in Unfinished Tales. Such as how Sauraman corruption of the White Council and the Hunt for the ring. Of why how Sauron was going to use Smaug to destroy Rivendale. And the most important: why Gandalf chose bumpkin Bilbo and only 13 dwarves to go against Smaug.

Of corse, the Big secret is that Tolkien never had the idea of the One Ring until he wrote LOTR.

He rewrote chunks of Riddle scene to fit the new narrative... The retconned of the geek literature.
 
2012-12-08 02:34:53 PM  
Where's all the hot 20 year-old babes in skimpy outfits? Not even one car chase FFS?? No sexy vampires? A creative filmmaker would find a way to work in a few massive explosions! OK, so they don't have guns, but how about a couple of fine, buff wizards casting wicked spells at each other? Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt! PEW PEW PEW!!!
 
2012-12-08 02:37:06 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: Where's all the hot 20 year-old babes in skimpy outfits? Not even one car chase FFS?? No sexy vampires? A creative filmmaker would find a way to work in a few massive explosions! OK, so they don't have guns, but how about a couple of fine, buff wizards casting wicked spells at each other? Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt! PEW PEW PEW!!!


images3.wikia.nocookie.net

"I'm listening."
 
2012-12-08 03:00:22 PM  
Let me guess....more walking. That'll surely be enjoyable-----zzzzzzzzzzz
 
2012-12-08 03:02:16 PM  
I guess we're getting at least a week of articles trolling Tolkien fans. Just roll your eyes and move on.
 
2012-12-08 03:03:46 PM  
No one will be seated during the thrilling walking scene!
 
2012-12-08 03:09:17 PM  
Serious question: my 8-year-old son read and loved The Hobbit. He wants to see the movie. Good idea?
 
2012-12-08 03:09:23 PM  
I liked the trilogy as much as anyone, but it certainly drags in many places.
 
2012-12-08 03:13:07 PM  

FarkingReading: Serious question: my 8-year-old son read and loved The Hobbit. He wants to see the movie. Good idea?


I was about 6 when the animated Hobbit movie came out on network television. I loved it, and my parents got me the book right away.
 
2012-12-08 03:13:42 PM  
So, three movies, around 9 hours total, so basically one season of high production value TV show. Sure, why not.
 
2012-12-08 03:13:55 PM  

I_C_Weener: I loved it the first time it was a movie.  Doubt I'm interested in 6 hours of Bilbo.  
 
When does Enders Game come out?  Or something based on the Wheel of Time?


It has been years since I thought of those as a movie but then you brought it up and I found this.
Evidently, it has been years since Universal has thought of it too.
Maybe someday.
 
2012-12-08 03:14:47 PM  

Weaver95: More time in Middle Earth is exactly what The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey provides-so much more that the movie starts to feel like some Buddhist exercise in deliberately inflicted tedium.

look, just because you've got a 30 second attention span doesn't mean that the rest of us have that same problem. you want instant gratification and lots of flash bang in your face screaming action....go watch the evening news. then get distracted by a shiny object on your way to the bathroom. or whatever it is you subhumans do with your pathetic lives. But those of us who actually LIKE storybuilding are going to watch this movie and enjoy it. yes - we're going...to enjoy....a movie that you hate.

and there is NOTHING you can do about it. Not a gotdamn thing.

madding, isn't it?


DEATHBLOW.

Subby and the article writer can die.
 
2012-12-08 03:16:16 PM  

Alphax: FarkingReading: Serious question: my 8-year-old son read and loved The Hobbit. He wants to see the movie. Good idea?

I was about 6 when the animated Hobbit movie came out on network television. I loved it, and my parents got me the book right away.


But the cartoon, while excellent, is still a cartoon. I'm worried this version will bore and/or frighten him. Fark it. I'll probably take him.
 
2012-12-08 03:19:12 PM  

MayoSlather: When they first announced they were making the movie I thought one 3hr film would do it justice. Then they decided to stretch it to two movies and I thought OK it's just going to be like LotR with the extended stuff in the theatrical release. When they pushed it out to 3 movies at likely well over 2hrs each I just went ahead and assumed there would be long boring stretches and terrible pacing.

I'm still going to see it and looking forward to it, but with tempered expectations.


eh, pretty much my thoughts. Even though the Hobbit is a short book, I can see it being a long (~4/5 hour) movie if literally translated and would probably still be fine. But three 3-hour movies? Eh, it just kind of seems like it moves from "literally translated" into pedantic and bloated territory; or even worse: padded out for the sake of getting even more of a box office draw.

for the record,because someone else will probably bring it up: I do think the extended versions of LOTR were much better than the theatrical version. You could tell where pieces were missing in the theatrical version. Extending The Hobbit is quite a bit different as it seems like they're not only not cutting out anything, but adding more than what was there in the first place.
 
2012-12-08 03:19:31 PM  
Is this the thread where people will complain about missing their 24fps aliasing artifacts?
 
2012-12-08 03:23:11 PM  
FTFA: "As someone with a lifelong resistance to fantasy literature (even as a kid, it was "This book has wizards in it? Next")"

Stopped reading there.
 
Displayed 50 of 283 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report