• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

The Movie Thread

I have no interest in Taken 2, I didn't really like the first one
Taken 3 is coming in 2013, in this one the bad guys kidnap the family dog... and Liam Neeson call his daughter and says:" Listen carefully Bobby is gonna be kidnaped, but don´t worry I'll rescue him..."
 
*** MILD SPOILERS *** MILD SPOILERS *** MILD SPOILERS *** MILD SPOILERS *** MILD SPOILERS *** MILD SPOILERS ***




Just saw The Hobbit - An Unexpected Journey. I personally feel that if The Lord Of The Rings were at all tiresome for you, you'll find something to complain about here. It doesn't have the advantage of being surprisingly good that The Fellowship Of The Ring had, as at the time people were taken aback by seeing Fantasy well done and done in a grown up manner (Harry Potter films grew up (a little) in the years following the Lord Of The Rings). This a very good story and I personally do not feel that it was "padded with filler". It sure is if you don't care about the fore-shadowing of events which lead to The Lord Of The Rings, which I found interesting. I found that it informed the audience nicely to make reference to the growing power of "the necromancer" and showing the ignorance and developing arrogance of Saruman. These things are somewhat necessary as far as bridging scenes to link the trilogies go. The scenes involving Radagast were not "Jar-Jar" like in the slightest as said by one reviewer and I found him to be quite a insular, reclusive wizard whom despite the fact he'd isolated himself, had plenty of common sense and perceptiveness.

The action at times felt a little pedestrian (though not at all times), perhaps mostly due to a focus on the 48fps 3D (I saw 24fps 2d, so some of the dimensional merits of aspects of these scenes may escape me). The apparent new villian for Thorin Oakenshield "Azog", seemed to be an adequately fleshed out character and promising, but still seemed a little too CGI based, unlike Gollum and it slightly hurt his realism, as it did the with the CGI models of actors at times during the Goblin cave escape (they appeared zippy, over animated and jumpy at moments).

Still, all in all Peter Jackson is on the right path here and people may be forgetting that the first stage of any journey is about establishing characters, past present and future plot and direction and tone. I feel he's done well here and deserves more than the "pass" or slightly better he seems to be getting from most. As far as negative criticism goes, there's very little I've read that's analytical about it and it seems to generalize what's supposed to be wrong into witty put downs. All in all, this is no perfect movie, but which one is? Which one deserves to escape criticism?

Lord Of The Rings has set high standards for genre fans of this type of "fantasy road movie", and that's understood, but when compared to that level, this movie does indeed do what it sets out to do, which is to tell The Hobbit and make what would be a dullish movie if it stuck to a page to page conversion an interesting if not overwhelmingly exciting adventure by adding what Jackson and co have found in various appendices.

As far as parts that surprised me? I really didn't think that the dialogue between Galadriel and Gandalf would carry any significance and plot wise it did turn out to be just light exposition, but I felt that Gandalf's speech about the Hobbit and how good is achieved through the little things in the world, by many little acts of goodness day to day, well I don't know about anyone else, but that does get to me.

The riddles in the dark scene is also very well handled and provides a more than satisfactory introduction to Gollum, the only problem being how Jackson will handle the original scene of Bilbo obtaining the ring, as there are obvious differences between LOTR and this scene in An Unexpected Journey.

Anyhow, overall I was more than satisfied and yes, I'd go so far as impressed, just not blown away and to be honest I never expected to be anyhow.

It's not possible to rate this movie on one scale when you have a fair idea of what type of camps people fall into, so I'll say this.

Tolkien Purist: 7
Tolkien Fan (across the board): 8
Lord Of The Rings Movie Fan: 9
General Movie Fan: 7
Thought LOTR was "alright at best": 6 (remember 5 is "average")

That's how I feel people might feel anyhow. It's well worth a look whatever category you fall into.
 
Last edited:
Skyfall a few weeks back. Not particularly a Bond connoisseur, but a good movie all around.
Far ahead of other films I've seen this year: the abominable Flight and rudderless Dark Knight Rises.
 
Went and saw the midnight screening of The Hobbit last night. I thought it was pretty damn good. Can't wait for the next one.
 
Very impressed by the hobbit, loved all the foreshadowing and references to LOTR. Also as I never really got much further then the hobbit and LOTR I like how the unfinished tales/apexes are being used to explore those areas.

Have to agree Azog was a little to CGI but I got used to it/it got better as the movie went on. He isn't a new character C A he was in the Return of the King a lot shorter and uglier but still in it.
 
I've read all of Hobbit and LOTR books, along with a book of stories Tolkien never finished but his son did and I'm quite well read on all the lore-ish stuff, and I'm reassured to hear you two liked it, because I've heard some pretty average reviews. I['ll be interested to see how they fit such a short book into three films. I shall be seeing it tommorrow
 
skyfall...

the bad guy is a "moffie"... unexpected but ok...

they ran out of idea's for gadgets... can't blame them... the good ones where all used in the 60s...

best part of the movie was when they went old school at the end... loved that!!! when I saw that DB5 I got a hard-one...

I love it when a movie has a good ending rather then a good beginning... you tend to remember the end more then the beginning...

so if the ending is crap, it spoils the whole movie...
 
Liked Skyfall but wish I had not had a pint before going in, after half hour of adverts then 2 and a half hours of film I thought my bladder was going to pop.
 
Liked Skyfall but wish I had not had a pint before going in, after half hour of adverts then 2 and a half hours of film I thought my bladder was going to pop.
that is sad... smoothing like that can spoil the experience... I learnt my lesson... watched MI:2, loved the movie but it spoilt everything for me... promised myself never again....
 
I did that with Sweeney Todd.
Can't remember whether I liked the film or not, just that I needed a **** for most of it!

Sent from my HTC Incredible S using Tapatalk 2
 
The new Total Recall. Found it ok, different to the original.
 
The new Total Recall. Found it ok, different to the original.
I too saw it. The setting was really well done but I thought the plot was a load of bager balls. Also saw Argo today. Reeeeeaaaalllly good, one of the better films this year
 
Finally watched Dark Knight Rises - thought it was ace. Think I like it more than The Dark Knight.
Also watched Ted - better than I expected. Pretty much an extended family guy episode.
Eastern Promises as well, which was very good. About russian gangsters in London - Aragorn is the main guy in it.
 
Went to see The Hobbit yesterday. I'd give it a resounding "was okay I suppose".
 
uh srs who gives a fk ?! haha nah kidding.

I saw Ted. And like MacFarlane and everything he touches, it was the most unutterably shitty thing I've seen in a while. I was...forced to see it.
 
Taken 2 was pretty good/okay. I enjoyed it. Nothing new or revolutionary, same recipe but still good.

Watched Cruel Intentions AGAIN. Excellent movie. Pulp Fiction again, and Total Recall as well.

Agree with whoever said the setting was great but the story was **** poor.
 
Hubby is a big Tolkien fan (I, on the other hand, am a Moorcock fan). I did see the first three movies, but at home, not in the theater. This time, to support my husband's interest, I went to the theater to see The Hobbit. I was not disappointed! Firstly, we saw it in glorious 2D - so much better than 3D! Visually the movie was just beautiful. I thought it was well-paced and entertaining, without any glaring flaws and the minor things aren't worth the time it takes to nitpick. Most importantly, it had Kili, the Hot Dwarf, which made the whole thing worthwhile! :p An excellent first installment of the trilogy.


das
 
I've seen the hobbit twice now, both times in 3D with the high frame rate and watching it a second time was just as good as the first. This is the first movie since The Lion King that I've seen more than once at the theatres.

Azog or whatever his name is I didn't think looked too CGI. Looked pretty damn realistic to me. Our security company did all the location security for the film and it was pretty amazing to see all these places transformed into Middle Earth on the big screen.
 
got the hunger games on bluray a while ago and watched it last night.

What a load of crap

I can understand if you are a fan of the books it gives something on the big screen that can kinda recreate that but as a stand alone film it's fricken pointless. Kinda like the Running Man but crap and unrealistic.

Saw the Hobit the other day.

Liked the first 3/4 of the movie but the action in the last 1/4 of the film was a bit overdone, escaping from impossible situation after impossible situation just started to get a bit stupid. The scene with bilbo and gollum was good. And the high frame rate made it the easiest 3d move I have watched.
 
Top