Peter Jackson's The Hobbit and Sequel!

Teaser had more mystery in it. More awe inspiring.

There's a difference in mood that is interesting don't you think?

If they can capture in the film how the Hobbit-feel differs from the LOTR-feel in the books, that's impressive.

Hm, I'm not sure what I want... The LOTR-feel is really good of course.

I think I tried to say that the difference in feel is already noticed in the short trailer. And I'm not sure what it is. Is it visually different or in dialogue or in 'tone', whatever that is? It seems lighter.

Looking forward anyway!

How's the movie, in essence? Also it's weird than when you often comment movies, we have to ask you on a 2nd question to actually comment on the scores as well

What a really good film! Like Thor says, it's wonderful and an often emotional return of the characters, the music and ... well, the whole universe of Middle-Earth. When the first music comes in, the tone is set. The introduction and history of the Dwarves is a very strong opening! The scenes in the Shire, which many say are too long, I thought was great and very atmospheric!

It's a less serious, or lets say a more chiller/easy-going affair, then the other fellowship. There's more humour because of the many Dwarves and some awkward jokes as well. However, that doesn't really spoil much of the fun.

The music is not as spectacular as Fellowship, and there's really a lot of it. Hearing the dulcimer (?) again when Gollem returns was spine tingling! Near the end there's also a fantastic piece [spoiler]when the big birds return[/spoiler]. I love how Shore takes the Lonely Mountain theme to a new Fellowship theme, it has a bit a similar sound and structure, and it returns in similar scenes (you know, when the camera flies over mountaintops and you see the group running enthusiastically over ridges without fear).

I've seen the regular version. And I sat next to a lonely incredible stinking smelly man that had smoked cigarettes too much. I had a headache near the end. Fuck.

I really enjoyed the movie, I didn't have any issues with the frame rate.

My only complaint was that I felt the movie was maybe a little long, which is surprising considering they apparently splitting one book into three films.


I didn't think the Radagast the Brown scenes were that bad.

What is hfr?

Ahhhh this is what they call it! Thanks

Saw it in HFR 3D IMAX today. Did not enjoy it at all. May elaborate later. I will say that this is Peter Jackson in bloated 'Kong' mode throughout.

The score loses all thematic integrity thanks to temp-track love in the last act.

Bits of Two Towers and Return of the King which have no relevance. Given the lengthy recording and composing schedule, it seems cheap.

EY! Just noticed something!

No idea if this has been discovered yet, but the extended tracks at the Special Edition album of The Hobbit aren't just extended, they're quite alternative! Inspired by a comment on Filmtracks ("to those who liked that one glorious Misty Mountain theme outburst in "Roast Mutton" (the non-deluxe version"), I thought, wait a minute, why specifically mention 'the non-deluxe version'?, and looked up the track. Turns out, THAT GLORIOUS MISTY MOUNTAIN THEME OUTBURST IS NOT ON THE DELUXE, EXTENDED VERSION! (it's the outburst around the 2:21 mark of Roast Mutton on the regular edition). Darn, since I love the theme and thought it wasn't developed enough on album.

Now, does anyone know of a more detailed description of the differences between these albums? Are there any more thematic statements or interesting material that's different on the albums, as opposed to just extended on the Special? Do I have to buy the regular as well, now? Because I'm tempted...

So it seems the tracks aren't just edited down for the regular version, they're all different takes?

EDIT:
To elaborate:
OLD FRIENDS: At the 1:50 minute mark, the Shire theme is at the regular edition stated with a simple whistle, while the Special Edition has the more fully orchestral Shire version.
ROAST MUTTON: At 2:21m., the Misty Mountains theme is quite impressively stated on the regular edition, not featured on the Special Edition.
MOON RUNES: The standard version ends on a more quiet note, with on harp an understated version of the Misty Mountains theme, which is, again, not on the special.

I saw the film in 3D and 48 fps. It was so stunning visually, the flight scene was one of the best experiences I had in a cinema.

I had a very different reaction. It is the extended scenes, e.g. at Bilbo's house in the beginning, that are the real FORCE in this film, IMO. I don't think it's 'bloated' at all. The 2 hour 50 minutes went by like nothing.
But for the most part, it's the audiovisual experience that sticks in my mind -- one of the greatest I've ever had in a cinema.

It does sound that way!

Here are some of the things I thought were wrong with the film (not for the most part spoilers, but I'll put the tag there just in case):

[spoiler]- It tries to be equal parts slapstick comedy and serious "epic" action/adventure; each of those aspects stops the other one from being entirely successful
- There's the classic "prequel problem" that the filmmakers assume that because characters are lovable from the films that are already known, people will love them by virtue of them being on the screen in the prequel; that's a particular problem with Gandalf, who spends the film being either comic relief or bringing one deus ex machina moment after another by rescuing the dwarves and Frodo from a completely impossible situation by appearing ten minutes into said situation and banging his staff on the ground to make the bad guys disperse
- There are far too many scenes there that add nothing - I don't think the Cate Blanchett stuff was in the book, so it's only there as an excuse to get Cate Blanchett in the film and it just doesn't add anything; the whole Radagast business seems entirely extraneous; the meeting with Gollum again seems to be there only to make people say "Ooooh, Gollum!" but you could have just shown Frodo finding the ring, cut to Gollum discovering that he's lost it a few minutes later and saved yourself half an hour of almost painfully boring film
- The Barry Humphries (Barry Humphries!) character is absurd and appears to have a giant scrotum hanging from his face - he's meant to be this menacing leader of a deadly foe but is just far, far too silly to have the desired dramatic impact
- Essentially, it isn't really a film - it's the first act of a film - this isn't The Fellowship of the Ring to the Lord of the Rings trilogy, this is the first third of The Fellowship of the Ring to The Fellowship of the Ring[/spoiler]

There are certainly some positives though:
- Martin Freeman is excellent as Bilbo (really, really excellent)
- The action is handled with aplomb
- The thing is for the most part visually stunning (though the 3D seemed entirely extraneous and unnecessary in this case to me, and I'm usually a voice-in-the-wilderness-proponent of 3D)

My companions had a mixed reaction. Mrs S liked it, my Tolkein-fanatic friend didn't, but her non-Tolkein-fanatic partner did.