The Hobbit

[jgmcdee]

The 48fps thing is definitely different, but I'm not sure if it is any worse or better than 24fps. For the first 5-10 minutes I did have a feeling that things were often moving too fast, but that soon went away and in general I thought that in general it looked really good. I'm also not fussed about it being over three films, although that might change after I've seen all three if there is too much padding.

It's not as epic as Lord of the Rings, and it seems to be aimed at a slightly younger demographic, but given that both of these things are true of the book as well I don't consider them detractors.

 

[jgmcdee]

[Stupid double post]

 

[topbanana36]

Not as much as a feel good than Lord of the Rings and alot darker in parts, would not bring my child to watch it. Great to watch if you like the Lord of the Rings like I do.

 

[Twizzle]

It's too fleshed-out and clearly for the mighty $£ it will make x 3.
However after sleeping through the superdull intro party scenes (which still fell short on spirit/drama too imo), I found myself getting involved.
The 3d was disappointing but for 1 moth.

 

[HastingsSeagull]

Going to see it tomorrow but imagine it would have made 2 good films rather than just 1 BUT...... 3 sounds poor choice. Book does start slow like LOTR does so not fussed about that aspect, but know reviews have gernally been bad from pros and good from punters.

 

[SeagullSongs]

I thought it was very good. I haven't read the book (like I didn't read LotR before those films came out) and I thought it was easy enough to follow. Very clever directing at times.

 

[HovaGirl]

I only just discovered its going to be three films rather than one. For this reason, I'm out.

Same here. No point in 3 films (except to make loadsa dosh for someone).

 

[BrianSwan]

Saw it online, good film.. As said already more of a child like LOTR which the book was.

Seemed kind of 'Avatar ish' with the cgi.

 

[Acker79]

YouTube