yay... may i ask, have you seen "before sunrise"?

The Ethan Hawke movie, right? No, I haven't seen it, but it has been recommended to me before. What do you think of it?

those two movies are great. the third one is done filming i think.

Jackson's best film is Heavenly Creatures.

The Frighteners.

How do you feel about those two movies, I'm very curious. I loved Before Sunrise the first time I watched it but kind of soured on it the second time. Before Sunset however, is just about perfect and I love it. Can't wait for Before Midnight.

i've had the same experience with "before sunrise", but that first time was simply magical... i was disappointed with "before sunset", but who knows, if i watch it a second time, maybe i'll have the opposite experience with it. didn't know a third movie is being made - i'm curious!

The Hobbit - An Unexpected Journey
possible spoilers, I'll highlight them in white

Well, this was mostly a great movie. I think the more story-book nature of The Hobbit (book) to begin with gives it an advantage, and while there is some of the self-seriousness and accompanying closing-in-shots that plague The Lord of the Rings trilogy (especially The Return of the King), they are done less so, and it is used during appropriate moments (LotR trilogy is already a bit darker and heavier, and the melodramatic/soap opera shots tended to undermine it rather than help it). It's been years since I've read any Tolkien, but I know this isn't exactly the same as the book (and it's my understanding they included some little things from LotR that were left out, and have incorporated Silmarion material), but it works well. I think the action sequences are almost all awesome (only toward the tail-end of the escape from the goblin layer does the Jacksonian excess get to be much, some of the bridge/scaffolding collapses, manipulations, and surfing start approaching the dual-TRex-vine-choreography of King Kong). The beginning background/history sequence is again pretty awesome, and the dwarves are brilliant as well.

I'd give it an 8/10, and I look forward to seeing the next two.

Ah I did wonder if they were incorporating The Silmarillion material. I'm halfway through a re read of The Hobbit before watching the movie but I'd started before finding out that there are three movies for a 380 page book! But that makes a little more sense if The Silmarillion is being referenced. I'm pleased to read a couple of positive reviews because I've seen some other negative ones and I must confess to being a bit cynical about the trilogy of films and characters such as Galadriel being written into it by Jackson.

Yeah, there's some material from the rewriting (and even kind of obnoxious winks to how these things connect to the LotR trilogy) that you could do without, but it's (at least, this far into The Hobbit trilogy) small enough where it doesn't detract from the meat of it.

Good stuff, Unk, looking forward to seeing it now!

His approach made a lot more sense to me after watching a few of Jackson's video blogs on the making of. I'm putting off seeing the film until I finish the book, which is being delayed by sickness and Christmas projects. Luckily it is a quick read and I have a vacation upcoming. Much, much needed vacation!

The Hobbit

This is not so much a review, but a reaction. A reaction to the criticism that has been shown through what I find to be pretty lazy, and poor critical reviews. A lot of the problems from reviews from what I have seen revolves around a few points: "Story is stretched too thin; one 300 page book now three movies"; the use of CGI; the same plot elements of falling into danger, and then suddenly being pulled out of said danger; 48 frames per second.

For the story is stretched too thin, i had this worry going into it too, but it is quickly dashed away when one sees what Jackson is doing by incorporating text that isn't used in the Hobbit, but is still referential enough to be used as a build up for the following films as well as the Lord of the Rings Triliogy; i don't feel as any of his additions as deterred from the main point of the novel, or bogged down the film - it creates a necessary balance to the joyful adventure side that the Hobbit was intended to be, and the more serious novel that the Lord of the Rings is supposed to be.

Some of the use of CGI is a bit much. The entire Goblin kingdom might go on for a bit too much, and it does lend it self to a bit too many narrative tropes where the characters fall into a trouble, and then finally find themselves out of it. Thats fine, and I had this problem, too, but this isn't the main problem that people seem to be having with the film. And while this is a fine critique, the same critique could be said about the Lord of the Rings and that was universally lauded, so it just doesn't add up to a natural narrative if this is the major problem of a poor film and a major problem of a good film.

The Framerate for me was bothering at the beginning and felt like a rushed PC game, and I didn't like it, i suppose, until I got used to it. Granted, I don't want to get used to it, and I want to see the movie again in a non high frame rate setting.

Overall, if you liked the Lord of the Rings, I feel that you would like this too. There is more humor, and less drama, but at the moment it fits for the overall narrative, and isn't disjointed by this juxtaposation of themes from scene to scene. The action scenes at times can feel a bit formulaic and repetitive, but the same can be said about the Lord of the Rings triliogy, although these thoughts only come afterwards; while watching, these thoughts do not come up at all and the film length does not seem to ride on the viewer. Lincoln is about 15 minutes shorter, and much more dialogue driven, and doesn't feel lengthy to me nor most critics. I don't feel like the length of this film is too long.

Then again, I am the type of person that saw this film at Midnight, so my opinion is a bit biased to begin with, but overall I think the Hobbit is a good adaptation of the Tolkien film, and an even better look into the Middle Earth Mythology. Can't wait for the next two.

Some of the reviews were scaring me a bit, but if it's good enough for Rob Thomas, god dammit it's good enough for me.

I think a lot of people just expected it to be LOTR all over again and now they're after Jackson's head on a pike because it isn't. It really, really isn't as bad as a lot of the naysayers are claiming it is.