• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

I saw 'The Hobbit' tonight...(Spoiler free)

Started by BaltimoreLauren,

261 posts in this topic

Hado

Hado

Posted
Posted
The only 3D movie that didn't make me feel like tossing my cookies was Dredd, and I think that's only because the whole movie was in slow motion. 2D Hobbit for this kid, which most likely means a trip to the ghetto theatre that doesn't even have stadium seating.
Canadian Ghettos :cloud9:
It ain't in the ghetto, it is ghetto. lol
Link to comment
Share on other sites
porky

porky

Posted
Posted
How will we know what theaters are screening the film in 24 fps versus 48? Fandango doesn't seem to be making any distinction.

 

 

www.48fpsmovies.com/48-fps-theater-list

 

http://www.thehobbit.com/hfr3d/index.html

 

Thanks. Looks like I'll be seeing it in 24.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uptown_Theater_%28Washington,_D.C.%29

 

me too. i like this theater. it's not only close, but old-school cool and has some history: world premieres of Star Trek, Dances With Wolves, and Jurassic Park were there :cloud9:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
montrealfilmguy

montrealfilmguy

Posted
Posted
I think the ending was done well. It didn't feel like a total cliffhanger. It was a fitting end to what felt like a long, long movie.

 

It didn't feel like...it WAS. Anything over 2hrs 30min is too long.

 

 

Nonsense.

 

As Roger Ebert once said ;"No bad film is too short,no good film is too long.

 

 

The Godfather

Lawrence of Arabia

Casino

Schindler's list

Goodfellas

Apocalypse now

The right stuff

Pulp fiction

 

 

The only factor in film is how much you are willing to invest in watching one.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted
I think the ending was done well. It didn't feel like a total cliffhanger. It was a fitting end to what felt like a long, long movie.

 

It didn't feel like...it WAS. Anything over 2hrs 30min is too long.

 

 

Nonsense.

 

As Roger Ebert once said ;"No bad film is too short,no good film is too long.

 

 

The Godfather

Lawrence of Arabia

Casino

Schindler's list

Goodfellas

Apocalypse now

The right stuff

Pulp fiction

 

 

The only factor in film is how much you are willing to invest in watching one.

 

 

 

Agreed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
montrealfilmguy

montrealfilmguy

Posted
Posted
I think the ending was done well. It didn't feel like a total cliffhanger. It was a fitting end to what felt like a long, long movie.

 

It didn't feel like...it WAS. Anything over 2hrs 30min is too long.

 

 

Nonsense.

 

As Roger Ebert once said ;"No bad film is too short,no good film is too long.

 

 

The Godfather

Lawrence of Arabia

Casino

Schindler's list

Goodfellas

Apocalypse now

The right stuff

Pulp fiction

It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World

 

The only factor in film is how much you are willing to invest in watching one.

 

 

 

Agreed.

;)

 

 

Of course,i just didnt want to list a dozen others.

 

The PQ on the Mad mad mad world Bluray is blissfully :cloud9:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Senormac

Senormac

Posted
Posted
I think the ending was done well. It didn't feel like a total cliffhanger. It was a fitting end to what felt like a long, long movie.

 

It didn't feel like...it WAS. Anything over 2hrs 30min is too long.

 

 

Nonsense.

 

As Roger Ebert once said ;"No bad film is too short,no good film is too long.

 

 

The Godfather

Lawrence of Arabia

Casino

Schindler's list

Goodfellas

Apocalypse now

The right stuff

Pulp fiction

It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World

Braveheart

 

The only factor in film is how much you are willing to invest in watching one.

 

 

 

Agreed.

;)

 

:hi:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sterlingcomics

sterlingcomics

Posted
Posted
I think the ending was done well. It didn't feel like a total cliffhanger. It was a fitting end to what felt like a long, long movie.

 

It didn't feel like...it WAS. Anything over 2hrs 30min is too long.

 

 

Nonsense.

 

As Roger Ebert once said ;"No bad film is too short,no good film is too long.

 

 

The Godfather

Lawrence of Arabia

Casino

Schindler's list

Goodfellas

Apocalypse now

The right stuff

Pulp fiction

It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World

 

The only factor in film is how much you are willing to invest in watching one.

 

 

 

Agreed.

;)

I didn't say a long movie was bad...simply that a long movie is...indicative of the level of interest the movie has garnered. Of course, a good movie can ALWAYS justify it's length. I'm betting based on comments made about the movie Jackson has extended segments needlessly.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Senormac

Senormac

Posted
Posted
I think the ending was done well. It didn't feel like a total cliffhanger. It was a fitting end to what felt like a long, long movie.

 

It didn't feel like...it WAS. Anything over 2hrs 30min is too long.

 

 

Nonsense.

 

As Roger Ebert once said ;"No bad film is too short,no good film is too long.

 

 

The Godfather

Lawrence of Arabia

Casino

Schindler's list

Goodfellas

Apocalypse now

The right stuff

Pulp fiction

It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World

 

The only factor in film is how much you are willing to invest in watching one.

 

 

 

Agreed.

;)

I didn't say a long movie was bad...simply that a long movie is...indicative of the level of interest the movie has garnered. Of course, a good movie can ALWAYS justify it's length. I'm betting based on comments made about the movie Jackson has extended segments needlessly.

 

Oh, an englishman eh ? :sumo:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lizards2

lizards2

Posted
Posted
The only 3D movie that didn't make me feel like tossing my cookies was Dredd, and I think that's only because the whole movie was in slow motion. 2D Hobbit for this kid, which most likely means a trip to the ghetto theatre that doesn't even have stadium seating.
Canadian Ghettos :cloud9:
It ain't in the ghetto, it is ghetto. lol
So..., anything, say, above the 49th parallel? :shrug:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sterlingcomics

sterlingcomics

Posted
Posted
I think the ending was done well. It didn't feel like a total cliffhanger. It was a fitting end to what felt like a long, long movie.

 

It didn't feel like...it WAS. Anything over 2hrs 30min is too long.

 

 

Nonsense.

 

As Roger Ebert once said ;"No bad film is too short,no good film is too long.

 

 

The Godfather

Lawrence of Arabia

Casino

Schindler's list

Goodfellas

Apocalypse now

The right stuff

Pulp fiction

It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World

 

The only factor in film is how much you are willing to invest in watching one.

 

 

 

Agreed.

;)

I didn't say a long movie was bad...simply that a long movie is...indicative of the level of interest the movie has garnered. Of course, a good movie can ALWAYS justify it's length. I'm betting based on comments made about the movie Jackson has extended segments needlessly.

 

Oh, an englishman eh ? :sumo:

Actually Germanic, but just want to make sure my thoughts were clarified.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mikephoen

mikephoen

Posted
Posted

I saw this movie last night, and I'm not sure if I saw it in 24 or 48 FPS, but whichever it was, the 3D was horribly distracting. I can't say I enjoyed the 'film' at all because every time I started to get into it, the horrible 3D effects pulled me right back out.

 

The big, sweeping, panorama shots were cool, but any time the action was win close the 3D made it almost unwatchable in my mind. Some of the effects looked horribly amateur too, especially the stuff in the goblin cave.

 

Finally, there is just not enough story to stretch this thing out to this length.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doohickamabob

Doohickamabob

Posted
Posted
I didn't say a long movie was bad...simply that a long movie is...indicative of the level of interest the movie has garnered. Of course, a good movie can ALWAYS justify it's length. I'm betting based on comments made about the movie Jackson has extended segments needlessly.

From the sound of things, Jackson was editing the movie right up until the day of its premiere. Doesn't sound like they had much time to test it with audiences (or among themselves) and edit it down for flow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hado

Hado

Posted
Posted
The only 3D movie that didn't make me feel like tossing my cookies was Dredd, and I think that's only because the whole movie was in slow motion. 2D Hobbit for this kid, which most likely means a trip to the ghetto theatre that doesn't even have stadium seating.
Canadian Ghettos :cloud9:
It ain't in the ghetto, it is ghetto. lol
So..., anything, say, above the 49th parallel? :shrug:
The theatre, not the country chowda head :kidaround:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sqeggs

Sqeggs

Posted
Posted
Might be the result of the 48 frames per second.

 

That's what people are saying. I read one review that said the 48 fps made the images so clear that it was easier to see that props were fake. They mentioned Gandalf's staff in particular.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing