THE HOBBIT

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mediocre in my dictionary means moderate to inferior in quality and thus someone (anyone!) who claims LOTR is mediocre doesn't get their entire post read because.... their reasoning is mediocre.

IMHO
 
Movie was incredibly mediocre, sorry. Just watched it this weekend and it was unbearably slow paced. That's not to say there aren't good parts about it: the acting was good, the set design was identical to the originating LOTR trilogy. But damned if they didn't drag things out immensely. Peter Jackson's fondness for excess like King Kong knows no bounds.
 

Cajungal

Staff member
I think it's just a thing people say... I've heard people say "stunningly mediocre," suggesting that reaching such levels of "just okay" despite their best efforts is amazing in itself.

I liked the movies, but I've heard that before. It's just a figure of speech.
 
Are you really sorry?

How can something be incredibly mediocre? That's kind of an oxymoron.
"incredibly mediocre" can be interpreted as "Amazingly enough, it's mediocre"

Considering the pedigree of talent that went into it, from the composer to the director to the acting, it should have been equal in calibre to the LOTR trilogy. It ain't.
 
"incredibly mediocre" can be interpreted as "Amazingly enough, it's mediocre"

Considering the pedigree of talent that went into it, from the composer to the director to the acting, it should have been equal in calibre to the LOTR trilogy. It ain't.
Hey, feel how you want about the movie, but the score was solid. And I say that when I didn't think it would be, coming off of LOTR.
 
Movie was incredibly mediocre, sorry. Just watched it this weekend and it was unbearably slow paced. That's not to say there aren't good parts about it: the acting was good, the set design was identical to the originating LOTR trilogy. But damned if they didn't drag things out immensely. Peter Jackson's fondness for excess like King Kong knows no bounds.
Yeah, we need a :confused: tag on the forum stat.
 
Eh, I'd argue it's as good as Return, the weakest of the trilogy and probably more on part with Two Towers. None of them touch Fellowship though, which is the best film of all them for many, many reasons.
 
I think the Extended Edition of Two Towers is one of the best things humanity has ever, ever created and achieved. Not only in movies, mind you, I'm stacking it up against calculus and Newton, Darwin, porn, you name it. It's up there.
 
I think the Extended Edition of Two Towers is one of the best things humanity has ever, ever created and achieved. Not only in movies, mind you, I'm stacking it up against calculus and Newton, Darwin, porn, you name it. It's up there.
Huge praise indeed!
 
I'm not talking from a personal perspective here for the record. Two Towers is my favorite as well, and I only watch the extended editions.

All that said, I still feel very comfortable saying that from a purely objective point of view that the theatrical cut of Fellowship is the best, tightest movie of all of them. It doesn't mean I like it best. Just that it is easily the strongest film in terms of story, characters, pacing and editing.
 
The EE for Two Towers has necessary scenes that make it pointless to watch the theatrical cut. That said, it also has unnecessary bits of dialogue that rehash stuff already gone over elsewhere in the movie, or just doesn't need to be said at all. It's not perfect, but I can't watch Two Towers without the Faramir flashback. I own all the theatricals and EEs except for the theatrical to this one.

ROTK's extended stuff never felt like they put in what used to be deleted scenes, but instead gives the movie as it's meant to be.
 
Can we please get an Extra EE without the warg rider attack but still with all the Theodred scenes in, I love that funeral bit!
 

fade

Staff member
One other thing I didn't like about The Hobbit: Saruman. He's superbly powerful at this point in the story, and none of the White Council suspect him of anything. In the movie, though, they make him kind of a weenie, and it seems like Galadriel and Gandalf already suspect him, since they talk around him.
 
I got a different impression of Sauruman. He was talking down to Gandalf, and simply didn't believe that Gandalf would understand trouble if he saw it, so discounts his report. Galadriel and Gandalf have their little meeting to avoid making Saruman angry due to his pride. I don't know that they suspect anything, but it's clear he is not interested in the warning signs.
 
ROTK's extended stuff never felt like they put in what used to be deleted scenes, but instead gives the movie as it's meant to be.
I can agree with that with one exception: they do the whole "ghosts charge from behind and through Aragon twice. It worked great in the theatrical cut because he was charging, which the enemy was almost laughing at...and then their expressions change on a dime when the ghosts shift into view.

The only redeeming bit of the other scene was seeing Peter Jackson get shot with an arrow and the whole Gimli shifting Legolas' shot.
 
I have to agree with so much being cut from TT that the extended version is really the best version out there. Faramir and Aeowin's arcs being the most notable to be cut to shreds for the theatrical release. Unlike the Fellowship, where most of the EE stuff is all the boring ass shit in the shire.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top