Cloudy, with a chance of Eagles

[oloriel]

Right.
Due to LJ being under attack once more (yawn), I missed my annual Happy New Year post.
So,
have a very happy, healthy, creative and delightful new year
belatedly.

I also missed the Professor's birthday toast. Now my fan card really will be revoked for good*.

Oh wait, I missed the birthday toast because I was at the Cinemaxx, FINALLY WATCHING THE HOBBIT. Maybe I may keep my fan card after all?

So. My cinematic experience, the first since Pirates of the Caribbean 4: On Stranger Tides. What have I become.

On the technical side, I'm afraid this was a disappointment. The Cinemaxx advertises that you get to see The Hobbit with state-of-the-art technology, but obviously that only goes for the 3D HFR theatres. We went for good old 2D, which was grainy, blurry, disconcerting and, often, nausea-inducing. (Ironically, we'd decided for 2D because we were afraid that the 3D would be, as it so often is, blurry and nauseating...)
Of course, that's not the film's fault.

Further impressions will go under the spoiler cut, just in case.


On the whole, I found the pacing of this film terribly awkward. It was a mixed bag, really, made up of lots of theoretically brilliant puzzle pieces, but it felt as though they had been put together by someone who wasn't entirely sure where they were going. This did make the movie long-winded in some scenes, and I say that as a fan; I can understand why less passionate cinema-goers felt bored on occasion. The Erebor scene could've used some trimming, even though I loved the glimpse into the past of the Dwarven kingdom, and the stone giants and White Council made even me look at my watch.

That said, the puzzle pieces themselves really were brilliant (aside from the stone giants and the White Council). So much love and attention went into the design and cinematography, and it really shows! I loved the shout-outs to the past and future, which is no surprise. New Zealand is still stunningly beautiful, which is no surprise either.

Some random thoughts that went through my head during the film:

- Thranduil's facial expressions really made me roll my eyes. A lot. Also, as they've now established that Thorin has a personal reason to dislike Elves and the Sindar in particular, I'm pretty certain they won't do the Doriath flashback I was hoping for.

- Unexpected Party: PERFECT.

- They managed to incorporate a couple of songs without making it Disney-ish! I'm impressed.

- I really appreciate that they managed to give each Dwarf his own personality. I mean, it's still not like I could immediately say which Dwarf is called what or anything, but they managed to turn that heterogeneous, generic Dwarven mass that was in my head into 13 distinguishable individuals, which must have been no small feat.

- Yay, Sting without the blade inscription! See, the blade inscription was something that really bothered me in the LotR movie trilogy, because as a reader of The Hobbit I knew that Sting didn't come to Bilbo bearing that name, but that Bilbo himself chose that, so the runes on the blade saying "Yo, I'm Sting" [paraphrased] were just stupid. In this one? THERE IS NO BLADE INSCRIPTION, JUST THE WAVE DESIGN IT WILL LATER FOLLOW. So Bilbo added that later! Now it makes sense and that makes me happy!

- Radagast was less jarring than I'd expected from what I'd read and seen in the Art & Design book. Still more discworldly than I'd have imagined him, but not as disturbing as I'd feared.

- CALACIRYA SHOUTOUT! No, seriously, that was a perfect allusion in all but name.

- The Elvish (but also the Orcish) felt sort of awkward and pastede-on-yey. Not sure whether they pronounce it so awkwardly in the original, or whether they made the German voice actors repeat them and they botched it, but NO REAL PERSON ENUNCIATES LIKE THAT.

- White Council: Nobody actually takes Saruman seriously, do they? Also, how on earth is Galadriel doing that thing with her gowns, I'm not sure whether I find it beautiful or stupid.

- Some of the Rivendell design felt really over the top, and not in a good way. The houses were nice, but that "solar" (lunar?) where Elrond discovered the moon runes? That was way beyond ridiculous.

- I really watched out for the reported Fëanorian stars around Elrond's council "chamber", but I'm afraid they're rather ambiguous - they don't actually have that clearly distinctive shape. Might be any eight-pointed star, really. Oh well. I WANT TO BELIEVE.

- Dwarves saying things like "Good Heavens" or "Oh God". Um... not quite? "Sebastian" the Hedgehog. Um... no? The Trolls having names like "Bert" or "Bill" I personally already find jarring, but Tolkien at least chose Saxon-ish names for them. But Sebastian is Greek. Or Latin based on a Greek/Near Eastern place name. If you have no idea what you're doing, don't do it.

- Also, Radagast is not "an Istari". Unless Saruman means to imply that Radagast is multiple people (at least three)? Look, I see how Quenya and its tons of cases can be confusing, but the difference between singular and plural is actually pretty straightforward.

- In Goblin Town (at the latest), I wish Gandalf had said something like "DO I HAVE TO SAVE YOU ALL THE TIME? CAN YOU GUYS NOT, LIKE, STAY SAVED FOR A MOMENT?!" Seriously, it was Gandalf to the Rescue! all the time! Until it was Eagles to the Rescue, of course. It seems I'm not alone.

- Goblin Town was so absurdly over the top that I actually found it fun.

- Riddles in the Dark was perfect.

- The Aquilae Ex Machina amused me way too much. It really is like I said in that one shoddy comic back in the day, the Eagles are totally the "Sea Turtles!" joke of the Tolkienverse.²

- Some of the Big Moral Moments were laid on a bit too thickly, I think. That said, Thorin's manly hug for Bilbo was still kind of awww!-inducing.

- LOL, a production manager who worked on this film is called Arwen Munro. I bet her parents are really thrilled now. XD

There was more, but it has now slipped my mind. So I'll leave it at that, and possibly add more later.



On the whole, I liked it all right. But I do have a slight headache from the bad quality of the theatre, which is annoying. In the olden days (TM), we used to say that this or that was a film you just had to see in cinema. These days? If it didn't take so bloody long, I'd indefinitely prefer a BluRay on our home TV set.

- - -
*I actually have one, in that I have a membership card of the German Tolkien Society. They don't easily revoke that one, though, as long as you pay your membership fees and don't criminally misbehave.

²The text, in case anyone really wants to know, goes: Panel 1: Fingolfin: "But... how..." - Fingon: "Eagle." - Panel 2: Beorn: "And why did the Orcs not get you?" - Gandalf: "Eagles, my friend." - Panel 3: Elrond: "How did you escape?" - Gandalf: "Eagle." - Panel 4: Elanor: "But why did you not fall off the Eagles' backs?" - Sam: "Because we roped ourselves to them. ... with Hobbit hair OFF OUR FEET."
If you don't get the joke, you should watch Pirates of the Caribbean some time.

Comments

[shadowbrides.livejournal.com]

On the whole, I found the pacing of this film terribly awkward.


Oh, this so much. Though in my case it was more about the melodramatic/overdone heroic aspects. I liked the Dwarves despite lack of beards but wished fervently they didn't try to make Thorin this Aragorn like personality and winced a lot at scenes like Bilbo's sudden heroic orc attack (and sudden ability to wield a sword and kill something much larger and more aggressive than himself!). See my post from a few days ago. Although I'm afraid it involves lots of caps lock.

And Discworldy! That is a good word for Radagast. Thing is, I despised him when I just came back from the movie but when I consider the movie character without trying to pretend he is an actual Tolkien Istari he could possibly be kind of fun. Possibly. I'm such a grump, I know.

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

Bilbo's sudden "Swordsmanship +5", yeah! They were all the worse because they actually often did show that he wasn't a fighter. I mean, in his case, holding the sword like a gun actually made sense - he has no idea what he's doing after all - and the way he swished it around aimlessly with his arms locked tight was also a nice move to illustrate that really, he's playing up but he can't handle a sword to save his life (... literally). The way the Warg basically killed himself by running into Sting was still believable - all Bilbo had to do was keep holding it the way he'd been holding it anyway - but the way he saved Thorin's life? I'm willing to believe that the Took in him took (no pun intended) over and made him try and jump in there, but actually accomplishing something? NEVER. That was the point at which the Aquilae ex Machina should've arrived to save the day, period.

And yeah, the melodramatics. Normally I'd say it's an American thing, but it's not even an American movie... *ducks*

Istar! Istar, damnit! I really thought I would dislike Radagast more! As it was, he was so OTT that I could simply ignore him. Sorta like Goblin Town. XD

[shadowbrides.livejournal.com]

Yeah. And I really didn't get why they had to alter that scene anyway. It just erased every bit of suspense from it - which was one of my main complaints about the movie anyway. I liked them climbing into trees and thinking they were safe from the wargs, only to have orcs arive later.

Let's just say it was influenced by the dominant American blockbuster movie culture? :P

I know! I will always picture Radagast as a crossbreed between St. Franciscus, Gandalf, and several other mythological personalities in my head. I pictured him sort of quiet and withdrawn, busy taking care of his bees and birds, sort of tired of all the wars going on all the time, sort of uninterested. This was...well. Different. And sorrryy. I know it's Istar, I swear. In my defense, I was half asleep when writing that.

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

Yup. In general, there were some bits where I just didn't understand why anyone felt the need for extra drama. Actually, that goes for the whole Azog arch. I think it would have been just as dramatic (and a lot less long-winded) without the "it's personal!" aspect. Let orcs be orcs, isn't that enough?
(So yeah, I dislike the Azog arch - not because it's "not canon", but because it's unnecessary. >_>)

Definitely. :P

I don't mind that Radagast went to Dol Guldur, nor that he informed Gandalf - so I'm ok with the "not uninterested" part - but I neither get why, in that case, he wouldn't be invited (and attend) the White Council meeting, nor why he had to be quite so over-the-top whacky. Oh well. Whatevs.
(It's ok. Saruman did it wrong first. >_>)

[allamistako.livejournal.com]

(Nitpick - shouldn't it be goblins?)

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

Nope; Tolkien later made it clear that they're Orcs, he just didn't dare to use the word back in 1937 because people would associate it with killer whales rather than nasty ugly vaguely humanoid creatures (presumably not having read Beowulf in the original). He got more courageous later on (and in the later German editions, it was amended from "Goblins" (which was used instead of "Kobolde" anyway) to "Orks"; I think it's still "goblins" in the English editions (though I haven't actually checked, shame on me). But Tolkien in fact worried that "goblins" might make people think of small, wrinkly, mildly naughty but ultimately harmless gnomes - fairy-tale goblins - rather than, well, what he envisioned as "Orcs" and just translated half-heartedly as "goblins".

But they're Orcs all right, and have been all along. :)

Fun fact aside: When we read and translated Beowulf in Anglo-Saxon class, the student reading it hesitated and translated it as "um... monsters?" Cue the professor: "Oh, just say 'orcs', I take it you all know what that means." :D

[allamistako.livejournal.com]

Okay - my UK-edition of the Hobbit (Late 80s copy) says goblins...

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

Yup. As I said, same difference. :)

[sermanya.livejournal.com]

I saw it in 2D too and I feel like I've never seen such a badly rendered movie. Even the wingnut logo was pixelated and that was a non-moving thing...

S. thinks that it might be the fault of the cinema software and maybe also because they have just one disc with the movie and as they were showing it on two screens at the same time that might have been the reason for lags and bad quality animations.

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

I think it was mostly the cinema's fault, yeah. In our case, they were only showing it (in 2D, that is) in one theatre at that time, so "splitting" can't have been the issue, but I definitely suspect outdated hardware was at least part of the problem. I mean, how often do cinemas typically upgrade unless something's broken? I know "our" Cinemaxx upgraded (some) theatres for Star Wars: Episode 3 (digital 2D, OMG!), and then some to 3D for Avatar, and now some for to 3D HFR for The Hobbit. But if you're looking at the wrong screen, you don't get to enjoy the upgrade :P

But I also think the conversion from 48fps 3D to "old-fashioned" 2D did some damage which even the best 2D cinema couldn't repair. The movie just wasn't meant to be seen in 2D, that's just a feature added as an afterthought... and it shows.

[sermanya.livejournal.com]

hm. I feel sick in 3D movies. I get a headache and want to leave as soon as possible. This is not because of bad technique or blurry pictures, but because of too fast moving things too near to me and around me that my head cannot cope with. Does that mean that cinema is not for me any more or maybe only pixelated. No more real cinema feeling. ouch. :(

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that's basically my problem as well. That, and the fact that somehow I always try to focus on some part of the screen that isn't meant to be focussed on, so it will always be out-of-focus no matter what my brain does, so I'll just end up confused, headache-y and feeling like I need better glasses. Supposedly, 48 fps comes closer to our natural habits of seeing, but I still doubt that suddenly you'll be able to focus on every detail (as you would be in reality).
So yeah, if 3D is the future of cinema, I'll probably stop going to the cinema. :(

[independence1776]

I'm glad you finally had a chance to see it!

Thranduil's facial expressions really made me roll my eyes.

So I'm not the only one! Everyone's been going "so majestic, etc." and my reaction was and still is, "He looks drugged."

I'm sorry you found it nauseating, though. I was honestly worried about that, because, to me, the entirity of the Erebor sequence was blurry. But the rest of the film was fine. *shrugs* I saw it in 2d, too, so I really don't know what's going on there.

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

"He looks drugged."

Yup. Precisely what made me feel really anti-3rd Age-Elf after the LotR movies. I get that they were trying to make them super-human, but as far as I am concerned, they only made them appear aloof in a bad way or Heavily Under The Influence Of Valium. Thorin was way more majestic (ok, occasionally OTT majestic, but still) than Thranduil. The Rivendell Elves weren't quite that bad in this one, though, which is something at least.
(Occasionally, I'll explain my love for the Silmarillion Elves with "They actually do something. Often the wrong thing, but at least they don't just stand around giving you dazed looks and useless platitudes." XD)

Pretty much all camera pans were blurry when I saw it. Probably a combination of outdated hardware in the cinema and the fact that it was actually filmed in 3D and 48fps and had to be recalculated/converted into 2D, which probably didn't do it much good. I guess I'll watch the next part in 3D HFR.

[independence1776]

The LotR Elves are what made me decide PJ doesn't get Elves at all. Aloof they are not.

Occasionally, I'll explain my love for the Silmarillion Elves with "They actually do something. Often the wrong thing, but at least they don't just stand around giving you dazed looks and useless platitudes.

That is pretty much how I explain the differences, too. (Mom is actually reading LotR for the first time in decades because of the movie, despite the fact that I've been after her to read them for years! She's in the middle of The Hobbit and keeps popping up with "PJ didn't do this, or he did this" and it's pretty amazing.)

My theater upgraded all their equipment early this summer, so that probably helped on my side. But I can't see it in 3D-- it makes me nauseous.

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

Sure enough, Jenny Dolfen just recently got a comment (to her finished "Drawing of the Sword" painting) along the lines of "Not sure you'd call it cooking as they don't eat meat."
I really admire her for not snarking at the person who said that. (Who already said a couple of things before that, including but not limited to "Yeah but these aren't Elves"...)
Right. Elves totally are fond of archery, but would never use those bows for anything but... war? That totally makes sense. In any world. It does cast a new light on them warlike Teleri, of course. "Slender bows", uh-huh... But it's in the movie, so it must be true!

So far, I got nausea and a head-ache from 3D movies as well. But if I'm going to get that anyway now, I can as well give 3D another try. >_>

[independence1776]

I am half-tempted to search that out, but I'm not sure I want to see it and hurt my brain further. And how are they not Elves?

Given that there's a line in the Hobbit about the Mirkwood Elves hunting… PJ can shut up. (My headcanon was that it was either a first course or a veiled insult.)

:( I wish there was a way to avoid the side-effects.

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

Their ears were hidden beneath their hair, so the poster couldn't see them, so s/he assumed they were no Elves. Reading the description (in which they were named, and in which Jenny also explained that they were High Elves from the Silm) would probably have been too much work.

Headcanon happily accepted.

Me too. I've been suspecting so far that part of the problem is that my brain doesn't accept being told what to focus on in the real world, so for a 3D movie - which closely resembles what the brain is used to from the real world - it tries to focus even on the bits that are background, and were never filmed to be in focus. That means the brain has to expend a lot of energy on something that just won't work, so in the end it'll send out a "Danger! The world has gone wonky! Either you forgot your glasses, or you're drunk, or it's really foggy!" Except it won't be so eloquent, but just push the nausea! headache! button.
No idea if that's really it, but it makes sense to me, so I'll stick with it until I get a better explanation.
Of course, they say that the 48fps comes closer to the natural viewing experience, so maybe I'll have less trouble with that? I will give it a try at some point, but admit I'm skeptical.

[chili-das-schaf.livejournal.com]

I was curious to read your opinion :) Coincidentally we watched the movie on the same day, but only because it was cheap xD


I can understand why less passionate cinema-goers felt bored on occasion. The Erebor scene could've used some trimming

khamura - whose mind boggles still that I slammed shut LotR when the ring was thrown into the fire pit ;) - said something in the same direction. I did not feel bored but wondered what it was all about and why it was there. The stitch-together-aspect, one of my favourite movie review sites (http://www.fuenf-filmfreunde.de/2012/12/13/der-hobbit-eine-unerwartete-reise-review/) had the same impression.

They also said the dwarves were all just the same with different costumes which I didn't feel at all. Like you I saw 13 personalities.

Also, how on earth is Galadriel doing that thing with her gowns

Ahaha, I also thought if there are some bloopers where she falls and trips. I mostly admire how she keeps them so sparkly clean.

- Some of the Rivendell design felt really over the top, and not in a good way.

I had to think of Tron a lot during the moonlight scene. To much blue light.

khamura also was disturbed by Sebastian. I handwaved it with coincidence. Such things just don't bother me that much, but maybe just it's not my nickpit fandom. I'll just wait for the next Star Trek movie for that.

Some of the Big Moral Moments were laid on a bit too thickly, I think

I actually thought that this was in character as the dwarves and especially Thorin, did not seem to me like people who freely talk about their feelings to each other all the time or readily admit that they were too brash and hurt somebody. I imagine when two dwarf friends had an argument and want to make up, they make a rude joke, headbutt and get drunk together, then tearily tell each other how much they love each other and pretend it all did not happen the next morning. So this awkwardness and using cliches somehow fitted in. Again, Fünf Filmfreunde see it like you do so I can understand where it comes from.

Poor Arwen's dream is maybe to be an accountant but she never got a job and just gave up at some point xD

I saw the movie all naked and without special effects and never thought I missed something elemental. So it's definitely not something you HAVE to see in 3D.

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

Well, I didn't find it as bad as 5 Filmfreunde did. ^^ That review actually made me feel all defensive. It wasn't that bad! And while I did find the pacing akward and the pieces badly linked, I think if you'd removed everything PJ added, you'd still have (at least!) 1 1/2 hours of film, so turning it into more than one film can be justified if you want to give the story some more scope than Schuppenlurch wegen Eigenbedarf rausschmeißen. The question is just whether it has to be 3 x 3 hours, and whether one couldn't have matched the pieces together better...

Such things just don't bother me that much, but maybe just it's not my nickpit fandom.

I think it's an obsessed linguist thing, not a fandom thing. Somewhere in Book I of ASoIaF, there's a throwaway mention of some girl named Bethany. Bethany's a place in Palestine. (Like Sebaste, btw. COINCIDENCE? ;)) How the hell would someone in Westeros end up named after a place in Palestine? Heck, when I was a kid, I was really annoyed that the evil witch in The Little Mermaid was called Ursula. Even as a kid, I didn't get why you'd name a sea-witch "little she-bear".
...
I may be the only person who finds that sort of thing really annoying. No, wait, khamura and shadowbrides also stumbled across Sebastian, so there's at least three of us! :D

So this awkwardness and using cliches somehow fitted in.

The awkwardness, yes, and I quite share your idea about how dwarf friends would make up. XD Which is why Thorin's hug, while kinda cute, felt so OOC. Noble - yeah. Willing to admit he was wrong? - Well, he does that in the book after SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER, so, apparently. But hug?
And, well. The cliches were just fine, I just don't think everything had to be spelled out like it was. Give viewers some credit, PJ, whoever manages to pay attention to a three-hour film will also manage to figure out the not all-that-subtle message. :P

I don't think it HAS to be seen in 3D, either - but I do think it has to be seen in reasonably good quality, and I'm kind of hoping that the equipment in the 3D theatres, being more recent, will perhaps be less lousy than it was where we went. :P

[chili-das-schaf.livejournal.com]

Oh, I didn't think that! They just explained the whole stitched-together-issue very well and so I saw where it came from. I also can't understand that they disliked it so much. Usually mine and their tastes in movies align pretty well.

IDK, with names I'm just not that easy to bother. I mean, in HP nearly everyone is named after what they are which is rather fun and quirky but makes no sense when you look at the biographical backgrounds of the characters. I grant authors the freedom of "sounds pretty" there. I can totally understand when in a so heavily linguistically imprinted work like Tolkien's people are bothered. I have the advantage of ignorance here ;)

Our 2D copy was, fortunately, really good and I will see it with all the fancy tech stuff for comparison.

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

Strangely, it doesn't bother me in HP, either. Perhaps because it's done consistently, so it's clear the author is just doing it for the fun of it (or for the sake of not having to find completely character-unrelated names that fit their age, family, social status etc!). So there, at most I roll my eyes at so completely over the top things like "Xenophilius Lovegood". Or at "Are you f*cking serious?" - "Yes, that too." jokes...
In ASoIaF, in contrast, Martin has actually done a good job of giving all the Westeros people Saxon-ish names, even coming up with such strokes of brilliance as "Samwell". And then there's Bethany. :P