Because of money.Originally Posted by fillow
Throbbing Member
Because of money.
Throbbing Member
I was skeptical about this movie (because the shameless cash grab trilogy thing pissed me off), but it was pretty good. You could definitely see where they were stretching it out though, especially in the beginning. "Now let's have a conversation about our intentions. Now let's have some flashbacks! Also, scenery porn." But I liked the general frivolity and sense of humor. And though the higher framerate thing (is that what it's called?) was weird at first, I really enjoyed it by the end of the movie, it felt perfectly natural. I would not be disappointed if more directors go this route. I think Jim Cameron's doing the Avatar sequels this way too.
Vertiginous Member
Still doesn't explain why this film is so ridiculously long, which from what I've been hearing is the main flaw. You'd think, having to spread one book over three movies, that each of them would be short. I think Jackson needs to find a new editor.
Active Member
It feels like the longest LOTR film despite being shorter than all the extended cuts. An Unexpected Journey literally feels like a 3 hour film full of deleted scenes.
Throbbing Member
I really disagree. I was watching it in a very near-empty room, and I actually heard a woman behind me go 'Oh, is it time for the break already?' a second before the credits started to roll. It started up slowly, but then after the first hour I thought it made great speed. Personally.
Unintelligible Whispering
I think it's tentatively spread out so that Desolation of Smaug ends with the title dragon being killed. Movie 3 will have has the 5 armies' battle, Bilbo's trip home, and PJ said something to the effect of focusing on Gandalf, etc. driving out Sauron from Dol Guldur for much of that. So the book's events are more or less really spread out over 2 1/2 movies, roughly; a great deal of padding is in place. They could easily have done this in two (not that I'm complaining)
Stubby Member
Haha i think the editor needs to find a new Director. I personally think this whole project might have been better with a different leading man. Jackson hasn't really made anything great since 2005 with King Kong. It's a been a while. Maybe he lost some of his magic? This film was good, but I do question some of the decisions made in it.
On the other hand, i'm sure some would argue that nobody else would have done a better job, right? I mean, who better. For those insane fans that want those pornographic scenery shots, dialogues, etc....this was fucking awesome.
Last edited by GoodSoldier333; 12-15-2012 at 03:20 PM.
BADGERS
Richardp's comment about it feeling full of deleted scenes rings true. But the comments that jackson has lost his touch dont. This is peter jackson emulating his own lotr style...
Stubby Member
Emulating it over a one-book, one-movie system is one thing. Doing the same thing for the Hobbit is a weird judgement call is all I'm saying man. I question if he would have done this three-film idea years ago when he might not have been able to on a basis of how much directorial power he had. Still, not a bad thing because as i said, to those Tolkien fans watching it...they probably would not want to have had it any other way.
Reply With Quote
