Hobbit Trailer looks crap
 

The new hobbit trailer looks very unappealing. Too much CGI In fact even some the of the elves are CGI. It totally ruins the movie.

It does.

I'm linking it here to make access easier for people who haven't come across it yet and want to waste two minutes (and eventually perhaps three hours) of their precious life.

As I said elsewhere, after seeing it Tauriel is the least of my concerns. It looks and sounds like a bad computer game.

Seriously the feeling I got is I'm not sure I want to sit through it in the cinema. I probably will though, because hey, hot dwarves.

Hello Folks!

My opinion:

Well, it's obviously not yet finished. The CGI. Especially on Smaug who otherwise seems to be very good!!

Action looks over the top again, ok, but we knew that would be happening.

But REALLY..:
The locations look amazing. Mirkwood, Thranduils Halls, Dale, Esgaroth.
I thought even though the CGI was not perfect, they were beautiful.

And Thranduil is pure AWESOMENESS!

Cheers

Welcome to the Downs, Arphen! Enjoy discussing stuffs!

Comments on the trailer:

0:22 - MAJESTIC THORIN!!!

0:24 - Bilbo didn't bother closing the barrels with the Dwarves?! What a nice friend. And are the elves blind not to notice???

0:27 - why are the black butterflies blue?

0:29 - why are there chimpanzee-like humans jumping on trees? Are those meant to be Elves?

0:36 - that Legolas is so clearly animated. Seriously?

0:40 - Return to Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone: Fluffy's back!!!

1:23 - they can't even make a thrilling escape sequence without a fight in it?

1:24 - and of course Legolas is pwning all the baddies.

1:25 - can you actually jump that high in RL, we wonders.

1:52 - I love how noiselessly Bilbo walks.



Conclusion: this trailer should be called Everything Wrong with DOS in 2 Minutes Or Less.

I've seen that Bilbo/Smaug scene before--in Jurassic Park.

:(

This movie looks hilarious! This may be a bit unbelievable, but I love it for all the wrong reasons.

I think those were the elves shooting at the dwarves because they didn't have the lids on so everyone could see them escaping.

Evidence suggests no.

I have a bad feeling that this is just scratching the surface of everything wrong with DOS.

I take it the huge thing trying to get into the room that the Dwarves are barricading (in a repeat of the Cave Troll scene from "Fellowship", I might suggest) is a bear, perhaps even Beorn himself?

But this sums it up for me:
"It is not our fight."
"It is our fight."

This appallingly simplistic, cliché-ridden dialogue has got to be the worst part of these films, worse than shonky CGI Elves turning up everywhere they're not needed.

"What if it's a trap?!?"
"It's undoubtedly a trap."

Spare me.

I thought the recent poster of Bilbo in the wilderness before Erebor actually looked quite nice, incidentally.

Also Bard looks like the love child of Thorin and Legolas, which come to think of it will probably please a lot of fan fic writers :p I honestly thought Thorin was talking to himself for a second.

EDIT: I'd like to add that a thread title like "Hobbit Trailer looks crap" is one of the reasons I joined this forum. We'd get crucified on TORN...

Now that you mention it...

Like the ludicrous Chutes-and-Ladders(TM) bit in the first movie, PJ takes implausibility to new levels with the uncovered barrels shooting the rapids. Have you ever canoed or kayaked down a rapids? It is imperative you keep your balance with oars, or else you are arse over teat and drowning. A barrel would be capsized in a matter of seconds. That whole gravity thing.

I will have to wait till tomorrow to dee this since it is beyond the kindle but is this the origin of a new cliche ~ like shooting dwarves in a barrel?

I think the most pressing question is this: where's Bilbo?

He barely appears in this trailer and has no lines.

"Forget about Martin, we need to squeeze in as much of Fran and Philippa's amateurish purple prose as possible! John Ronald Reuel who?"

fight! fight! fight! fight!

–mumble cliché line under breath–

fight! fight! fight! fight! fight! fight! fight! FIGHT!

(Repeat until end.)

Got it.

I think the thread title should not be so outright negative.
I really don't get the overwhelming hate you guys are reacting with here.
At least try to see the positives...

BTW have you seen this?
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10151697149436171

Actually... I am really not the “hater” type, Arphen and in fact I have been known to argue myself against people whom I think are being unreasonably negative. I tend to see “hatedom” as basically the other side of blind fandom, and just as annoying.
So, in a way I can sympathise with what you’re saying–

–Except well, in this particular case I honestly just can’t see that much to be positive about. Sorry, but it really does look pretty bad.

Those of us who dislike the films have to have someplace to go. You certainly aren't going to get any kind of balanced discussion on TORN either.

Well I don't know what trailer you are seeing, but to me most of it looks great. The CGI is good, it's just not touched up yet.
They still have 6 months to go!
Do you really think the design for example laketown or Thranduils Halls is bad?
If it's one thing the movies really deliver.. it's the visuals.
Perhaps one exception: Azog, but that was because he was added too late.
Just think of a Smaug at Gollum-level CGI-wise.
Also, the actors still are awesome: Lee Pace just nails absolutely every line he got.

One can of course argue about the OTT Action sequences and deviations from the book, those really are unnecessary and bad as in AUJ. But there are still things to look forward to.
And also you must remember those parts with the elves won't be the whole movie. We still just have a glimpse of Beorn, the Spiders, Laketown etc.

Touch of irony no in being so judgmemtal of Barrow Downers on such a short acquaintanceship? Why not see the positives? On the whole we are an intelligent. witty bunch who reaaly know and loveTolkien. Some (not me ) really know about film. Some even like the films to a greater or lesser degree. Now I know there are Pollyanna Pangloss types ~ some I encounter on a unrelated board~ who refuse on principal to dislike things and when accused of lacking discrimination then say they like some things more. Now that ma be a therapists approved choice of language but semantically it is afine line between using liking more and less and saying like and dislike.

So you have a bunch of opinionated people but the opinions are not mindless.. If you want an unquestioning PJ lovefest you may be in the wrong place. But it is a motherlode if you have more than a superficial interest in Middle Earth. Here you will find those who have lectured and publishd on Tolkien. Again not me yet but I have loved Tolkien's worlld for a very long time now and I mind when it is demeaned.

Positives? How about that they haven't decided that making Eorn a transvestite rather than a skin changer would make him/her more relevant to modern audiences? I am thinking Grayson Perry clutching Alan Measles here.... :Merisu:

Sure, the set design is pretty good and the acting– the very little you see of it– doesn’t look too bad (though I’d call it “workmanlike” rather than ”awesome”). So, if you want people to mention the positives– fine, there they are.

But for the rest– well, come on, look at your own comments: “the CGI is good, it’s just not touched up yet. They still have six months to go!” “[the action scenes] are unnecessary and bad” “those parts with the elves won’t be the whole movie”. So... um... it’s a great trailer except for almost everything that appears in it?:confused:

@ Mithalwen
I think I have any right to say what my opinion about given movie/trailer is, no matter how short I am member here. And also why I think the broad majority of the people here tend to overlook that Peter Jackson is not the devil himself.
I said clearly that I dislike about the same things that most dislike about the new Trailer and about AUJ.
But I'm not hating on principle everything PJ and his Team have come up with.
Or use sarcastic statements every time they comment on the movies like you did in your post, instead of for example give your view of things I thought were quite good.
(no matter how you see it, just use a different tone)

@ Nerwen
I meant the part with fighting, sliding elves. I think Tauriel is a character who is okay.

Interestingly, PJ has taken a boring barrel ride and made it into a flight/chase/fight scene, because surely that's what this trilogy has been lacking. Explains why the barrel lids needed to be left in Thanduil's wine cellar.

Awesome trailer. I think Peter Jackson does a good job with the movies.

[QUOTE=Arphen Silverhair;684142]@" Mithalwen
I think I have any right to say what my opinion about given movie/trailer is, no matter how short I am member here. And also why I think the broad majority of the people here tend to overlook that Peter Jackson is not the devil himself.
I said clearly that I dislike about the same things that most dislike about the new Trailer and about AUJ.
But I'm not hating on principle everything PJ and his Team have come up with.
Or use sarcastic statements every time they comment on the movies like you did in your post, instead of for example give your view of things I thought were quite good.
(no matter how you see it, just use a different tone)"

I wasn't being sarcastic. You do have the right to post your opinions on the films. I was merely pointing out what seemed to be double standards. We have to see the best in the films but you have the right to see the worst in us on your first visit. And equally the original poster is entitled to his choice of words which while uncouth has passed the censor. Give others the rights you claim for yourself and don't dictate to them how they should post.

So this is not sarcasm?

It was meant to be joke......hence stupid smiley but having seen the trailer with it's extremely minimal connection to Tolkien I feel rather bleak.

I think one thing that concerns many people around here is that people had expectations with the LotR -movie, that it would be something great - not just one more blockbuster action movie with some comic relief added. In retrospect it is easy to see that you just should have guessed it: there is no high art coming from Hollywood, even if the screenwriters use a masterpiece as a basis (of deviation) for their storyboard.

I know many people differ on how they see the LotR-trilogy here. But many of even those who kind of liked the LotR by PJ are now facing a new situation when the Hobbit seems to be nothing more than yet one more "Avengers" or "Spider Man" or "Star Trek": an exploitation of older popular material built to maximise the income of the studios by following the lowest common denominators of their marketing department's imagined teen-age audiences.

Which doesn't mean it can't be quite an eye-candy.

I'm taking the optimist's route then. It maybe Hollywood doesn't know any more how to tell a story or to build interesting and deep characters (or they are not interested in those things any more) but they sure know how to make things look breath-takingly good and epic.

Kind of a larger image of our world today: we may have nothing inside, but darn we look good! :rolleyes:

Hobbit trailer looks crap.

Is the thread title missing a word or some letters, or does it contain some textspeak slang that the youngin's use, with the meaning:

• Computer rendered and processed
• Completely reimagined, all PJ
• Cash raking after production

?

Might some of us not be criticising this trailer for perfectly legitimate reasons? I mean, Arphen, it seems you largely agree about what’s wrong with it– it’s just that you think we should ignore that and focus on what’s positive. Okay, in a way that’s a pretty good attitude– but the thing is, when most of what’s shown in a trailer is CGI-heavy action scenes, then the quality of both CGI and action becomes rather relevant. Plus, what there is of dialogue sounds awfully trite to me. So– what’s left? I just don’t think “scenery” is enough to swing it. (“Acting” is a moot point– it’s a good cast, but we’re not actually seeing much of what they’re capable of here.)

They do... but that doesn’t mean they always succeed... I mean, honestly, this doesn’t even look good– in fact, that’s largely what we’ve been talking about.

Besides, I think you’re making a lot of sweeping generalisations here. Hollywood is what it always was– i.e. mainly about profit, but quality films can and do get made. And believe me, I can appreciate a decent blockbuster/popcorn film, and enjoy it for what it is rather than what it isn't. That doesn’t mean one has to be completely uncritical all the time.

Of course you have every right to state your opinion about the trailer in here. Similarly, those posters who wish to state their opinion that the trailer is a load of crap also have every right to do so.

What you are being criticised for is not your opinion that the trailer is good, but your presuming to lecture other posters about their opinions.

Surely you can see this very simple point?

This might go a bit off topic, but I personally don't hate the movie on principle. I just dislike it on principle. Not even that. I don't really care about it, but I love to complain about every little detail they get wrong. You should try it, it's fun. :D :Merisu:

Yup. What really bothers me about this trailer is those blue blue eyes that Legolas has. I mean, what IS the deal with that? :p

I don't think Orlando Bloom is a good actor. There, I said it.

He does! I can almost never be bothered to read fic, but I might make an exception for this one. :p

Yes, actually, I was going to say earlier that this is one of the funniest thread titles I've seen for a while.

I've paid close attention to the positives! As I said, Tauriel is the least of my concerns now. ;)
I'm not seeing any hate here, though. Criticism, but not hate, and the criticism is there for a reason. We know what PJ did with LOTR and AUJ, and some of us have our doubts. I don't think anybody has decided to outright hate everything PJ produces, it's just that many of us don't expect very much.

Hahaha I want that so much! :D

Oh alatar... I tried to rep you but apparently I haven't been spreading enough rep lately. That was awesome.

Mostly this thread is about a little humour. If you knew us, you would be able to recognise the jokes. But that's the problem with internet communication. It's also very difficult for people well versed in Tolkien's books to take a Hollywood adventure/action/gaming flick in any way as a legitimate interpretation of Tolkien. We've learnt, as Agan says, from four previous ones.

One of the things we Downers pride ourselves on, besides our knowledge of Tolkien's books, is the way we conduct discussion here. We tend to avoid simple statements of opinion and favour explanation and argument to support our positions. Sometimes we even manage to persuade each other! Or exhaust each other. ;)

So, given that we tend to listen to each other's reasons, I want to ask you what you mean by linking to that You Tube video. What do you think it proves in terms of your argument? That others are deeply impressed? That we should follow suit also?

Simply linking to that video does little to further your point that we are full of hate. We aint'. But let my give you one possible interpretation of that video to show how it needs a bit of explanation.

It shows some fangirls giggling and excited over the trailer. And it shows three actors' response to the you tube video.

Are the fans giving any kind of argument or debate? No, they are simply going gaga over the scenes they are seeing. They seem to be thoroughly excited by what they are viewing.

Why would Jackson choose this particular video to highlight in the marketing of the second Hobbit movie? Is it a way to forestall criticism? It is a way to demonstrate who he believes his audience is? Is it a way to titilate fangirls by showing them a reaction in the actors they admire?

Why show three actors reacting to the video--and in particular, these three actors? They are all in costume, so it is not likely an unrehearsed or unscripted response, but very likely part of the publicity that the actors must engage in as part of their employment in the film. Is it a way for Jackson to suggest a Middle-earth response? Is it too cynical to regard this as a mere merchandising ploy, using fans to further the marketing strategy?

I for one could never be one of those fangirls, so the entire video does not address me as a fan of Tolkien.

Really, I'm left with the comments, if not here then from one of our recent threads, which presented two of Jackson's writing team's defense of their work: "It's in the appendices!" "It represents the spirit of Tolkien."

Those two statements beg for critical analysis, and neither one of them can bear the scrutiny for long. Critical analysis is not hate. It is the response to the films from people who know the books well.

So, tell me, why did you link to that video? Do you have another "reading" of it that would enlighten us and make us regret our initial responses to the trailer?

"What's your plan?"
 

"We find the gold...
"We take the gold...
"And we run like there's no Manana!"

"And that's your plan?!?"

"Mm hmm."

".....well, I like it."

Well, I do like it. The trailer, I mean. Lots of reasons not to, but I'd rather be happy about it than curmudgeonize the evening away. I'm even glad to see Leggybopper back, and his redheaded sidekick isn't so bad.

Actually, she's a badass Merisuwiniel.

I think it's time I start planning my opening night costume.

Hmmm, Aiwendil, I'm not sure I disagree with you. So I shan' t think about that too hard before I sleep, perchance to dream. He's a good bowbender, anyway.

:Merisu:

Killjoy. ;)

Yes, but Merisuwyniel was intended as parody.

Still, I don't doubt the unintentional humor quotient will be high. :cool:

Oh dear. Helen, I remember a certain balrog's eyeliner that got your fancy. :D

[quote=Kuru]
Still, I don't doubt the unintentional humor quotient will be high. [quote]

There has to be some recompense for seeing it. ;)

Well, neither do I, actually, but that didn’t seem the place to mention that.


Well, if we feel like being really charitable we might suppose that Jackson was for some reason so touched by the decision of the girls to film themselves giggling over the trailer that he shot the response as a purely friendly gesture, with no ulterior motive whatever– but you wouldn’t think he’d have the leisure for that kind of thing right now. And it’s a characteristic of modern marketing to make a lot of use of “spontaneous fan reactions” (whether real or not is largely irrelevant).

So... if we assume there’s a point to this, then what is it? It really seems like the basic messages are, “here’s some people getting excited, so you should too”, plus, “look, even YOU, the ordinary fan, can be a part of this!"

Note the responses on the page:
etc, etc.

Well, he did make a video with him, John Howe, and Alan Lee for the Tolkien Society's Return of the Ring con last summer, meant to welcome us to the event.