The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

I'm still waiting for them to announce how they're bringing the HFR version home. I'd much rather watch it in the original format than having to use TruMotion to simulate it.

Will wait to see if an extended version gets released like lord of the rings did.

Saw it at the theater and felt cheated by the lack of an ending, so I will be certainly skip this one unless there is changes in the disc...
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
The way this man is doing this-like a sci fi channel series on free tv-leaves me with no choice but to not buy the individual discs and only get the full 3-disc set if I can find it in the bargain bin. The disc in March will have to have the correct ending including the PERIOD that was left out, for me to even consider it.

It's the exact same cut, why on earth would you expect it to be different?

Makes me wonder what people's expectations are with this sort of thing. LOTR was three books, three movies. This is ONE book, three movies. The breaks were never going to be as clean. And you can't compare it to films like those you listed.. this isn't a "trilogy" like those, this is one film split into three parts. If you honestly didn't know that going into it, then it's your own damned fault that you didn't like the way it came out.

And yes, there will be extended editions later on. I have no intention of purchasing the theatrical releases of any of these.

He could...STILL put a PERIOD in this movie regardless! The one armed Orc is NOT in the book! The dragon IS...okay...cant touch HIM...This was a villain he put in this movie. So defeating him here has nothing to do with the source material. He could have put the Orc down here and introduced a new villain to have a PERIOD for part 2, then the dragon for part 3. How does a veteran director not know how to do this . Highly overrated...this is the THEATER...this is paying audiences...if he was gonna do this, put it on sci fi channel as a 3-part movie.

I learned my lesson for sure. If Peter Jackson is involved, dont bother with the theater or blu ray, only cable tv .

I don't know what you were expecting but quite honestly the ending in this movie was no different to the endings of Fellowship or the two towers, both of which were clearly leading into the next movie in that particular trilogy. Expecting some sort of ending that makes then first part of this latest trilogy a stand alone movie was never going to happen and most of us were well aware of this before we watched it.

Yup, 1 Book, 3 movies...

I re-read the book just before it was released, and I did notice that the ending was a bit "rushed". After the defeat of Smaug, Bilbo & company remained on/in the mountain and fortified their fortress, expecting conflict with the river people & the descendants of Dale. They got the conflict, which included the wood elves from the Mirkwood forest. The dwarves get help from their kin who travel from the Iron Mountains. All these folks then join forces to defeat the horde of orcs that have massed to assualt the men/elves/dwarves. After the men/elves/dwarves victory, Bilbo heads home (with the ring & the methrill shirt). This is probably what the 3rd part of the movie will be about. Just have to wait until Spring 2014 to find out!

Check it out: Already a release date:

http://www.amazon.com/Hobbit-Unexpected-Journey-Blu-ray-UltraViolet/dp/B00BEZTMWW/ref=sr_1_1?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1362149622&sr=1-1

They won't be able to with the tech that's in our homes right now. But you bring up an interesting point; would maxed out frame interpolation be a reasonable facsimile of HFR in the theater?

As for the length, LOTR was three books, three movies, but they still left out a lot: Tom Bombadil, the Barrow Downs, the Scouring of the Shire, etc.
The audio book of reading the Hobbit runs 11 hours. With the stories in the LOTR appendices, and other sources, there's plenty of material for 3 Hobbit movies.

As for HFR 3D, the 3D blu ray spec supports only 24fps for 1080p, but it supports 60fps for 720p. If 24fps film or 50fps PAL can be converted to 60fps video, I don't see why they can't convert 48fps from the hobbit to 60fps. It wouldn't be perfect, but I for one would like to see at least a test clip.

Just watched this, great movie and amazing picture quality and the 3D was not bad either. It comes on 2 disc each a little over an hour long. The quality is just WOW, none of that crappy film grain.. Just pure colorful and bright video.

It's 2 Disc 3D like Titanic? Time for larger Blu Ray discs lol I'm going to watch this on my Panny 60GT50 with "soap opera" effect set to high...My bootleg HFR

Yep, it's 2 disc:cool:

It is two 3D discs? Just to watch the entire movie? Ouch... Sort of like going back to Laserdisc days.....

what is the experience like when you get to the end of disc 1 and have to switch to disc 2? Is it pretty quick to get disc 2 going?

not really a big deal, there isn't any of the Usual trailers and filler they put on disc at start up. You put the disc in it takes you to the main menu, play from there. The movie is almost 3 hours so a break midway through the movie isn't such a bad thing, get up stretch and take your glasses off.

Saw this today on my passive 55" LG LM7600.

The movie itself was entertaining and I actually liked it far more than the original trilogy as the characters were far more engaging and the pace, despite the film's length, more brisk. In terms of 3D I found it to have a very nice sense of depth and the occasional pop out of the screen always worked well and seemed well integrated into the proceedings. While I would have preferred a full frame 1.78:1 presentation overall I'd say this is one of the better live action 3D presentations to date.

Interesting. Our opinions could not be more night/day on this topic. One of the reasons I found The Hobbit lacking so much compared to the LOTR trilogy is because I flat out dont find ANY of the new characters interesting or engaging. Interesting how much opinions can differ between people at times.

Well, I'll never deny to being one of those types who tends to go against the grain and can have some unconventional opinions. I always thought Terminator 2 was vastly overrated and that Marc Webb's Spiderman was vastly superior to Sam Raimi's movies. As you say, it all comes down to personal taste. When it comes to The Hobbit, it did go on a bit too long and the first hour had too much exposition and unnecessary scenes but even with that, it seemed more well paced than the original films which always seemed interminable to me. Given the moderately lukewarm reaction to this first chapter I will be curious to see how Jackson cuts the next two movies in the series.

Very comparable to Fellowship as far as pacing.

When seeing the hfr version in theaters I noticed a few scenes that looked unnaturally sped up. The ret oh the movie looked fantastic and smooth, but a few shots at the beginning, middle, and end stuck out poorly. I watched b the 24fps 3d version on bluray last night and this same shots still looked weird, but not to the same extent as in the hfr version.

Disclaimer: I did not see any of the Trilogy movies--just wasn't interested, and decided to see this because of the 3D. Not being in 16:9 really put me out of the sense of being there, but the scenery was great. The movie was divided into action scenes and non-action scenes, some of which seemed to drag on trying to get to the scene climax. 3D was good, but there were several cgi running animals mixed with real scenery that were unnatural with mixed 3D. They happened so fast that most people wouldn't notice, though. I also felt like some of the scenes had a Star Wars feel. I'm somewhat baffled, though, by who the intended audience was for this movie. The violence, action and some characters would be way too intense for most children under the age of 12, and the fantasy aspect of the movie is probably more than most adults can take, so I guess it's for high school kids? Glad I rented it instead of buying--not something I care to watch again.

I only watched the first disc, but so far I totally loved it. I don't get how people find it slow. I thought the pacing was fine, and there was plenty of action especially near the end of the first disc. As far as 3D, I found it to be phenomenal. The 3/4 panning shots of the characters running along the mountains was a particular standout, as was the outdoor scenes in the shire. I have a scope setup, so for me the 3D draws me in more in that aspect ratio than 16:9. I also have the frame interpolation maxed out, so it is very fluid and not taxing on the eyes. Soap opera-y, yes, but smooth nonetheless and apparently a reasonable mimic of HFR?? I can't wait to see the rest.

I love it too, watched it 3 an a half times now. My wife made it through the 1st disc last night were watching the 2nd tonight. Still dont find it slow or too long, but I love long movies. I think the sharp detail is beautiful. I do find some scenes too dark, but that may be my HD66's 5K'ish hr bulb and large(146) screen. I think my projector struggles with dark scenes in general.

Good ammo to talk the wife into an upgrade. I'm leary of putting a new bulb in it for fear the RBE will come raging back.

The Optoma HD33 or Benq W1070 are very reasonably priced DLP's and both have really awesome 3D. I've had better luck with Optoma and their customer service, but that BenQ is such a smokin' deal. FWIW, I've never seen better 3D than in my home theater - it trumps the theater by a huge margin. Absolutely zero crosstalk and stunning depth and sharpness. I looooove 3D!

I've only owned 2 units, both Optoma. That Benq does seem nice but its a lil shorter throw then I'd like. I'm thinking of holding out a few more months and see how the HD25 compares to the HD33. Take me a month or 2 to save the dough anyway. 3D is the most important factor in my decision. I want the best 3D I can get under say $1500. I've never seen 3D in the theater, 2 years ago I would've been "3D... pff I dont need that"

The only thing is Those nasty dark scenes I hate em. The 1st 30mins of Avengers, I'm looking at you. Priest, allways too dark or too bright(To a much lesser degree the hobbit suffers that). Constantlly changing presets in the middle of some movies. Even she commented last night that some scenes are too dark.
Edited by FARAD - 3/25/13 at 4:55pm

Hmm, I have an Optoma HD3300 projecting onto a 1.2 gain screen and 3D is just fine in terms of brightness. However, I hear that the Epson 3020 is a fair amount brighter in 3D (also has 400 more lumens), but there's more potential for having crosstalk, so you gotta pick what's more important to you (it can be found for around $1500 if you know where to look). I just finished the second disc last night and man it was thoroughly enjoyable. There were a few scenes that had a Michael Bay-ish that-could-never-happen feel to them, but hey its a fantasy movie. And again, I thought the 3D was really well done. Probably one of the best I've seen in terms of inward 3D.
Edited by blastermaster - 3/26/13 at 8:50am

No problems with brightness here and I use a lowly GT750, the dark scenes seemed well balanced to me.

As far as the movie goes? I thought it just OK-ish.... I think I am just getting bored with the theme maybe? I was definetly on the Tolken bandwagion when I read the books as a teenager.

I have them sill and have thought about re-reading them. I find many things I loved back then just don't click with me at age 50-ish. I liked the Trilogy a lot though.


3D was good, flying animals had me ducking but were such fast cuts it was only for a fraction of a second when it happened. Seemed to do well to put me into the scenes though in general.

I watched this on Saturday, and yes, the 3D was very well done. Even the darker scenes that usually give my TV fits didn't have much if any ghosting. Perhaps they weren't pushing the 3D effects as much in those scenes to compensate for people like me who have first-gen 3D LED sets.

It was nice to be back in the Shire and Middle Earth again. I saw all three of the LoTR movies in theaters but held off with The Hobbit based on poorer reviews.

All of the Dwarves kind of blend together with the exception of the hot one (so-named during the Sunday special feature webcast). The thing I loved about Fellowship of the Ring was how each of the nine members of the fellowship were so individualistic and memorable. Granted that is a lot easier to accomplish when you have one Elf, one Dwarf, one Wizard, two Humans, two comedy-relief Hobbits, the one Hobbit whose mission it is to carry the ring, and his best Hobbit friend.

And I noticed what the guy above said about how those creatures looked during that scene where the orcs were chasing the brown wizard as the dwarves and Bilbo were escaping. It just looked like crap CGI compared to how amazingly well done everything else in the movie is. Seriously, how can they have passed inspection and been so hard to render when you can have entire mountains fighting each other look so freaking realistic? I guess the answer is adding CGI creatures to a real scene is harder to pull off than dropping a few live actors into a completely CGI scene. That mountain fight scene was jaw-dropping and worth the price of admission for me.

Still, a very entertaining movie, and I can't wait for the next two.

I didn't notice that. I can see 3D pretty well, but I have a slight astigmatism and wonder if that affects anything. I have a problem resolving fast outward 3D, whereas if the 3D juts out of the screen slowly (potato cod in Imax: Under the Sea) I can resolve it just fine.

Totally! However, the bass just wasn't present in a lot of scenes like it should have been. In most movies I have to dial down my bass but in this one I had to crank it up.