Welcome to Harry Potter Forum! Below you will find many interesting threads and discussions. Enjoy.
- Last Active
- Prefect, Enforcer, Gate Keeper
-Movie is not Nolan's best, but still an incredible experience unlike anything you've ever witnessed. This last part is not fully evident until you've left the theater for a few hours and realize you can't stop thinking about it.
-Regardless of a few filmmaking flaws, the ambition and scope of the film is unparalleled.
-The screenplay is a perfect blend of science and philosophy. Somewhat hard to follow (also due to the fact that the music often overpowered the dialogue) but absolutely begs repeated viewings.
-I think I'm going to have to see this at least twice more before I can accurately analyze it.
It can probably speak for itself that when I got out of the theater I simply couldn't speak. I just couldn't comprehend what I had seen unfold on screen. It's quite an amazing experience.4
I think you mean "How does he do it? Kloves?"
"I knew that she's see things my way. Rowling."
Steve Kloves likes this.probably sitting there all "hmm....yes, I agree"....
Wow, it was actually difficult to word it in his stupid writing style. How the hell does he do it?
I just saw it today. Still laboring over it so I can't really give it a rating yet. As someone who was sitting through the whole thing thinking how much better it could've been, I was slightly disappointed. But judging by the expectations and standards that its predecessor set, it was quite enjoyable.
I thought the pacing worked quite well for the most part, and the film flowed much better than the last film, with the exception of the beginning. After the opening scene in Bree, I thought the whole part with Beorn and Mirkwood was awkwardly realized and kind of shoehorned in. It didn't fit much of a purpose. But after they reach the Woodland Realm, things smoothed out and the cutting between multiple storylines was well done.
Lake-Town was easily the best portion of the film. The set was actually built, and it shows. It is the most well-designed and realized environment in (I'm betting) the entire trilogy. I had the same enchanted feeling here as I had when I first discovered Edoras and Minas Tirith. It's a wonder to behold, and all the digital sets pale in comparison.
Which brings me to the most problematic part of the film: the CGI. What was digitally created in An Unexpected Journey is multiplied twofold here. So much of the action is logic-less, physics-defying CGI which undermines any actual fear, stakes or intensity. The barrel ride and spider fights were swashbuckling and visually resplendent, but lacked the grit and realism of the action that made Lord of the Rings come alive. The Orc fights were an improvement, but would've been even better had the main orcs such as Bolg and Azog been costumes and makeup rather than digital. It just feels so fake, all of it, and the shots of real New Zealand environments were the captivating ones, the ones where I felt the magic return from the first trilogy. With Jackson's digital environment comes the freedom to swing the camera around anywhere, and he takes all these liberties, with shots that swoop from character to character. These are brilliantly envisioned but lack majesty. Once again, all this could've been avoided if Jackson hadn't tried to push for 48fps, which caused him to abandon matte paintings and miniatures for his environments rather than digital environments.
Perhaps the only saving grace of the CGI is Smaug, who is rendered masterfully. In fact, the Smaug sequence is the only one in the film where I felt on the edge of my feet. It's the voice of Benedict Cumberbatch that enhances the performance as well. The cinematography is on par with the first film, but the score by Howard Shore is underwhelming and underutilized. I felt myself not only missing the familiar cues from Lord of the Rings but also missing epic new music. At least AUJ had the brilliant new theme, but that was hardly played in this film. Much of the music is dark and foreboding, and the themes for the Wood Elves and Lake-Town are subtler and less memorable--the only exception here is Smaug's theme, which is dark and thrilling.
Compared to An Unexpected Journey, DoS is a better film. It's more atmospheric, more impressively-handled and features more of Middle-Earth. But compared to the Rings trilogy, it's a disappointment and boasts the same issues as its predecessor. I found myself thinking again and again how Peter Jackson could let it come to this. I mean, I myself could come up with better ways to handle scenes and to make them more meaningful. This may not sound like a valid complaint, but it doesn't feel nearly as epic or majestic as any of the LotR films do. And before anyone says that the Hobbit is not meant to be epic or majestic, the book is not--but by splitting it into three films, adding in countless Orc fights, enhancing roles, creating parallels to LotR, and so much more, Jackson is trying to make it into an epic. And it somewhat gets there, but I don't see how he doesn't realize that if he made these films the way he did the Rings trilogy, they could actually be so much better. It just pains me to see all the potential wasted.
All that being said, I really did enjoy the film. I won't even go into how the film works as an adaptation, because it diverges into fan-fiction territory. However, the cliffhanger ending worked slightly better than I thought it would. Still, I think the film would benefit from ending after Smaug attacks Lake-Town, and having the trilogy carry on with the politics of the Erebor throne, the Arkenstone, Bard's story, the Battle of the Five Armies, and Thorin's decline round off the final film. Of course, that would involve making Sauron into the overarching enemy of the films rather than Smaug, but isn't that what they're doing anyway? They just call him the Necromancer and still haven't found a way to connect that plotline into the main one. Anyways, I have no doubt that the next film will easily be the best of the three. Jackson is a pro at battle scenes, and can even juggle emotional weight with CGI (Pelennor Fields), and lord knows there will be plenty of emotional weight, with all the deaths coming. I can only imagine Tauriel's reaction. :P2
As someone who enjoyed the first movie but lamented the lack of focus on the districts and other stuff, will I get that with Catching Fire? I really want to see this movie, but I don't want to sit through more action stuff. How much action is in it? Is there more focus on characters than action? Will someone help assuage my fear? Thanks.There's definitely some more social commentary going on, including further explanation of the districts and how they are starting the revolution. There is more action in terms of a 2nd Hunger Games, but it is shorter, more stylish and ties in to the focus of rebelling against the Capitol at the end.
Okay, how many people here on the forum are looking to pursue film career/are doing film school right now?