Cinnamon Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Just been to see it & it was FANTASTIC I really really enjoyed it, & I was dubious because I don't like the book at all,but it was just so great. The scenery is stunning & worth the cinema fee in itself. Its worth seeing it in 3D,because its not too 3D'ish,if you know what I mean. Some of the effects are beautiful & brilliantly done. The acting is superb too,with the lovely Aiden Turner playing a dwarf,which was a nice surprise & I am sure that Stephen Fry voices a huge Orc towards the end, although I didn't see his name in the credits. It was also good to revisit characters played by Cate Blanchette & Hugo Weaving again. Best film I have seen in ages Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dogmother Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 I want to see it, it has mixed reviews though and it slightly sticks in the craw that they've managed to spin one book out into three films... talk about egging it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinnamon Posted December 14, 2012 Author Share Posted December 14, 2012 You will love it Clare,especially the woodland scenes & the rabbit sleigh! It didn't feel stretched at all to me,but as I said,I haven't read the book. Can't wait for the next one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dogmother Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Simon Bates reviewed it this morning; he liked it but said that it was overly long and that the 3D/new shooting speed made it hard on the eyes. I'm not sure that I can sit still for 3 whole hours, but may give it a try if Rosie wants to go. Phil's not keen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckmum6 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 I'm taking the children and OH on Monday, before other schools break up and the cinema is heaving. I'm not too sure whether to see it in 3D though, I feel that films often tend to not be as good as animated versions in 3D, but Cinnamon has got me thinking it might be worth it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dogmother Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 I think it depends on whether you normally find 3D viewing enjoyable; from the reports I've heard some of the scenes with swooping in made a few folks feel seasick and they had to take their 3D specs off for a while to rest their eyes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinnamon Posted December 14, 2012 Author Share Posted December 14, 2012 We didn't find it a problem at all & I couldn't see anyone else having trouble with it in the cinema either. Its not very 3D ish..........there were no bits that had obviously been shot just to look good in 3D,and I think the 3D did enhance the gorgeous scenery shots. There was one bit that seemed to swoop quite quickly which I can imagine would give some people a bit of a head rush. As for the length ,well,we were settled in for a long haul with posh extra comfy seats,food & drinks,but the time just flew by. It really is a beautifully done movie & well worth seeing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lavenders_Blue Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Hubby wants to go and see it. I am not bothered either way but will go if he wants to. I'm also a bit sceptical about the fact that a relatively short book has been made into 3 films and also the 3D aspect of it - I had the seasick feeling you describe, DM, watching Avatar. Got quite queasy at one point and had to take the specs off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TAJ Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 I have 13 going to the 10.40 pm showing tonight for DDs 18th birthday party - we are not allowed to go with them! - just collect them at gone 1.30 am. ...I might go to bed and set the alarm! Then all back here to watch Lord of the Rings trilogy, extended editions through the night apparently. Tracy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Speckled Hen Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Just trying to book tickets. Can't wait. Loved all the books. I gather it's not the 3D that's upset some but the fact that it's shot at 48 frames per second rather than the normal 24. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TAJ Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 (edited) The review from 13 teenagers was 48 frames per second worked fine for wide/scenery shots, but in some close-up fast action elements it was 'a bit blurred' as too fast. T Edited December 16, 2012 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patsylabrador Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 Brilliant. Didn't bother with 3D because I knew I'd not like it. The film was so good, true to the book with some appendices woven in which gave some history of middle earth and then some fun. The ba ttles were great. It was a smashing way to spend 3 hours, the audience were quiet - me, MS and an elderly couple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ain't Nobody Here Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 For Christmas I've asked for a family outing to the cinema . Groupon have a great offer for our local cinema so we'll all be going to see it soon too . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
