К сожалению не нашел темы про фильм, ну если че добрые моедраторы ткнут носом.
Меня собственно интересует отдельный аспект, а не мнение о фильме в целом. А именно: почему так многим фанам книги (Даэ и ТерМос, превед!) не нравится экранизация? я тут в полглаза поглядываю на третюю часть по зомбоящику и удивляюсь, че ж вы там так активно ненавидите. не слово в слово конечно, но в целом отличная визуализация любимой вами книги. че вы так кипятитесь-то? О_о

Сообщение отредактировал Dhani - 22.12.2014, 11:55

Ну не так же фанбойно, Алекс...


Вики обобщает лучше меня:
The main consensus of debate was regarding the film's length, visual style, its highly controversial High Frame Rate, and whether or not the film matched the level of expectation built from The Lord of the Rings film trilogy.

А я конкретизирую:
The Lord of the Rings was a fresh and exhilarating movie experience: the CGI breakthroughs, the thoughtful and somber tone, the sheer cinematic scale and gusto. With The Hobbit, Jackson might have taken on a different challenge, telling a story more innocent and intimate, more hobbit-sized. Instead, he's offered up something a bit too indulgent, a bit too familiar, a bit—if I may borrow a phrase—there and back again. - Кристофер Орр, The Atlantic

The problem with "The Hobbit" is that instead of moments like these (речь о сцене с Голлумом) being the point, they feel like the mortar to the bricks of computer-calculated action. - Лиза Кеннеди, Denver Post

The first half-hour [...] is painful on the eyeballs. The look on the screen is distracting but familiar – somewhere between a soap opera, a sports-bar football game and a direct-to-video kids program from a bygone era. By doubling the frame rate of traditional 35mm film production and current high-definition video, the new format provides twice the visual information. Instead of being immersed in the action, you find yourself staring at the prosthetics and props. Instead of engaging with the drama, you’re staring at the sets and the actor’s choreography. ...the difference between this and conventional film is the difference between in-your-dreams and in-your face. - Лиам Лэйси, Globe and Mail

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is making a bizarre kind of history by going out in limited release at 48 frames per second (double the usual standard). Couple that with 3D and the movie looks so hyper-real that you see everything that's fake about it, from painted sets to prosthetic noses. [...] Second, there's the length of it. The 169 minutes of screen time stretches further than lines for a new iPhone. This hurts, since the first 45 minutes of the film traps us in the hobbit home of the young Bilbo Baggins [...] It's Middle Earth overkill. - Питер Трэверс, Rolling Stone

It’s purely a matter of taste whether this world is one you want to inhabit for nearly three hours. And it might be a function of age and aesthetic expectations whether the super-high-definition digital technology Jackson used to film -- sorry, capture -- ”An Unexpected Journey” strikes your eye as dazzlingly crisp and realistic or more akin to the visual grammar of a giant ”Teletubbies” episode. There are moments when the combination of high-definition and 3-D lend the film an appropriately pop-up storybook quality... But too often, Jackson’s awkward staging and swishing, panning, careening camera work make ”An Unexpected Journey” look like a rehearsal he’s watching through his video monitor. - Энн Хорнэдей, Washington Post

This is an adventure story, a caper with elves and goblins. And yet Jackson gives it the same portentous, heroic swagger; the same doomy menaces. It's just that this time the action is spooned out in thimbles. The rest of the running time is given over to dwarfish humor, endless, unfunny comic bluster and banter interspersed with duff warrior dirges and desperate close-ups of Freeman mugging. [...] "An Unexpected Journey" may look sharp in TV showrooms or on your PS3, but in the movie theater the picture's clarity comes at the loss of texture, shading and consistency. Shifts from exteriors to dark interiors are especially jarring. Look also at the dull, flat orange taint that is meant to approximate candle light in numerous scenes, and compare that with the glow you find in "Barry Lyndon," or "Fanny and Alexander," or your own birthday snaps. - Том Черити, CNN

The three "Lord of the Rings" were heavy on battle scenes, but "The Hobbit" is almost nothing but battles. Without a stopwatch, it would be hard to know for sure, but probably 50 percent of screen time is taken up with fighting - perhaps up to 80 percent if you count planning for and recovering from battles. Some of these battles have pockets of interest... But most of "The Hobbit" is like looking over Peter Jackson's shoulder to watch a computer screen. - Мик ЛаСалль, San Francisco Chronicle

The comparative playfulness of the novel could have made this ”Hobbit” movie a lot of fun, but over the years Mr. Jackson seems to have shed most of the exuberant, gleefully obnoxious whimsy that can be found in early films like ”Meet the Feebles” and ”Dead Alive.” A trace of his impish old spirit survives in some of the creature designs... but Tolkien’s inventive, episodic tale of a modest homebody on a dangerous journey has been turned into an overscale and plodding spectacle. - А.О. Скотт, The New York Times

The Hobbit is concerned with (and sidelined by) its own obsessive technology. This is not about a reluctant hero drawing courage from some deep personal well. It's not about dread and danger. It's about visual effects. But there, too, Jackson and his team falter. Shot in 3-D at 48 frames per second (twice a film's normal speed), the "premium experience" version, available in around 500 theaters nationwide, looks like, well . . . more like cheesy, high-def video. Neither the elaborate Middle-earth sets nor the elaborately prostheticized and costumed characters traipsing across the vertiginous ravines and endless rope bridges look "real" in any credible way. - Стивен Ри, Philadelphia Inquirer

You endure this monstrously overproduced misfire with the numb apathy of a prisoner slowly throwing a ball against a cell wall. It's a husk with the superficial features of a "Rings" movie but none of the energy and heart and wit [...] Aside from pacing, the main problem is that "The Hobbit's" characters lack the crispness that makes for inspiring adventure. Freeman's finger-fidgeting Bilbo is a fussbudget creature, frustrated, prissy and befuddled. His personality takes a darker, more determined hue when he encounters Gollum (Andy Serkis, digitally transformed) and slips on the Ring of power and bad vibes, but that evolution comes very late in the game. His dwarf commandos are characterized mostly by their facial hair, which is sculpted like topiary. The mustache budget on this thing must have topped "Lincoln's." - Колин Конверт, Minneapolis Star Tribune

The movie lacks majesty. Grand in parts, it is too often grandiose or grandiloquent, and the running time is indefensible. It’s like the three-hour first cut, assembled by editors, of even the most modest film before the director says, ”O.K., now let’s make a movie out of this.” This Hobbit plays like a rough cut, with no deleted scenes left for DVD. - Ричард Корлисс, Time

But with great clarity comes greater vision. At 48 frames, the film is more true to life, sometimes feeling so intimate it's like watching live theater. That close-up perspective also brings out the fakery of movies. Sets and props look like phony stage trappings at times, the crystal pictures bleaching away the painterly quality of traditional film. [...] The technology may improve the story's translation to the screen. There's just not that much story to Tolkien's "Hobbit," though. Jackson is stretching a breezy 300 pages to the length of a Dickens miniseries, and those in-between bits really stick out in part one. - Дэвид Жермейн, Associated Press

In Jackson's academically fastidious telling, however, it's as if The Wizard of Oz had taken nearly an hour just to get out of Kansas. There are elements in this new film that are as spectacular as much of the Rings trilogy was, but there is much that is flat-footed and tedious as well, especially in the early going. This might be one venture where, rather than DVDs offering an ”Expanded Director's Version,” there might be an appetite for a ”Condensed Director's Cut” in a single normal-length film. - Тодд Маккарти, The Hollywood Reporter

И так далее, и тому подобное.