 |
|
| Runtime: 161 min Audio: 2.1 Stereo Language: English Subtitles: Italian Frame Rate: 24 fps Video Bitrate: 3226 Kb/sec Audio Bitrate: 384 kbps |
|
|
Review: I'm not going to check the contents of the film in detail, but give some thought about how this film should be addressed. I consider myself a Tolkienist (I actually saw this movie on opening night, because I secured a promotional deal with local theater: I spent four hours until midnight in writing the names of the people in Peri writing) It is expected that many fans the original books will see the movie as a bloated, messy monster written version of their beloved story. It is important to realize, before departure, that this. Not just a movie of this book It Jackson's The Hobbit, Tolkien's not, and appreciate them works best as independent. They provide various media, from different centuries and has a partially different target. Written children's books, before Tolkien had to follow a great idea of ​​the trilogy; Jackson has produced Lord of the Rings trilogy and somewhat understandably try to make it resemble the prequels, in tone and can scope.One found Jackson's Hobbit trilogy, once completed, prepare the LotR trilogy film is much better than a simple children's book Tolkien's LotR prepare literature. (Changes in the tone of a children's book great epic very pronounced, even grating for those who read the Hobbit after LOTR tried.) By the way Jackson seems prequel trilogy not be harmful to LotR trilogy of Star Wars prequels way are important plot points from the original movie. Once completed, the Jacksons six Middle-earth movies can be watched in sequence to benefit certain internal chronology.To, Jackson's Hobbit trilogy, based on the 1930 children's book in the sense that the characters have the same names and the same visit many places at the same bit sequence (though the new characters and locations are also added). Their basic motivation is the same. But more than that, you should not expect much loyalty. There is hardly anything that is not very much adorned and elaborated, so that it is possible for most of the dark tone and action fantasy FAR FAR more (ie, fights). Spiders of Mirkwood here true horror approach, compared with slightly more children from their literary counterparts (where we Bilbo Attercop they insult with silly rhymes). The witch against the Necromancer of Dol Guldur, which happens in this book is strictly confidential and is only on for a short time, when Gandalf has hinted again at the end, here is actually displayed. This is understandable; Gandalf would otherwise be completely absent for much of this film. In addition, the audience will already know that the Jacksons This is the beginning of the war with Sauron, and the all-important dark can not be ignored. Tolkien in his letters determines how only a shadow of Sauron took a look at the pages of The Hobbit; Jackson's film the dark shadows and new subplots deeper.Entire created free and in history. The Elf Tauriel and madness is not possible with a dwarf they clearly intended a love story in which the book was already there and add at least one strong female character (there is no concern of Tolkien when he wrote a story for children in 1930). Despite endless brushes with death ALL survival protagonist not only stretch credibility - it is really and truly ward off and eliminate credibility. We are left with FANTASY actions in the proper sense, to be enjoyed for choreography, makes no sense. If a cat has nine lives, dwarf Jacksonian clearly enjoy a three-digit number from lives.So will be seen as an independent work, this is a good movie? Technically, it was nothing less appreciated than brilliant, full details of which only on the big screen. Smaug is, hands down, the best designed dragon world has not seen the movie. When I was a teenager instead of a mature 42, this wealth of fantasy action from me can have no end. It's nice to see Legolas again, even if he did not in the book. I l ...
 | This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. |
No comments:
Post a Comment