It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
That said, I did like Desolation of Smaug more than An Unexpected Journey and I'm still going to watch The Battle of the Five Armies, hoping for the best. But two films, as originally planned, would have suited their vision for The Hobbit just fine.
The story is something else entirely...
I've never read the books but I have heard a lot about them. I've also watched the animated films and I know the LOTR films well enough from multiple viewings.
The Hobbit started as a difficult test for me. Given that it's a kids' story, ultimately, I feel much less invested in the tale of a collection of dwarfs, their gold stock and a dragon. However, Jackson brings just enough Sauron material into the mix to keep me focused. Smaug has a couple of scary moments to offer but much of the effect is lost because of...
... many, lengthy scenes. Let's face it, it's hard not to look at certain scenes and judge them to be just filler material. But because everything in this world looks amazing and because we know many of the characters, Jackson more or less gets away with it. Still, I can't shake off the feeling that Hobbit is too small in scope to succeed the epic LOTR trilogy.
Now obviously one can argue that such a judgement is unfair. After all, Hobbit is a totally different book too. BUT, because Jackson eventually insisted on making not one or two but three films, of 3 hours each no less, it's almost impossible not to compare them to Rings. And then, I'm afraid, I can't but conclude that Hobbit, while overall good and looking great, is the weaker of the two series. Now to be fair, I have yet to watch the third film. It may blow me away. I'm curious though, since it's built on only a couple of pages from the book. But we'll see. Nevertheless, even if the last Hobbit film gets me all jazzed up, the first two simply cannot compete with Fellowship or The Two Towers.
What , you want more? Okay: Mordor, yes!
</b>How do you feel about Jim Carrey when he doesn't play comedic parts?</font>
It is quite strange, after seeing him in loads of comedies, to actually watch him give a straight-faced, serious performance. Sure, there are moments in The Truman Show where the goofiness shows ("let's go for a drive!") but on the whole, it's quite a brilliant performance, to be honest.
Is it possible to be bored in a good way? *confused*
As for Jim Carrey, oh, he's much better in those. I liked The Truman Show as well, and Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind, and Man On The Moon. I can't remember if I've seen him in anything else where he didn't irritate me - I don't find him funny at all overacting in his regular comedic parts. But I must say that I haven't seen him in anything for years, so my memories of his performance even in those movies I mentioned isn't very fresh.
Read the IMDB trivia page for a whole bunch of 23s you probably missed (I know I did).
I can add one more:
The 23rd element on the periodic table is vanadium. Its chemical symbol is V. The Roman number 'V' is of course 5, which is 2+3. ;-)
As far as the non comedic movies I enjoy him in, I'd say The Majestic, The Number 23, and terrific voice work in Robert Zemeckis's 2009 adaptation of Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol. I know many criticize the animation style in the film but the voice cast and music alone carry the film incredibly well.
I´m not sure if it counts as serious, but the way he played that crazy magician in The Incredible Burt Wonderstone (bah what a terrible film) made me think Carrey could be really scary as a psycho killer.
</b>Avengers, X-Men, ... Which Marvel movie franchise do you like best?</font>
I did like Captain America Winter Soldier a lot too, but may be because it was somewhat spy oriented. I wasn't that much of a fan of the first one, mainly because I don't really like WW2 period pieces..
I have never really got into XMen either for some reason. I've seen them all, but they do nothing for me. Not sure why and I'm at a loss to explain it. I always come out of the theatre underwhelmed.
What I'm waiting for, and waiting for.......is a really good Hulk movie. I hope they make one soon with Mark Ruffalo. Should be great.
The first stable properties that I thought had promise were Blade and X-Men. Blade obviously slowed down - so did Wesley Snipes - but X-Men kept going. However, even X-Men lost a lot of its charm once Brian Singer decided to put Tom Cruise in a Nazi uniform. And for a while, things didn't go so well.
But you had your Hulk and your Incredible Hulk. And then you had your Iron Man, the chicken with the golden eggs. And Marvel was back in business. "Business" is indeed the right word because who would have thought they'd ever be so bold as to plan ahead and aim towards that superb Avengers event? Iron Man 2 wasn't quite the film that Iron Man had been, but it was still infinitely better than FF, Daredevil or Ghostrider, to name but a few. Cap and Thor did pretty well. Meanwhile, X-Men showed up again with a quality film, First Class, after The Last Stand and X-Men: Origins had nearly hammered the final nail in the mutants' coffin. Avengers went big and its successors almost as big. The Wolverine disappointed some but this year's Days Of Future Past was a stunner. Yet so was Cap 2...
And now I guess I must choose. Though it very much enjoyed Neveldine & Taylor's high-caffeine take on Ghostrider, it really comes down to Avengers or X-Men. I will choose... X-Men. Can't help it. The Mutants are my favourites. So much potential is still hidden in that property. I enjoy the comic books, the characters and most of the films. I can even partially forgive the flaws in The Last Stand and Origins.
The X-Men films are kind of a mixed bunch. I've seen them all except Days of Future Past (meaning to see that any day now) and X2: X-Men United still stands at the top for me. First Class was pretty good, too.
At the end of the day, I must agree with @RC7: Guardians of the Galaxy wins by leaps and bounds.
Anyway, I have enjoyed Iron Man, Avengers and GotG just like everyone else has but I don't feel a special connection to them like I do the X-Men. At the end of the day I just love these characters. Stewart, McKellen, Jackman, Fassbender and McAvoy have all been outstanding. Just imagine if Singer had never left.
I do sympathize with those who are sick of Marvel or who are insulted by their assembly line attitude regarding these films. We have been absolutely bombarded by Marvel with no end in sight any time soon. It does feel extremely watered down at this point. I understand that it's a business but I think they've gone too far. At what point will the masses stop shelling out money for all of these releases?