What's your next favorite movie? Join our movie community to find out
Image from: Life of Pi (2012)
Manage your own movie collection and always keep it with you with our Apps. Price track movies and get price drop notifications instantly. Become a member to take full advantage of all site features.
The Hobbit Blu-rays Officially Announced and Detailed
Posted February 5, 2013 10:28 AM by Webmaster
Warner Bros. Home Entertainment has officially announced and detailed both the standard Blu-ray/DVD/UltraViolet and 3D BD/DVD/Ultraviolet Combo Pack releases of director Peter Jackson's The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. Both versions of the theatrical cut of the film are set to feature DTS-HD Master Audio 7.1 surround, and arrive on Blu-ray on March 19th.
Official synopsis: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is the first chapter in Peter Jackson's new epic trilogy set in Middle-Earth 60 years before J.R.R. Toklien's "The Lord of the Rings" saga. Follow Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman) as he's swept into a quest to reclaim the lost Dwarf Kingdom of Erebor, long ago conquered by the dragon Smaug. Approached by the wizard Gandalf the Grey (Ian McKellen), Bilbo finds himself joining a company of thirteen dwarves led by the legendary warrior Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage). Their journey will take them through treacherous lands swarming with Goblins and Orcs, deadly Wargs, giant Spiders, Shapeshifters and Sorcerers. They must escape the goblin tunnels, where Bilbo meets the creature Gollum (Andy Serkis), who will change his life forever. Alone with Gollum on the shores of an underground lake, the unassuming Bilbo Baggins not only discovers guile and courage that surprise him, he also gains possession of Gollum's "precious" ring that holds unexpected and useful qualities, tied to the fate of all Middle-Earth. Several key talent members from The Lord of the Rings trilogy reprise their roles, along with exciting new cast members.
Cover art is final. Special features available on both the 2D and 3D editions of the film include:
New Zealand: Home of Middle Earth
Start of Production
Shooting Block One
Filming in 3D
Locations Part 1
Locations Part 2
Stone St. Studios Tour
Wrap of Principal Photography
Wellington World Premiere
The Hobbit: Kingdoms of Middle-Earth
Guardians of Middle-Earth
Lego The Lord of the Rings
Standard DVD copy of An Unexpected Journey (2D)
UltraViolet digital copy An Unexpected Journey (2D) (expires 3/19/15)
Those who purchase either Blu-ray Combo Pack release will also gain special access to a Live Sneak Peek at its sequel, The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug, presented online by filmmaker Peter Jackson on March 24th at 3pm Eastern/12pm Pacific. Warner Bros. has yet to provide further details. The Desolation of Smaug opens in U.S. theaters on December 13th.
Decent film. Overly long though. I think I will pick this up, and perhaps the extended later, then whichever cut I like less will be my gauge for purchasing theatrical vs. extended for the final two films.
I liked the film, but I was disappointed that all the enemy creatures (orcs, goblins, trolls) were CGI. In my opinion that took a little bit away from the experience. Also, I think this was long enough as it is. Unlike the original trilogy, I don't think I'd want to see this one extended even more.
i liked the movie and so did my wife but we both felt after leaving the theatre it was stretched...
there are some instances wich seem to drag on forevever,one example is the "guess what it is" between smeagoll and...this was over 10 min long!
cant imagine a extended version tbh..wich will happen...might be overkill tough.
Peter Jackson must have read the numerous comments about the "sometimes" stretched dialogue,if he's smart...he listens to advice from us" the customers" and just re-cuts its slightly so the flow of the movie gets better.
I'm holding out for the "Warner's Totally-Middle-Earth 95th Anniversary-Edition 27-Disc 3D BD/DVD Combo exclusive diamond platinum gold silver bronze rock paper scissors ultimate limited extended special definitive remastered collector's director's cut w/lossless audio, commentaries, interviews, UltraViolet digital copies, CD soundtracks, notepads, post-its, coasters, shot glasses, pewter action figures, full set of replica rings, and a talking Bilbo doll."
I'm somewhat in agreement with _ck. I'd personally like an "extended & condensed" edition (if that makes any sense). Extended in terms of Gollum material (more of him talking to himself), and condensed regarding most of the rest of the film (namely the troll sequence, the fighting mountains, and the scene at the end of the film with the dwarves trapped in the trees...if they want, they can also remove the Goblin King's silly "That'll do it" death line)...Whatever the case, I will not be buying the Theatrical Edition, and will be waiting for an improved EE of sorts.
@peterraes while there's much about the film that admittedly can give it a stretched feel, I, for one, was glad to see them give the riddles in the dark segment such space and attention. Having Bilbo waltz off with The One Ring without giving us a full sense of what he had to go through to get it would be a disservice; showing Gollum's madness, love of games and sharp wit with riddles is pretty important. Shortening it to just a few quick, dumbed down riddles really wouldn't cut it. Also, this is the only scene in this story that features (introduces, no less) this major character of LOTR, so of course they'd flesh it out if for that alone.
I expect I'll get the regular version. I saw the HFR 3D in the theater and absolutely hated it. I felt it was aesthetically completely wrong for Middle Earth, which should be a land of mists & haze & dreamlike vistas -- NOT super-sharp digital "realism". And as for a future Extended Edition: I'd probably rent it first, as I felt the theatrical was overly-long as it was.
Not a big LOTR fan at all, yet I found The Hobbit to be a more enjoyable experience than any of the trilogy films. Maybe it was due to the theatrical experience (3D IMAX 48fps), but it was an entertaining film and I might just buy this.
@Tom Servo: the covers that appear above are the final covers per Warner Bros. Home Entertainment, as taken from the studio's official assets website this morning when the announcements were posted and made. Hope that helps clarify
@lupinskitten: the cover featuring Beorn isn't official, you're correct. The two covers above, though -- the first featuring Bilbo, Gandalf and some of the Dwarves, and the second featuring Gandalf standing in the midst of falling leaves -- are official. It sounds like your browser is either displaying old cached images instead of the new, official images that have been loaded on the site, or you're looking at the Movie Only listing on the site, which still has a temp image (since a movie-only release hasn't been announced or confirmed). Hope that helps!
the movie was OK, too long of course, & for anyone to whine & B!tch about "where's the info on the Extended Cut", all I can say is, "Really??!!" Did you See this version? THAT wasn't LONG enough? At least it'll be in 7.1 so you know it'll Look AND Sound great. Decent movie, similar to the first one IMO, not YOUR opinion, My opinion.
First week 3D rental for me. I'll probably buy the extended when it comes out. I know a lot of people think it was too long, but I loved the whole thing. I never read the books, so it was all new information. We'll see if that changes the second time watching it.
I saw the 24fps/3D version first, and ultimately preferred it over the 48fps/3D version. While the 48fps version made many of the full CGI scenes (particularly the opening scenes in Erebor) look amazing, the 48fps really exposed the FX seams between composited elements in latter scenes (particularly the Radagast/Warg chase) moreso than in the 24fps version. I suspect that with more time, and the experience of having made "An Unexpected Journey" and seen the results, the filmmakers and FX wizards can improve on their efforts at making the FX even more believable at the highr frame rate.
Still, I hope not only "The Desolation of Smaug" and "There and Back Again" both feature 48fps/3D presentations, but Hollywood filmmakers learn how to better exploit the technology to overcome the problems audiences and critics had with it in "An Unexpected Journey."
@thephantomcat: Interesting point but then are you saying that Gandalf looked more powerful and assured after his battle with the Balrog and his subsequent "rebirth"? To me he was the same Gandalf all through the trilogy. Right from that first appearance where he explains to Frodo how a wizard is never late. Frankly it seemed to me that the actor was having trouble remembering his lines. He is now in reality quite a bit older after all than he was when he made the LOTR films.
It would be nice to have a fan edit, making the ALL THREE PARTS into one three-hour movie.
I can't imagine an "extended edition" of this. It's already too long just with part 1, and seems like it's stretching itself sooo hard to become an overlong trilogy. Pretty painful watching, really. I hope there ISN'T an EE, just because it feels like the three-part set already will be the "final director's intent".
I'm also going to wait for the extended cut. In fact, I will wait patiently for a collection that includes all 6 movies with extended cuts and Fellowship of the Ring as color corrected. That's probably going to happen at the end of 2015.
I was fortunate to have seen this at an iMax theater. It was amazing. I am torn between waiting for the extended cut or buying this one to tide me over. Ultimately, I will purchase the extended trilogy. The think the original movies were more complete with the additional footage and expect this trilogy to be no different.
Great movie, day 1 buy. Hoping the 3d is at least half as good as in the theater. This movie was beautifully put together and is yet another testament to the genius that is Peter Jackson. People need to stop their pissin n moaning like little girls. Its toooo loooooong!!BooHoo!!! Christ on a cracker, get over it already!!!
ReidW, Rewatch Gandalf the White's first scene in The Two Towers. "Gandalf? Gandalf the Grey. Yes, that was my name. *I* am Gandalf the White." The emphasis is Ian McKellan's. You'll notice that Gandalf the White is far more "together" than the Grey. I believe even in the special features or was it an interview that Ian McKellan indicated he viewed them as different characters and even went so far as to say he prefered Gandalf the Grey.
Afraid I don't see it as phantom does. I don't think it has anything to do with the part as written. I think its just a sign that the actor is losing some of his abilities. He seemed to be having trouble with his lines. That's sad for him and for anybody in the same situation.
Lol! Yes, all old people are weak minded and grow more useless as they age. Age-ism at its finest. Lol! I'm sorry, but I don't think you can tell the difference between someone who is acting and someone who is senile.
I going to get the extended cut versions of The Hobbit Trilogy because I watched this film and it's SO EPIC!
Well, day one for the extended cut!
If you watch The Lord of the Rings Trilogy before, wait for the extended cut to be more EPIC!
will pass on this movie i hated it ..Peter jackson ruined what could have been a good movie...its a shame he couldnt just do the movie by the book...nope he like george lucas have to tinker and change things
Do those of you who think that Ian McKellen had trouble with his lines have any notion at all of how films are made? This isn't a Broadway play where everything is done live. They can film one line at a time if they have to and if the delivery isn't quite right, they loop the dialogue later. You may not like his performance or how he was directed or you might find fault with the script. But to say that McKellen couldn't remember his lines in a way that negatively impacted his performance is absurd.
FYI, Sir Ian McKellen is also a stage actor. Now how could he possibly be doing that if he can't remember his lines? Also, if you cannot tell the difference between Gandalf the Grey and Gandalf the White (apart from the physical appearance), then no offense, but maybe you're not the best person to judge someone's acting abilities.
Did those of you who claim to want 48fps see it in a theatre in 48fps? Because in 48fps, it had the dreaded "soap-opera" effect and IMO, looked amazingly horrible - to the point where I couldn't understand why Peter Jackson would have wanted his film to look that way. And if you want that look, it's very simple. Just turn on the motion modes on your TV. It will look exactly the same.
CrescentMoon: While I wrote above that it's absurd that McKellen forgetting his lines would have any effect on the result because they could film a line at a time and/or loop, stage actors do indeed forget their lines. I once saw "A Walk In the Woods" (probably in '89 or '90) in London with Alec Guinness and near the beginning of the play, he forgot his lines, got up, walked off stage for a moment, then walked back and picked up where he left off and was fine for the rest of the play.
@ZoetMB: You're right, stage actors do forget their lines occasionally, regardless of their age However I have serious doubts that one can act on stage if his performance on film requires countless takes to make it more or less right. That, as you put it, absurd.
Countless takes are part of the movie business that has nothing to do with whether or not an actor knows his/her lines. I felt that Ian seemed distracted and not completely with it. Or perhaps he was just asking himself why he had agreed to do the film in the first place. It isn't anywhere close to LOTR in quality.
ZoetMB: Yes we saw it in 48fps. It looked amazing. The soap effect is just the effect of smooth video, and you call it the soap effect because you've only seen it in cheap TV before. 24fps looks more cinematic to us only because our minds are trained to equate jerky video with cinema, and smooth video with soap operas. This is a completely artificial mindset; there is nothing superior about 24 fps. It produces judder and limits how filmmakers can use cameras. Films have used 24 fps because it's the lowest framerate they could get away with, and it's technically more challenging to have more frames. There's nothing sacred or magical about a barely-tolerable framerate. Let's take the time to get used to smooth video and then move on (after a few films everyone will get used to it), instead of restricting cinematography with a technical artifact of the past.
@the phantomcat: It more than just one character. The whole effort came up short for me. There just isn't enough in The Hobbit to make three movies. The element of jeopardy and what's at stake is much lower in value in this film than in the Lord of The Rings. There was too much CGI in scenes where Jackson used real people, props and sets in LOTR. The whole production had the sense of an attempt to try to "go home" again. That rarely works well in the movies but they keep doing it. I don't think anyone not even Jackson could recreate the delight we all felt when we first saw The Lord of the Rings. FTR, I consider LOTR to be one of the cinema's greatest accomplishments.
So you see there's a lot more than one actor's performance that I don't like about this film. But phantomcat please grow a bit of a thicker skin and learn to stop insulting/attacking/ridiculing any one who has the temerity to disagree with you.
I was so looking forward to this movie. I absolutley loved the LOTR trilogy and could not wait for the extended editions to come out. I wanted more, more, MORE!
I have read The Hobbit and The LOTR trilogy several times.
When I heard PJ was making the Hobbit into three movies I began to get a little nervous. As it turns out I was right to be scared. Just like King Kong, Peter Jackson has taken a 90 minute story and stretched it beyond the limits trying to make it more than it needs to be. I actually fell asleep in the middle. I could not wait for this movie to end. What a total disapointment. Maybe in 5 or 6 years they will edit the three movies down to a condensed version that lasts about two and a half hours total. I might consider watching that but sitting though this version again? No Thanks.
All these people complaining about HFR have lost all credibility when arguing for "director's intent" in Blu-ray transfers.
Real life is much higher than even 48fps and higher frame rate adds detail to motion like high resolution adds detail to each frame. 24fps is just tradition. I'll be happy when cinema moves beyond that limitation.
Will definitely wait for the extended cut. Maybe even longer if Warner doesn't come up with a makeshift method of translating 48 FPS to current Blu-ray 3D, Blu-ray, and DVD standards by then. (I say "makeshift" because the BDA's already convened to figure out how to make room for 48 FPS in the official standards.)
Maybe for the DVD and 2D Blu-ray they could do it in 29.97i and do a 1:1:1:2 pulldown for the 48 FPS footage?