[Movies] The Hobbit Trilogy (Possible Spoilers)

[theturn]

Yeah I've read the books. I just don't like them because all they do is open up massive plot holes. Didn't like them in the books and didn't like them in the movies. In the Hobbit, they randomly come out and save everyone from Azog, then they leave them on top of a cliff, then they don't even have the courtesy to fly them all to the Lonely Mountain. Hate Super Action Eagle Squad.

The book explains why they can't go all the way to lonely mountain, don't remember why though.

[Kasierith]

The book explains why they can't go all the way to lonely mountain, don't remember why though.

Fear that humans will shoot them down, I believe it was.. which is still a flimsy excuse. But, such deus ex machina events were standard in his source material so

[starkey]

the last time i was this disappointed in a movie, it had jar-jar binks in it. i loved the LoTR trilogy, i have no idea what this P.O.S. was. this movie was "straight to dvd" quality.

im in awe of how bad it was.

Bit over your head was it.

[theturn]

Fear that humans will shoot them down, I believe it was.. which is still a flimsy excuse. But, such deus ex machina events were standard in his source material so

I think it had to do with the evil of murkwood, but yes its mostly a plot device. Arguably any story has a quick simple solution that defeats the purpose of the tale.

[Kasierith]

I think it had to do with the evil of murkwood, but yes its mostly a plot device. Arguably any story has a quick simple solution that defeats the purpose of the tale.

95% of horror movies' plot hole: Don't be stupid.

[dwarven]

Critics comparing it to the LOTR trilogy or knocking it because of the new recording style are retarded. That has nothing to do with the content of the film. The characters were well developed, and very colorful. The cinematography was as beautiful as ever. The Tolkien feel was represented very well throughout the film, including the portrayal of the Dwarves, which was dead-on accurate. After reading some bad reviews, it just seems apparent that a lot of the critics haven't read the book. Being a die-hard fan of The Hobbit, I would not see Tolkiens amazing world discolored by anyone, and that has not been done with Peter Jackson's adaptation.

The film was a solid 9/10.

[Amsden]

Love the movie. Seen it twice already. 1st time was in HFR 3D (friends wanted to see it that way) I hated it (the 3D HFR, I loved the movie) but I knew I would because I hate 3D movies anyway and the HFR just seemed weird to me. 2nd time was with my Brother in 2D and loved it again, even more so this time because it was in my preferred "D".

[GeordieMagpie]

10/10 Amazing! Wished it was longer so they would finish the whole thing, can't wait for the second part, absolutely brilliant movie!

---------- Post added 2012-12-15 at 10:09 AM ----------

I love the fact they added the "Good morning" part from the book, really made me smile.

[Muzjhath]

I wish I could see it in 2D HFR. Watched it yesterday and really enjoyed it in 3D LFR (the HFR showings were at eithre too late or too early showings for what fit with the family, same with the 2D).
But I'm generally not a fan on 3D unless you have a true imax bowl screen. Closest to where I live is in Copenhagen, and that's across a huge bridge etc. Since frankly. On a normal cinemascreen you bloody don't notice it.

But overall I really enjoyed the movie. Was enjoyable, made a good showing of the book.
As for someone saying at times Bilbo didn't come of as intelligent. I would say he did, just it made a very good show of showing him nervous and afraid.

[Wilian]

The Hobbit was written for young adults. It's not a difficult read really. Tolkien just uses a lot of strange names for characters and places which can get confusing if you've never read it. Probably why they come with a map in the books.

I know, which is is why that reply was about LotR, to a dude who didn't understand why someone's friend might not enjoy Tolkien's work. I even specifically mentioned LotR, not Hobbit.

[Deleted]

I absolutely loved it and cannot wait for the rest! It is different from the Lord of the Rings, but that isn't a bad thing. It shows another side of Middle-earth. I have read the book and I still loved it. I don't mind some alterations to be honest, I love to be surprised.

[Deleted]

Not a very good movie, painfully average throughout despite the cast and the source material. It only begins to shine when Gollum enters the picture. Overall the movie was too long, the new filming technology clearly has not been nailed down yet and many of the jokes came at completely inopportune times.

Come to think of it though, I never liked the book much either, the Lord of the Rings is a much better read (and thus far a better movie trilogy as well).

[Muzjhath]

Vanin, I am in the complete oposite which litterature is the better read. I find the Hobbit better in almsot every aspect besides the language used, where they are equal.

[Pachycrocuta]

Vanin, I am in the complete oposite which litterature is the better read. I find the Hobbit better in almsot every aspect besides the language used, where they are equal.

I would have to agree. I much preferred reading the Hobbit than Lord of the Rings (could only make myself read the Fellowship), even though Lord of the Rings has more fantasy elements than the Hobbit (ents, oliphants, etc). The reason I think this movie > LotR trilogy is because of the Dwarves. It's why I liked the book more, too. Besides, there being no Mary Sue-esque Legolas makes this so much better. And besides, Dwarves > Hobbits/Elves/Men, even though the Hobbit has a Hobbit (hence the name), and is more the story of Bilbo's adventure, but it is also the story of the Dwarves.

Oh, and There are female Dwarves in this movie, during the part at the beginning showing how the Dwarves lost the Lonely Mountain, and they DON'T HAVE BEARDS!!! Made me smile.

[Northern Goblin]

Absolutely brilliant film, raised a chuckle when the film ended and I thought out loud "Crap, I need to wait another year for the next one" from people around me.

Jackson's visualisation has been absolutely stunning throughout the Middle Earth series, and the Hobbit has been visually the best one of the lot in terms of fantasy visuals. The battle scenes haven't quite been quite up to par yet, but then again we've yet to get to any of the major fights.

[Markluzz]

I would have to agree. I much preferred reading the Hobbit than Lord of the Rings (could only make myself read the Fellowship), even though Lord of the Rings has more fantasy elements than the Hobbit (ents, oliphants, etc). The reason I think this movie > LotR trilogy is because of the Dwarves. It's why I liked the book more, too. Besides, there being no Mary Sue-esque Legolas makes this so much better. And besides, Dwarves > Hobbits/Elves/Men, even though the Hobbit has a Hobbit (hence the name), and is more the story of Bilbo's adventure, but it is also the story of the Dwarves.

Oh, and There are female Dwarves in this movie, during the part at the beginning showing how the Dwarves lost the Lonely Mountain, and they DON'T HAVE BEARDS!!! Made me smile.

There are!? I completely missed them, I have to go see it again just to see the females.

[sinilaid]

There are!? I completely missed them, I have to go see it again just to see the females.

Yea, I went to see the movie again today, and saw her too.. I saw only one tho, when they were running out of the gate.

[Djuntas]

Think there is even a slight chance one will enjoy this movie, if one never really watched LOTR movies, or even cared for them? As inn found them booring.

Got a chance to see it for free next week, but just feel like skipping it...yea Im a very odd nerd, dont like LOTR, starwars, Matrix or w/e classic themed films:P

[theturn]

Not a very good movie, painfully average throughout despite the cast and the source material. It only begins to shine when Gollum enters the picture. Overall the movie was too long, the new filming technology clearly has not been nailed down yet and many of the jokes came at completely inopportune times.

Come to think of it though, I never liked the book much either, the Lord of the Rings is a much better read (and thus far a better movie trilogy as well).

I actually prefer the hobbit story in the books over the lotr books. But this movie has sooo much that isn't in the books that it slows down the book material. When you have a character, Azog, who was killed in lore YEARS before the Hobbit takes place and the events of the council which takes place over 300 years before the hobbit as well slow down the film and really takes the focus off of Bilbo which is who this story is about.

---------- Post added 2012-12-15 at 04:05 PM ----------

Think there is even a slight chance one will enjoy this movie, if one never really watched LOTR movies, or even cared for them? As inn found them booring.

Got a chance to see it for free next week, but just feel like skipping it...yea Im a very odd nerd, dont like LOTR, starwars, Matrix or w/e classic themed films:P

If you didn't like the LOTR trilogy or the Hobbit book then I see very little reason for you to like this film.

[Saycheese]

I absolutely loved the LOTRO movies, never read the books, however for the Hobbit I did decide to read the book before going to see it in theaters. Big mistake. The movie was nothing like the book, and it was very long and drawn out with parts either left out or changed so much that they are undistinguishable from the novel. Don't get me wrong, I love lord of the rings and peter jackson as well, but the film just fell short. It was unnecessarily cheesy at times and the characters who made an appearance from the past films were just...different, it seemed like they were less epic than I remember. Also, the need for peter jackson to make the book into three films seems unnecessary as well, since this one was almost entirely about walking. I realize that these films are known for their length, and that doesn't necessarily mean that long films are bad, in fact i prefer the longer films. However I only enjoy them when they have a reason to be long, and manage to stay entertaining the whole way through.