[Movies] The Hobbit Trilogy (Possible Spoilers)

[Zoranon]

You need to be extremely skilled in denial and self-deception to remember LOTR without remembering The Hobbit. While LOTR was better, without The Hobbit we have nothing like it, and that emptiness will be felt next December.

I wish I could forget the Hobbit movies and I am glad there are no more moves to come, no new disappointments to be had.

[Arrowstormen]

I wish I could forget the Hobbit movies and I am glad there are no more moves to come, no new disappointments to be had.

That's rather selfish no?

[Zoranon]

That's rather selfish no?

Yes lets have more hack and slash movies that dont really bear any resemblance to either the LOTR movies or Tolkiens books...

[BHD]

Well in my opinion, the greatest mistake was making 3 movies, if there were 2, they would probably have been better. There was simply too much space to fill and thus some of the really bad scenes got in. It also meant far too much story writing by people simply not as good at writing as Tolkien was. I mean crap like burring the Ringwraiths, why oh why?

In my opinion it was necessary to add the White Council material to tell the viewer where the hell Gandalf runs off to all the time (since it's not explained in the book), but there was indeed a few scenes that made both of the first two movies feel a bit dragged out. So I dunno, I both liked and disliked not only using the Hobbit book for material, but I have a feeling it would've been worse if they didn't. If Gandalf ran away for half a movie and then just appeared again without any explaination I'm afraid anyone who's not a dedicated Tolkien fan would think poorly of the movies just because of that.

The whole Nazgul died but got rezzed and escaped their prison/tomb-thing is something I don't understand. I'm guessing that was mostly PJ's work, because I don't see how Philippa Boyens could've made shit like that.

And frankly, If Hobbit was released first, I dont think I would even go to see any more movies from Middle-Earth...

After watching the Hobbit and having the battle of the five armies still in fresh memory, and suddenly there was a trailer about a darker trilogy set in the same world promising even more epic battles and cooler characters, you wouldn't even give it a chance? :/

[Arrowstormen]

Yes lets have more hack and slash movies that dont really bear any resemblance to either the LOTR movies or Tolkiens books...

You're kidding, but you've never been never been more right. Certain elements of The Hobbit are arguably better than LOTR. I know some people who just generally like The Hobbit better than LOTR.

[sinilaid]

So I just saw it, and it's definitely the worse of the three movies. A lot of lame overly drawn out slow-mo death scenes, really bad CGI stuff and random "funny" scenes that had no place in the movie. Also the movie felt really out of focus, they tried to do way too many thing and ended up hoping around too much never letting you enjoy anything. For a movie named "Battle of the five armies" it had very little battle of the five armies in it... And as in all movies the annoying children....

[Zoranon]

In my opinion it was necessary to add the White Council material to tell the viewer where the hell Gandalf runs off to all the time (since it's not explained in the book), but there was indeed a few scenes that made both of the first two movies feel a bit dragged out. So I dunno, I both liked and disliked not only using the Hobbit book for material, but I have a feeling it would've been worse if they didn't. If Gandalf ran away for half a movie and then just appeared again without any explaination I'm afraid anyone who's not a dedicated Tolkien fan would think poorly of the movies just because of that.

The whole Nazgul died but got rezzed and escaped their prison/tomb-thing is something I don't understand. I'm guessing that was mostly PJ's work, because I don't see how Philippa Boyens could've made shit like that.



After watching the Hobbit and having the battle of the five armies still in fresh memory, and suddenly there was a trailer about a darker trilogy set in the same world promising even more epic battles and cooler characters, you wouldn't even give it a chance? :/

Well the problematic writing was already seen in some parts of the LOTR trilogy (elves in Helms Deep, the pointless detour to Osgiliath, Frodo sending Sam home from the stairs of Minas Morgul, etc.) but they were few and were overshadowed by the otherwise well made story.

In the Hobbit on the other hand, the quantity of bad writing is simply much greater and is made worse by the completely of the rails battle scenes and CGI for the sake of CGI (the various Orc/Troll mutants, Legolas scenes. etc.)

AS for the Nazgul, well it did not make sense in the second movie and it makes even less with the third one, also if the Nazgul were imprisoned, that presumably means they did not take Minas Ithil which pretty much breaks the rest of the story...

- - - Updated - - -

You're kidding, but you've never been never been more right. Certain elements of The Hobbit are arguably better than LOTR. I know some people who just generally like The Hobbit better than LOTR.

No just no.

[theturn]

You need to be extremely skilled in denial and self-deception to remember LOTR without remembering The Hobbit. While LOTR was better, without The Hobbit we have nothing like it, and that emptiness will be felt next December.

They will be forgotten because they aren't even the best version of the story. Best thing I can say about the first two is they are dumb action movies, similar to transformers. Given how good the source material is, its disappointing.

[ringpriest]

You need to be extremely skilled in denial and self-deception to remember LOTR without remembering The Hobbit. While LOTR was better, without The Hobbit we have nothing like it, and that emptiness will be felt next December.

So very much this. Sure, LotR has places where it was a weaker adaptation than it could/should have been. And, despite moments of greatness that do fit well with Tolkien's original (Bilbo understanding the spiders once he put on the ring is now firmly a part of my headcanon), the Hobbit movies also have large stretches where they part ways with the original. But both trilogies are still breathtakingly amazing High-Fantasy movies in their own right. Low fantasy has been done decently - heck, GoT is pretty damn good low-fantasy on TV. But quality high-fantasy? There's LotR and The Hobbit, and... what? Legend and Excalibur, maybe?

[Deleted]

They will be forgotten because they aren't even the best version of the story. Best thing I can say about the first two is they are dumb action movies, similar to transformers. Given how good the source material is, its disappointing.

Don't tell me you consider the Rankin Bass version to be better, thems fighting words where I come from.

[Kelimbror]

Best thing I can say about the first two is they are dumb action movies, similar to transformers. Given how good the source material is, its disappointing.

Yes. A very brief children's novel is so far beyond a rather well created, character driven narrative on film that I can't fathom why anyone would disagree with you. And while we're on the topic of ridiculous perception bias, like comparing these movies to a transformers movie...

You really have to watch the extended editions, which is the full vision of what the film should be. Almost all the scenes cut seem vital to the overall story and character development, which is quite a shame and entirely the fault of consumers and studios who don't want to put out or watch 3+ hour movies. The scenes added to the first two films are integral to the overall work. It likely won't change such a crass view of films, but to people who actually care about lore and characters it is sure to make more sense.

[Simulacrum]

My overall judgement on the series is: Meh.

The movies were extremely forgettable. The only scenes that left any impression at all were the ones that remained very true to the book, like Bilbo and Gollum's conversation, or Bilbo and Smaug's conversation, or Bilbo's stealing of the arkenstone then sneaking back inside to stand right next to Thorin when it was revealed... meanwhile, all the other stuff was just noise. I probably wouldn't have compared these movies to the transformers ones myself, but now that someone else has I completely see the similarities.

It's just lots of stuff happening, for no apparent reasons, with lots of just utterly imbecilic scenes that honestly made me kind of shameful while watching them.

Man, like the opening to this last movie. Was so great. Smaug burning the town down; people getting immolated in front of us; horror everywhere. Then we get... fucking below-three stooges level pysical comedy as a fucking side show. Oh look, at the bumbling stephen fry sneaking off on his barge so full of gold that it's about to sink. Oh, and he tosses out his snivveling servant to keep it from doing so. So funny, and perfectly appropriate in context of what's happening at the time. Then we get the hilarious scene where Bard escapes by completely coincidentally delivering some cosmic justice to the fat asshole by nearly snapping his neck with a rope while breaking out of his prison. I'm sure the 4 year old children in the audience will enjoy this horrible incongruous cartoon violence next to scenes of the terrifying carnage of most of the population of an entire city being burned to death right in front of us.

But the worst of it all... was the dragon's death... I could overlook the stupid physical comedy at the time, because the dragon was just so well made. He was intimidating. He was burning that place to the ground... uh, to the buttom of the lake, like it didn't even take any effort. Smashing buildings to pieces like they were toys. Bard is the only one who dares take a (seemingly hopeless) stand against him, and Smaug just laughs in his face. "Who are you to challenge me!" I thought it was great... then it was all fucking ruined, by the worst scene in the entire series. Bard fucking kills him... with a makeshift, hand (foot?)-strung bow, using his son as part of it... and smaug just dives heart-first right into it... it was so fucking stupid, I had to cover my face and sigh loudly in the theatre.

I mean, I'm not the kind of guy who hates all this comedy stuff in the movies. I realize it has its place. The silly battle scenes with trolls crushing orcs under them were clearly played for laughs, but that's fine to me because it wasn't as extreme. But then we get stupid shit like the above, or fucking... every god damned scene with the cowardly asshole, the peak of which was probably when he dressed as a woman and ran around during the battle with a pair of giant, fake gold-filled tits, spilling coins everywhere and making a total ass of himself. It was so fucking stupid, it was incredible. That shit does not belong in the same movie as a straight-played Smaug, or the 100% unironic scenes of madness from Thorin (which I thought were pretty good, albeit too drawn-out).

I could go on. At great length. The whole retarded fucking goblin mountain scene. My god. Or fucking Radagast the rabbit-riding birdshit-wearing imbecile (why are there birds nesting under his fucking hat? why, if he fucknig cares about these animals does he fucking keep them on his-fucking-person when exploring some of the most dangerous places in the world?). That was so horrible. Or the love plot. Man. The love plot. Jesus christ. Why is this in here? Why? Why? Why? ...I know why. It's because the movies are made to appeal to all audiences! That's why we get shit like the retarded cowardly asshole spilling his fake titgold all over the place, or this fucking stupid romance plot that made zero-fucking-sense at all; to appeal to the womens, because apparently that's what women go to the fucking hobbit to see - a romance plot. Demographics! And I'm not done yet, no I have dozens of other complaints... but I'll stop anyway, because it's going to turn into a book on its own otherwise.

It's such a shame... if Jackson could just have fucking kept his dick in his pants and made one movie (maybe two, at most), without all the bullshit, and kept it to the story of the hobbit with a little bit of explanation of what makes all the armies show up for the final battle, it would've been great. And if he had fucking kept some of the most iconic scenes that would've been great too. Like the fucking company of 13 bursting out just as the battle looked lost, with Thorin eventually dying because of it, and Fili and Kili sacrificing themselves to protect him after he was wounded. Decades since I read that book and I still remember the description of that event. But in the movie, they just get killed randomly in stupid situations one at a time. Fucking. Lame.

the movie is carried by the source material and the excellent special effects, costumes, and set design. the parts of the story that they changed was mostly crap, and half of it was forgettable as fuck. I'd rather have seen the hilarious way in which the dwarves gained entry into Beorn's home in the books played out over a 5 minute sequence than a 5 minute sequence of dwarves riding down a river looney-tunes style while legolas jumps around on their heads... and that was one of hte better action pieces... shit like the goblin mountains scenes I honeslty can't remember at all right now, other than that it was a mess of stuff happening, where none of the physics made any sense, and then eventually the big fat goblin king landed on them all in another hilarious piece of physical comedy.

whatever. I'm just another crouchy old asshole at this point, I guess.

[Thandrend]

I will be seeing the third movie this friday. I do love The Hobbit, but I love the book that much more.

It was my first jump into Tolkien's work. It has a very special place for me as being the first major fantasy novel I read as well. With that being said, there are a lot of issues I have with Peter Jackson's liberty taking for this particular trilogy of movies.

What he did amazingly well in Lord of the Rings did not work so well for The Hobbit. The Hobbit (to me) was never something I saw as a flashy symbol of power and might. I don't think many people do. The book was dreary and explored a lot of aspects of growing up (it is a children's book, after all) and how life gets more and more difficult but it can be rewarding.

One of the most obnoxious aspects of the entire trilogy is the fact that they are overplaying every single fight. The only one that was close to the books was the trolls. That's it. Obviously I haven't seen the third installment yet. But if it's some desperate final stand like described in the book by the elves and dwarves, I'll be okay with it.

The Battle of the Five Armies is not some large spectacular show the movie is making it out to be. While it might gain the trilogy some viewers, I'm not quite so sure it is lasting fandom like LOTR has. LOTR was epic, it was supposed to be. The Hobbit is trying to be epic when it shouldn't have been. It was very much a very bad situation for the elves, dwarves and humans. Not some glorious deal.

It's almost like Helm's Deep in Two Towers. Where it was one chapter in the book, it was half the movie in LOTR. It fit in the movie there. It doesn't here.

[Magicalcrab]

My overall judgement on the series is: Meh.

[snippety snip snip]

whatever. I'm just another crouchy old asshole at this point, I guess.

Not at all. I agree with a lot of your points, and I'm a little bit surprised by the amount of positive reviews and hype surrounding this movie even though it clearly had a lot of problems with pacing and its tone.

Like you said, a lot of the awkward slapstick humour in the middle of dramatic violence was very out of place, and it brought me out of the movie emotionally. It's very jarring, especially in a movie's opening scene. The entire trilogy had a lot of these problematic, jarring scenes, and the most damaging that I can think of is the 30-minute chase sequence with Smaug by the end of the second movie.
Smaug was super-intimidating in his opening sequence with Bilbo, and I was super-hype to see what they do with this clever and physically imposing bad guy. In the very next scene, he's super-incompetent and flailing about being outwitted by a bunch of magma-surfing dwarves.

As an audience member, I don't know what I'm supposed to feel. Am I supposed to cheer for the heroes? Am I supposed to be scared of the bad guy? Am I supposed to giggle at him? What is happening i don't know i can't feel anything what is this aaahhh

I haven't even read the book, and I'm not sure where to start with my criticism of the last movie, since pretty much everything is wrong and excessive and mindboggingly weird from a moviemaking perspective. I'm shocked at how they managed to turn a 40-minute script into a 160-something minute movie with such extremely long and counterproductive action scenes and they STILL rushed the ending super hard. Nothing is really resolved at all.

What was the point of the Sauron subplot?
What happened to Bard and his people?
Did Alfrid learn his lesson? What was the point of his character?
What happened to Thorin's cousin? Did he ever find his face?
What happened to the treasure?

I just don't know what to think anymore.

If this is love I do not want it.

[Deleted]

It's just lots of stuff happening, for no apparent reasons, with lots of just utterly imbecilic scenes that honestly made me kind of shameful while watching them.

But the worst of it all... was the dragon's death... I could overlook the stupid physical comedy at the time, because the dragon was just so well made. He was intimidating. He was burning that place to the ground... uh, to the buttom of the lake, like it didn't even take any effort. Smashing buildings to pieces like they were toys. Bard is the only one who dares take a (seemingly hopeless) stand against him, and Smaug just laughs in his face. "Who are you to challenge me!" I thought it was great... then it was all fucking ruined, by the worst scene in the entire series. Bard fucking kills him... with a makeshift, hand (foot?)-strung bow, using his son as part of it... and smaug just dives heart-first right into it... it was so fucking stupid, I had to cover my face and sigh loudly in the theatre.

I mean, I'm not the kind of guy who hates all this comedy stuff in the movies. I realize it has its place. The silly battle scenes with trolls crushing orcs under them were clearly played for laughs, but that's fine to me because it wasn't as extreme. But then we get stupid shit like the above, or fucking... every god damned scene with the cowardly asshole, the peak of which was probably when he dressed as a woman and ran around during the battle with a pair of giant, fake gold-filled tits, spilling coins everywhere and making a total ass of himself. It was so fucking stupid, it was incredible. That shit does not belong in the same movie as a straight-played Smaug, or the 100% unironic scenes of madness from Thorin (which I thought were pretty good, albeit too drawn-out).


It's such a shame... if Jackson could just have fucking kept his dick in his pants and made one movie (maybe two, at most), without all the bullshit, and kept it to the story of the hobbit with a little bit of explanation of what makes all the armies show up for the final battle, it would've been great. And if he had fucking kept some of the most iconic scenes that would've been great too. Like the fucking company of 13 bursting out just as the battle looked lost, with Thorin eventually dying because of it, and Fili and Kili sacrificing themselves to protect him after he was wounded. Decades since I read that book and I still remember the description of that event. But in the movie, they just get killed randomly in stupid situations one at a time. Fucking. Lame.


whatever. I'm just another crouchy old asshole at this point, I guess.

The dragon death was just as lame in the book, dragon burning city down and death everywhere, suddenly unknown man named bard, standing in the middle of it all firing arrows at the dragon, and then go to some kinda catapult/harpoon machine to fire a black arrow at smaug. To then take a shitton of gold with him and travel out to live a rich life with his new people who don't even fucking know him, lame


The Movie is based on a childrens book and is obviously supposed to have comedic stuff, it's not LotR

the book could easily fit 2 movies, only reason it went to three movies was because of Azog and the necromancer stories that he so wanted to fit in for some reason

and i'm not quite sure, but i don't remember the story telling anything about thorin getting wounded and the dwarfs defending him, yup. just read through the pages from when he smashed the stone gate and went into battle, nothing about him being wounded.. at all, he went into battle and they startet to lose and got surrounded, then the eagles came and bilbo passed out from a stone to the head

the books says nothing about how thorin was wounded, nothing about the battle after the eagles came, bilbo passed out and when he woke up the battle was over and thorin was almost dead, but he managed to speak with bilbo etc. before he died

the battle lasts few pages in the book

there's pretty much nothing to go off for the battle, it descripes the different armies shortly and how it looks like the orcs are about to win

[Zoranon]

The dragon death was just as lame in the book, dragon burning city down and death everywhere, suddenly unknown man named bard start standing in the middle of it all firing arrows at the dragon, and then go to a catapult to fire a black arrow at smaug. To then take a shitton of gold with him and travel out to live a rich life with his new people who don't even fucking know him, lame

The Movie is based on a children book and is obviously supposed to have comedic stuff, it's not LotR

the book could easily fit 2 movies, only reason it went to three movies was because of Azog and the necromancer stories that he so wanted to fit in for some reason

and i'm not quite sure, but i don't remember the story telling anything about thorin getting wounded and the dwarfs defending him, yup. just read through the pages from when he smashed the stone gate and went into battle, nothing about him being wounded.. at all, he went into battle and they startet to lose and got surrounded, then the eagles came and bilbo passed out from a stone to the head

the books says nothing about how thorin was wounded, nothing about the battle after the eagles came, bilbo passed out and when he woke up the battle was over and thorin was almost dead, but he managed to speak with bilbo etc. before he died

the battle lasts few pages in the book

You must have read some different book, certainly not Hobbit by Tolkien.

Bard killed Smaug by a bow, there was no catapult, balista or anything else. Then he used his portion of smaugs treasure to rebuild Dale, which was populated by a portion of the population of Lake town, who knew him well.

The book clearly states that Thorin was mortally wounded while fighting Bolg´s bodyguard, Fili and Kili died defending him and he was rescued by Beorn who then destroyed the bodyguard and killed Bolg himself.

- - - Updated - - -

Lot of good points

Ultimately, I think what killed the Hobbit movies was Jacksons megalomania which resulted in completely overblown scenes like the battle, the barrel chase and others. The second thing that certainly did not help was the sloppy writing which over the course of the 3 movies pretty much turned the original canon on its head and worse yet, it makes very little sense even in the movies themselves.

[Deleted]

What was the point of the Sauron subplot?
What happened to Bard and his people?
Did Alfrid learn his lesson? What was the point of his character?
What happened to Thorin's cousin? Did he ever find his face?
What happened to the treasure?

I just don't know what to think anymore.

If this is love I do not want it.

The book mentions gandalf have been on a mission to figure out if The necromancers return is true, which it was, but that is all
jackson just decided to make a story out of it

Bard in the movie is very different from bard in the books
The movie tells more about bard, who he is and why here is there etc. than the book does, which is good

I don't rly remember alfrid in the books, he is prob there, but doesn't have a big role, in the movies he is a person you hate, a coward and a comic relief

some of the treasure was shared with those who had deserved some of it, but i bet most of it went to the dwarfs

[Kelimbror]

The second thing that certainly did not help was the sloppy writing which over the course of the 3 movies pretty much turned the original canon on its head

Wow. What weird theatrical releases have you seen? I did not see the version where Smaug joined forces with Sauron, killed Bilbo, and Bard, and Gandalf was secretly evil and murdered all the eagles when they came to rescue them. I too would be appalled at such a reversal of canon.

Embellishment does no one any favors.

[Deleted]

You must have read some different book, certainly not Hobbit by Tolkien.

Bard killed Smaug by a bow, there was no catapult, balista or anything else. Then he used his portion of smaugs treasure to rebuild Dale, which was populated by a portion of the population of Lake town, who knew him well.

The book clearly states that Thorin was mortally wounded while fighting Bolg´s bodyguard, Fili and Kili died defending him and he was rescued by Beorn who then destroyed the bodyguard and killed Bolg himself.

can't rly remember the story well.. but doesn't change the fact that bard killing smaug was just as lame in the book as in the movie, book was prob more lame

just remember the books saying something about bard and his people travelling out to build a new place to live and they had so much money that they all lived a good life
(Bard gave sone of his money to the people living in the city on the sea so they could rebuild it, and he rewarded everyone who followed him) couldn't find much more

thorin's story of how he got wounded must have been a story after the battle then or a side story

i've been reading the battle three times now, and i still can't find it, so either i have a gimped version or there's something i'm missing

[frequency]

I saw the 3rd movie last night and really enjoyed it.

If you are invested in the characters it is a rollercoaster film.

Ranking the films. I would go 2, 3, 1.

Could it have been done over 2 films? Short answer, yes.
Could it have been done over 1 film. Short answer, yes. Longer answer, No, leaving out the character building, the appendices and the tie ins back to LotR would have been a fatal error, IMO.