[Movies] The Hobbit Trilogy (Possible Spoilers)

[Kasierith]

Ah yes. But can you explain why they need him in the movie? Something about the battle of the 5 armies.

A different orc leads the horde in the battle of 5 armies, so no he has no place there. It's simply better for cinema if you have a tiny plot giving more characterization beyond "random orc attacks yay!"

[BHD]

Just the thread I was needing!

So 3 of my well educated friends saw it before I could (still haven't) and they gave it a somewhat 6-7 out of 10.
I know it's a trilogy and the story unfolds, but is it really a 6-7?

No spoilers please, just rate it (subjectively, of course)

I'd give it a 9.5/10, there's a reason I saw it four times! The 0.5 is because a few jokes are a bit cringeworthy. I expected it to be awesome, which it was, but I also expected that I'd feel that LotR still was better, which I think it was. But that's because I'm more into the darker epic trilogy than the children's book.

[SirRobin]

So why is he there instead of his son when he's supposed to be dead? Doesn't make sense. Maybe I'm missing something.

Seems like PJ is trying to make it more "personal" to the protagonists.

Just the thread I was needing!

So 3 of my well educated friends saw it before I could (still haven't) and they gave it a somewhat 6-7 out of 10.
I know it's a trilogy and the story unfolds, but is it really a 6-7?

No spoilers please, just rate it (subjectively, of course)

I would give it about the same, maybe even an eight out of ten. I think of it like the first one for the last trilogy. Its laying the groundwork for the stuff that follows. Plus, to be honest, some parts I just didn't like. Too dark in this or that scene. Minor stuff really but they add up.

[Deleted]

Alright thanks for the replies everyone. It feels like they could have put Bolg there instead and his motive being killing Thorin to avenge his father.

[pateuvasiliu]

(I was honestly hoping for a Dwarf to die so that I could find myself caring about what happened in the film.)

And this right here is where it shows you have no idea what you speak of. He follows the book.

[KCguy]

Well, I loved the movie and I love how it's following closely to the book. I call it a warm up movie, as it really gets going in the second and third movies.

[bamf775]

A different orc leads the horde in the battle of 5 armies, so no he has no place there. It's simply better for cinema if you have a tiny plot giving more characterization beyond "random orc attacks yay!"

I thought I saw somewhere that Azog's son (Bolg) is planned to appear in the trilogy. So, it may be one of those "Azog dies from Thain, Bolg takes over leadership of the goblins and orcs starts the 'The Battle of Five Armies' in the last movie of the trio.

[Arrowstormen]

Just the thread I was needing!

So 3 of my well educated friends saw it before I could (still haven't) and they gave it a somewhat 6-7 out of 10.
I know it's a trilogy and the story unfolds, but is it really a 6-7?

No spoilers please, just rate it (subjectively, of course)

I rate it 10, but I think LOTR is the best movies ever made (yet), and I generally want more fantasy movies (something truly lacking, and nobody got the memo after LOTR it seems, besides The Dark Knight http://moviecriticassassins.com/essa...han-you-think/,) so take that as you want.

We all have different opinions, apparently even more so when it comes to The Hobbit, although I think that is somewhat fueled by the critics not praising it to the skies like the LOTR trilogy, so people who didn't like LOTR all that much in the first place has become brave enough to express their opinion on The Hobbit.

I don't see 6/10 as a justification, although my 1-10 rating system is based around 7 being a solid "good movie", 6 being a "just enough good to beat the bad overall", and 5 to be a "just bad enough movie to beat the good overall".

[Faroth]

Random tip for people who haven't seen it or those seeing it again.

I read a suggestion from another viewer to ignore the film during the Riddles in the Dark and literally closer your eyes. I will agree the scene was too light and let you see too much where it really should have felt more difficult to see. Riddles "in the dark" after all.

[Arrowstormen]

Alright thanks for the replies everyone. It feels like they could have put Bolg there instead and his motive being killing Thorin to avenge his father.

Bolg is still going to be in the movies as stated previously, so he probably has a(nother) role to play.

[Deleted]

I rate it 10, but I think LOTR is the best movies ever made (yet), and I generally want more fantasy movies (something truly lacking, and nobody got the memo after LOTR it seems, besides The Dark Knight http://moviecriticassassins.com/essa...han-you-think/,) so take that as you want.

We all have different opinions, apparently even more so when it comes to The Hobbit, although I think that is somewhat fueled by the critics not praising it to the skies like the LOTR trilogy, so people who didn't like LOTR all that much in the first place has become brave enough to express their opinion on The Hobbit.

I don't see 6/10 as a justification, although my 1-10 rating system is based around 7 being a solid "good movie", 6 being a "just enough good to beat the bad overall", and 5 to be a "just bad enough movie to beat the good overall".

Actually a lot of the critics that praised LOTR are giving The Hobbit bad reviews. I think it's because they are comparing it to much to LOTR. It shouldn't be. It's based on a more lighthearted book.

[SirRobin]

Alright thanks for the replies everyone. It feels like they could have put Bolg there instead and his motive being killing Thorin to avenge his father.

That does seem like an odd choice of PJ's too. However, it may make a lot more sense once we see the next two movies.

[Arrowstormen]

Random tip for people who haven't seen it or those seeing it again.

I read a suggestion from another viewer to ignore the film during the Riddles in the Dark and literally closer your eyes. I will agree the scene was too light and let you see too much where it really should have felt more difficult to see. Riddles "in the dark" after all.

While it sounds fun, that scene and Gollum's facial expressions are just too gold to not watch. But, he does hide during the riddle game at some point.

[Deleted]

Can you elaborate? It was ages ago I read the book but that Azog dude sure as hell wasn't in it.

He's not in the book, it's just Jackson messing with several timelines and the overall lore so that he can justify stretching a 300 page book in to 3 movies. I was kind of hoping the characters would be better fleshed out. In the book they were pretty 1 sided and boring and Jackson had the chance to change that but judging by movie he didn't and probably won't. He seems more concerned filling up the run time with unnecessary/unnecessarily long scenes, such as the pale orc storyline, the long stone giant scene, the frodo cameo at the beginning of the movie, the list goes on and on. All this additions just lead to a poorly paced movie.

[SirRobin]

Actually a lot of the critics that praised LOTR are giving The Hobbit bad reviews. I think it's because they are comparing it to much to LOTR. It shouldn't be. It's based on a more lighthearted book.

Personally I'm not sure where the bad reviews are really coming from. While I wasn't blown away, it wasn't a "bad" movie by any means.

[Arrowstormen]

Actually a lot of the critics that praised LOTR are giving The Hobbit bad reviews. I think it's because they are comparing it to much to LOTR. It shouldn't be. It's based on a more lighthearted book.

Not talking about the critics though, they are the ones who give the good scores and Oscars that scares the crowd from badmouthing the movie to begin with.

I think there's different reasons for the critics not liking the movie, while it may be the wrong expectations and stuff, I find that it probably also has something to do with the appeal to create a "Amazing movie turned horrible in sequel/prequel" headline. It DID create a whoole lot of attention to dislike the movie over liking it.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/markhugh...s-a-triumph/3/

[Faroth]

He's not in the book, it's just Jackson messing with several timelines and the overall lore so that he can justify stretching a 300 page book in to 3 movies. I was kind of hopping the characters would be better fleshed out. In the book they were pretty 1 sided and boring and Jackson had the chance to change that but judging by movie he didn't and probably won't. He seems more concerned filling up the run time with unnecessary/unnecessarily long scenes, such as the pale orc storyline, the long stone giant scene, the frodo cameo at the beginning of the movie, the list goes on and on. All this additions just lead to a poorly paced movie.

I liked the Frodo cameo. I thought it was actually a well done way to tie the movies into LotR. I particularly liked him calling Bilbo odd and Bilbo dismissing that he's as sociable as ever with "put that sign up will you?"

I didn't care for the pale orc, but I feel like not having him would have resulted in just as many complaints that there's no antagonist either, so I guess it's one of those pick which side to be damned on.

Weren't there stone giants fighting but not directly affecting them as much other than the shower of rocks and threat of avalanche in the book? I did feel that part was taken a bit more extreme than necessary.

[Deleted]

On another note. How did you guys like the new goblin looks? I liked the LOTR designs much better. It doesn't really affect my opinion on the movie though.

[Faroth]

Not talking about the critics though, they are the ones who give the good scores and Oscars that scares the crowd from badmouthing the movie to begin with.

I think there's different reasons for the critics not liking the movie, while it may be the wrong expectations and stuff, I find that it probably also has something to do with the appeal to create a "Amazing movie turned horrible in sequel/prequel" headline. It DID create a whoole lot of attention to dislike the movie over liking it.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/markhugh...s-a-triumph/3/

I generally find movies the critics don't like to be my favorites.

[bamf775]

I hope the dont stop at "The Hobbit". There are so many other epic timlines in the history of MIddle Earth that just can't be ignored. Hell, they could probably do a movie or trilogy on just the battle of Beleriand. Anyone have a favorite timline?