Average 7.3 rating and 6.9 top critics rating is not a bad start for the trilogy.

Honestly this is the movie with all the hype and expectations to uphold to the Lord of the Rings trilogy (which any sensible person who has read the books would know this would not hold its own against the Lord of the Rings), so the critics seem more disappointed it does not uphold to the Lord of the Rings than they are saying that its a bad movie (no critic has actually said that). And the main critic (besides the unjustified 48 fps one) is the slow start which was true with fellowship and material that felt out of place (which ties in during the future two movies). I honestly I expected this one to have the lowed ratings same as Fellowship did. I would expect the next two to get better ratings and improve on each other (like the Lord of the Rings did). I would not be surprised to see Desolation of Smaug be in the 80% range and There and Back Again the high 80 to low 90 percent range.

Don't like the 73% and 25% delude you it's a 7.3 average and nearly a 7 average for top critics, a 7 is a good score (movies such as Gladiator, Wreck It Ralph, Iron Man, Forrest Gump, and Braveheart have similar and in Gladiator, Braveheart, and gump's case, lower scores). People are really misinterpreting these reviews as saying the movie is garbage when really what they are saying is the movie is good just disappointed critics when comparing it to Lord of the Rings.
All-Knowing Panda
12-10-2012 04:44 PM

Thread Replies

Please log in to participate in this forum.

scifimark

scifi mark

The movie is going to run into a few problems. First its too long. If you read the hobbit as compared to lotr it has a lot less dialogue mostly due to the fact it was written for children. The fps thing is turning some people off, and the fact the hobbit does not have the same tone which some people probably are expecting.

I think for the next two installments jackson needs to better edit to make this a 2 hour movie. There is no reason these movies need to be almost 3 hours.

Dec 12 - 07:20 AM

This comment has been removed.

Christopher J.

Christopher Jones

top critics were actually 60% at the time you wrote this. Think it has now been updated to 6.4 but still an overall 7 is still great.

Dec 12 - 01:07 AM

Djordje Cerovic

Djordje Cerovic

I think that this movie isn't for everyone. That's the vibe I got from the reviews. Jackson apparently put a lot of emphasis on showing the works and landscapes of Middle Earth to patch up the pacing and it annoyed some people. For me that is the most awesome thing ever. Also people seem to complain about the slow start which should be Bilbo narrating the story to the Hobbits, and that was the part I was most excited about in the trailer. It just had such an awesome feeling to it.

Dec 10 - 07:46 PM

Jim Puder

Jim Puder

If it were based on a trilogy, I would agree. It's based on a book that, depending on the print version you have, is only about 300 pages. Half of what ONE volume of Lord Of The Rings is. This is a bunch of fan fiction attached to the original story, starting with a female elf character whom one of the Dwarves has an unrequited love for. Absolute crap.

Dec 10 - 07:31 PM

Gene Bodyl

Gene Bodyl

I think this movie will be just fine. It wont be on par with the Lord of the Rings, but it will be enjoyable enough. Most of the the critics are complaining about the length and the new digital format. Heck, this just makes me want to see this movie even more!!

Dec 10 - 05:50 PM

Find us on:                     
Help | About | Jobs | Critics Submission | Press | API | Licensing | Mobile