Please log in to participate in this forum.
Did it ever dawn on your that many critics are also Lord of the Rings fans?
Dec 18 - 10:50 AM
Terrible movie, theres no structure in the screenplay, no carachter development, terrible editing, unispired dialogue, intrusive scenes and moments ripped-off from FOTR, unecessary CGI, jerky camera movements that travel a scenario like in Prince of Persia, the game, not the movie.
Besides all those flaws, the greatest one is the inability of Jackson in storytelling. Theres not one single moment in Hobbit that provokes suspense, victories arent victorious and challenges arent challenging.
Its a enormous shame that the Prequel to the Fantastic, almost flawless original trilogy ended up like that, like S***
Dec 18 - 05:33 AM
Stating that LOTR is almost flawless is laughable. There are many flaws in those films.
Dec 18 - 07:54 AM
Thank you, im glad you brought this up. It is true, I think any flaws in the new film are comparable to the old.
Dec 19 - 03:24 PM
I disagree, LOTR wasn't flawless by any means, but it's hard for me to understand how anyone can think they're comparable in terms of quality. The way I see it, and as a big Tolkien fan, the LOTR films were largely successfully in capturing the tone, storytelling type and quality, characterization and character development, etc. Peter Jackson also deviated from the source a bit in adding some mass-market appeal. In The Hobbit, those flaws are hugely inflated and dominate any good qualities (in my opinion). The magic is gone. And where before you had a smattering of Tolkien loyalists denouncing the films as failing to capture Tolkien's storytelling genius, there are much more of us this time. Watching The Hobbit was like watching any mediocre box office hit.
While I completely understand not enjoying the LOTR films (even though I do, I accept that they aren't on the same level as the book), I don't think it's fair to put them on the same level as The Hobbit. The Hobbit was a bad film, even considered independent from the LOTR. Wouldn't you agree that LOTR failed to achieve the same level as its source, but wasn't a bad film?
Dec 19 - 06:26 PM
people who say its too long and boring need to shut the hell up,nobody these days has anymore sense for charakter development or just enjoying this beutifull world that this movies let you become a part of,its a great movie,probably the best fantasymovie since the LOTR trilogie. 10out of 10 points from me!
Dec 18 - 03:25 AM
I have no problem with length or character development. However, that not where the length comes from. The length comes from unnecessary exposition and subplots about the Necromancer. Jackson could have saved that for the extended edition.
Dec 18 - 05:23 AM
I think the Necromancer will play an important part in these films though, which make leaving it for the Extended Cut undoable.
Dec 18 - 07:57 AM
LOL TOLKIEN NERDS HAVE WET DREAMS OVER SHITTY MOVIES LIKE THE HOBBIT YOUR TASTE IN MOVIES IS POOR AS FUCK.
Dec 16 - 12:18 PM
Strange coming from a man who is just a troll and most likely a sad little man with no life and nothing going for him. I hope you find meaning one day, cause it seems for now you'll prob just end up a sad old man all alone. Boo hoo
Dec 18 - 03:17 AM
that coming from a guy who likes the fucking starwars prequels lol
Dec 18 - 03:26 AM
It seems a lot of people giving it poor reviews are baing it on technical, such as frame rate and length (despite it being shorter than the fellowship) and comparing it to LOTR, but the thing is, it is not lotr, its a different story, with new characters (and a small amount of returning) and a different tone, just set in the same world.
I found it to be an amazing, entertaining and delightfull film, that is even quite emotional is some places, personally i rate it better than fellowship as an opening film. Everyone i know who has seen it loves it, and i really don't understand why such negative reviews from critics, i think they need to realise it is not lord of the rings, and in a way, not a prequel, as lord of the rings was written afterwards (yes in filming sense it is coming after lotr, but lotr is the sequel)
Dec 16 - 12:08 PM
It is a "lighter" movie with sweeping panoramas, a great story line, splendid special effects, and overall a much better movie than I anticipated. Focusing on the characters and the quest made this a very worthy Hobbit.
Dec 14 - 08:16 PM
Dec 14 - 08:17 PM
IMO this movie was awsome. A Tolkien fan's wet dream. The asthetic was superb to boot.
Dec 14 - 07:20 PM
It was a fantastic movie. It is a much lighter movie though. One that matches the book perfectly. I wonder if the people complaining ever read the book.
Dec 14 - 06:58 PM
The movie was awesome, i'd even like to go see it again. Ok. . . im going to go see it again, it was great guys! So many awesome little details, its exciting to see the story unravel even when you have already read all the books. The characters were all portrayed so well, like rhadagast. I was so excited to see how jackson would depict them all and I was really pleased! I honestly don't know why critics are giving it such harsh ratings, its awesome. If you loved lord of the rings go see it!!! You wont regret it!
Dec 14 - 06:26 PM
Saw it this afternoon, and I must have seen a completely different movie than 34% of the critics on this site, because I thought The Hobbit moved at a fairly quick pace and if there was any fat to be trimmed, it was in the second hour, not the first. And as soon as the party leaves Rivendell, the movie really takes off. I even loved the 48 FPS, thought it looked fantastic. Can't wait to see this in the theater again.
If you're a LOTR fan, you will like The Hobbit, if you not love it.
Dec 14 - 06:18 PM
Yeah the 48 fps gave it a dreamlike quality ive never seen before in a movie. I felt like I was actually there at points. Really good
Dec 19 - 03:27 PM
No the movie makes you gay
Dec 14 - 05:19 PM
You see everyone, this is a fellow using logic for his trolling.
Dec 14 - 05:22 PM
What a prefect example of logical trolling.
Dec 14 - 05:23 PM
What a perfect example of using logic while trolling.
I just saw The Hobbit and I loved it.
What the Hell is wrong with this site. I saw the Hobbit in Germany, and the first Hour was not to long. That is simply nonsense. In the Lord of the Ring movies, takes it a long time, too, when the action was coming. The same is it in The Hobbit too. The First Hour from the hobbit was very amusing and funny. For me The Film was too short, the time was running out so quickly. For me its a very good and entertaining movie.
Dec 14 - 09:44 AM
I have seen the movie and I have to say if you're an avid Tolkien fan, it's a disappointment.
Dec 14 - 08:22 AM
I am an avid Tolkien fan and was not disappointed at all. In what ways were you?
Dec 14 - 09:37 AM
I'm an avid Tolkien fan and was thoroughly impressed. So were the other 37 Tolkien fanatics I went to watch the film with.
Dec 14 - 10:10 AM
I'm an avid Tolkien fan and left the theatre craving more.
Dec 14 - 05:15 PM
Here's another Tolkien fan who loved it!
Dec 18 - 12:08 PM
Heres a Tolkien devotee giving two thumbs up.
Dec 19 - 03:28 PM
I'm with you, Johanna! But the other commenters are right that most Tolkien fans loved it... at least most of the ones I know. I feel isolated from a culture I used to consider myself so in tune with. It's kind of difficult actually, haha.
Dec 19 - 06:30 PM
Have YOU seen it?
Dec 13 - 07:57 AM
no,my friend(who doesn't like lotr) saw the premiere and said it was an visually comedy adventure treat..it will rock in box office 4 sure
Dec 13 - 08:00 AM
So why are you an a forum about critics?
Dec 13 - 08:16 AM
from now on, don't make a forum for a movie you haven't seen yet. it comes out tomorrow, so i'll give you that. and i made the same mistake myself, so watch out for trolls.
Dec 13 - 09:26 AM
come back when you've seen it.
Dec 13 - 02:58 PM