I haven't seen The Hobbit yet.

Album Rating: 3.0

As a massive Lord of the Rings fanboy, the first Hobbit movie was severely disappointing. The second one was fantastic though

The first Hobbit was everything I wanted to be. Second one isn't out in Australia yet fufragigomg

Album Rating: 3.0

The second is everything the first should have been

In other words, even more perfectly amazing than the first one was? sweet

Album Rating: 3.0

It's a solid 8-8.5/10

I'm sure I'll like it more than you, don't worry

Album Rating: 3.0

Probably. An Unexpected Journey was about a 6/10. The child in me wanted to love it but the film fanatic and Hobbit fan was displeased. There was just an excess of CGI and pointless garbage used only to pad the length for three films when it should have only been two. The new one still fails in the excessive CGI department, but at least the story gets the ball rolling past the first twenty or so minutes. The three hour time passes by so fast

Pointless garbage? I don't know man, everything in it was faithful to Tolkien's novel and it linked in with LOTR perfectly. And the acting was immaculate, like I need to mention that

Album Rating: 3.0

These movies aren't faithful to Tolkien's novels in any way, to the point that Tolkien's son has publicly stated that he fucking hates Peter Jackson for batardizing his father's hard work. Of course, I disagree as I think the first trilogy is far superior to the book.

How are they unfaithful? Tolkien's son doesn't get to be the judge of that, he didn't write the books

Album Rating: 3.0

Lord of the Rings looks better than the Hobbit films because all of the orcs are actually men in prosthetics and they shot everything on location. If it didn't exist, they built huge sets for the actors to stand on/around and then CG'ed what they had to. The Hobbit is mostly green screen shit except for when they are outside, but even then everything is altered. Ian Mckellen literally cried on set of the Hobbit and said it was horrible and this shouldn't be the way films are made.



I definitely agree that without Jackson, no one would give a shit about LOTR besides fantasy fanatics and those types. The Hobbit is a great book but LOTR is just duller than dirt, which was a good thing since the movies had so much detail.



Christopher Tolkien actually edited the Silmarillion and wrote some of the passages JRR hadn't written and he was the one who drew all of the maps for the LOTR. The Hobbit also began as a bedtime story for him, so his opinion slightly matters on the regards. Jackson has completely changed the tone of the Hobbit so that it will fit in with the first trilogy and altered and added worthless shit all over the place

Album Rating: 3.0

I couldn't stop myself from writing that novel of a reply. I'm sorry

I still don't get what you think is worthless shit though. The only thing he's changed about the
Hobbit is adding in the subplot about Sauron returning, which Tolkien intended to have in the book
anyway. Sure Tolkien's son might have contributed to the Silmarillion but this isn't the Silmarillion
it's the Hobbit.

Album Rating: 3.0

-In the novel, it's the Necromancer who they are all confused about and fight. In the films, the Necromancer is quite literally revealed to be Sauron at every chance they get to shove it down your throat who it is. That wasn't ever revealed until Lord of the Rings. Azog is also completely and utterly worthless. He is long since dead by the time the Hobbit begins but they bring him back for some worthless shit and in the second one, he is even more worthless and actually gets demoted on the importance scale due to events.

-Radagast is never featured in the story, only appearing in one sentence of the novel and then appearing in like one chapter of the Fellowship. His moments of comedy relief are cringe inducing

-The ring is already having an affect on Bilbo making him violent and "evil"



These are off the top of my head. There are so many other things

Watching the hobbit now. Its pretty good. A little slow, like the first lotr.

Album Rating: 3.0

I was actually really looking forward to Del Toro directing these films. At the very least, they would have been absolutely beautiful and crafted with love. Smaug was absolutely fucking amazing though and Cumberbatch did an incredible job

In the novel, Smaug is the main villain. They literally hardly ever mention the Necromancer, it's just "yeah guys Gandalf has to go for a while now and return when it's convenient with no explanation", and the way that they've done it in the movie makes so much more sense, is more enjoyable and fits in better with LOTR.
Azog is put in the movies as a nemesis for Thorin to give him more of a drive and remind us why he's doing the things he's doing. Radagast does indeed appear in one line of the story and it's such a disappointing waste of a character who is my favourite part of the films. The ring hasn't affected Bilbo by the end of part 1 so I'm guessing you just referenced Part 2 which I haven't seen yet, so I'm not sure what you expect me to say to that. Del Toro isn't as good a director as Jackson though

Del Toro is a great director. Just some of the stuff he does lacks in the story Dept.

Exactly, and you can't have the Hobbit lacking in story