Poll: Of Jackson's Hobbit films, which is your favourite?
- Thread starter Hawki
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Ugh.Mathak said:
What were they thinking with that guy? No one wanted a Comic Relief, I mean you already have the Comic Relief in your more goofier Dwarves like Bombur.
What the hell are you smoking. The trilogy was incredibly unfaithful. Sure, they got most of the main story beats, but everything else was completely ridiculous.Samtemdo8 said:
I should get my brother to come on here and rip these abominations to shreds.
OP:
You can probably guess my thoughts on these movies.
No we are debating right here.Glongpre said:
But lets get the obvious out the way, Tauriel and the Bumbling Comic Relief guy from Laketown.
Well the first one was the only part of the trilogy that I was able to get through more than once, so I guess it would have to be that one.
If I had to pick a favorite, it would be Desolation. But what I really mean is just the scenes of Bilbo meeting Smaug.
I'd be one of the few saying Desolation. It seemed to have a lot more, what I would say, fun moments. One of the scenes a lot of people didn't care for, the scene of them trying to cover Smaug in gold and setting all the traps into place, Bilbo speaking with Smaug, Mirkwood(before they get to the Elf city), and even when they first show up into Lake-town were all very fun and beautiful to see. Unexpected Journey was also good but the best way to describe a lot of it was the final scene with the Orcs and the fire. It just dragged on too long without actually showing anything interesting. I'm fine with longer action scenes as long as things are happening, but slow motion climbing and walking on a tree for five minutes is a bit much.
The battle of five pages was just so unnecessary. Even Lord of the Rings, with multiple long drawn out battles managed to avoid dedicating one movie to an entire battle, even with the siege of Gondor being as big of a battle as it was. The best way to describe the last Hobbit movie is the one scene where the leading villain Orc kills one of the brother Dwarves by beheading him. Everyone looks super taken aback, except Martin Freeman, of whom just looks as though he smelled a bad fart or something. I like Martin Freeman, but it didn't even seem like he cared at that point, and I can't blame him.
I'd say that overall the movie trilogy is not "bad" as much as it's just unnecessary. If they did two movies, they could have done everything happening in book, plus a few side stories happening in the Silmarillion, like they were initially trying to do to begin with. But they insisted on trying to make another Lord of the Rings, and to put it how Bilbo described himself, it felt like butter, spread across too much toast. Honestly, I think I would have been more interested if they decided to have scrapped that idea and gone with something closer to a TV show like Game of Thrones to redo LotR. It would have honestly been cool to see Tom Bombadil or Frodo retaking the Shire, or even the long experience of Sam and Frodo crossing the entire country of Mordor, which did take them a good while to fully make it across, which wasn't shown well in the movie, even in the extended cut. While some would have called this unnecessary, I wouldn't have seen it as any more unnecessary than what we already got, and at least then I'd have gotten a few more itches scratched and I don't think anyone could argue that it wouldn't be possible to make such a TV show. The extended cuts of the movies are missing a fair amount of content, and they were still 12 hours long. They could have easily made a few seasons of a TV show with hour long episodes.
The battle of five pages was just so unnecessary. Even Lord of the Rings, with multiple long drawn out battles managed to avoid dedicating one movie to an entire battle, even with the siege of Gondor being as big of a battle as it was. The best way to describe the last Hobbit movie is the one scene where the leading villain Orc kills one of the brother Dwarves by beheading him. Everyone looks super taken aback, except Martin Freeman, of whom just looks as though he smelled a bad fart or something. I like Martin Freeman, but it didn't even seem like he cared at that point, and I can't blame him.
I'd say that overall the movie trilogy is not "bad" as much as it's just unnecessary. If they did two movies, they could have done everything happening in book, plus a few side stories happening in the Silmarillion, like they were initially trying to do to begin with. But they insisted on trying to make another Lord of the Rings, and to put it how Bilbo described himself, it felt like butter, spread across too much toast. Honestly, I think I would have been more interested if they decided to have scrapped that idea and gone with something closer to a TV show like Game of Thrones to redo LotR. It would have honestly been cool to see Tom Bombadil or Frodo retaking the Shire, or even the long experience of Sam and Frodo crossing the entire country of Mordor, which did take them a good while to fully make it across, which wasn't shown well in the movie, even in the extended cut. While some would have called this unnecessary, I wouldn't have seen it as any more unnecessary than what we already got, and at least then I'd have gotten a few more itches scratched and I don't think anyone could argue that it wouldn't be possible to make such a TV show. The extended cuts of the movies are missing a fair amount of content, and they were still 12 hours long. They could have easily made a few seasons of a TV show with hour long episodes.
I don't mind Tauriel, she just kinda doesn't have much to do... That's sorta the issue with the characters in general really only Thorin, Bilbo and the Bard are fully developed characters with arcs and stuff. Though Thranduil is fabulous and rides a moose so good for him.
I don't mind the movies, but hmm. I guess I like Desolation the most since I like Smaug and it gave me lot of Bilbo/Smaug fanfiction to read.
For context, I'm a huge LOTR fan and have been since I was a little kid, LOTR was one of the first real adventure books I read, so I had very vivid images of everything in my head. The LOTR movies are good, but they never made a huge impact on me because the books are the real deal for me. (Come on Jackson don't you know the Shire should look like Finland and that the Weathertop is situated near my grandparents summer house and the fellbeasts look like that one picture of Quetzalcoatlus in the dinobook in my daycare???)
But also I didn't mind the hobbit movies being what they were either since I wasn't that invested.
I don't mind the movies, but hmm. I guess I like Desolation the most since I like Smaug and it gave me lot of Bilbo/Smaug fanfiction to read.
For context, I'm a huge LOTR fan and have been since I was a little kid, LOTR was one of the first real adventure books I read, so I had very vivid images of everything in my head. The LOTR movies are good, but they never made a huge impact on me because the books are the real deal for me. (Come on Jackson don't you know the Shire should look like Finland and that the Weathertop is situated near my grandparents summer house and the fellbeasts look like that one picture of Quetzalcoatlus in the dinobook in my daycare???)
But also I didn't mind the hobbit movies being what they were either since I wasn't that invested.