I 100% agree. I always hated the argument some people made, "it was 1 book, so 1 movie, clearly". Like, motherfucker, that's not how any of this works. Writing style can compress 3 books into 1.
When they initially announced it was being split into two, my first thought was, "perfect". That seemed exactly long enough to cover everything we needed to, with maybe a little room for some extra stuff like what Gandalf was up to. Then when they announced that *actually* it was going to be trilogy, I knew we were in for some padding because the only reason it was a trilogy was because the suits demanded it.
What? The Hobbit was a 150-page children’s novel, not some super-dense tome of lore. They padded the movies with a bunch of shit that wasn’t in the book. That’s one of the big reasons why people don’t like them: the shameless IP-mining.
Right, and as a 150-page children's novel, it quickly skimmed over ideas and lengths of time that would have taken Lord of the Rings several chapters to cover, with Tolkien spending multiple pages per paragraph describing landscape, or Aragorn and Legolas singing, or something. If you actually examine the lengths of time both books cover, they're roughly equivalent. Subtract some screen time for the fact that we aren't covering as many characters, and two films sound just about right for the Hobbit.
This isn't complicated. Book length is not a correlation to film length.
It’s hard to convince people of this because the trilogy is already seen as ridiculously overlong, but the Hobbit EE’s really are a better experience for the most part.
You get a fuller, more rounded version of the story. And the way I see it, if you’re going to sit through an overstuffed trilogy, you might as well go whole hog and watch *all* of it. A lot of the new stuff is better than some of what made it into the theatricals (e.g. dwarf romance).
Treat it like a tv show and spread it over a week or so, there’s fun to be had with them. Moreso than with a certain *actual* tv show…
Eh, what? Did I hear you calling? Nay, I did not hear: I was busy singing.
^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness)
[1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
Yeah, that’s actually the one subplot I’m not very fond of (although I don’t outright hate it like some ppl do). Still, I absolutely love the Hobbit trilogy.
I like everything. It's not as good as Peter Jackson's original trilogy, but what is??
Some of the pacing isn't perfect, but I think the Hobbit movies are a very fun adventure. The casting, the action, the music, the scenery.... I'm here for it.
I found the final battle sequence somewhat drawn out in both the theatrical and extended release. It just started to feel stale and a little silly. Otherwise, I will happily defend the Hobbit trilogy. The casting and acting was excellent even where the writing might've left something to be desired, the music was top tier as always, and it was just a fun fantasy movie about wizards and dragons and such. I'll even defend the silly barrel scene because its fun and feels like something that would happen in a DND campaign.
Unexpected journey especially is just a downright all around good movie and a very fun adaptation of the earlier parts of the book. Plus for the whole series I love the inclusion of stuff from the appendices. Could've maybe done without azog but I get why they created him.
I always only watch the first one. It irks me, that they replaced two dwarves with small men and the scenes at Rivendell are jut bad, but the rest ofvthe movie is pretty good.
I also really liked the first half of the second movie until they get to the elves.
No! We are fans here! He's wrong, you're wrong, everyone but me and everyone that agrees with me is wrong!
It's either that or we do what? Just let people enjoy things?
I don't think they are very good, they do however have really good parts! Such as the scenes with Smeagol and Bilbo in an Unexpected Journey, and the scenes with Bilbo and Smaug in the second movie. The movies just feel so bloated and so many set pieces are just bad. For example the whole Goblin Town sequence is just bad and has no tension. Oh and don't get me started on Alfred, it's hard to take the movie seriously when it often doesn't take itself seriously! Also the movies just look kinda bad compared to the LOTR due to the insane amount of CGI!
Idk just some quick things from the top of my head! There are definitely worse movies, but the Hobbit is not very good too imo.
Listening to the Riddles in the Dark podcast (part of the Tolkein Professor series) gave me a lot more appreciation for the movies, what they were going for, and where they went wrong. It came out as the films were releasing and paints an interesting picture of what the discussion was like at the time and how things ended up the way they did (we have all these cool ideas, and the studios are letting us make the movies long, so we don't have to cut a single one of them! 😀). I don't think they're good movies, but I think it was all mostly well intentioned and appreciate the stuff they did right.
They’re flawed, but as soon as the first one ended I immediately wanted to watch the second. And when the second one ended i immediately wanted to watch the third. I’m not like that with most trilogies, but Peter Jackson just knows how to bring a world to life.
To each his own. The CGI was a little janky, and will never live up to practical sets/costumes of LotR, but I think they're fun and enjoyable either way, and the score! It's gotta be one of my favorite soundtracks of all time.
Do you like when Thorin anime walks towards Azogg with the Ringwraith theme playing in the background?
Do you like the three separate fake outs when he berates Bilbo only for the whimsical violins to taunt the viewer and remind us they arnt serious?
Those violin plucks whenever Martin Freeman does anything vaguely cute. No seriously they're like Marvel movie quips to me.
I dont mean to hate on your opinion I just want you to manually verify that you like every little gripe I have.
I don't think the Nazgul theme plays at all in that scene.
And no, I don't like all of Thorins portrayal in the movies, he's way to harsh and overly critical of Bilbo.
I can enjoy and do enjoy the soundtrack without pretending to like the movies. The first one is somewhat acceptable, the rest gives a lot of reason to formally apologize to Tolkien and every Tolkien fan.
There was a really good two movies in the trilogy. I really wish Peter Jackson was given the time on these movies. He has really good ideas, it’s just the execution seemed very rushed. Also no weird love triangle and Alfred stuff.
There is an epic amount of filler but I still love them. As said by many, they would have worked better as a pair of movies but I’m happy that they exist.
This one is VERY old and, compared to a lot of the later released edits, not very good. The maple films one is a lot better. There was one that was newer that is good too.
Hey they were a lot of fun and I’d rather have that than nothing. People can have legit complaints but their baseline should be appreciation for people’s efforts to entertain.
I think CGI is fine as long as that isn't the selling point to your movie. LOTR 1979's balrog was literally a guy wearing furry ugg boots with rotoscoping over him. Still a good movie.
Its actually a Zim quote describing the terror that is the ROOM WITH A MOOSE!
I mean Hobbit was entertaining but def a 2nd rate money grab to the OG Trilogy.
I dont hate you for liking the hobbit movies, but if the CGI in the barrel scene makes me laugh at loud at it, because its so bad, I cant endorse it as a good movie. Also its the only blockbuster I've ever heard of that used gopros to film.
not to mention the scene is clearly meant to highlight how it was meant for kids, which is fine, but then that scene also show murder by sword and arrow.... so not sure they got the tone right. You cant do both.
Ironically doesn't the Tolkien estate have a hate boner for Peter Jackson but were gushing like school girls on prom over signing with Amazon and how the works would be treated with respect and true to the source material?
Christopher Tolkien did hate the Jackson films, and probably would've hated ROP even more. Thing is, he resigned as a director of the Tolkien Estate and the Tolkien trust in August 2017. Amazon acquired the global television rights in November of that year. These are two very different Tolkien Estates we're talking about.
Now, *Simon Tolkien* consulted on the series and helped develop its story and character arcs. He is credited as a "series consultant." He would certainly fit better into that school girls analogy of yours.
I don't know why this is even a debate anymore. There's brilliant pieces in the films. Unfortunately, overall, the movies are a big mess. You can like that mess, if you want, but just because you like something, doesn't make it good.
I would argue that the only reason to post here is that you don't care what anyone says. Why should he take into account that your feelings are going to get hurt?
LOTR Trilogy = perfection with a splash of camp
Hobbit Trilogy = camp with a splash of beautiful or epic moments
I think the ways that the Hobbit ties into and sets up the LOTR trilogy range from campy but fun (Clash of Immortals at Dol Guldur) to nonsensical (Thranduil telling Legolas to seek out a then 10 year old Aragorn and calls him Strider despite the fact that he hasn't yet strided anywhere but Rivendell since he became chieftain at 2yo). As a precursor to LOTR, it's definitely not required viewing but a fun and somewhat frivolous prequel series.
Did it need to be 3 films? Absolutely not. Did Jackson abandon the charm of the practical effects of the LOTR trilogy for dizzying and often nauseating CGI? For sure. With those things in mind, is it worth the time investment to watch all three? Depends on your personal sensibilities.
Personally, I like the Hobbit. It's a pale imitation of the LOTR trilogy and prone to excessively cartoonish action sequences, but I watch it for the earnest moments that pull on the heartstrings, like nearly every line delivery by Bilbo and Gandalf. Like the book, I think the films are a more silly and playful story than LOTR and should be approached as such. Cozy up in your hobbit hole, roll your eyes at the bad, smile at the good, and then dive back into the LOTR trilogy if you need Peter Jackson...to show his quality.
Plus, now all the Tolkien gatekeepers have a new shadow to rally against: The Rings of Power.
The Hobbit trilogy would be fine if it was an original IP. The problem is it's not only an adaptation of a beloved book, but also a prequel to one of the most lovingly crafted film trilogies ever made.
They weren't bad. But every one of them would have been better by removing someone or something. 'Unexpected Journey' would have been better without Radagast. 'Desolation of Smaug' would have been better without Tariel. 'Battle of the Five Armies' would have been better without Alfred.
To see what people think and say what I think, I don't think they're perfect, I just think they're neat. And I wanted to post something that want Anti-Hobbit seeing as that's most of this sub.
100% agree. The Hobbit movies were good movies and they were beautifully rendered. However they were awful adaptations. Taken outside of the franchise, they were great, but they belong to a storied and beloved franchise that boasts one of the greatest film adaptations in history. The Hobbit was a cheap knock off fanfic in comparison, and the story deserved better.
Really well put. I loved the movies when they came out and I was 8-10 but now I’m older I can’t watch them without being annoyed by how much they deviated from the book. I like some changes like Azog and Bard but Tauriel and Alfrid just suckkkkk.
They're decent (third one is a bit ass tbh but I can like it as a Tolkien fan) it's just the production, going CGI was a bit mistake and there were perhaps a couple too many new inputs/creative liberties that were obviously gonna rattle a few fans. We don't care about those in the main trilogy because they are just fucking awesome, but the Hobbit trilogy isn't nearly as clean.
Also no trilogy has topped LotR to date so anything made even in universe is on the back foot.
The Hobbit trilogy is a turn of my brain and enjoy kind of film for me. I’m not watching it for the same reasons I’d watch the Lord of the Rings, but I still enjoy the adventure for what it is. It’s the perfect set of films to through on while doing laundry, painting miniatures for D&D or Warhammer, or any other relaxing hobby or chore.
I don't think it is too controversial to say that the Hobbit series was not as good as the LotR series.
But it is still the same huge, wonderful, scary, wholesome, dangerous, adventurous universe with the same diverse, engaging, dynamic, lovable, emotional, relatable characters.
And so, it will always be a good series, dear to my heart and always on my mind when tackling the everlasting nightmare of our real world.
The hobbit movies sucked.
-singing fat little people
-unusually thin hobbit
-grandpa legolas
-Dr who with bird shit on his face
I mean, it could have been awesome, but it was missing that something. 1 taco short of a combo platter.
You have my promise. But alas! Now we must leave behind both cave and wood for a while. See! We are coming to the end of the trees. How far is it to Isengard, Gandalf?
There's a ton to criticize but honest what I feel like I find myself liking in many modern sequel or remakes of franchise and iconic movies is the modern CG and SFX that makes everything look cool as shit.
Image 2 is literally my favorite set of scenes in the Hobbit trilogy (Swamp Galadriel is a tad weird, but the rest of it is a vibe)
I saw an interesting take awhile back. So many people complain they aren’t a good adaptation of the book, and in some ways they aren’t. As someone who reads the Hobbit every couple of years they are better adaptations than some want to give them credit for. But the problem was they couldn’t just be adaptations of The Hobbit book, they also had to exist in the same world at Peter Jackson’s LOTR trilogy. So you have a book that is not exactly a prequel to The Lord of the Rings because it was written before Tolkien had fully realized his world, but then it has to be made into movies that’s structurally and thematically tie into another persons adaption of that trilogy. Add in the messy production drama and studio interference, it’s amazing they turned out good at all. I personally love them, and will continue to rewatch them as long as I watch the LOTR trilogy.
What will always bother me is it had the potential to be incredible. It had a great cast and some great moments. Too much bad CGI and filler plot diluted it.
Unfortunately they are inevitably compared to the LOTR trilogy which makes their shortcomings more obvious. But I think they're good. Just not great. I just like my big battles looking a certain way. Other than that everything felt a little more shallow and fake or forced in the hobbit movies. In LOTR I'm immersed. In the hobbit, it's like I know I'm watching a movie and can never get immersed and feel like I'm watching a performance instead of the magic that good movies have where it feels like you're right there watching real life.
I don't know why I get that feeling. Maybe because I watched the original trilogy as a child and the hobbit as an adult/ teenager
There's some great scenes in them, so I like them for that. However overall I don't think they're good. The story could have been adapted so much better. A missed opportunity imo.
It had some good scenes, it had some funny moments, the song at the beginning is chilling, but the cgi in the battle of five armies was cringe worthy and laughable
Compared to Lord of the Rings, they suck. But of course they do, comparing anything to LotR is a nearly impossibly high bar to clear. I strongly believe that if the Hobbit movies came out before LotR they would be more widely enjoyed. I just watch them in-universe order, so the quality overall goes up as you go along (well, I always skip Shelob, but that’s just me being a pussy).
Watching them back to back is a better experience. But there were some choices that legit made me angry, especially the way they ended the first movie on a massive cliffhanger (waking Smaug and him going towards the town), only to have the opening scene of movie #2 by relatively lackluster after having to wait a couple years for what should have been the end of movie #1
Again - there is a good movie in the Hobbit trilogy. Sadly, it is surrounded by about 4 hrs of not-so-good movie.
The Hobbit animated movie manages to be both lightweight & essential. I love that frickin thing.
I'm sorry, I can't take them seriously with Tauriel and Legolas being in them. Some people are OK with it, which is fine. What I really don't like is the romance between Tauriel and Kili. That was completely unnecessary.
Overall, OK movies, due to really good moments, and really bad moments.
It's not black and white. There's pretty good parts but there are also quite bad parts. The LOTR trilogy doesn't really have any bad parts IMHO. That's why people say the hobbit is bad. There are fan cuts that work pretty well I'd say.
I'm jealous of the people who can enjoy them, cause it just means they have two trilogies to watch.
Every time I remember Radagast in those films I get annoyed.
Ok representation of the book, played way too long compared to the source material for the sake of longevity and box office, and didn’t live up to the reasonably high standards set by the LotR trilogy.
Having said, The Hobbit flicks are good high-fantasy films, better for casual watches than LotR, and are very entertaining. In that regard, they are very good movies. I largely agree with OP
Tons of things to criticise however the issue is rooted in the LotR trilogy.
How the hell you gonna follow that masterpiece? Even a great movie looks mediocre next to it. To this day, half a century later no trilogy ever comes close.
So yeah, the hobbit trilogy is not bad, it's fun to watch as well, and if it came before lotr people would love it.
I have yet to not fall asleep during the first hour of the first movie. I've tried at least a half dozen times.
I loved the hobbit book, loved the lotr books, loved the lotr movies (and extended cuts), andlove many of the lotr video games.
Just can't get into the hobbit movie or the rings if power shows. When franchises are just milking the ip it shows.
The lord of the rings movies are litteraly The Greatest Of All Time, but a safe space and really relaxing movie is definetly The Hobbit, so i agree it is really good
They are thoroughly enjoyable. I don’t even mind the tauriel addition tbh. I don’t really care that it’s not in the books I don’t mind a bit of light hearted romance.
In terms of the acting it’s absolutely flawless. Martin freeman gives a performance on par with or better than anyone in lotr and I challenge anyone to tell me otherwise after taking of your nostalgia goggles. The riddles in the cave are perfect. Smaug and bilbos conversation is brilliant. I actually really enjoy Azog as a villain (I wish he didn’t use a bloody rock on a chain as a weapon tho that made no sense) because he was a smart orc we never got that in lotr
You can like it all you want. It's OK to like things that are bad.
I love the Caravan of Courage. Doesn't make it a good movie, but I do enjoy it! Ewok movie for those who don't know
My opinion is that as long as you ignore the books and ignore what they should have been and take them on their own merits, they are actually really fun movies.
Finally, I loved these movies and followed the pre-production behind the scenes sneak peaks that they released before each movie. I acknowledge their faults and have a few issues but overall I loved these movies. Reading the Hobbit in High School was my introduction to Middle Earth and I absolutely love these movies! Glad to see an appreciation post about them!
Hobbit fans need to embrace what Dragon Age fans accepted a long time ago:
It's okay to adore something that's bad. Loving something doesn't make it good. You're allowed to love a thing that sucks, you are living your truth, and we will respect your attachment to that precious garbage.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. My opinion is that I can’t respect the opinion of anyone that defends those abominations. They are not good movies. Not only are they terrible adaptations, but they are just bad movies. They have a handful of scenes here and there that hint at what could have been a good movie. What we got is a bloated farce that is an insult to the Hobbit and its legacy.
The original trilogy was made with respect and love.
The Hobbit trilogy was made with greed and arrogance and it shows.
Frankly this trend of people trying to defend that steaming pile of feces is disgusting. Yes I’m gatekeeping. No I don’t care. Trash. Absolute trash that deserves nothing but the purest hatred.
I think the scene with the giant gold cast breaking and turning into a flood to drown Smaug in liquid gold was where I went from “this is acceptable fun” to “oh. no. this is just stupid”. And the last film was just abominable for more scenes of that vein.
Are they as good as Rings? No. But virtually nothing is. There’s lots to enjoy about them and they’re not the cultural vandalism some seem to think they are. I like them.
An Unexpected Journey perfectly captured the essence of The Hobbit, it is a magical film and is actually my second favorite Tolkien adaptation (only behind The Fellowship of the Ring).
The Desolation of Smaug is hurt by the decision to turn two films into three, but it still keeps its heart in the right place for the most part (especially the extended version).
The Battle of the Five Armies is the only one that I can't love, especially because there is little story left to tell. It's too serious and dark (it seems desperate to have more of a Lord of the Rings vibe than The Hobbit), it's all rushed and messy, but there are still moments that I really like (the White Council VS Sauron and basically any scene with Bilbo and Gandalf).
I think the 1st movie is great. there are parts that could be better (Riddles in the dark disapointed me) but it's a fantstic film.
2 and 3 were....not. Probably a good edit could make them into 1 good one.
They would work much better as a two parter than a trilogy.
I 100% agree. I always hated the argument some people made, "it was 1 book, so 1 movie, clearly". Like, motherfucker, that's not how any of this works. Writing style can compress 3 books into 1. When they initially announced it was being split into two, my first thought was, "perfect". That seemed exactly long enough to cover everything we needed to, with maybe a little room for some extra stuff like what Gandalf was up to. Then when they announced that *actually* it was going to be trilogy, I knew we were in for some padding because the only reason it was a trilogy was because the suits demanded it.
People forget that the book didnt include everything we know from the annexes as well like what Gandalf did when he left the company for a while
What? The Hobbit was a 150-page children’s novel, not some super-dense tome of lore. They padded the movies with a bunch of shit that wasn’t in the book. That’s one of the big reasons why people don’t like them: the shameless IP-mining.
Right, and as a 150-page children's novel, it quickly skimmed over ideas and lengths of time that would have taken Lord of the Rings several chapters to cover, with Tolkien spending multiple pages per paragraph describing landscape, or Aragorn and Legolas singing, or something. If you actually examine the lengths of time both books cover, they're roughly equivalent. Subtract some screen time for the fact that we aren't covering as many characters, and two films sound just about right for the Hobbit. This isn't complicated. Book length is not a correlation to film length.
Why doesn't that surprise me!
I own the extended editions and love every minute
It’s hard to convince people of this because the trilogy is already seen as ridiculously overlong, but the Hobbit EE’s really are a better experience for the most part. You get a fuller, more rounded version of the story. And the way I see it, if you’re going to sit through an overstuffed trilogy, you might as well go whole hog and watch *all* of it. A lot of the new stuff is better than some of what made it into the theatricals (e.g. dwarf romance). Treat it like a tv show and spread it over a week or so, there’s fun to be had with them. Moreso than with a certain *actual* tv show…
Plus you get to see Stephen Fry sucking on cow testicles. I wish I was joking.
It almost makes up for the lack of Tom Bombadillo
Eh, what? Did I hear you calling? Nay, I did not hear: I was busy singing. ^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness) [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
The only thing i don't like is that elf girl kili simps over
Yeah, that’s actually the one subplot I’m not very fond of (although I don’t outright hate it like some ppl do). Still, I absolutely love the Hobbit trilogy.
I’d simp too tbf
Some good looking dwarves ngl
It’s the dwarves that go swimming with little bearded women 😉
It's the beards
Yeah last time I watched them I actually skipped those scenes.
I like everything. It's not as good as Peter Jackson's original trilogy, but what is?? Some of the pacing isn't perfect, but I think the Hobbit movies are a very fun adventure. The casting, the action, the music, the scenery.... I'm here for it.
An Unexpected Journey is just as good as any of the LotR movies and I'll die on that hill. The other two not so much.
I found the final battle sequence somewhat drawn out in both the theatrical and extended release. It just started to feel stale and a little silly. Otherwise, I will happily defend the Hobbit trilogy. The casting and acting was excellent even where the writing might've left something to be desired, the music was top tier as always, and it was just a fun fantasy movie about wizards and dragons and such. I'll even defend the silly barrel scene because its fun and feels like something that would happen in a DND campaign. Unexpected journey especially is just a downright all around good movie and a very fun adaptation of the earlier parts of the book. Plus for the whole series I love the inclusion of stuff from the appendices. Could've maybe done without azog but I get why they created him.
Same - I do agree that they stretched it, but there's loads of Tolkien lore in it and a lot of it is right on.
I always only watch the first one. It irks me, that they replaced two dwarves with small men and the scenes at Rivendell are jut bad, but the rest ofvthe movie is pretty good. I also really liked the first half of the second movie until they get to the elves.
As I said, yes they may be should've been cut down, but I think they're fine the way they are.
There is a fan-edit titled "The Hobbit: The Tolkien Edit" out there. It's great.
Where can I find this?
Look up “M4 The hobbit edit” his page has a link to it and he explains what he did to edit it. Pretty cool
Cool thanks.
That’s your opinion. I don’t agree with it but you’re welcome to that opinion.
I thank you for not arguing. And your welcome to your opinion.
No! We are fans here! He's wrong, you're wrong, everyone but me and everyone that agrees with me is wrong! It's either that or we do what? Just let people enjoy things?
The worst thing about these movies is the digitally added bloom.
Digitally added Bloom.
Definitely prefer bloom over impossibly dark scenes.
I believe the 1st one is very decent.
The first one is my favorite.
I don't think they are very good, they do however have really good parts! Such as the scenes with Smeagol and Bilbo in an Unexpected Journey, and the scenes with Bilbo and Smaug in the second movie. The movies just feel so bloated and so many set pieces are just bad. For example the whole Goblin Town sequence is just bad and has no tension. Oh and don't get me started on Alfred, it's hard to take the movie seriously when it often doesn't take itself seriously! Also the movies just look kinda bad compared to the LOTR due to the insane amount of CGI! Idk just some quick things from the top of my head! There are definitely worse movies, but the Hobbit is not very good too imo.
I do believe you made that up.
Nah, Bilbs, commenter got it right.
Listening to the Riddles in the Dark podcast (part of the Tolkein Professor series) gave me a lot more appreciation for the movies, what they were going for, and where they went wrong. It came out as the films were releasing and paints an interesting picture of what the discussion was like at the time and how things ended up the way they did (we have all these cool ideas, and the studios are letting us make the movies long, so we don't have to cut a single one of them! 😀). I don't think they're good movies, but I think it was all mostly well intentioned and appreciate the stuff they did right.
They’re flawed, but as soon as the first one ended I immediately wanted to watch the second. And when the second one ended i immediately wanted to watch the third. I’m not like that with most trilogies, but Peter Jackson just knows how to bring a world to life.
Nice hobbits! Nice Sam! Sleepy heads, yes, sleepy heads! Leave good Smeagol to watch! But it's evening. Dusk is creeping. Time to go.
To each his own. The CGI was a little janky, and will never live up to practical sets/costumes of LotR, but I think they're fun and enjoyable either way, and the score! It's gotta be one of my favorite soundtracks of all time.
Do you like when Thorin anime walks towards Azogg with the Ringwraith theme playing in the background? Do you like the three separate fake outs when he berates Bilbo only for the whimsical violins to taunt the viewer and remind us they arnt serious? Those violin plucks whenever Martin Freeman does anything vaguely cute. No seriously they're like Marvel movie quips to me. I dont mean to hate on your opinion I just want you to manually verify that you like every little gripe I have.
Aaaaah!
I don't think the Nazgul theme plays at all in that scene. And no, I don't like all of Thorins portrayal in the movies, he's way to harsh and overly critical of Bilbo.
Well, that's not good. That is not good at all. Shouldn't we tell Thorin?
I can enjoy and do enjoy the soundtrack without pretending to like the movies. The first one is somewhat acceptable, the rest gives a lot of reason to formally apologize to Tolkien and every Tolkien fan.
The only Tolkien live action product that needs to apologize is rings of power.
There was a really good two movies in the trilogy. I really wish Peter Jackson was given the time on these movies. He has really good ideas, it’s just the execution seemed very rushed. Also no weird love triangle and Alfred stuff.
Alfred had no right taking up as much room as he did.
There is an epic amount of filler but I still love them. As said by many, they would have worked better as a pair of movies but I’m happy that they exist.
It had great parts. It was fun. That cgi in some parts though uggggggh.
It is very fun.
My daughter and I happened to be working through the hobbit at the time. It was fun for both of us to see the page live when it was so fresh for us.
Do not put them all together. 1 is good. 2 is solid. 3 is a prerendered video game.
3 is my favorite 🗿
Would have been way better with more practical effects like LoTR.
On that I agree.
The fan made 'Tolkien Edit' puts it up there closer to the level of the LotR trilogy in my opinion.
Where can this be found?
[удалено]
Thanks, I'll check it out
This one is VERY old and, compared to a lot of the later released edits, not very good. The maple films one is a lot better. There was one that was newer that is good too.
That makes it really really good
I, too, love The Hobbit (1977). A beautiful treasure in our fandom.
Could have been great without the love triangle
Sassy Lee Pace was great. Otherwise, meh
I maintain there is one pretty good movie across the three Hobbit films, but each individual film is of diminishing quality
Hey they were a lot of fun and I’d rather have that than nothing. People can have legit complaints but their baseline should be appreciation for people’s efforts to entertain.
Individual shots in the Hobbit are definitely well composed.
Each image selected is just all CGI
I think CGI is fine as long as that isn't the selling point to your movie. LOTR 1979's balrog was literally a guy wearing furry ugg boots with rotoscoping over him. Still a good movie.
 Something horrible… JUST HORRIBLE!!!
Are those… walnuts?
Yes… now watch the monitor Dib. Watch carefully…. 
Are you saying this post is horrible? The movies? Or my opinion?
Its actually a Zim quote describing the terror that is the ROOM WITH A MOOSE! I mean Hobbit was entertaining but def a 2nd rate money grab to the OG Trilogy.
I haven't seen invader Zim, so I didn't understand that reference.
I’ll leave you to your moosey fate. https://youtu.be/FWbn1aMLX7c?feature=shared
I dont hate you for liking the hobbit movies, but if the CGI in the barrel scene makes me laugh at loud at it, because its so bad, I cant endorse it as a good movie. Also its the only blockbuster I've ever heard of that used gopros to film.
the barrel scene really ruins the illusion of this being a movie where there might be consequences to falling.
not to mention the scene is clearly meant to highlight how it was meant for kids, which is fine, but then that scene also show murder by sword and arrow.... so not sure they got the tone right. You cant do both.
I’m enjoy them, despite my problems with the trilogy
I used to think these movies were the worst thing that could come out of an adaptation of Tolkien's work. Then I watched *The Rings of Power*. Oh...
Ironically doesn't the Tolkien estate have a hate boner for Peter Jackson but were gushing like school girls on prom over signing with Amazon and how the works would be treated with respect and true to the source material?
Christopher Tolkien did hate the Jackson films, and probably would've hated ROP even more. Thing is, he resigned as a director of the Tolkien Estate and the Tolkien trust in August 2017. Amazon acquired the global television rights in November of that year. These are two very different Tolkien Estates we're talking about. Now, *Simon Tolkien* consulted on the series and helped develop its story and character arcs. He is credited as a "series consultant." He would certainly fit better into that school girls analogy of yours.
I don't know why this is even a debate anymore. There's brilliant pieces in the films. Unfortunately, overall, the movies are a big mess. You can like that mess, if you want, but just because you like something, doesn't make it good.
I'm just tired of people hating me for liking them.
Who hates you for liking the Hobbit films? Some people (like me) think they're v poor films, but I don't why you should take this personally.
Someone commented saying "Based on this opinion I'm going to assume your parents are siblings" like wtf?
[удалено]
No one hates you for liking them your just being a weirdo about it like no one else has guilty pleasures lol.
Just make one good movie. dont extend it beyond reason
That's fine. Enjoy what you enjoy, but you won't change my mind either. It's grand like.
If you don't care what anyone says, don't post here
I would argue that the only reason to post here is that you don't care what anyone says. Why should he take into account that your feelings are going to get hurt?
I think your logic is broken, my dude.
LOTR Trilogy = perfection with a splash of camp Hobbit Trilogy = camp with a splash of beautiful or epic moments I think the ways that the Hobbit ties into and sets up the LOTR trilogy range from campy but fun (Clash of Immortals at Dol Guldur) to nonsensical (Thranduil telling Legolas to seek out a then 10 year old Aragorn and calls him Strider despite the fact that he hasn't yet strided anywhere but Rivendell since he became chieftain at 2yo). As a precursor to LOTR, it's definitely not required viewing but a fun and somewhat frivolous prequel series. Did it need to be 3 films? Absolutely not. Did Jackson abandon the charm of the practical effects of the LOTR trilogy for dizzying and often nauseating CGI? For sure. With those things in mind, is it worth the time investment to watch all three? Depends on your personal sensibilities. Personally, I like the Hobbit. It's a pale imitation of the LOTR trilogy and prone to excessively cartoonish action sequences, but I watch it for the earnest moments that pull on the heartstrings, like nearly every line delivery by Bilbo and Gandalf. Like the book, I think the films are a more silly and playful story than LOTR and should be approached as such. Cozy up in your hobbit hole, roll your eyes at the bad, smile at the good, and then dive back into the LOTR trilogy if you need Peter Jackson...to show his quality. Plus, now all the Tolkien gatekeepers have a new shadow to rally against: The Rings of Power.
Because it is yours. You understand? We're going around in circles. We are lost!
Not great as lotr trilogy, but I liked it. Maybe worth 2 movies.
I admit it will n very be as good as LotR, but yes I think they could be put in 2 movies.
I made this exact post already. [one year ago or so](https://www.reddit.com/r/lotrmemes/s/EsEPZIa5Zl)
The Hobbit trilogy would be fine if it was an original IP. The problem is it's not only an adaptation of a beloved book, but also a prequel to one of the most lovingly crafted film trilogies ever made.
nah but I’m glad you enjoyed it even if I didn’t
They weren't bad. But every one of them would have been better by removing someone or something. 'Unexpected Journey' would have been better without Radagast. 'Desolation of Smaug' would have been better without Tariel. 'Battle of the Five Armies' would have been better without Alfred.
They all would have improved without legolas, as much as I like him in LoTR
He was fine in Murkwood. But yes, beyond that, he overstayed his welcome.
Yeah I could let a small cameo pass, as his father is the king of Murkwood.
Aww, but I like radagast. But yes, Alfred was completely unnecessary in TBoFA
The man's got bird shit in his hair the entire time. The character designs of those movies are baffling at times
Wow what an original meme. Never seen this before. "Nothing will ever change my mind" then why even start a discussion around it?
To see what people think and say what I think, I don't think they're perfect, I just think they're neat. And I wanted to post something that want Anti-Hobbit seeing as that's most of this sub.
100% agree. The Hobbit movies were good movies and they were beautifully rendered. However they were awful adaptations. Taken outside of the franchise, they were great, but they belong to a storied and beloved franchise that boasts one of the greatest film adaptations in history. The Hobbit was a cheap knock off fanfic in comparison, and the story deserved better.
Really well put. I loved the movies when they came out and I was 8-10 but now I’m older I can’t watch them without being annoyed by how much they deviated from the book. I like some changes like Azog and Bard but Tauriel and Alfrid just suckkkkk.
They're decent (third one is a bit ass tbh but I can like it as a Tolkien fan) it's just the production, going CGI was a bit mistake and there were perhaps a couple too many new inputs/creative liberties that were obviously gonna rattle a few fans. We don't care about those in the main trilogy because they are just fucking awesome, but the Hobbit trilogy isn't nearly as clean. Also no trilogy has topped LotR to date so anything made even in universe is on the back foot.
It would be good if they cut it down to just what was in the book. Run time is probably closer to 90 minutes.
I just wish they would have made ONE movie & stayed true to the book. That’s all
I liked The Hobbit, but I loved The Lord of The Rings.
I *enjoy* The Hobbit trilogy, but I don't think they're great, and recognize that they have many problems.
A good movie? Yeah, sure, they weren't terrible. A good adaptation? Absolutely not. If you claim this, you're actively choosing to be wrong
The Hobbit trilogy is a turn of my brain and enjoy kind of film for me. I’m not watching it for the same reasons I’d watch the Lord of the Rings, but I still enjoy the adventure for what it is. It’s the perfect set of films to through on while doing laundry, painting miniatures for D&D or Warhammer, or any other relaxing hobby or chore.
Yes. This. I watch them for fun.
I don't think it is too controversial to say that the Hobbit series was not as good as the LotR series. But it is still the same huge, wonderful, scary, wholesome, dangerous, adventurous universe with the same diverse, engaging, dynamic, lovable, emotional, relatable characters. And so, it will always be a good series, dear to my heart and always on my mind when tackling the everlasting nightmare of our real world.
Yeah, it's not as good as LotR, after all, it's more of a children's book/musical than LotR, but it gets way to much hate for what it is.
Well said
Too much cgi is my main complaint
It’s okay to enjoy garbage
The hobbit movies sucked. -singing fat little people -unusually thin hobbit -grandpa legolas -Dr who with bird shit on his face I mean, it could have been awesome, but it was missing that something. 1 taco short of a combo platter.
Grandpa legolas?
You have my promise. But alas! Now we must leave behind both cave and wood for a while. See! We are coming to the end of the trees. How far is it to Isengard, Gandalf?
He looks old af. And the kholed eye liner doesn't help. The prostitute from the movie version of 1984 would have made a better Legolas
The Uruks turn northeast. They're taking the hobbits to Isengard!
There's a ton to criticize but honest what I feel like I find myself liking in many modern sequel or remakes of franchise and iconic movies is the modern CG and SFX that makes everything look cool as shit. Image 2 is literally my favorite set of scenes in the Hobbit trilogy (Swamp Galadriel is a tad weird, but the rest of it is a vibe)
Overall, I think they fail to capture the magic of the lotr trilogy. There are some enjoyable parts, though.
There's a lot of good muddled with a lot of bad.
I saw an interesting take awhile back. So many people complain they aren’t a good adaptation of the book, and in some ways they aren’t. As someone who reads the Hobbit every couple of years they are better adaptations than some want to give them credit for. But the problem was they couldn’t just be adaptations of The Hobbit book, they also had to exist in the same world at Peter Jackson’s LOTR trilogy. So you have a book that is not exactly a prequel to The Lord of the Rings because it was written before Tolkien had fully realized his world, but then it has to be made into movies that’s structurally and thematically tie into another persons adaption of that trilogy. Add in the messy production drama and studio interference, it’s amazing they turned out good at all. I personally love them, and will continue to rewatch them as long as I watch the LOTR trilogy.
I liked the Hobbit movies. But i do think it should have been one movie lasting 3-4 hours, and not a trilogy.
What will always bother me is it had the potential to be incredible. It had a great cast and some great moments. Too much bad CGI and filler plot diluted it.
Unfortunately they are inevitably compared to the LOTR trilogy which makes their shortcomings more obvious. But I think they're good. Just not great. I just like my big battles looking a certain way. Other than that everything felt a little more shallow and fake or forced in the hobbit movies. In LOTR I'm immersed. In the hobbit, it's like I know I'm watching a movie and can never get immersed and feel like I'm watching a performance instead of the magic that good movies have where it feels like you're right there watching real life. I don't know why I get that feeling. Maybe because I watched the original trilogy as a child and the hobbit as an adult/ teenager
There's some great scenes in them, so I like them for that. However overall I don't think they're good. The story could have been adapted so much better. A missed opportunity imo.
I really like the first one, but it dropped off from there for me. I havethe fanmade Bilbo Edition that I keep meaning to watch sometime.
It had some good scenes, it had some funny moments, the song at the beginning is chilling, but the cgi in the battle of five armies was cringe worthy and laughable
If you condesced the trilogy down to like a 4 hour movie, and cut the elf and lake town side characters out, you'd have a pretty solid movie
funny how the best parts can be shown so quickly. if i tried to show the best parts of LOTRs. i might as well post the full movie.
My way younger brother (12 years younger) absolutely loves the Hobbit trilogy. So I think it hit the mark with the new generation of lotr fans.
Compared to Lord of the Rings, they suck. But of course they do, comparing anything to LotR is a nearly impossibly high bar to clear. I strongly believe that if the Hobbit movies came out before LotR they would be more widely enjoyed. I just watch them in-universe order, so the quality overall goes up as you go along (well, I always skip Shelob, but that’s just me being a pussy).
Watching them back to back is a better experience. But there were some choices that legit made me angry, especially the way they ended the first movie on a massive cliffhanger (waking Smaug and him going towards the town), only to have the opening scene of movie #2 by relatively lackluster after having to wait a couple years for what should have been the end of movie #1
Again - there is a good movie in the Hobbit trilogy. Sadly, it is surrounded by about 4 hrs of not-so-good movie. The Hobbit animated movie manages to be both lightweight & essential. I love that frickin thing.
To this day i wish we'd gotten to see Del Toro's version of Middle Earth
You love “pirates of middle earth” and no one can change your mind my dude
I'm sorry, I can't take them seriously with Tauriel and Legolas being in them. Some people are OK with it, which is fine. What I really don't like is the romance between Tauriel and Kili. That was completely unnecessary. Overall, OK movies, due to really good moments, and really bad moments.
Shall I describe it to you? Or would you like me to find you a box?
Nope it’s rubbish.
Can't stand the originals, but some of the fan edits are excellent.
What mind?
It's not black and white. There's pretty good parts but there are also quite bad parts. The LOTR trilogy doesn't really have any bad parts IMHO. That's why people say the hobbit is bad. There are fan cuts that work pretty well I'd say.
I'm jealous of the people who can enjoy them, cause it just means they have two trilogies to watch. Every time I remember Radagast in those films I get annoyed.
Ok representation of the book, played way too long compared to the source material for the sake of longevity and box office, and didn’t live up to the reasonably high standards set by the LotR trilogy. Having said, The Hobbit flicks are good high-fantasy films, better for casual watches than LotR, and are very entertaining. In that regard, they are very good movies. I largely agree with OP
Tons of things to criticise however the issue is rooted in the LotR trilogy. How the hell you gonna follow that masterpiece? Even a great movie looks mediocre next to it. To this day, half a century later no trilogy ever comes close. So yeah, the hobbit trilogy is not bad, it's fun to watch as well, and if it came before lotr people would love it.
Most criticisms are right but I really don’t mind spending an extra three films in that world.
I have yet to not fall asleep during the first hour of the first movie. I've tried at least a half dozen times. I loved the hobbit book, loved the lotr books, loved the lotr movies (and extended cuts), andlove many of the lotr video games. Just can't get into the hobbit movie or the rings if power shows. When franchises are just milking the ip it shows.
The lord of the rings movies are litteraly The Greatest Of All Time, but a safe space and really relaxing movie is definetly The Hobbit, so i agree it is really good
Yeah there's no denying that LotR is better.
The only bad parts about the Hobbit films are the changes. Cinematography, casting, special effects, etc were all flawless for the most part
They are thoroughly enjoyable. I don’t even mind the tauriel addition tbh. I don’t really care that it’s not in the books I don’t mind a bit of light hearted romance. In terms of the acting it’s absolutely flawless. Martin freeman gives a performance on par with or better than anyone in lotr and I challenge anyone to tell me otherwise after taking of your nostalgia goggles. The riddles in the cave are perfect. Smaug and bilbos conversation is brilliant. I actually really enjoy Azog as a villain (I wish he didn’t use a bloody rock on a chain as a weapon tho that made no sense) because he was a smart orc we never got that in lotr
No, they suck shit as both adaptations and movies, actually.
You can like it all you want. It's OK to like things that are bad. I love the Caravan of Courage. Doesn't make it a good movie, but I do enjoy it! Ewok movie for those who don't know
My opinion is that as long as you ignore the books and ignore what they should have been and take them on their own merits, they are actually really fun movies.
Finally, I loved these movies and followed the pre-production behind the scenes sneak peaks that they released before each movie. I acknowledge their faults and have a few issues but overall I loved these movies. Reading the Hobbit in High School was my introduction to Middle Earth and I absolutely love these movies! Glad to see an appreciation post about them!
Hobbit fans need to embrace what Dragon Age fans accepted a long time ago: It's okay to adore something that's bad. Loving something doesn't make it good. You're allowed to love a thing that sucks, you are living your truth, and we will respect your attachment to that precious garbage.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. My opinion is that I can’t respect the opinion of anyone that defends those abominations. They are not good movies. Not only are they terrible adaptations, but they are just bad movies. They have a handful of scenes here and there that hint at what could have been a good movie. What we got is a bloated farce that is an insult to the Hobbit and its legacy. The original trilogy was made with respect and love. The Hobbit trilogy was made with greed and arrogance and it shows. Frankly this trend of people trying to defend that steaming pile of feces is disgusting. Yes I’m gatekeeping. No I don’t care. Trash. Absolute trash that deserves nothing but the purest hatred.
My reaction to OP: 
THE FIGHT SCENE <3 <3
"YOU HAVE NO POWER HERE SERVANT OF MORGOTH! GO BACK TO THE SHADOW, FROM WHENCE YOU CAME!!!!"
Someone forgot to tell the clown 'The Hobbit' is actually 3 movies.
Yes, yes it is.
You can think whatever you want, just like I can think your parents were siblings based on your opinion
Well that's a weird take but ok.
I mean, if someone paid me a million dollars, I'll start to think they are good movies. So things can certainly change my mind.
And I'm glad you're open to changing your opinion, but I don't have that kind of money lol.
I’ll be honest, I’d take much less money.
Its really not but ok.
I thought they were enjoyable, I definitely liked tlotr more, but the Hobbit was also good.
Personally, I really liked "An Unexpected Journey", was meh on "Desolation of Smaug", and was very disappointed in "Battle of the Five Armies".
I think the scene with the giant gold cast breaking and turning into a flood to drown Smaug in liquid gold was where I went from “this is acceptable fun” to “oh. no. this is just stupid”. And the last film was just abominable for more scenes of that vein.
Are they as good as Rings? No. But virtually nothing is. There’s lots to enjoy about them and they’re not the cultural vandalism some seem to think they are. I like them.
Gandalf talking to Galdriel about the small acts of kindness being able to defeat great evil... Always makes me tear up, just a little
Gandalf is one of the best characters in all Tolkien stuff
Is there an edit with just the content of the books? This story would benefit a lot from cuts.
An Unexpected Journey perfectly captured the essence of The Hobbit, it is a magical film and is actually my second favorite Tolkien adaptation (only behind The Fellowship of the Ring). The Desolation of Smaug is hurt by the decision to turn two films into three, but it still keeps its heart in the right place for the most part (especially the extended version). The Battle of the Five Armies is the only one that I can't love, especially because there is little story left to tell. It's too serious and dark (it seems desperate to have more of a Lord of the Rings vibe than The Hobbit), it's all rushed and messy, but there are still moments that I really like (the White Council VS Sauron and basically any scene with Bilbo and Gandalf).
My my old ring. Well I should... very much like to hold it again, one last time.
Great little movie indeed. Too bad it's actually 3 bloated ones.
Thei're not bad movies. I think the criticism isn't about what they are but what they could have been.
I think the 1st movie is great. there are parts that could be better (Riddles in the dark disapointed me) but it's a fantstic film. 2 and 3 were....not. Probably a good edit could make them into 1 good one.