the first is that there is certainly a perception that it is very hard on ToRn to offer any sort of complaint of PJ's Tolkien based works without what has occured here happening: 3 pages of people shouting down the OP, calling them a troll (I was accused of this myself in the past), or making silly statements that imply thinking PJ did a less than stellar job means you dont think anyone invovled with the film did anything right or were any good.

There is a good reason ToRn has a reputaion as being the home of PJ fan boys who will not tolerate any negativity about their favourite films- this thread rather indicates why that reputation persists, even if it might not be strictly true.


The second point is the problems with the films themselves.

I would agree that the OP post was not the most diplomatically worded OP ever, but that does not make the points or post, or opinion invalid either.
In my view there is much to complain about in PJ's films, particuarly as adaptations of the source material, but also just as films.
Which brings me to TH.

It is in my view a very average film that could have been a timeless classic film.
But somehow it is not, I think even the most vervant PJ fan here would not claim TH was the greatest film of all time, or even one of the greatest childrens films of all time. (I would agrue PJ's verion is not even suitable for the target audience of the book)

So the question then is why is not a classic film?
Well it is almost exaclty split 50/50 between an adaptation of the book and stuff PJ made up.

Claims that he was drawing on the appendix ect had some limited credibility before we had all seen the film, but it has vey little now we have as nothing has survived even close to intact from the appendix without huge alterations in service of the stuff PJ has made up.

Those additions PJ has made, particuarly the very artificial (in practise, feel and look) insertion of Azog into the story to give it more impetus is pretty disasterous.

During these parts PJ tries to recreate a tone suited to his LotR's film, but he has to sit it alongside whimsical moment like the Crack the Plates song. And it does not work well at all I would say, as the two tones clash from the off.

And that is leaving aside the way Azog just pops up whenever the script needs him without otherwise any rymne nor reason, nor the subpar pulp fantasy book dialogue.

I also think the opening prolgue was a mistake- I do think having old Bilbo narrate was a good idea, this is in keeping with the narrators voice present throughout the book and the conceit Tolkien got it all from the Redbook- but all the Erebor and Dale stuff, whilst pretty and bombastic is completely the wrong mood to begin TH with, Bilbo is an unsuitable narrator for that information, and its irrelevant because all the information divulged in it comes out in the telling of the story later anyway.

Its main purpose seems to be to have a big opening to the film wih some action and lots of effects. That seems to fit in with PJ's view, expressed throughout his LotR's work that his audience is largely a bit dim and will stop watching if something effects laden and blatantly exciting doesnt happen right away.

In fact its this thinking (beyond needing filler to stretch it to a trilogy) which seems to be behind the inclusion of Azog and much of the other more ridiculous unnecessary action scenes- dwarf/troll fight-bunny sled/warg chase/ -stone giants fairground ride, everything in the Goblin Town escape- Thorin proving he cant fight worth tuppence to Azog/ Bilbo killing a warg and orc, proving he is a much better fighter than Thorin, who is truelly pathetic..

For me the obvious way to deal with the difference in tone between TH and LotR's was to have Bilbo narrate the tale to a young Frodo and Sam.

This is in keeping with the book as we know Sam has been listening to Bilbo's tales all his life. And more importantly it allows for the difference in tone as it can be explaind as Bilbo telling the tale suitably for a child audience. It would also have been much shorter. And the opening sequence is far to long, as especially as nothing of any relevance beyond 'oh look its Frodo!- doesnt he look older?' happens in most of it. And as to altering the final line for no good, or even apparent reason, of the opening famous, iconic paragraph I am at a lost for any reasonable explanation. The only thing I can think of is that PJ deliberetly wanted to stick two fingers up to people like me who think his handling of Tolkien's dialogue and language throughout the adaptations has been nothing short of disgraceful.

Now these are just a few initial points, I could of course go on to give reasons and explainations for many more things about the film I thought were poorly handled or detrimental to Tolkiens original tales. (And people on here always complain those who are negative dont give thought out reasons, so I have offered some).

The point I suppose is that there should be room on any forum for a wide variety of view to be able to be expresed and debated without it becoming accussations of trolling and other unpleasantness right from the off.