Our Sponsor Sideshow Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
Please post all Hobbit reviews within this thread. (Links to previous review threads within.)


Dec 15 2012, 2:42pm

Post #1 of 18 (1093 views)
Please post all Hobbit reviews within this thread. (Links to previous review threads within.) Can't Post

Thread 1

Thread 2

Thread 3

Thread 4

Thread 5

Thread 6

Thread 7

Thread 8

Thread 9

Thread 10

Thread 11

Thread 12

Thread 13

Thread 14 (can you believe it! We have a lot to say Laugh)

Thread 15 (and going strong)

Koru: Maori symbol representing a fern frond as it opens. The koru reaches towards the light, striving for perfection, encouraging new, positive beginnings.

"Life can't be all work and no TORn" -- jflower

"I take a moment to fervently hope that the camaradarie and just plain old fun I found at TORn will never end" -- LOTR_nutcase

Tol Eressea

Dec 15 2012, 6:22pm

Post #2 of 18 (445 views)
oh my! 16th review thread!?! [In reply to] Can't Post

I will begin by saying, I will see The Hobbit again.
And I'll go ahead and get out my grumble about 3D....did not work for me! Yes, there were a few times when the effect got an "oh, that's cool!" response out of me but not enough to leave me feeling good about 3D overall. (Did anyone else get the sense of characters/objects being separated from the background--like a pop-out book effect?)
Now, I will try to step away from prior story knowledge and fandom (and may not succeed!) while reviewing The Hobbit.
I very much liked the characters and the settings. Overall, I enjoyed following the events taking place ( a couple of bumps in the road that I may address later). The score....I have mixed thoughts on and I am pretty certain that's one of those "prior" issues. On its own---quite nice but....it felt a little...contrived (?)...inorganic (??). This is a tough one for me. Moving on...the CGI. In some places it worked so very, very well and in others it was so-so. The eagles scene ....great, grand, and wonderful use of CGI. That bit got a big WOW from me!

I will have to think more on the Azog storyline---that's probably the only "insert" that I had a big issue with. White Council and Radagast concepts felt OK overall. My only gripe with Radagast scenes ---chase scene. Meh---was that just some silliness or less than good editing? And, wait a minute! I didn't know Galadriel could go "poof!" like that!

Revisiting Bad End and Rivendell--yep, yep--that got me teary-eyed. Seeing Dale and Erebor and Goblin Town---very nice!

Alrighty, that's my random review! Looking forward to seeing The Hobbit again---next time in 2D.

(This post was edited by batik on Dec 15 2012, 6:23pm)


Dec 15 2012, 7:27pm

Post #3 of 18 (471 views)
Saw The Hobbit in 48 fps 3D AND 24 fps 2D. My Review. [In reply to] Can't Post

I saw the movie last night in 48 Imax 3D. I wrote a review about it in thread 15 so i will just reiterate here that I loved the 48fps in scenery and heavy CGI scenes but in scenes that were on sets with people and no CGI ( like Bage End) it was arkward and out of place. You could immediately tell what the critics were saying about the BBC shows. Some guy said it looked like a renactment playing out on screen.Thats what I thought of through half of the movie. i kept thinking," this dosent visually look like LOTR". "It looks like a cheap knock off". This little drawback of 48fps held me back from total imersion of the film. I kept catching myself anayzing the scenes because of this and not fully follow the story... Now, today I went again to see it again in 2d 24fps. Last nights experience was still fresh in my mind.So when the movie started I was comapring for the first couple of shots. By the time the dwarves showed up at Bag End, I let out a sigh of relief. Now THIS was what I was looking foward to. Everything looked as it should have been. The lighting was spot on( none of that over lighting the foreground). It matched LOTR cinemtography perfectly. I wasn't aware of it till after the credits rolled that I didnt once after Bag End have a second thought about any of the scenes. I just enjoyed the movie fully and wholeheartedly. ( didn't even mind Azog this time around ) I was just immersed in the beauty of The Hobbit. So, until 48fps gets worked on,and I belive it will truely take a while, I will be going with 24fps. The good news is that we as fans have THREE ways of seeing this movie 48fps 3D, 24fps 3D, and 24fps 2D. thank you PJ for not locking us into one way to see this film.

Tol Eressea

Dec 15 2012, 7:56pm

Post #4 of 18 (453 views)
More good news... [In reply to] Can't Post

From Box Office Mojo...


Adjusting for inflation, and accounting for 3D prices, The Hobbit seems to be on par with where The Two Towers was this time in 2002.

Crunchable Birdses

Dec 15 2012, 8:00pm

Post #5 of 18 (436 views)
We can only pray [In reply to] Can't Post

We can only pray that good word-of-mouth from the general audience can cancel out all the negative media caused by the critic backlash fiasco.

This film should be doing Avengers-type numbers, not TTT numbers.

* crunch *

Mr. Arkenstone (isaac)
Tol Eressea

Dec 15 2012, 9:04pm

Post #6 of 18 (388 views)
Loca and spoilery spanish review [In reply to] Can't Post

After waiting 9 years here we are, this review is not going to enter into panic, I´m a hard core fan I got what I wanted.

I have read The Hobbit more times than Lotr Im more used to that story than Lotr
Opening tittles, ...The Hobbit...I start clapping hands the rest of the cinema follows me, we are a big family...

Old Bilbo, cool, good Ian Holm, suddenly Frodo appears, some cheers in the audience, so cool...

All that part is just awsome because some part of middle earth that can be cosider as a normal plac without magic (Bag End) has now such a powerfull gravitas, more than before, every hint of that hole is magic, is home...

In a Hole of the ground there lived a hobbit, Bilbo putting on that candle, remind me one video of professor Tolkien turning on his pipe, so cool...

The prologue...such an amazing culture, dwarfs in full power, so new tings, designs, the arkenstone, just wow, Thror, what a beard! Thrain, I missed him..Thorin and Balin, super cool, Thorin surprised me but more later on...
Thrnaduil just so well casted he looks perfect as Legolas father. That deer awesome..I herad some ´wow´in the audience when he appeared.

Thorin in exile, dwarves in exile, so so cool, I saw that shot of Thorin on a hill guiding his people, and that movement he makes with his hand pointing his people to follow him, I don´t know why but they showed a very particular way for the dwarves to be. Dwarves being supersticious, so cool, more dramatic like the rest of middle earth beings, so well done PJ...

Back to bag end, and just the books pops up, better adapted than LOTR. We have to let ourself go into those 300 pages plus the apendixes, this is not LOTR , thank goodness...this is the hobbit.

Dwarves, music, a lot of music, no shame to include that, loyal to the book, respect to the book, oh yeah...Thorin arriving everyone quiet, hat an amazing character, I say Thorin surprised me because I thought he was going to be more cold as ice, but despte he is rough and proud he delivers a distinct warm fo hsi people, and I jus t love that

Note: I find surprising that I had no problem at all with Kili, in fact he was one of my favourites.

Bilbo following them, well done little one, every detail of the book even bullroarer tuk is there, yesssssss

Then we have Radagst, I love him, the dol guldur story line, the witch king, the necromancer, well done...I loved that even when I tought it was going to be out of place, and of pace...

There is no tension in the Hobbit, this is more relaxed, is a child story, lets say and by the time dwarves arrive to trolls I had this feeling, so powerfull. I have the same sensation than when I read the book, so THATS an adaptation and this feeling was more powerfull than when I see LOTR.

Then Azanulbizar, just wanted that they dont cut so often to Balin, but it was great Thoring becomes a legend in that moment in that group but I didn´t expected that the group wasn´t aware of that story, most of them seem not having idea what Thorin did.

And then, wargs, and Azog is back, and, where is The Hobbit? I feel too much wargs, thought I liked and if yu take it as a reminder of that scene on LOTR books that the Wargs attack the company around the fire, this could be worked better than a bunny chse trough what seemed to me Rohan´s plains.

If you have same criatures and same characters, do something new, or don´t do it. (I will love it anyway when I devoure the DVD)

Then Rivendell, Elrond arriving, I liked whole Rivendell, but there could have shown a more mesmerizing feeling in Bilbo about that place and why he as an old hobbit desires so much to return there. So nice touch on the book,

Withe Council , a little bit boring, BUT, that conversation between Gandalf and Galadriel peying no attention on a bla bla Saruman, I liked that a lot, and finding them all more lighter than in LOTR when Galadriel first appearence was like she was on a headache or something, I liked the tone of tis big characters here, including Saruman.

Misty mountains coming, stone giants, cool rogeous, but a little bit transformers, he he, but they are unexplained and perhaps a little bit pointless in the book so they are fine.

Goblins, Bilbo departure, I loved Bofur, and that feeling of the dwarves not having a home, then the chase begins, I wasn´t dissapointed at all in the whole secuence of Goblins, and nor Gollum´s...

it was a large part of the movie reflecting the book so well, I even tought : ok Azog is not going to appear so lets get into the book for a while

Gollum scene, SUPERB, I cried when Gollum cried, it was so well done, AMAZING, the besto gollum in all LOTR and Hobbit series, the best.

Then Bilbo´s moment in the forest when he finds the dwarves it was just as I imagined it, and then Azog returns,

final fight and Bilbo in rescue, a little bit over the top but I understand why PJ did this, Eagles, stunning they fight more than ROTK,

And finally Thorin hugging Bilbo, I likd this because dwarves are that kind of people you know, and then one of the best moments for me in the movie, that shot of Erebor in the distance, that sight worth the ticket for me...

And then Smaug opening his eye, I liked more the detail that of the ird cracking the rock, and as it seems they are going to keep it by the book , all the key and the door stuff so it is COOL.


BUT here is one thing that maybe we are not thinking about: Pespective, the movie will get better with time, and in contexct with the other two to come, and LOTR ones. So the tone of the whole it was not like sometimes yes and ometimes it wasnt tre to the book, EVERY TIME they touched a scene from the book it was the ame feeling: The Hobbit.

Note: I regret for having seen all those clips and spoilery images all around, ver hard not to do so, but sometimes I was like: Come on go to the next scene I have seen this so many times this last days!

So my congratulations for Peter for being not true of what he thinks or true to the money if he has done three instead two because of that, but THANKS for despite his own thoughts and what money claims for itself, the movie feels like the book , plain as it is, so for those dissapointed, blame Tolkien bor not doing The Hobbit equel to Lotr.Tongue

The flagon with the dragon has the brew that is true!

(This post was edited by isaac on Dec 15 2012, 9:12pm)

Tol Eressea

Dec 15 2012, 9:17pm

Post #7 of 18 (389 views)
But you can't deny [In reply to] Can't Post

that if it does anywhere near as well as TTT did, that would be a great start for the trilogy. Guaranteed hit that it may have seemed, this is a new, untested property, and if it does even as well as FotR did that would be considered a huge success (especially considering the critical reception). Anything beyond that will be, as they say, gravy.

Crunchable Birdses

Dec 15 2012, 10:18pm

Post #8 of 18 (369 views)
It will be ok, but it's a tougher sell to the general audience than TTT [In reply to] Can't Post

We are seeing big numbers right now because it has a huge frontloaded critic-proof fan audience that will see it no matter what the reviews are. The test remains whether or not it has legs to pull in the general audience, and that will require very good word-of-mouth, as it will get no boost from the awards season, and it will get a none to negative boost from the critical reception (which is poor by anyone's definition).

TTT earned massive legs from awards and critic hype, so it's kinda not a very good comparison.

To be honest, I don't what film to compare this too - I would say Phantom Menace, because of the same built-in fanbase who will always see it, but then again I doubt Phantom Menace carried good word of mouth. Even fans were saying that sucked.

I think this film will have good word of mouth, despite the utterly unfair pendulum response from the critics. The fanbase is really happy with it overall, and so are neutral audiences. The critic reception seems to bear no relation to the audience reception, unlike TPM.

* crunch *


Dec 15 2012, 11:04pm

Post #9 of 18 (390 views)
My SPOILER HEAVY review! [In reply to] Can't Post

Ok, i saw The Hobbit on Friday, so here are my thoughts. I'm going to assume that people who don't want to be spoiled are going to stay away from this thread until they've seen it, like i have, so just to warn you this is going to be very spoiler-y!

When i was asked after seeing it what i thought, i said 'meh'. I liked it, i enjoyed it overall, but there were a few things that took me out of the movie but i think i need a second viewing to really get to grips with it.

Let's start at the beginning - i loved old Bilbo's introduction, but i do think he said 'My dear Frodo' quite alot of times! When he spoke you could tell he's in poorer health than his LOTR days, and the use of a double for his 'quick moving' scenes, and his New Zealand scenes, was quite evident. Still good to see him though and i LOVED the portrait he looked at of him as Freeman's Bilbo, that really tied the two together quite well.
The flashback was first class, and we saw alot more of Smaug than i was expecting. Erebor and Dale looked perfect, and the king under the mountain looked INSANELY brilliant.

A big highlight for me was how much of the original text from the book was used. It seemed a bit clunky and old-fashioned at times, but the actors did a good job of delivering them as best they could, and it did give the movie a strong feeling of being a faithful adaptation. Gandalfs meeting with Bilbo was brilliant, as were the scenes of the dwarves in Bag End, and the inclusion of the two songs from the book was good.
I was hoping they would stop off at the Green Dragon before heading off like in the book, but having Bilbo chase them through the forest was ok!

I liked Radagast, but NOT the bunny sled. I know The Hobbit is supposed to be lighter tonally but there were a few things like this that just went a bit far. I liked his journey to Dol Guldur though - was that the Witch-King he was fighting??
I disliked, however, him then being able to track down Gandalf and the dwarves so easily and then being involved in distracting the orcs and wargs off, which brings me to maybe my biggest problem with this film - Azog.

He looked good in the flashback we had told to us by Balin, but was his eventual reveal at Weathertop (GREAT to see it again, but i would rather have had the company walk past with it in the distance than have this made-up scene taking place on it, although i guess it's as good a place as any if you're looking to make camp in that area!) supposed to surprise us? It was fairly obvious he was the one tracking the dwarves, and he was very obviously CG. I'd hoped more of these orcs and goblins had been played by actual actors in prosthetics - that worked so well in LOTR, why not The Hobbit? I know Azog is tall but we had a guy playing the Morgul Lord who was tall aswell!
In the mythology, Azog is dead and it's his son Bolg who eventually fights Thorin at the Battle of Five armies. I think that would have worked better as an avenging-his-father kind of storyline.
Maybe it made sense to include these orcs and wargs tracking the dwarves as that's essentially what happens in the book, just from a distance. Their inclusion in the movie seemed very much like fan fiction and a way to stretch the story out as much as possible.

The trolls - handled perfectly and loved it. And they ended up in the same position as we saw them in FOTR! Woo hoo!!

Rivendell - very good and loved seeing the White Council, but would have preferred Radagast to appear here to show what he had found rather than seemingly travelling for miles and miles very quickly to randomly meet Gandalf in the woods.
I liked the exchanges between Gandalf and Galadriel but thought the film-makers were trying too hard to give the audience a 'message' when Gandalf turned away from Galadriel towards the camera - it was like he was talking to the audience when saying it's the good deeds of every-day folk that keep the darkness at bay.
Also - since when can Galadriel just disappear into thin air when someone looks away from her then back again? Very bizarre and cheesy.
I also think Gandalf should have left when the dwarves did - how the hell else was he able to find them in Goblin town??

The stone giants - i was glad to hear that they would be in the movie, but i didn't know they would be part of the mountain that the party was on!! I guess they needed something dramatic to happen to make them worthy of inclusion, so maybe this is one of those things i'll enjoy more the more i see it.

I loved everything about Goblin town. The action may have gone on for some but i felt it was needed and i loved seeing Gandalf decapitate goblins and his face-off with the Goblin king. I liked that he was hit by the goblin king before hitting back - and i loved the goblin kings line - 'Hmm. That'll do it!'!!

Riddles in the dark - just perfect. Gollum was amazing and i thought the riddle game might be a bit old-fashioned and unrealistic to work on screen but Martin Freeman and Andy Serkis did such a great job to make it believable and exciting. The revealing of the ring was wonderfully done. The whole scene was a big highlight of the movie.
But i still wish Bilbo had lost his jacket buttons by squeezing out of the door after getting past the guards! But it was a good move to see Gandalf et al escaping instead, and then Bilbo's sparing Gollums life was really powerful.

The final scenes stayed quite true to the book, obviously aside from the inclusion of Thorin fighting Azog. I was expecting Thorin to kill him and bring about the end of that particular side-story but i guess this is going to keep going until a final show-down at the battle of Five Armies, where they effectively kill each other. Though i don't see how they can work in Azog tracking them through Mirkwood, but hey, anything's possible with this crazy storyline!
I also think Bilbo 'came out' as a hero a bit too early. Him showing his true worth and Thorin's acceptance of him should have come later, in the second or third movie. In the book Thorin only accepts him on his death bed. Also he isn't supposed to kill anything until he kills a spider in Mirkwood and thus names his sword
The eagle rescue was good, but i guess we can now have a new version of the whole 'why didn't the eagles fly the ring to Mount Doom - Why didn't the eagles fly the dwarves over Mirkwood!
Also Erebor seemed TOO close - i thought Mirkwood was supposed to be so vast you can't see from one end to the other? But anyway i would have preferred the film to end with a long shot towards the mountain before fading out like they did in FOTR, rather than Smaug's eye opening, but i can live with that

So overall i enjoyed it, but i don't think it was better than any of the LOTR movies. Watching FOTR, the story progressed further than it did here, but i was never bored, there was always something going on, but watching The Hobbit i did start to get bored, probably with all the warg chases, before it picked up after they left Rivendell. But i think i'll appreciate it more after seeing the other two movies, and when we have all 6 out and able to appreciate together, i'm sure they'll be the finest group of movies i could ever hope to see!

Final note - i didn't notice or experience any problems with the frame rate. I saw it in IMAX and the only problem i had was wearing glasses, i've never got used to them and kept fiddling with them all the way through the film!

'I wish the Ring had never come to me. I wish none of this had happened.'
'So do all who live to see such times but that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us.'

Crunchable Birdses

Dec 15 2012, 11:39pm

Post #10 of 18 (351 views)
Quite a few more rottens on RT went in today [In reply to] Can't Post

...and they seem to be trying to outdo each other in frothing, scathing hatred. I mean this one is probably the most offensive review I've read about any film ever:


The score will be in the 50s tommorow I imagine.

* crunch *


Dec 15 2012, 11:59pm

Post #11 of 18 (375 views)
Oh my.... It is time [In reply to] Can't Post

So, having been a follower of this production for a long time, I certainly had high hopes for this trilogy. I love LotR more than I might even care to admit, a lot because of the emotional tug it gives me every time I watch it. Perhaps it was naive of me to expect the same, but that was my hope. I was looking for a great emotional bond amongst the dwarves, slick action like the LotR, and a fantastic world to step into. Did I get any of this?

Not nearly enough.

I saw it in 48FPS 3D, and I need to see it again to find out if Jackson has changed his style or if it's this technical stuff. Don't get me wrong, I'm not so foolish as to think that 48FPS is instantly a bad thing. There were shots in the film I liked, but a lot of the time the quick style really didn't compliment the high frame rate choice. The incongruities were easier to spot and some of the actor's movements certainly felt stilted. This needs to be played with a lot more before it's truly ready for prime time. On the plus side, I actually thought it made the visuals even more dazzling, and the special effects overall never sucked me out of the film.

The film also felt incredibly fast. If people thought LotR rushed through the plot, then this must be like a rollercoaster in a tornado. Never have I felt so whized along. Again, it may be a 48FPS issue, but I certainly know people were lying when they said "Bag End is 45 min!". More like 10. That really leads me to the problem that hit against my expectations hard: Character interaction. Where was it all? Where are the fun snippets of playing off each other like with the Fellowship? Where are the situations to be resolved by the characters' personalities? I know Tolkien didn't put them in there (well, he did, the omitted Balin one) but that could have done better than the you-know-what subplot.

The action also suffered a significant downgrade, probably because the bad guys have been downgraded to CG creatures. Really good CG, mind you, but making their faces realistic has not resulted in them getting better at being up close in personal. I would still vastly prefer the orc we got in LotR, for they both looked grimier and more subject to the punishment they were taking. The mid-movie sequence was just awful. It looked like (in the trailers) that one place I could let it be fun, but it was way too much. LotR (TTT especially) did such a great job at giving us bloody action. Here, we get decapitations on a whim, and it feels weightless.

Overall, I just didn't feel taken back to Middle-Earth. The whimsy wasn't the same, the seriousness wasn't the same, and just the feel of the plot seemed more about encounters than naturally flowing. I am severely disappointed, though entertained. The biggest plot problem seems though is that everything apparently has to be tight and restricted. No side adventures, as it all must flow back to two central themes. Worst of all, nothing is even resolved. Bilbo is accepted by Thorin; that's all. All plots are left dangling in the air right in front of our face. At least at the end of Fellowship, you saw the characters moving on to new journeys. Here you get so little emotional tug.

What was good were the performances, the comedy, and some of the cinematic techniques used to bring the story together. The ways they justified certain changes were very clever, if left empty. More time on things could have served them well. The Riddles in the Dark sequence, for example, played greatly on fear and the elements around them. I certainly felt tense, even as I was reciting the riddles along with them. That was a slow, quiet moment though. LotR had plenty of those, but even the solemn moments here seemed like they needed to get them done quickly. Also, lots of walking in slo-motion. I can accept that for action scenes, but man, that stuff was distracting.

I don't know what to say of the film. I certainly felt disappointed coming out of it. Jackson gave me such awesome feelings a decade ago, and still does today. Now... What has been lost? What got in the way that forced his hand to change the tone of his Middle-Earth? It's unfortunate, whatever it is. I stand by his technical decisions and all, though I'm not sure how it will effect my film experience further. I hope for better going further on.

Crunchable Birdses

Dec 16 2012, 12:15am

Post #12 of 18 (342 views)
This is interesting [In reply to] Can't Post

Never have fan reviews been at such utter polar opposites to the critic reviews. I'm on your side. I agree with you; the film felt fast.

Read this critic review for example and let me know what you think. This is typical of the critic reviews cluttering up RT right now:


* crunch *

Lucky Luke

Dec 16 2012, 12:15am

Post #13 of 18 (332 views)
Nicely said. [In reply to] Can't Post

You summoned up what I felt about the movie.


Dec 16 2012, 1:34am

Post #14 of 18 (319 views)
Great movie. I want to see it again. [In reply to] Can't Post

My wife and I just got back from a 3D 24fps showing of The Hobbit. We were both 3D virgins. Impressive image. The scenery and effects were beautiful.

The story was good and the inclusion of extra material and characters really added to it and tied everything together. There was comedy, drama and action. I expected more 'riddles' and found the changes from the book fascinating.

My wife, hardly a fan of Middle-earth enjoyed the movie.

When it ended it left us wanting more.


Kangi Ska

Dec 16 2012, 3:37am

Post #15 of 18 (273 views)
Good review Isaac. [In reply to] Can't Post

I can find no fault in what you said. I cannot wait to see the movie for additional times.

Kangi Ska Resident Trickster & Wicked White Crebain
Life is an adventure, not a contest.

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Kangi Ska

Dec 16 2012, 3:42am

Post #16 of 18 (281 views)
I really do not care about rotten tomatoes. [In reply to] Can't Post

Sounds like a bunch of kids jumping up and down trying to get attention. We had a term for that type back where I came from. "Losers".

Kangi Ska Resident Trickster & Wicked White Crebain
Life is an adventure, not a contest.

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.


Dec 16 2012, 11:01am

Post #17 of 18 (244 views)
You should do [In reply to] Can't Post

I really do not care about rotten tomatoes.

They completely ruin a sandwich. Yuck.

Want Hobbit Movie News? Hobbit Headlines of the Week!

Mr. Arkenstone (isaac)
Tol Eressea

Dec 16 2012, 1:28pm

Post #18 of 18 (290 views)
Regarding the decison of making a trilogy and how EE would have been more interesting than ever [In reply to] Can't Post

Sorry for the spelling mistakes, I was on a rush, and I´m not a very good english speed writerTongue

Next week I´ll go again to the cinema looking for 3D, I´m a little bit dissapointed now about the music and the editing decisions when making this film a trilogy, they are noticeable, I imagine how would things should have gone if there where two movies, and I´m just thrill of excitement to find out that in one movie we could have had also Thranduil, the spiders and all that.

I wouldn´t have no problem at all having a longer movie about more than 3 hours, and as the entire world was waiting for this movie, I guess the vast majority of viewers, not only book fans, would have happy with two 3 hour movie plenty with such and excelent stuff...

and I can´t understand why on earth, as they know that extended versions of LOTR were a hype on DVD sellings, that ground was safe to have all the necromancer and withe coundil appearing only in the EE, people would have devoured literally when it would have come into stores, I´m a mixed feeling now, even more when I (a mere mortal) can guess better ways to have done this...

The flagon with the dragon has the brew that is true!


Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.