Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles 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
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
CNN: 'The Hobbit' One of the Top Ten Worst Movies of the Year?!
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

News from Bree
spymaster@theonering.net

Dec 31 2012, 8:18am

Post #1 of 28 (1701 views)
Shortcut
CNN: 'The Hobbit' One of the Top Ten Worst Movies of the Year?! Can't Post

The following is a small editorial from co-owner and staffer Calisuri. It does not necessarily reflect the opinion of TheOneRing.net:

CNN.com writer Tom Charity has posted his 'The 10 worst movies of 2012' and decided to controversially include 'The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey' on the list. It should be noted, he specifically calls out the 48fps experience as being the 'worst' - not the actual film itself. Though he does take a dig at the length of the latest Middle-earth tome. The facts about 'The Hobbit' seem to paint a different picture: RottenTomatoes Critic index of 65%; RottenTomatoes audience rating of 81%; CinemaScore rating of 'A;' Ringer Review average of 4.5/5; Three week lead at the international box office; and breaking multiple December box office records. Looking at Mr. Charity's other films on the list, most have a RottenTomatoes.com rating of < 30% and only one breaks the 50% mark.

So what made Mr. Charity put 'The Hobbit' on his list? The easiest explanation is he really didn't like the 48fps experience as he states in the article. Hey, I didn't either (my review) - but I wouldn't put it on any kind of 'worst list.'

His true intention is even more transparent. He simply wants more eyeballs and a bit of controversy. After all, he only continues to get paid if he remains interesting. (The quote from Zoolander comes to mind...'Dance Monkey, Dance!') So including a popular film on his 'worst of' list on a major outlet like CNN.com is sure to do just that. It will definitely cause some discussion.

Would you put 'The Hobbit' on your own worst list of 2012? Is Mr. Charity totally off base? Tell us what you think!

(This post was edited by entmaiden on Dec 31 2012, 2:51pm)


Lindele
Gondor


Dec 31 2012, 2:27pm

Post #2 of 28 (676 views)
Shortcut
CNN is one of the top ten WORST news organizations of the year [In reply to] Can't Post

 


sauget.diblosio
Tol Eressea

Dec 31 2012, 2:28pm

Post #3 of 28 (689 views)
Shortcut
The one thing we can do to counter this fool [In reply to] Can't Post

is to just not click the link to CNN.


ltnjmy
Rivendell


Dec 31 2012, 3:02pm

Post #4 of 28 (638 views)
Shortcut
How absolutely ridiculous ! [In reply to] Can't Post

I am definitely NOT going to be watching CNN anymore - this clown obviously did not watch the movie nor noticed the great box office it is achieving not only in the US but worldwide.


KilroyMcFadden
Registered User

Dec 31 2012, 3:30pm

Post #5 of 28 (612 views)
Shortcut
To place it as number 1... [In reply to] Can't Post

To place it as number 1 was way off base, maybe it shouldn't have even made the top ten worst. But creating a prequel to LOTR as opposed to a standalone adventure with a passing reference to future events was, in my opinion, a mistake, and sucked all of the spirit out of the story. While I agree and personally don't think it belongs at the bottom, I can certainly understand why there are a large number of people who may think it deserves to be there.


unexpectedvisitor
Rohan

Dec 31 2012, 3:55pm

Post #6 of 28 (573 views)
Shortcut
no [In reply to] Can't Post

absolutely not. there is no proper justification for this. there are so many levels on which The Hobbit is a verifiably accomplished film, it is complete hyperbole to call it one of the year's worst when there are hundreds of films released every year that are utter tripe--script, acting, technical aspects, everything. the only level on which AUJ could be put on some sort of "worst" list would have to be relative to expectation level (though i personally loved the movie). in which case, he should have labeled it one of the year's most "disappointing" movies or something like that.

it is truly absurd to sling this kind of negativity at a film mostly because of an OPTIONAL viewing format. i do think that Warner Brothers would have been wiser to screen the film for the press initially in 2D 24fps, so many of these critics were never immersed in the film because they are so acclimated to 24fps from years and years of watching tons of movies and the HFR was a source of constant cognitive dissonance. however, this guy has had more than enough time to give the movie another shot in 24fps before choosing to include it on a "worst of the year" list. no, a lot of critics didn't have the opportunity to do that before they had to publish their reviews and, no, a critic shouldn't have to see a movie twice to review it (though, when some of their criticisms were so rooted in something that is not a defining characteristic of the film itself but essentially an add-on, i wish they could have tried to wait until a second viewing in 24fps before giving their final word) but in this particular case i think this guy is either 1) just trying to generate hits, as someone suggested, or 2) just hated HFR that much that he's trying to use this bit of hyperbole as a way of joining the stand against HFR becoming any sort of an industry standard.


Crunchable Birdses
Rohan


Dec 31 2012, 4:34pm

Post #7 of 28 (552 views)
Shortcut
You are just making things worse by posting this article on the front page [In reply to] Can't Post

No-one agrees with the article; it's complete crap, but linking to it and increasing visibility of it is counter-productive.

* crunch *


Norc
Registered User

Dec 31 2012, 6:11pm

Post #8 of 28 (587 views)
Shortcut
the hobbit is a dissapointment. [In reply to] Can't Post

hi, I am new to this forum and I am not really sure yet how these technical stufff works yet, but anyways.

I agree with the article. Maybe TH wasn't the worst of 2012 movies, but it clearly was the most dissapointing. It starts off okay, though really slow pased and a bit too much old bilbo and Frodo time, but after that it is just a ballad of PJ egoistic nonsence. Radagast, okay he was fun and all, but the rivendell scene is so slow and boring, the elves aren't merry and where is the sword that was broken, the one we saw in the trailer? and I haven't started on Azog or the mute eagles or Bilbo killing an orc. KILLING! Suddenly our dear Bilbo is a loony murderer.


(This post was edited by Norc on Dec 31 2012, 6:13pm)


Nightwing
Bree

Dec 31 2012, 6:33pm

Post #9 of 28 (572 views)
Shortcut
I do consider it an awful film [In reply to] Can't Post

But calling it the worst of 2012 seems a bit extreme, and seemingly done for the sake of sensationalism.


Crunchable Birdses
Rohan


Dec 31 2012, 6:35pm

Post #10 of 28 (491 views)
Shortcut
So... [In reply to] Can't Post

...your problem is that the film is different to the book?

* crunch *


Rostron2
Gondor


Dec 31 2012, 6:36pm

Post #11 of 28 (480 views)
Shortcut
You know you've read enough reviews [In reply to] Can't Post

When you get one like the one from CNN. He happens to be in the minority. In math we throw out the extreme highs and lows don't we?


Bladerunner
Gondor


Dec 31 2012, 7:06pm

Post #12 of 28 (481 views)
Shortcut
Yes, Outliers (or should it be Out-Liars ;0). [In reply to] Can't Post

That review did not deserve two separate original posts, much less a reference in the front page....:-/.




N.E. Brigand
Half-elven


Dec 31 2012, 7:50pm

Post #13 of 28 (489 views)
Shortcut
THE HOBBIT is one of my ten worst films of 2012. [In reply to] Can't Post

But since I've only seen thirteen films from the year now ending, The Hobbit is also one of my ten best films of 2012.

Here's a link to the earlier discussion of this article.

If it were possible to rate the film on an absolute scaleI think I'd give it 2.5 out of 4 stars. That's up from 2 stars when I'd only seen it in 3-D.

-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Discuss Tolkien's life and works in the Reading Room!
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
How to find old Reading Room discussions.


unexpectedvisitor
Rohan

Dec 31 2012, 7:54pm

Post #14 of 28 (446 views)
Shortcut
well, fair enough! [In reply to] Can't Post

The Hobbit is definitely in my Top 5 for the year. #2, in fact, behind The Master.


MouthofSauron
Tol Eressea


Dec 31 2012, 9:55pm

Post #15 of 28 (383 views)
Shortcut
this person needs to get his head examined [In reply to] Can't Post

And fast!


take me down to the woodland realm where the trees are green and the elf women are pretty, oh will you please take me home!!


Captain Salt
Tol Eressea


Dec 31 2012, 10:39pm

Post #16 of 28 (382 views)
Shortcut
I don't think killing an Orc makes one a murderer in ME... [In reply to] Can't Post

The Free People don't really consider the Orcs to be anything other than living pincushions...also, the Orc in question was about to kill a debilitated Thorin, if one remembers.

I get what you're saying about Bilbo all of a sudden being an action hero, through. Frodo refuses to use a sword and never fought in the books as well...the difference between writing for an audience in the mid 20th century, and making a movie for an audience in the early 21st century.

And the Orc in question which Bilbo slew was obviously fake, and awfully goofy looking. Looked like a CGI turtle.

My Top 5 Wish List for "The Hobbit"
5. Legolas will surf down Smaug's neck
4. Bilbo will be revealed to a Robot
3. Naked PJ cameo as Ghan-Buri-Ghan
2. Use of not only 3D, but smell-o-vision, plus the inclusion of axes coming out of the seats and poking the audience when appropriate
1. Not only keep the claim that Thorin & Co. ran amok in Mirkwood "molesting people", but depict said incident in vivid detail!!!!!


mefansmum
Rivendell

Jan 1 2013, 3:21am

Post #17 of 28 (323 views)
Shortcut
is not to feed [In reply to] Can't Post

what probably was partly at least a grab for attention. He is probably quite happy to have stirred up some Tolkien fans too.


RhodeCamelot
The Shire


Jan 1 2013, 5:54am

Post #18 of 28 (340 views)
Shortcut
Hater are gonna hate [In reply to] Can't Post

(–__–) I personally think not wasting our time/energy over such dumb negativity is in order. I've never known any fandom that exists in this universe that doesn't have "enemies" ……imo this idiot reporter should just be ignored as he's not significant enough to waste time worrying about.

#dftba


marillaraina
Rohan

Jan 1 2013, 7:45am

Post #19 of 28 (289 views)
Shortcut
Your opinion. :) [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
hi, I am new to this forum and I am not really sure yet how these technical stufff works yet, but anyways.

I agree with the article. Maybe TH wasn't the worst of 2012 movies, but it clearly was the most dissapointing. It starts off okay, though really slow pased and a bit too much old bilbo and Frodo time, but after that it is just a ballad of PJ egoistic nonsence. Radagast, okay he was fun and all, but the rivendell scene is so slow and boring, the elves aren't merry and where is the sword that was broken, the one we saw in the trailer? and I haven't started on Azog or the mute eagles or Bilbo killing an orc. KILLING! Suddenly our dear Bilbo is a loony murderer.


It wasn't at all disappointing to me. I loved it. I liked it better than I liked the first LOTR film, FOTR. :)


percy
The Shire

Jan 1 2013, 8:00am

Post #20 of 28 (294 views)
Shortcut
"Just as good" has become "not good enough" [In reply to] Can't Post

When The Hobbit was announced, and furthermore when Peter Jackson turned out to be directing after all, I was beside myself with excitement. This excitement continued all throughout the production phase and doubled when I saw the first trailer. Here was a rarity: a movie (series) that I knew I would love 100% before walking into the theater. My expectations were unreasonably high.

And do you know what? They were met, and exceeded in some respects. I avoided reading any reviews before I saw the film. After I saw it, I read some opinions... and was sincerely shocked at the mixed response. The movie was what amounted to another entry in a hugely successful and much-praised film series which was made by largely the same team using the same aesthetics and production values of the previous entries. With the exception of the unnecessary (but optional) HFR 3D treatment, you could have believed it came out in 2004, and I mean that in a good way: it felt consistent with the LOTR trilogy.

I'll agree with what others have said about this reviewer having an axe to grind (no pun intended) with the 48p format. Full disclosure: I did not see the movie in that format, and have no plans to do so. I've had enough experience with different frame rates to know that I prefer the 24p look, and since the LOTR movies were shot traditionally, I prefer to watch TH that way as well. I did see it in 3D the first time, however, and while it wasn't bad, it was also superfluous, like all 3D films. The second viewing was in good ol' 2D, and that's how I'll watch it every time I see it from now on.

I think TH is facing the same challenges that the Star Wars prequels faced. Again, full disclosure: I like the prequels just fine, though not as much as the original trilogy. When Episode I came out, people unfairly compared it to three beloved movies that came out about a generation prior. That criticism continued throughout the next two films, and people still haven't gotten over their own disappointment. In much the same way, people are comparing the first TH film to its three predecessors that came out a decade ago. It's even worse due to the enormous critical accolades that they received, ROTK in particular. Your mileage may vary, but for my money, Peter Jackson made the three greatest fantasy films of all time with LOTR, and TH fits in nicely with those films. I have no doubt the next two will be of the same quality. If the LOTR movies didn't already exist, TH would itself be the greatest fantasy film ever made.

I think all media and art today is subject to a degree of criticism that simply wasn't possible before widespread use of the Internet. As the old saying goes, everyone is a critic, but that has never been as true as it is today. Our opinions are often shaped more by external influences than we probably realize, but it's important to remember that they are not facts. It's also important to understand that when an artist makes something exceptional, (like the LOTR films) and then makes something new, their audience will not be satisfied with something merely "as good" or "almost as good" as the previous work. They will expect the artist to top themselves, even if that's not realistically possible. They will compare it to every other similar work that came out between the two, especially if the original work inspired others by setting new standards. When the artist almost inevitably meets their original standards, it is not enough. Every flaw will be magnified out of proportion to the point of absurdity. A single flat joke or scene (which will vary depending on the viewer) will be deemed the thing that "ruined the movie" for the critic in question. Portions of the audience will cite diametrically opposite reasons why the film was inferior, creating an unpleasable fanbase.

Making films like LOTR and TH is hard work (as anyone who watched the documentaries on the Extended Editions knows). Yes, it is a commercial enterprise, but it is also an artistic one. Jackson and Co. have put sincere effort into making a movie that honors the spirit of its source material while also reinventing it for a new audience, and doing so with the same care and attention to detail that was put into their previous efforts. People have every right to hold a positive or negative opinion about the finished product, but I wonder whether we've gotten a bit too critical in general, and become cynical in the process. I see a trend in modern media and discourse to tear down rather than build up, and with as positive a message as these films have, I find it a bit disheartening.


cobalt358
Registered User

Jan 1 2013, 8:18am

Post #21 of 28 (293 views)
Shortcut
agreed [In reply to] Can't Post

not in the worst 10 films, not by far, but for me personally definitely one of the most disappointing. i was really hoping all those grumpy movie critics were wrong and just had a bad case of tall poppy syndrome, but after seeing it i had to agree with them on a lot of points. PJ said he didn't want to direct because he didn't think lighting could strike in the same place twice, he was right.


Alcarcalime
Tol Eressea


Jan 1 2013, 4:25pm

Post #22 of 28 (252 views)
Shortcut
Hear, Hear! // [In reply to] Can't Post

 




TengwarJunkie
The Shire


Jan 1 2013, 4:34pm

Post #23 of 28 (242 views)
Shortcut
It's in my top ten best! [In reply to] Can't Post

Honestly I loved the Hobbit, I did not see it in 48fps so I can't comment on that but I thought it captured the storybook feel of the book very well and was visually very beautiful. I probably still like P.J.'s LoTR movies better but they are very different, the Hobbit is less serious (like the book) but both are very enjoyable, I can't wait for the next one!

"All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us."

My Website


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Jan 2 2013, 1:40am

Post #24 of 28 (238 views)
Shortcut
Well, it would be murder if an orc were sitting, minding his business, eating fish down by the river [In reply to] Can't Post

and someone stabbed him in the neck. But, as said, that isn't what happened here. It wasn't a matter of sparing or not sparing an orc, it was about saving THorin

Frodo does fight in the books. He stabbs the Cave Troll, and he also stabs at The Witch-King, slashing his robe.

In Reply To
The Free People don't really consider the Orcs to be anything other than living pincushions...also, the Orc in question was about to kill a debilitated Thorin, if one remembers.

I get what you're saying about Bilbo all of a sudden being an action hero, through. Frodo refuses to use a sword and never fought in the books as well...the difference between writing for an audience in the mid 20th century, and making a movie for an audience in the early 21st century.

And the Orc in question which Bilbo slew was obviously fake, and awfully goofy looking. Looked like a CGI turtle.


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Jan 2 2013, 1:55am

Post #25 of 28 (289 views)
Shortcut
Excellent summation. There were some flaws, but flaws of the same sort existed in the earlier movie trilogy [In reply to] Can't Post

,yet people, critics in particular, did a far better job of keeping them in perspective. Largely, I am all but sure, because the overall product was so amazing, and so far beyond most genre fare, even beyond well produced, well plotted and reasonably well oved fare like the first Narnia movie and Willow, they overwhelmed the flaws in the minds of most critical viewers. Here, people were already entirely prepared for the "wow' factor, having seen Rings, and thus were better able to devout their time to . . . well, nit picking.

In Reply To
When The Hobbit was announced, and furthermore when Peter Jackson turned out to be directing after all, I was beside myself with excitement. This excitement continued all throughout the production phase and doubled when I saw the first trailer. Here was a rarity: a movie (series) that I knew I would love 100% before walking into the theater. My expectations were unreasonably high.

And do you know what? They were met, and exceeded in some respects. I avoided reading any reviews before I saw the film. After I saw it, I read some opinions... and was sincerely shocked at the mixed response. The movie was what amounted to another entry in a hugely successful and much-praised film series which was made by largely the same team using the same aesthetics and production values of the previous entries. With the exception of the unnecessary (but optional) HFR 3D treatment, you could have believed it came out in 2004, and I mean that in a good way: it felt consistent with the LOTR trilogy.

I'll agree with what others have said about this reviewer having an axe to grind (no pun intended) with the 48p format. Full disclosure: I did not see the movie in that format, and have no plans to do so. I've had enough experience with different frame rates to know that I prefer the 24p look, and since the LOTR movies were shot traditionally, I prefer to watch TH that way as well. I did see it in 3D the first time, however, and while it wasn't bad, it was also superfluous, like all 3D films. The second viewing was in good ol' 2D, and that's how I'll watch it every time I see it from now on.

I think TH is facing the same challenges that the Star Wars prequels faced. Again, full disclosure: I like the prequels just fine, though not as much as the original trilogy. When Episode I came out, people unfairly compared it to three beloved movies that came out about a generation prior. That criticism continued throughout the next two films, and people still haven't gotten over their own disappointment. In much the same way, people are comparing the first TH film to its three predecessors that came out a decade ago. It's even worse due to the enormous critical accolades that they received, ROTK in particular. Your mileage may vary, but for my money, Peter Jackson made the three greatest fantasy films of all time with LOTR, and TH fits in nicely with those films. I have no doubt the next two will be of the same quality. If the LOTR movies didn't already exist, TH would itself be the greatest fantasy film ever made.

I think all media and art today is subject to a degree of criticism that simply wasn't possible before widespread use of the Internet. As the old saying goes, everyone is a critic, but that has never been as true as it is today. Our opinions are often shaped more by external influences than we probably realize, but it's important to remember that they are not facts. It's also important to understand that when an artist makes something exceptional, (like the LOTR films) and then makes something new, their audience will not be satisfied with something merely "as good" or "almost as good" as the previous work. They will expect the artist to top themselves, even if that's not realistically possible. They will compare it to every other similar work that came out between the two, especially if the original work inspired others by setting new standards. When the artist almost inevitably meets their original standards, it is not enough. Every flaw will be magnified out of proportion to the point of absurdity. A single flat joke or scene (which will vary depending on the viewer) will be deemed the thing that "ruined the movie" for the critic in question. Portions of the audience will cite diametrically opposite reasons why the film was inferior, creating an unpleasable fanbase.

Making films like LOTR and TH is hard work (as anyone who watched the documentaries on the Extended Editions knows). Yes, it is a commercial enterprise, but it is also an artistic one. Jackson and Co. have put sincere effort into making a movie that honors the spirit of its source material while also reinventing it for a new audience, and doing so with the same care and attention to detail that was put into their previous efforts. People have every right to hold a positive or negative opinion about the finished product, but I wonder whether we've gotten a bit too critical in general, and become cynical in the process. I see a trend in modern media and discourse to tear down rather than build up, and with as positive a message as these films have, I find it a bit disheartening.


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

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.