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:
Excuse me
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All


Jan 23 2013, 11:05am

Post #1 of 28 (4702 views)
Excuse me Can't Post

I see a lot of threads celebrating Hobbit box office gross saying that it proves how great of a movie it was. I can't understand logic behind it. It says ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about movie quality. 800, 900, billion? How does passing every of this numbers make a movie a little better in someones eyes is beyond me. Why is it for a lot of people, quality measured by income of the product?

Would you say those products are great just because of the money they made:

Transformers: The Dark of the Moon - 1,1 billion
Star Wars: Episode One - 1 billion
Spider Man 3 - 890 million
Transformers: Who Cares - 836 million
Backstreet Boys - 130 million albums sold
Rihanna - 100 million albums sold
Britney Spears - 100 million albums sold
Kardashian show - millions of viewers

The unkind truth is that there are A LOT of stupid people out there. Shallow, boring, witless, stupid people. You could sell them their own garbage back for dollar ninety nine. Hobbit was great because it was art made by the artists. Book and movie.

(This post was edited by ElendurTheFaithful on Jan 23 2013, 11:07am)


Jan 23 2013, 12:17pm

Post #2 of 28 (3992 views)
Calling people stupid because they like something you don't [In reply to] Can't Post

Your post is immediately void. I think quality and success are two seperate things to celebrate. But I think it's only fair to comment on The Hobbit's success when we see the DVD numbers. These are people who want to see the film again.


Jan 23 2013, 12:49pm

Post #3 of 28 (4003 views)
Excuse ME.... [In reply to] Can't Post

... but who here on this board said high gross equals quality?

People are just interested how it is doing, how many people go see it, etc.

Especially here on the board people will certainly not base their judgment on the numbers.

So chill out - it does not really help either that you use this kind of unnecessary aggressivness in your post. Unimpressed


Jan 23 2013, 1:00pm

Post #4 of 28 (3972 views)
"Yes you're very smart. Shut up." [In reply to] Can't Post

how much did Princess Bride gross I wonder? It sure get's quoted a lot.


Jan 23 2013, 1:34pm

Post #5 of 28 (3893 views)
you are wrong [In reply to] Can't Post

Art has no given standard of judgement. The beauty of art lies in the eyes and ears of the beholder. For example, a man could listen to the sound of someone farting all day and call it "beautiful music." To blatantly claim that the others around you are dim-witted because they like the things you don't is arrogance.

Sam: Trust a Brandybuck and a Took.
Merry: What? That was just a detour, a shortcut.
Sam: Shortcut to what?
Pippin: Mushrooms!


Jan 23 2013, 1:51pm

Post #6 of 28 (3858 views)
If anything, the numbers are.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Important due to some of the early negative reviews of the movie by some of the movie critics.

Me personally like the movie for what it is. A way to go back to Middle-earth. To have the honor to see the Hobbit on the big screen is good enough for me. I do go out of my way to promote the film to family, friends, and fellow movie buffs. Even though I'm an Orc.....I'm a happy one Smile


Jan 23 2013, 1:52pm

Post #7 of 28 (3873 views)
People are just rooting for the film to do well, that's all [In reply to] Can't Post

If the film did poorly, then it would definitely be the end of any Middle-Earth adaptations going forward, assuming the Tolkien Estate allows for any more. Also, given the time invested for the crew on these films, people are rooting for them to do well.

Kangi Ska

Jan 23 2013, 2:03pm

Post #8 of 28 (3953 views)
Shallow, boring, witless, stupid people! [In reply to] Can't Post

But then we are above that aren't we?Evil

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.


Jan 23 2013, 2:22pm

Post #9 of 28 (3855 views)
This movie was critic-proof... [In reply to] Can't Post

...just like the other "examples" you gave. People don't always go to the movies to see "high art", they go to the movies to waste a few hours by hopefully having a little fun. Music is even worse for that...it's very rare that people are popular because their music is good...they use people they can market. Don't even get me started on reality tv.

I don't think anyone is going to claim The Hobbit is "high art" (even the filmmakers). I think they just set out to make a good movie using the source material they had. Some people won't like this kind of movie...that's fine. It's their prerogative. I wouldn't insult anyone, though. That's just trolling. As much as I like this movie, I will defend someone's right to NOT like it, and will gladly discuss my opinions with said person in a civilized manner.


Jan 23 2013, 3:24pm

Post #10 of 28 (3783 views)
Spot On [In reply to] Can't Post

In Reply To
If the film did poorly, then it would definitely be the end of any Middle-Earth adaptations going forward, assuming the Tolkien Estate allows for any more. Also, given the time invested for the crew on these films, people are rooting for them to do well.

This post is exactly right. And it shows yet again that critics don't know everything. Fans of Tolkien and PJ are loyal. And we have a willing heart. You can't ask more than that.


Jan 23 2013, 4:19pm

Post #11 of 28 (3773 views)
I understand what you are saying, but... [In reply to] Can't Post

Your point was poorly made. As you can see, many take your wording as provocative, particularly your usage of the word 'stupid'.

Many of us find a certain validation against the internet trolls in the box office for AUJ. It is not that we feel that the box office numbers guarantees a quality product.

'There are older and fouler things than Orcs in the deep places of the world.' - Gandalf the Grey, The Fellowship of the Ring

Tol Eressea

Jan 23 2013, 4:31pm

Post #12 of 28 (3751 views)
i agree to an extent. [In reply to] Can't Post

Box office success isn't necessarily a reflection of a great movie but it does reflect an audience's desire to see it.

Typically movies on this scale are measured by their return because so much is invested financially. Again, it doesn't mean that a high return on investment instantly makes it a great movie.

For critics, this was a less than "successful" movie (Sidenote: I personally find critics useless because ultimately I subjugate myself to someone else's thinking before I've even had a chance to view the work through my own eyes and process it with my own mind).

But audiences have given it considerably high marks by comparison. (Enter the pavlovian dog argument). Ultimately, we the viewers, are the ones who determine the "success or failure" of a movie. The more people that want to go and see it and do, the more money is made, right? To your point, it still doesn't mean it's a great movie.

But then you have to ask yourself what does make something great. To me, we could create a list, give it analytical review, come up with a scientific formula, and still someone could say it was or was not great for a litany of other reasons or dispute the one's we gave.

I think it's safe to say that a lot of people liked this movie as much as it is safe to say a lot of people didn't. At the end of the day, for fans who did like it, they also enjoy in the process of watching it profit.

I can honestly say that I would have enjoyed it no matter what the box office numbers were. But I do want to see it do well because I am a fan of Peter Jackson and Company and I love Tolkien's stories. I also want to see them succeed financially because ultimately that means we will see more of these kinds of works get made (i.e. Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series).

Oh... and you are excused. Laugh

Middle Earth is New Zealand!

"Question everything, embrace the bad, and hold on to the good."

Tol Eressea

Jan 23 2013, 5:22pm

Post #13 of 28 (3732 views)
The true test will be how many people return for the sequel [In reply to] Can't Post

In Reply To
But audiences have given it considerably high marks by comparison.

Then we'll really see how people felt about it.


Jan 23 2013, 5:24pm

Post #14 of 28 (3766 views)
Or, as I said, the DVD sales figures // [In reply to] Can't Post


Tol Eressea

Jan 23 2013, 5:35pm

Post #15 of 28 (3709 views)
Yeah it should be interesting to see... [In reply to] Can't Post

the turnout for Act ll.

In my opinion, the second movie could be massive.

So much happens in this next act... I'm thinking this will be somewhat like Empire Strikes back in that it get's darker and a bit more complicated.

Act l was all setup... which is probably why a lot of people didn't like it.

Again, it's my view that when all the acts are finished we will have incredible movie as a whole.

Right now we have a good start.


Middle Earth is New Zealand!

"Question everything, embrace the bad, and hold on to the good."


Jan 23 2013, 6:06pm

Post #16 of 28 (3742 views)
I think you are making a fundamental mistake, [In reply to] Can't Post

you are confusing quality with taste. The films you mention have in objective terms of high production value. They have millions of dollars of special effects, and the actual 'quality' is high. The content of these films is subjective, its down to taste. Whether you find it good taste or bad is down to the individual person. Some would find Transformers tasteful. For you The Hobbit film is tasteful therefore you like it. I am very interested about what these films actually tell us about the society we live in, just why are films like Transformers so popular. I wonder why LOTR and the Hobbit are so popular, do we need to go back to some comforting mythical world to escape the present? do Transformer films confront us with the alien and the undefeated human spirit but in the modern world? who knows, I certainly dont, but I think its interesting.


Jan 23 2013, 6:14pm

Post #17 of 28 (3708 views)
Wow [In reply to] Can't Post

well done, you made Transformers sound almost... deep. :)


Jan 23 2013, 6:47pm

Post #18 of 28 (3686 views)
Calm down [In reply to] Can't Post

Go write a rant journal on DeviantArt.



Jan 23 2013, 8:32pm

Post #19 of 28 (3636 views)
In the OP's defense... [In reply to] Can't Post

People on these boards who express their dissatisfaction with the film seem to be met with far more opposition than those who are stating their satisfaction.

Agreed, way too harsh of a post, but I see the point he's trying to make. Even though the film did great at the box office, it was expected to do a little bit better. Obviously, box office has nothing to do with the quality of the film, so this thread is kind of pointless. I believe Wizard of Oz was considered a commercial failure, but it's one of the greatest films of all time.

"You're love of the halflings leaf has clearly slowed your mind"

Morok Cloudkeeper

Jan 23 2013, 9:19pm

Post #20 of 28 (3652 views)
Stupid is as stupid does, sir. [In reply to] Can't Post


Your work is going to fill a large part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do. If you haven't found it yet, keep looking. Don't settle.


Jan 23 2013, 10:27pm

Post #21 of 28 (3591 views)
More Middle Earth? [In reply to] Can't Post

I agree there's nothing wrong with fans wanting the Hobbit to be a big financial success.

Surely though this is the end of Middle Earth movies whether the Hobbit does well or not? I can't see any reason for the Tolkien Estate to change their minds regarding the Silmarillion. The Tolkien Estate will be doing well financially, largely from LotR, and I don't think it's money that's holding back adaptation rights for the Sil.

In about 2043 it all goes public domain, so we'll see if there's still a big fanbase around then!


Jan 23 2013, 10:35pm

Post #22 of 28 (3650 views)
Public domain [In reply to] Can't Post

Voronwe_the_faithful explained once that book published after 1978 go into the public domain after 70 years. But of course, The Silmarillion was published in 1977, so the rule doesn't apply. I believe he said there are ways for the copyright to be extended, though eventually it too will go into the public domain. But whatever it is, it's going to be a long time from now.

There's a sad sort of clanging from the clock in the hall and the bells in the steeple, too.
And up in the nursery an absurd little bird is popping out to say coo-coo (coo-coo, coo-coo).

Ziggy Stardust

Jan 24 2013, 1:35am

Post #23 of 28 (3537 views)
I get what you are trying to say [In reply to] Can't Post

Thought you do sound a bit harsh, you have a point. In my experiance it is quality not quantity that counts. You give some good examples of movies that made a lot of money, yet were not good. I have another. The Twilight movies also made a lot of money. In my humble opinion, they are not good, and a lot of people hate Twilight. Yet it made a lot of money. How can that be? Quality does not equal quantity.
I loved The Hobbit too, and naturally want it to do well. I think the novel on which it was based is true art, and I put it up there with Sherlock Holmes, Dracula, Frankenstein, The Picture of Dorian Gray and other great classics of the 19th and 20th century. I think they did well on the film adaptation, and in my eyes, it is art compared to what is out there nowadays.
Let's just say The Hobbit didn't make as much money in box office. It means nothing to me. It's still a good movie, and quality is more valuable than quantity. Perhaps numbers can lie after all.
I value quality so much, that I don't mind waiting 2 years for another season of Sherlock, if it means I will get three good-quality episodes.

Ziggy Stardust

Jan 24 2013, 1:40am

Post #24 of 28 (3532 views)
My thoughts exactly [In reply to] Can't Post

Just because a movie might not have gotten as much money as a silly, crappy movie, doesn't make it bad. Like I said in my previous post, look at the Twilight movies. They made money, but they're not good. I also saw Transformers: Dark of the Moon, and I didn't care for it. The special effects were good, but there wasn't much of a story. Quality over quantity.

Another good example: Back in the late 70s, when punk band The Clash debuted, they're records weren't the best-selling, but they're considered one of the best bands, and one of the best punk bands.


Jan 24 2013, 1:58am

Post #25 of 28 (3511 views)
If people like it on DVD, [In reply to] Can't Post

assuming they missed it at its theatrical run, it might lead to an increased audience for tDoS. But that depends too on if they retain their initial theatre audience.

One thing that is often ignored when comparing or interpreting box office is the breadth of the release, for instance everywhere, wide, average, select, or repertoire. (Not sure if those are official terms but you get the idea.) It is not a level playing field. Sometimes the number of theatres the thing is released to affects a self fulfilling prophecy of sorts, making it look more popular than it actually is, relatively speaking of course. One thing's for sure, if a movie is released everywhere, it better do exceptional box office... in fact it is telling, very telling, if it does not.

I've said before that the best indicator of popularity (which is sometimes related to quality) is when a film's release widens after a couple weeks. Usually though a film isn't recognized as a sleeper until after it hits the home market.

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.