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:
"The Hobbit" films ranked as among the worst out of 5,000+ films of the 2010s.
First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All

Hasuwandil
Rivendell


Feb 15, 9:40am

Post #51 of 58 (436 views)
Shortcut
5,254–5,256 [In reply to] Can't Post

I saw all three films in the theater, but haven't seen them since. I wouldn't rate them among the best films of the previous decade, but then I wouldn't rate them so low, either. I find it suspect that an attempt to judge over 5000 movies places all three Hobbit films in consecutive spots.

I did have a prejudice going into the theater: I was skeptical that The Hobbit could be turned into three films without adding unnecessary filler. I don't think I was proven wrong.

Things I liked:
  • Most of the beginning of An Unexpected Journey.
  • The music: much better than The Hobbit (1977), in my opinion.
  • It made sense to show the White Council expelling the Necromancer from Dol Guldur, given the length.
  • It made sense to include Legolas in the films, although I don't think he needed more than a cameo or two.
  • I liked the production design overall.
I was going to add that the fight scenes were more realistic than The Hobbit (1977), but then I remembered the Donkey Kong and Super Mario Bros. homages.

Things I didn't like:
  • The character designs of the thirteen Dwarves.
  • The pointless Frodo flash-forward.
  • The character design and characterization of Radagast.
  • The character designs of the prominent Orcs/Goblins.
  • The Elf-Dwarf love story.
  • The Alfred character.
  • Too much Legolas.
  • All in all, too many obvious references to LOTR.
I'm sure there's more I could add to both lists but, like I said, it's been a while since I saw the movies. Sometimes I wonder how things would have turned out if Peter Jackson had done The Hobbit first, and then gone on to do The Lord of the Rings. Presumably The Hobbit would have turned out better, but would The Lord of the Rings turned out worse?

Hêlâ Auriwandil, angilô berhtost,
oƀar Middangard mannum gisandid!


Noria
Gondor

Tue, 2:44pm

Post #52 of 58 (190 views)
Shortcut
Interesting question [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Sometimes I wonder how things would have turned out if Peter Jackson had done The Hobbit first, and then gone on to do The Lord of the Rings. Presumably The Hobbit would have turned out better, but would The Lord of the Rings turned out worse?


I have always felt that a Peter Jackson Hobbit movie, one movie, that had been made before LotR could have been very different without the expectations and constraints that being both a prequel and a follow-up to the hugely successful LotR trilogy engendered. Yet Jackson is still the same director who likes special effects, big action and juvenile humour, who made both Braindead and Heavenly Creatures before LotR. So what would that original Hobbit movie have been like? I wonder too.

The effects on the LotR films would have been profound as well, probably not in a good way, had the original plan come to fruition. . LotR would have been two films instead of three and a lot more would have been condensed or left out, affecting both plot and character. No doubt many beloved scenes would never have been filmed. I have read about the two-film treatment but can’t remember enough about it now to provide examples. Nor do I recall if a script for the Jackson/Walsh Hobbit had ever been written.

Since I love TH movies almost as much as the LotR trilogy, it all worked out for me.


Otaku-sempai
Immortal


Tue, 2:59pm

Post #53 of 58 (189 views)
Shortcut
If Jackson had made 'The Hobbit' first. [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
I have always felt that a Peter Jackson Hobbit movie, one movie, that had been made before LotR could have been very different without the expectations and constraints that being both a prequel and a follow-up to the hugely successful LotR trilogy engendered. Yet Jackson is still the same director who likes special effects, big action and juvenile humour, who made both Braindead and Heavenly Creatures before LotR. So what would that original Hobbit movie have been like? I wonder too.

The effects on the LotR films would have been profound as well, probably not in a good way, had the original plan come to fruition. . LotR would have been two films instead of three and a lot more would have been condensed or left out, affecting both plot and character. No doubt many beloved scenes would never have been filmed. I have read about the two-film treatment but can’t remember enough about it now to provide examples. Nor do I recall if a script for the Jackson/Walsh Hobbit had ever been written.

Since I love TH movies almost as much as the LotR trilogy, it all worked out for me.


Of course, Peter Jackson had proposed adapting The Hobbit before the Lord of the Rings films were made. It likely would have been a single film, maybe two. Elements from the appendices might have been included, but probably no Tauriel and no Alfrid, no Were-worms.

I am not prepared to say that the LotR movies would not have been a trilogy in this case (if they were made at all). There are too many variables, too many unknowns.

#FidelityToTolkien


Noria
Gondor

Wed, 3:18am

Post #54 of 58 (149 views)
Shortcut
One Hobbit, two LotR [In reply to] Can't Post

As I recall, Jackson and Walsh went to Miramax with a proposal to make three films: one Hobbit and two LotR. The rights to film TH were too hard to acquire so that movie was eliminated, But there were still supposed to be two LotR films and I think the scripts were written and pre-production had started. Then it all famously fell apart when the Weinsteins insisted on a single LotR movie.

So the two-movie LotR project was well underway before it died. The subsequent three movie deal with New Line necessitated a complete rewrite, so we don't know what the original concept would have been like unless somebody has read that treatment.

Thus it seems to me that both TH and LotR would have been very different if the original plan had worked out. By the time LotR became three movies, The Hobbit film had been abandoned.

It's funny that the difficulties in getting the rights to film The Hobbit were suddenly worth working through post-LotR, once they all knew how much money there was to be made.


Otaku-sempai
Immortal


Wed, 3:42am

Post #55 of 58 (146 views)
Shortcut
That seems accurate. [In reply to] Can't Post

Your post lines up with my distant memories concerning the abandoned project. If there are any corrections to be made, I'm sure someone will chime in with the information. If the Hobbit movie had been made under Miramax, though, and been successful, I could see the idea of the LotR as a film trilogy being revisited at that time. As was said later, by a New Line exec: There are three books, aren't there?

#FidelityToTolkien


Noria
Gondor

Wed, 1:50pm

Post #56 of 58 (106 views)
Shortcut
Of course it's possible [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Your post lines up with my distant memories concerning the abandoned project. If there are any corrections to be made, I'm sure someone will chime in with the information. If the Hobbit movie had been made under Miramax, though, and been successful, I could see the idea of the LotR as a film trilogy being revisited at that time. As was said later, by a New Line exec: There are three books, aren't there?


But in my opinion three films from Miramax were unlikely given that that Weinsteins were balking at (and maybe couldn't afford) two, unless the single Hobbit film made a fortune. I hope that Hobbit movie would have been successful but I can't think that it would have had the impact that the epic LotR had, like three cannon shots across the world of film, three years in a row.

But we'll never know, though it's entertaining to speculate.


Otaku-sempai
Immortal


Wed, 2:31pm

Post #57 of 58 (107 views)
Shortcut
Yes... [In reply to] Can't Post

...but we are, after all, playing a game of 'what if'. Alternately, we could ask: What if New Line had agreed to Peter Jackson directing an adaptation of The Hobbit before making The Lord of the Rings? Again, I think we would most likely have seen a single movie made of TH, without most of the embellishments that we actually got. It could have been expanded into two films, especially if additional material from the LotR appendices were incorporated into the narrative. Again, I could see Legolas being included, but likely in a much smaller role--perhaps little more than a cameo. We might have even seen Aragorn in such a movie, but as the young boy 'Estel' in Rivendell as opposed to the reference to a Ranger as mentioned by the Elvenking.

#FidelityToTolkien

(This post was edited by Otaku-sempai on Wed, 2:35pm)


Paulo Gabriel
Rivendell

3:12pm

Post #58 of 58 (23 views)
Shortcut
Yeah... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To

In Reply To

In Reply To
IMO the movies needed to set up a reason for the animosity between the Wood Elves and the Dwarves of Erebor, not rely on ancient history known only to book fans.


That's a fair point, though Thorin's attitude was a bit extreme, extending to all Elves including Elrond's folk, who--when they lived in Eregion--had had a good relationship with the Dwarves of Khazad-dum (Thorin's ancestors).


Thorin in the book had none of the animosity toward Elrond (or even Elves in general) that movie Thorin displayed. Thorin was your basic proud old man/dwarf fallen on harder times than he’d like to admit. He took offense to Thranduil’s questioning (and compounded that with innate dwarves greed). Movie Thorin hated Elves to the point of unreasoning racism.

Just one more reason my joy at the start of AUJ with the “Good Morning” scene quickly turned to dismay and revulsion as the movies progressed.


Even as a Jackson ''apologist'' (for a lack of a better term), I don't get why he made certain choices in the scripting processes. Why alter Thorin's personality in such an extreme way?

Does he give any reason anywhere (say, the EE's Appendices)?

It just seems STUPID to change the book gratuitously like that. If the change has a cinematic/narrative purpose, then maybe it can be excused. But for NO REASON?


(This post was edited by Paulo Gabriel on 3:26pm)

First page Previous page 1 2 3 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.