MovieChat Forums > The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012) Discussion > Why I believe some don't like these film...

Why I believe some don't like these films.

posted 8 years ago by satchjc
11 replies | jump to latest

I'll start by saying I'm no troll. I loved the Lord of the Rings. When I heard they were doing the Hobbit as a trilogy I instantly thought, "How are they gonna capture that magic again?"

The ring was destroyed, epic journey completed. Now let's go back and watch the story of how Bilbo got the ring? Prequels sometimes work well but I just wasn't interested this time around. I saw the trailers and it just didn't do it for me.

I waited for the films to pop up on HBO to watch them. Every once and a while I would catch one starting up and everytime about 5-10 minutes into watching it I just became incredibly bored. Now I can't say much about the story because I have yet to make it through any of them but what I noticed was the look of the film.

The look of the film is mind numbing. What I realised was everything looks to be the same color, scenes look fake, the character makeup looks bad and a lot of the characters look alike making them less distinctive, the sky in the backgrounds are completely Computer generated and badly at that and the scenes tend to just drag on.

I think the Lord of the rings truly had an edge because no film had looked like that before now it's like more of the same with
less interesting characters
Less interesting story because we know what happens.
More CGI heavy sets and sequences that don't hold up to the first trilogy.
And an overall odd look to the film that just makes it look cheaper than the LOTR.
This is one guys opinion. I know how dedicated fans can be so I'm not knocking you if you like these films. I'm just shedding some light on the reason some may dislike this trilogy.

[–] ZakkWyldeMyLittlePony 8 years ago

I enjoyed the Hobbit trilogy. I'll take them over the Star Wars prequels any day. People can hate the Hobbit trilogy and I respect their opinion.

"My precious"-Gollum

[–] Stenian 8 years ago

Same here.

[–] Housefan2 8 years ago

Interesting insight. I can't say I disliked this trilogy but I certainly didn't love them the way I did LotR.

For me, Peter Jackson did the opposite of what he did with LotR. Tolkien's writing style isn't for everyone. It doesn't flow terribly well. There's a lot of detail in LotR that wasn't necessary for the story. The films were able to really focus in on storytelling and let the details come out in the characters and the epic nature of the quest. I didn't miss anything the cut from LotR. I consider it to be the rare case of the film being better than the book.

The Hobbit takes a simple story makes it terribly bloated. They give what takes only a page or two in the book lengthy screen time. They add details that weren't in the book (or the appendices either) which take up even more screen time. I loved the Hobbit simply because it was a simply adventure story. It's about dwarves going after gold. This isn't LotR where everything will fall to darkness if the Fellowship fails.

This just seemed bound and determined to be on the same epic level as LotR when it was never meant to be.

Lizzie

To love another person is to see the face of God! - Les Miserables

[–] satchjc 8 years ago

I actually just watched a short video with Peter Jackson saying how difficult it was to make these films. It was a disaster. No prep time was the theme of the video. You can find it on Geektyrant.com. It sure does explain a lot.

[–] brand242003 8 years ago

The Hobbit trilogy is no way on the same level as LOTR trilogy. LOTR movies were 3 of the best movies ever made. That being said, I do think The Hobbit is watchable and very enjoyable. I never found any of the hobbit movies boring. Martin Freeman's performance as Bilbo is the bright spot for me in the trilogy.

[–] dx360 8 years ago

The biggest issue is Peter Jackson didn't have nearly enough pre production time AND since every scene had to be CGI heavey due to mixing of drawves and other races of varying sizes there is always a CGI look. I think they pushed the fantasy elements hard to hide it but that only makes things less believable than LOTR which was effective because despite its solid fantasy elements felt like it could have happened.

[–] AmbienWineDiet 8 years ago

You def hit on this multifaceted failure that was the hobbit

-bad pacing
-fake cgi
-overabundance of cgi
-lack of practical settings and effects
-overabundance of forced characters
-overabundance of padding, not only through extended action scenes, but extra characters and dialogue
-boring side plots
-forced love story
-poor use of comic relief
-suspension of disbelief so extreme the viewers are taken "out of the film" (smaug chase, barrel chase etc)

The list goes on and on..

[–] gtichris 8 years ago

I loved the book....I could not watch more than twenty minutes...the book was a masterpiece...no need to change ANYTHING..yet these fools changed/added characters...similar to "charlie and the chocolate factory" in the 70's
Stick with the book- or let someone else make it.
yeah buddy

[–] darkness_surroundz 8 years ago

its mind boggling that PJ walked into a nearly bankrupt New Line Films in 1999 and hesitatingly proposed the LOTR as "2 films"-Immediately, the head honcho responded-"er, are there not 3 books-hence 3 movies?"
And the rest is history.

It seemed that NL spared no expense to make the LOTR films look and feel spectacular-no shortcuts taken!

They took a chance- a big chance-and now are rolling in money -Kudos to them

[–] truther 8 years ago

This analysis is exactly right. I'm trying to watch this movie on TNT right now and it's so mind-numbingly boring I came here precisely to try to find out why.

It's all just so . . . medium. Like listening to a 30-minute speech given by somebody who never alters their voice in any way, choosing instead to just drone on and on in the same flat tone.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]