- Time
- Post link
Disagree, but I liked most of each movie.
- Time
- Post link
One movie would have been enough.
The Person in Question
THE HOBBIT — Page 3
- Time
- Post link
I firmly believed, right up until I saw BOTFA, that the 3 movie decision was the right choice. I still think there was the potential to make all 3 worthwhile, but I’m not sure they quite managed it. I need to see the extended BOFTA to know if it’s even possible to do justice to the 3 film concept, if not, I’ll jump ship to the 2 film solution.
- Time
- Post link
I enjoy all three Hobbit movies, but nowhere near as much as The Lord of the Rings. The first is the best one, the other two are six out of ten movies.
Not enough people read the EU.
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
I like the idea of fanedits of these in theory, but I can’t see how trimming the movies down would work to be honest. The way the characters were so underwritten was a big problem as much as all the excess nonsense and you can’t add stuff that wasn’t in their script.
Everyone should just read the David Wenzel comic because it’s really nice.
- Time
- Post link
The characters were underwritten?
- Time
- Post link
If I’m going to read something Hobbit-related, I’ll just read the book again. The movies should have kept to the 2-movie solution as well, the content in them could probably be slimmed down to a single movie as-is.
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
The characters were underwritten?
Sure. One LotR movie has more characterisation than the whole of this trilogy. Bilbo is barely in them, instead there are 45 minutes of some guy carrying gold and then 45 more of a bunch of CGI characters running amok, etc etc. Maybe it’s just my crazy brain but I kind of expected with there being this much running time that they might expand things that matter since the ensemble is quite large. But instead a dumb love triangle briefly and the rest don’t even get dialogue. Go watch some of the production diaries and laugh at how the cast describe who they’re playing.