PLAY THE HOBBIT MOVIE REVIEW

Doomer Doug

Doomer Doug

TB Fanatic
:D

Doomer Doug just watched the latest, and final, installment in the three picture Hobbit movie series. I would give it three stars with a couple of exceptions. I found Richard Armitage's portrayal of the gold lusting Dwarf King to be outstanding. I thought Morgan Freeman as Bilbo, Ian McKellen as Gandalf and Lee Pace as the Elf lord to be outstanding also.

Unfortunately, I also spent most of the movie pointing out repeats from all previous five movies. Send eagles to fly in, kick ass and deal with flying bats with fangs? Check. Send in crazy Dwarves, led by Billy Connoly in a very bad Scottish mode? Check.

Have huge cave trolls? Check. Have big earthworm type things leftover from the Dune science fiction movie? Check. In fact, the movie was totally derivative and didn't have a single new idea in it.

I feel the Hobbit would have been much better if they stayed with the original plan to only make one or two. While this third movie is "only" 144 minutes long, versus the 164 and 169 minutes in the others, it still feels bloated, uninspired.

Jackson goes out, not with a bang, but with a movie that is one long battle scene, with some very good acting from a couple of actors thrown in.

I paid $9 for a matinee show that had maybe 20 people in there. I can remember when an opening day show for any Lord of The Rings movies would have had to be reserved weeks in advance. The Battle of the Five Armies shows how the mighty have fallen. I think it is worth it, and enjoyed it, if you accept the limitations built into it.

Hopefully, Jackson isn't going to keep going with the series.

You can wait for this one to come out on DVD. I gave it to myself for my private Christmas gift.
 
bw

bw

Fringe Ranger
When I read the series in 66-67 or so, it was mind-blowing. Now it's a business. Got better things to do.
 
B

Bumblepuff

Veteran Member

Gollum-400x445.jpg


"Gollum sees Doomer Doug found old gum stuck to bottom of cinema seats! Gollum
wants to trade fresh meat just strangled! Gollum wants to blow precious bubbles!"
​
 
almost ready

almost ready

Inactive
Loved the book,

Thanks for the review, DD!

It was a given that it would be

painfully long and require discipline to sit through boring extended battles with animated characters that have long since lost their charm.

Would disappoint the book lovers and leave those who hadn't read it yet wonder what the fuss was about anyway.

Deviate from the book in ways that lessen the value of the script and add nothing to the meaning of the story.

Your report sounds like he's staying the course, which is dreadful considering.
 
Kathy in FL

Kathy in FL

Administrator
_______________
My daughter went to see it and said the part she couldn't stop laughing about was when the eagles dropped the giant bears into the middle of the battle. She said it was just beyond bizarre. I haven't seen Hobbit #2 yet ... too busy ... but have the DVD. Might have to watch it in bits and pieces.
 
SageRock

SageRock

Veteran Member
The movie is starting to sound like a long, hard slog. I barely made it through part 2 of The Hobbit. A few parts were good. I'll probably watch part 3 on DVD.

Anyway, thanks for the review!
 
Ice Guy

Ice Guy

Inactive
I have yet to see #1 & 2, on demand still requires you purchase and will not offer rental.Not to mention the 3 hour commitment. I refuse to pay 14.99, now that 3 is out, hopefully that will change.
 
L

ladydkr

Veteran Member
A couple of weeks ago I went to a local independent used book store to check out if they had a certain writer. A man was autographing his books. I am aware of value of autographed books. It was Michael Hague who has illustrated over twenty children's books and Hobbit books. He signed and drew a illustration in the stack of his books I bought. His illustrations are in the style of the hobbit. One of the books is the Hobbit which had several restored was 1996 by the Tolkien trust.

The most amazing thing is that all the illustrations and characters are exactly like that of the movies. Michael Hague is a man of age, and he looks like Gondalf. He has the hair style and everything. He lives in Colorado Springs.
 
Morning Star

Morning Star

Groovy Hoosier
I enjoyed the movie. Saw it in IMAX 3D. I felt like it was a little long (even though it was the shortest of the three movies), but showed the character development well.
 
Hacker

Hacker

Computer Hacking Pirate
intowolves said:
I always find the honest movie trailer reviews entertaining, and they usually sum up movies pretty well. They haven't done one for the 3rd movie yet, but I bet their review of the second one is spot on
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFAGVVt0HvA. I have yet to see it, but plan on watching it and the third one on dvd
Click to expand...

My best recollection of Hobbit II was that is was long, filled with aimless plot, aimless characterization, and aimless CGI - in fact, so much that I cannot remember what it was about. Needless to say, I was deeply disappointed when it was over.

I'm aware that the second film was so boring that I need to watch it yet again to find my way into Hobbit III. However, I dread having to go through it again !!

Someday, when they are all collected in the $5 bin at Wally World, I may actually pick them up and watch them in sequence - making certain I have much coffee, toothpicks (for my eyelids), and other stimulants to keep my eyes open through the ordeal !!
 
R

Richard

TB Fanatic
the problem is that the Hobbit book is a very slim volume only 300 small pages, great events are described in a few paragraphs, it doesn't have the detail of the LOTR trilogy

Jackson has got too Hollywood OTT with the last two Hobbit films, anyway no-one else will film it ever
 
Doomer Doug

Doomer Doug

TB Fanatic
The final installment is basically a 100 minute, out of 144 total, battle. So, if you liked, for instance, the battle scenes in the first Lord of the Rings where Boromir, Sean Bean, gets killed, or the second Lord of the Rings, with the battle at Helms Deep, or the third Lord of the Rings, with the battle of Gondor, you will like this one.

My final judgment on both series of movies by Jackson is this. Jackson left out the scouring of the Shire in the first three movies. By doing this, he completely altered the author's intent and added a happy ending where there wasn't one. It is one ending, where Sauraman goes to the Shire and takes over, murders Hobbits and physically destroys a large chunk of the Shire. It is quite another to have an ending where the Hobbits sit around a bar feeling misunderstood.

The Hobbit was one book only. Jackson turned this into three mediocre movies, bloated with excess content, made up characters in order to maximize the PROFIT. It is unfortunate Jackson sold out and allowed artistic quality to be sacrificed on the altar of corporate profits. Jackson failed as an artist, even if his share is likely measured in the tens of millions of dollars.

This movie is still going to make several hundred million dollars, maybe over a one billion, world wide. Still, it is just not a very good movie on so many levels. Thankfully, there are no more major books to be made into movies by Jackson.

Doomer Doug rates all three Hobbit movies in the three stars range. The final one has much better acting from several lead characters than the first two. It is shorter so the bloated mess of one and two isn't as pronounced.
 
R

Richard

TB Fanatic
I am not sure whether it was Jackson who decided that the Hobbit should be 3 movies or the backer/producers?
 
Doomer Doug

Doomer Doug

TB Fanatic
Jackson is responsible

Richard, it was Jackson and Fran Walsh who decided to leave out the scouring of the Shire and completely change the ending for the Lord of the Rings. It was an act of artistic terrorism and I judge him harshly for it.

Second, it was Jackson who made the decision to do three Hobbit movies. The original plan was to do one, then they changed it to make two; finally, Jackson decided to do three. The decision to make three bloated blobs was Jackson's alone. I hold him accountable for the artistic mess that resulted in taking one 300 page book, and ending up with nearly 8 hours of film. At best, the Hobbit has enough material to make ONE 120 minute movie.

This is on Jackson in my opinion. Jackson has a real tendency towards bloat in his movies. Jackson did a King Kong movie that was quite honestly horrible.
 
R

Richard

TB Fanatic
only said I wasn't sure!



the Hobbit book has a completely different style as it was written years before the trilogy, it's more like a children's adventure book without any of the later development of the mythology

I think Jackson has becomes too hollywood, trying to outdo all previous films with over the top violence, effects and CGI etc, blame hollywood

think I should reread LOTR, make an exception as I don't normally read fiction nowadays
 
Last edited:
Firebird

Firebird

Has No Life - Lives on TB
I have never seen any of these movies. They sure seem strange from what is described here..........
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top