Lord of the Rings + The Hobbit

The prequels were very good. They weren't lord of the rings but they were still great movies.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=Tugt5ZVeRJc
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

3 was garbage

No.

the first one is okay. far, far weaker than any of the LotR movies, but still just fine. the latter two are horrible offensive stupid ridiculous infantile over the top corporate product trash.

>great movies.

Hobbit was executive meddling cash grab.

LOTR had so much passion put into it. Hobbit was "Let's make LOTR 2, it will make a lot of money"

i disagree. i think peter jackson did a good job with the time he had. i would have loved to see what del toro did with the hobbit though.

yeah i was watching fellowship again this morn, and the LotR is just such a beautiful thing. it's so well crafted, so emotional, so triumphant. it's just great, and jackson cared so much about it.

and then we get fucking the hobbit, which is basically the opposite of everything that made LotR great.

1 was ok-ish, 2 and 3 were shite

i don't think you really watched it. lotr is my favourite film series of all time, and the hobbit series isn't perfect but there are some beautiful moments. it deserves to stand with the lord of the rings. the casting was very good the music is beautiful. nothing can really stand up to the original trilogy but it's not like star wars. the hobbit has quality.

Nope

youtube.com/watch?v=Tugt5ZVeRJc

Fuck off Hackson.

The Hobbit was okay, but felt so much like filler.

But Thorin was a dick.

i can't believe if you liked lotr that you totally hated the hobbit films. i mean fuck me return of the king theatrical cut was fucking shit as far as i'm concerned. the first hobbit movie was better than rotk.

All of the movie sucks except Fellowship.

two towers is my favourite.

Fuck off Hackson.

this is why people call you pleb

how rude i'm so insulted etc

I think the Hobbit movies are really good. And i will always think that. I'm sorry that there are people who feel let down by the Hobbit movies and adore the LOTR trilogy. Because that's shit.

seriously so few of you on Sup Forums liked the hobbit movies? they were genuinely good, bloated, but fucking good.

well okay.

The LOTR trilogy was a masterpiece. The first Hobbit was super comfy, the second one was okay. Even you have to admit the Battle of 5 armies was a shit show. I still enjoyed it, but objectively speaking it was not a good movie.

i appreciate your reply. i genuinely think all three were very good. when you compare most movie prequels or sequels to the originals i think us lotr fans got away with it.

How new are you? Everyone here just hates anything that remotely good or popular. Ask them to name one good movie, they can't. The only movie that people will admit was good is BvS, which was 8.5/10 at best.

watch the tolkien edit of 4 hours of 3 movies. much better.

i've been here long enough to know if you're patient the lurkers come out and give their opinions. and they're usually the most considered and level opinions.

I wouldn't say they were great but they were definitely much better than what people say they are. Objectively, they were all good movies. I always roll my eyes when I see people compare them to the SW prequels.
Respectively, I'd rate them 7,7.5 and 6 in chronological order.

i think they're great movies and if it wasn't for the influx of CGI in movies these days and the exceptional movies that came before it, this trilogy would be given serious acclaim.

The first Hobbit is a perfect romp befitting a children's book adaptation. The other 2 are drawn out Lucas-esque fly by the seat of your pants directing.

Part 2 disappointed me greatly and part 3 actually irritated me.

The fan edit where it condenses them into a 3 hour movie is great though. That's what it should have been all along.

I'm with you 100%
No homo.

What did he meme by this?

There is a good movie in there somewhere. I think things would have turned out perfectly acceptable if Jackson didn't run out of time and had just done two movies.

The 4 hour edit is the good movie.

1 was good 2 was okay 3 was shit

Lotr was God tier

LMAO LET'S MAKE DWARFS BASICALLY HAVE HOBBIT FACES

>i disagree. i think peter jackson did a good job with the time he had

this same fucking meme in every hobbit thread. Just because he hobbled a trilogy together that managed to make it to the end doesn't mean it wasn't bad

t-thanks

the only right answer

lotr has it's problems too but for a film adaption it's great.

First two were good movies, but the third one... holy shit. Speciafically that love triangle between Killy, Legolas and that red haired chick. So cringy.

First two were very comfy movies, the book "The Hobbit" was a children's books anyway, so I wasn't specting plots as "complex" and serious as the ones in LOTR.

*specifically

Jackson had to much of a hard on for Elves and that ended up fucking up everything. That and he's incapable of seeing characters as anything else but tropes: it comes up time and time again in movies he directs but stands out the most in The Hobbit.

I dont know why Del Torro left, but he would have at least made a good movie.

The Hobbit movies were trash and no one can change that. Freeman as Bilbo was the only redeeming quality.
>Half the dwarves looked alright, half looked like fucking muppets
>Shoehorned romance plot
>shit orcs
>shittier goblins
>Monty Python's Lake Town, guest starring discount Wormtongue and le funny fish
>Dwarvish clone army
Took a fun story enjoyable for children and adults alike and re-engineered it for toddlers.
There's some 4 hour edit out there that's tolerable.
Candybumble as Smaug was alright.
I enjoyed the Barad Guldur stuff

*Dol Guldur

I didn't like Jackson's schmaltzy, emocharged, wishy washy take on LOTR. The tone was completely alien to the novels which were clever and more grownup. They're a fucking slog by the third, miserable movie.

I wish they spent as much time making them as they did LOTR

The real LOTR 2 are the Appendices

The Starwars prequels are better than The Hobbit trilogy

Patrician

>The fan edit where it condenses them into a 3 hour movie is great though. That's what it should have been all along.

How can I find this? The beginning of 2 is so jarring

First two were excellent.
Third is garbage.
Of course, the only one I got to see in theatres was the third one. I wasted money on one of those seats that moves around with the movie.
I facepalmed after pic related

I saw the first one in theater when it came out, saw the second one and third one for the first time today. I enjoyed the first one a lot, the second one was good too. The third one not so much, but the fight scenes with the dwarves were really cool and I got the feels when Thorin died. LOTR was 3 books and they made 3 movies, the hobbit was 1 book and they made 3 movies, pretty obvious why there's a lot of "filler". One thing I did like though was that more time was spent on Bard because in the book I found it kind of lame that Smaug died by some random guy we don't really know instead of the dwarves. I'd give the trilogy an 8/10

Lord of the Rings had years of production design before they began shooting. The hundreds of people who worked on the movie, including all of the actors, were incredibly devoted to their work and it shows. The musical composition, the set design, the performances, the direction was all very inspired and in many ways groundbreaking. The 5 years of hard work and passion really shows through in the end product.

The Hobbit only exists to capitalize on LotR's success. It is a mess of phoned in performances, lazy filmmaking and awful writing. I feel bad for the few cast and crew members that took it seriously and tried their best.