How were the Lord of the Rings movies literal classics and the Hobbit ended up being a fucking dump? Same director...

How were the Lord of the Rings movies literal classics and the Hobbit ended up being a fucking dump? Same director, same world, some of the same actors, mostly same crew. Why the fuck did they end up so vastly different?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=SQkygZdZ_Vk
youtube.com/watch?v=3aTPiShcm78
youtube.com/watch?v=SQkygZdZ_Vk&ab_channel=Joshalots
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Peter Jackson was tricked into making the hobbit

You can’t recapture lightning in a bottle.

>same director
>same World
>same actors
You answered your own question, user.

what

i don't get it

You can start to see the cracks in ROTK.

Like what?

Lord of the Rings was made with love while the Hobbit moves were souless cash grabs with the occasional LOTR light beam shining through

I just don't get why or how. Jackson obviously cared about the universe as evident by the LOTR movies, and he wasn't hurting for money, so why slapdash it?

LotR was never good to begin with and certainly hasn't aged well. It was the first large-scale fantasy production with CGI so it got recognized but when you watch it in 2017 it's fucking cringey.

>Guillermo
>del
>Toro

whats it like only posting to be contrarian

...

>loved world wide with a message of hope and friendship and unity against all odds
>no tits or gore or kino dark edginess so its cringe
xD

he didnt want to do it

Lord of the rings was good until the elves showed up.

why did he

Lmao brah star wzes a.wats had shitty fx tooo haha

Time, and the studio, those were the big differences.

LOTR had years of pre-production, storyboardingm, concept development and script writing before shooting a single scene. The Hobbit got six months. That was due to three things - one, GDT dropping out, two Jackson getting sick, and three MGM pushing them for time.

For the LOTR New Line, the studio backing them, just gave Jackson 300mil and let him do whatever he wanted. MGM didn't do that with the Hobbit, and you can tell. (Tauriel, the romance sub-splot are a good example).

It's sad, because you see in the good bits of The Hobbit (most of the first movie, some parts of 2 and 3) what could have been. Having watched the SEE bts stuff, I really don't blame Jackson much. He was ill, and pushed for time, and in an impossible situation. The fact he made one quite good and 2 passable movies is actually quite impressive.

>the reason LotR is bad is because it isn't grimdark
Idiot. It's a bad film because of overuse of dramatic music, absolutely ridiculous army formations, constant slow-mo, bad sound effects, bad set design, lack of a good villian after Saruman's death, cringey attempts at comedic relief and the worst fucking love story ever.

because it was rolling full steam ahead.
he was a producer, he wrote the screenplay
and del Toro was going to direct it.

it was going to be a quirky, interesting, fantastical single film but then hollywood wanted more money, they saw the success of trilogies, tetralogies, entire series of films that made them billions

when del toro pulled out, jackson literally couldn't say no

if he did he would have never worked again

also the studio was pushing all sorts of bullshit on him to include in the films, something he didnt want to do

so it's a bad film because of the elements it adapted from the books. so is lord of the rings a bad book series?

LOTR was about saving the world and the hobbit about a greedy dwarf who wanted some gold

I don't like Star Wars either despite a few memorable scenes in Episode IIV and IV. Star Wars is 90% filler because George Lucas has no idea how to make a two hour movie with just 4-5 important scenes. If you want proper SciFi, watch Soviet SciFi.

>if he did he would have never worked again
Stop talking shit youngfag

agreed - never good to begin with. The first one wan't terrible but the second and third ones were. The hobbit movies were also terrible.

Peter Jackson does not make good movies.

go away weinstein

>Episode IIV

Guillermo Del Toro was supposed to direct it and pulled out at the last minute. Jackson took over and pretty much made it all up as he went, being forced by the studio to stretch it out into three movies for more shekels.

LOTR had been been planned for years in advance and was literally Jackson's dream project.

LOTR was a Wingnut production, Hobbit was not. That's all!

Book and film are two different media. What works great on paper may not work in a movie, especially since the appeal of LotR its the language and the homage to old Anglo-Saxon myths like Beowulf. It's a great book but not necessarily a good movie, now that being said, it would be possible to make a great LotR movie but it would have to be entirely different from what Jackson did.

What did he mean by this?

Yeah alright. I'm a little drunk.

Mumakil cgi fest feat. Legolas.

Its the George Lucas effect; a single director gets all credit for a group product and gains more clout, meaning people are less able to tell him when he's being retarded, which leads to a massive degradation in quality because it turns out the director is a hack without people slapping down his stupid ideas.

You are also a dumb fuck

we all know the reason why the second tintin movie was never made

Not an argument. Stop idolizing bad movies because they were part of your childhood.

Stop spouting ignorance fagboy

1. They tried to make it sort of like a fairy tale with wacky locations and props rather than trying to make it like an historical production like in LoTR
2. With LotR they had to cut things out while with the Hobbit they had to add new fanfic their shit in to pad the length.
3. CGI

Overall, The Hobbit makes me sad because the team was really passionate and worked so hard when you look at the appendices, like it wasn't a total botch job by everyone involved, it was just bad leadership, both from the studio and Jackson.

>Not an argument
Neither is that reddit

Stunning rebuttal you drooling mongoloid.

>fake deaths
>689 slow-mo scenes
>trying too hard with poetry
>insufferable plot holes
c'mon guys, i like LOTR but it wasn't that good

(You)

aka PR was worse, and a very bad timing
and the hobbit is a rather average short book

What im getting at kid, is that you should shut the fuck up when you have no idea what youre talking about.

Time does seem to be the big difference between the two productions. If you ever watched the appendices for LotR, you hear that they nearly made the same colossal mistakes then as well, Arwen fighting at Helm's Deep, RotK climax was to be Aragon fighting Sauron, etc. They even started production on some of those ideas. Be grateful they had the time to think of a better plot.

>if you don't like reddit movies you must be from reddit

Just because you dont like or cant relate to something doesnt make it bad.

How smart are you, seriously.

>tfw I've watched The Hobbit extra materials more times than the actual movies

This is the worst meme.

Respond and elaborate or stop shitting up the board with your ironic reddit posting.

youtube.com/watch?v=SQkygZdZ_Vk

>A movie from 30 years before reddit is reddit.
90s born queers were a mistake

The hobbit was fine, you faggots are just over reacting. It was better than most big budget fantasy movies that come out now, it was just shitty compared to lotr. Although the 3rd was significantly worse than first and second. Shouldve been 2 movies.

1 was decent. 2 had some great scenes, 3 was pure trash.

How is that a meme you dumb fuck? You said stupid shit and got called out for it. Do some fucking research instead of regurgitating shit youve seen other fags post.

They had 5-6 years preparing for lotr i think, where as hobbit was maybe 6 months since del taco bailed. Also studio jewry was much more prominent in hobbit, whereas jackson told the weinstein bros to fuck off when they tried to meddle with lotr.

> LOTR is 3 books.
> the hobbit is 1 300 page book.
> should have been 2 movies

?
>?
?
>?

that's pretty simplistic.
the modern batman movies did fine.
there is also a small series of movies from something called the "marvel cinematic universe" or some such thing.

yes you fucking tard. 2 movies.

3 long books 3 movies vs 1 short book 3 movies

y doo?
>lotr: work hard to cram it in 3 movies
>hobbit: work hard to stretch it out to 3 movies

PJ obviously didn't give a fuck by the end of it. The extended version is rated R.
youtube.com/watch?v=3aTPiShcm78
pure, unadulterated le kino. inb4 the cgi is shit. billy connolly is 100% cgi.

>higher budget
>more freedom for PJ
>6 books into 3 movies vs 1 book into 3 movies

it would fit 2 movies perfectly. Especially since they have the battle of five armies , which was essentially skipped in the book. All three hobbit movies are around 9 hours, cut out around 2 hrs of the added stuff and it would be fine.

the cgi is shit, put a marvel logo somewhere and we can talk

The Hobbit is the text-book example of "milking it dry". They just "couldn't" find a way to adapt a 300-page children's book into one movie, so they made three 2h40m movies where nothing happens 70% of the time.

Obviously, because of this, they also had to add OC Donut Steel material to a tight story. Everyone really wanted to see a badass female elf-elf-dwarf love triangle that ends nowhere because we know the fates of all characters, right? And who can forget the amazing scenes featuring the ugly corrupted village mayor's helper, sprinkled throughout Hobbit 2 and 3?

Then, they decided to rush production and made the dumb decision to go with CGI over practical in scenes where CGI wasn't needed. The camera work was atrocious and even featured a scene filmed with a GoPro. In a movie about Middle-Earth.

This poster has no replies and yet he is on the money.

youtube.com/watch?v=SQkygZdZ_Vk&ab_channel=Joshalots

go read about the production and filming of The Hobbit. Switching directors at the 11th hour completely screwed any chance it had at being decent. They basically had to shoot completely random scenes that they stitched together to make into the movies.

he should have made ~10 movies as the origin story of each and every dopey and sneezy to conclude it in the battle of the infinite cgi armies