• Scrof@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    129
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The Hobbit. Probably not the worst movies with not the worst bastardisation (that’d be The Dark Tower for me), but I simply can’t wrap my mind around the overbloated monstrosity that the Hobbit TRILOGY is. Like why would anyone do this, it felt like it’s in the bag, they got Peter Jackson, they already made LotR to great success, why do we suddenly need wacky wheels with cartoon CG goblins in 48 FPS for some reason… It doesn’t even match neither the tone of the book nor the tone of LotR movies.

    • jcit878@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      47
      ·
      1 year ago

      peter Jackson was dragged in kicking and screaming years after preproduction started. it was destined to be a studio driven mess from the start

      • Konman72@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you watch the behind the scenes stuff it honestly is pretty impressive how competent the movies ended up being. Yes, they are terrible, but they could have been a lot worse. Peter Jackson made them watchable, at least.

    • Patariki@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      1 year ago

      The hobbit movies should have fleshed out the dwarf characters better with all that extra time, give each of them a substory spread out over the trilogy so they would be more memorable. They did that with only one of the dwarves and it’s a silly love triangle that barely goes into the character of said dwarf. With the movie we got, ask any average person directly after seeing the movies to name the dwarves, i bet hardly anyone can.

      • GlendatheGayWitch@lib.lgbt
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not only does the love triangle not make sense, but it really only serves to erode the significance of friendship of Legolas and Gimli. They were supposed to be first friendship between an Elf and dwarf in a long time

    • Susaga@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Warner Bros didn’t want to make the Hobbit. They wanted to make another Lord of the Rings movie, and had to use the Hobbit for it. The Hobbit is very much NOT a Lord of the Rings story, despite the shared setting. Square book, round movie.

      Also, they knew there wasn’t enough content, but Warner Bros had to split the profits of the first movie five ways. They didn’t have to do that for the second movie, and then they added a third to squeeze out even more.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      See, I think the high frame rate would look great if what you were looking at was real. But what you’re looking at is a room of actors in nylon beards and Martin Freeman in rubber feet.

      And where did the spare barrel come from?

      • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Spare barrel? Bear in mind I have only actually seen the first of the Hobbit trilogy, and then later I watched the Tolkien Supercut, that cut out anything not at least alluded to in the book.

        • Blackmist@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think it’s in the second one. It’s hard to be sure when you’re vaguely remembering a 300 page children’s book inexplicably squeezed into three movies.

          It’s the much hated GoPro barrel ride bit. All the dwarves have a barrel, there are no spares, Tim from The Office has to hang onto the side of one. The fat dwarf breaks his, and then after bouncing around like prequel Yoda, jumps into a spare that comes from nowhere.

          I would think the version you saw just shows them all going into the water and coming out at the other end. It’s been a long time since I read it (close to 30 years), but I don’t remember any massive river battle going on.

    • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The 1970s animated The Hobbit is a good adaptation, also the Tolkien Supercut version of the live action movie is watchable.

    • RavenFellBlade@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      In defense of The Dark Tower… it isn’t an adaptation of the books. It’s a sequel. It continues the story in a way in which Roland finally breaks the loop.