What didnt you like about Peter Jackson Hobbit movies?

[herlig9]

I remember i was so hyped when this was new back in maybe 2011 or 2012, it came around that time probably. But then i saw the movie poster... and something was off

THE BEARDS! O_O.

No full blown beards. I can be ok with the edgy black cloaks as a director take on it, but... removing full blown beards is a unwritten non to do rules. Its like making Elves non tall, it just doesnt add up.
(one example in LOTR movies before this or Hobbit 2003 game by Sierra)

What did you like or not like about it?

 

[Vorondil]

Curse it and crush it! We hates Tauriel forever!
The battle of five armies was also not very good. And I didn't like the fact that they had killed the Nazgul and then resurrected them, it kind of ruins the whole point of the Ringwraith's deathlessness. There are a few other minor points, but I still enjoy the films. Apart of Tauriel of course, nasty little so-and-so.

 

[Deimos]

Q: What didn't you like about Peter Jackson Hobbit movies?​

A: The Peter Jackson Hobbit Movies.

 

[Tyelkormo the Fair]

I only enjoyed the first one if I'm being honest...
And the Mirkwood's aesthetic was good too
@Aethelwulf ...I agree,Tauriel had like zero Personality...I liked the idea of there being a female wood elf warrior but not one that was so disloyal to her people and king that decides to disobey her king for a dwarf and also plans to commit the worst sin an elf could do, again for a dwarf... really,what was up with that?

 

[Olorgando]

I only enjoyed the first one if I'm being honest...
And the Mirkwood's aesthetic was good too
@Aethelwulf ...I agree,Tauriel had like zero Personality...I liked the idea of there being a female wood elf warrior but not one that was so disloyal to her people and king that decides to disobey her king for a dwarf and also plans to commit the worst sin an elf could do, again for a dwarf... really,what was up with that?

Check out this post by Aldarion:

https://thetolkien.forum/threads/how-the-hobbit-got-ruined.28732/

It's in the second of the three clips, "Battle of Five Studios", starting at 23:50 where Evangeline Lilly describes how the studio trolls had the whole love triangle garbage squashed into the films in re-shoots a year after principal photography had finished.
So if PJ & Co. as scriptwriters, can't produce enough garbage, leave it to the studio trolls to come by with a 30-ton dumpster.

 

[Aldarion]

Q: What didn't you like about Peter Jackson Hobbit movies?​

A: The Peter Jackson Hobbit Movies.

THIS.

As for specifics:

• being a trilogy instead of a single movie - too little butter on too much bread
• forced romance subplot
• lack of proper dwarven beards
• dwarves being positively skeletal for dwarves
• forced OCs
• Beorn being too thin
• Beorn's beard
• the Black Arrow
• fights
• acrobatics
• acrobatics during fights
• dumb albino orc
• giant worms
• Dol Guldur subplot
• fact that movies were so boring that the above list is all I can possibly remember because I slept through the rest

What I liked:

• Smaug

 

[Tyelkormo the Fair]

THIS.

As for specifics:

• being a trilogy instead of a single movie - too little butter on too much bread
• forced romance subplot
• lack of proper dwarven beards
• dwarves being positively skeletal for dwarves
• forced OCs
• Beorn being too thin
• Beorn's beard
• the Black Arrow
• fights
• acrobatics
• acrobatics during fights
• dumb albino orc
• giant worms
• Dol Guldur subplot
• fact that movies were so boring that the above list is all I can possibly remember because I slept through the rest

What I liked:

• Smaug

Benedict Cumberbatch rocks every role,even if he is just a dragon's voice

 

[Barrow Wight]

Benedict Cumberbatch rocks every role,even if he is just a dragon's voice

I think he was more than just the voice; I think he actually slithered around on a green-screen with the micro-dot outfit on, like AndyS with Gollum, to give Smaug movement, at least for close up shots. Maybe it was someone else, but I thinks I've seen shots of BenedictC. "acting out" the Smaug role.

 

[Tyelkormo the Fair]

I think he was more than just the voice; I think he actually slithered around on a green-screen with the micro-dot outfit on, like AndyS with Gollum, to give Smaug movement, at least for close up shots. Maybe it was someone else, but I thinks I've seen shots of BenedictC. "acting out" the Smaug role.

What I meant as well, I think I phrased it badly

 

[Deimos]

THIS.

As for specifics:

• being a trilogy instead of a single movie - too little butter on too much bread
• forced romance subplot
• lack of proper dwarven beards
• dwarves being positively skeletal for dwarves
• forced OCs
• Beorn being too thin
• Beorn's beard
• the Black Arrow
• fights
• acrobatics
• acrobatics during fights
• dumb albino orc
• giant worms
• Dol Guldur subplot
• fact that movies were so boring that the above list is all I can possibly remember because I slept through the rest

What I liked:

• Smaug

Oh, come now...don't be shy.
Tell us what you really disliked about the trilogy 😱🤣😉

 

[Amon Rudh]

I must be weird. I really like them. Maybe I just like all things Tolkien related even if things are stretched somewhat. I'm watching them currently and other than fillers and additions to make them more generally appealing (i.e. to people who will never read the books) they certainly capture the general feel of what I imagine Tolkien intended.
To answer the question, I suppose some of the apparently unnecessary changes to the plot for reasons I presume are commercial. But hey, they outlay the cost and need to recoup a profit.

 

[Deimos]

OK .. parable time (except the parable is true)...
Some celebrity from way back was on a 1970s talk show (Tonight Show, I guess, with Johnny Carson)
He was talking about how he finally lost a lot of weight, over 100 lbs (45Kg)... how he tried all different ways and nothing worked except whatever the one way was that did it...(can't recall what it was) .
But one of the failed ways was hypnosis... post hypnotic suggestion was, he could only eat specific foods at specific times, in specific amounts, and if he tried any thing else (or amounts), then whatever he ate would taste like burnt tire rubber.
He became silent for a few seconds and then said, "You know, you can come to like the taste of burnt tire rubber."

Anyway (bear with me, I'm getting there) an awful lot of people (you know who you are), in their hunger for "anything Tolkien" are willing to consume "burnt tire rubber", despite the presence of a banquet table filled almost to collapse with the equivalent of Middle Earth ambrosia.
And I need not mention the "burnt tires" I have in mind (but I will: one, no two, are from the Bezos Yugo, and three are from Peter's Pinto; and another coming in 2024 from Phoebe's and Arty's Edsel) )

 

[Ent]

I must be weird. I really like them

You are not 'weird'. you are you.
And there are many 'yous' out there able to enjoy a thing for what it is, rather than denounce it for what it is not.

There are certainly things I did not like...probably most particularly the unnecessary appearance of Wadaghast and his wabbits, along with the contrived goblins on wargs presenting an equally unnecessary 'tension session' in the fray. (Things like this are what make some wish there were just two, or even one, movie(s), though there is more than ample room for a 3 movie segment as was done.)

Mostly I don't like that segment because for half of it the CGI is just... well... not good.

However, there are also quite a number of things I do like.

but trust me, I'm not at all representative of 'most people'.

Is it a story unto itself? Absolutely. It's fanfic, 'based on' the creation by Tolkien.
I don't mind fanfic.
If I did, there would be very few books remaining in any library or bookstore in the world, for me to read...and virtually zero movies 'based on a book'.

 

[Radaghast]

What did I like about the movies might be a more pertinent question, though I usually don't like bits and pieces of movies. For me, a movie either stands as a cohesive whole or it doesn't. And, just in case anyone is wondering, no, I don't think the LoR movies fare much better. If they're good at all it's more because of Tolkien than Peter Jackson. The Hobbit movies are proof of that Peej lacks vision.

Anyway, it's funny that this question was asked because I've been watching a series of three videos on the Hobbit films called "The Hobbit Is Not Very Good" on YouTube that dissect each film. Each video is over 2 hours long so as you might expect they're pretty thorough. The videographer even touches on points that he likes about the movies but not only do I not agree, even if I did like those particular parts I don't single out parts of movies that might otherwise come off as good, and I honestly wonder if anyone does (again, either I like a movie or I don't). The videos mostly just do a great job of reminding me why I loathe these movies.

 

[Ent]

I honestly wonder if anyone does

You are not alone, oh wizardly one.
And yet... if you read above, you'll find many who can (and do) take movies 'piecemeal' so to speak, and make judgments 'on the balance of the scales' given their personal predilections.

The world is full of an amazing panoply of people, all of whom have multiple opinions... often on a single thing, given the day of the week, the amount of sleep they've had, and even whoever they're trying to impress at the time.

That's part of why "you can please some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time."

(To which I must add "some of the people none of the time. No, not once.")

 

[Olorgando]

That's part of why "you can please some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time."
(To which I must add "some of the people none of the time. No, not once.")

This immediately made me wonder why Honest Abe left this fourth possibility out of his famous quote that you're paraphrasing. Too fantastic to contemplate as realistic? 😈

 

[Ent]

Too fantastic to contemplate as realistic?

Sadly, no.

 

[Radaghast]

As I watch those videos I mentioned a few things in particular occur to me about the movies that I feel like commenting on, just as examples of why I find these movies so ludicrous:

• The first is a scene I don't remember from the second film. In this scene the dwarves have fled Beorn in his giant bear form and locked themselves in his house. The next morning Gandalf (with Bilbo in tow) goes out to greet Beorn in human form as he chops wood. Gandalf then signals to the dwarves to come out in pairs to introduce them to Beorn. This is, of course, is based on the book scene, except in the book Gandalf eased the dwarves into Beorn's presence by introducing them into his conversation with Beorn, whereas in the movie it only seems to piss Beorn off to see pairs of dwarves coming out of his own house. That his anger amounts to nothing is beside the point and doesn't make it any less stupid (or any funnier; if funny at all).
• In the films, the thrush and raven are gone, replaced by a windlance, a kind of ballista (apparently invented by the filmmakers), the only weapon that can fire a Black Arrow that can kill Smaug. In the second movie, Bard has a danged Black Arrow in his own danged own house and after being told by his daughter that the dragon will kill them says as he grips the arow, "Not if I kill it first." In the next movie Bard has completely forgotten about this and attempts to kill Smaug with a regular bow and arrow until his son shows him the arrow. So this whole movie-extending scene exists for the sole purpose of creating a role for Bard's son (whom, btw, Bard uses, along with his own bowstring, as a makeshift ballista since he either can't get to the windlance or it's been destroyed 🙄; good job Smaug didn't blast them with fire while all this tomfoolery was happening). It's this kind of egregious padding that is a huge reason why I hate these movies. Did each of these movies have to be around 2.5 hours?
• Along those lines, the subplot with Kili getting shot with a "Morgul arrow" (🙄) and then being saved by Tauriel is a huge waste of time (not to mention the so-called "love triangle" with Kili, Tauriel and Legolas). Also, Tauriel saving Kili with kingsfoil is a gigantic load of horse hockey.

 

[Olorgando]

Too fantastic to contemplate as realistic?

Sadly, no.

Errrrr - maybe I should clarify ...

To revert to the original quote, which had "fool" for your "please", I was wondering if Lincoln thought that some people being impossible to fool was "too fantastic to contemplate as realistic"; but I suppose his "all of the people some of the time" excludes any people being impossible to fool. Which, then again, must exclude from "people" all of those who are making such an effort to fool them ... the usual suspects, gangsters all.

With your substitution of "please" for "fool", the fourth possibility does make sense. Sort of (grumps² x curmudgeons²)³ ...

 

[Ent]

Errrrr - maybe I should clarify ...

As well you should, because you are essentially correct.
If you can please "All of the people Some of the time..." it becomes exclusive of "some of the people none of the time."

So I would submit the original phrase "all of the people some of the time" is to be stricken... first because it is an impossibility, and second because the truth "some people are never satisfied" is all too evident all around us to ignore.