Peter Jackson's Hobbit Movies

the book is short and exciting, i still can't believed they turned such a humble quaint story into le epic trilogy of war and conflict, WTF

They named the troll? Also I like how Elrond and Elf are two separate things apparantly

This drives me up the fucking wall, I hate how the second two movies just forget about Bilbo almost altogether. The Legolas + Tauriel + Kili stuff is some of the most autistic shit I've seen in a film. Not even ironically good.

Smaug was good, the action with the gold and stuff was shit, but he and Bilbo were good, should've been longer, and more book accurate, there were some good lines in the book missing. I did kind of enjoy about 2-3 minutes of the Battle of the Five Armies, the battle itself I mean until the elves went full ape mode.

If the '77 version showed us anything, the book is just barely too long for one movie, but 2, 2-hour movies could work, I think. The book really is special though, grew up with it, still have it on my desk, I bring it wherever I go.

Was there a lore reason why the orcs looked so different?

its a very bitty book, you would have had to drop most of the iconic scenes to get it into one film without it being a slideshow. should have been a tv series

there's no way it's quite that long, each set piece only needs 10-15 minutes or so, and how many of those were there 20?

Technically Elrond is only half-elf.

It's not the length, it's the pacing. Going from one location to another in one movie (and the books has quite a few locations) it tiring to the audience.
>trolls
>rivendell
>misty mountains
>wolves
>beorn
>mirkwood spiders
>barrel riding
>laketown
>smaug conversation
>laketown burning
>battle of the five armies
That's a lot of fucking events just for one movie.

no idea, but in LOTR they look scary

For comparison, fellowship of the ring
>shire
>bree
>weathertop
>rivendell
>caradhras
>moria
>lothlorien
>amon hen
That's 8 locations and that's a 3 hour movie.

>battle of the five armies
That's mostly skipped in the book by Bilbo falling unconscious. Should've done the same in the film. Smaug attacking Laketown is a far more fitting climax.

the point of adapting something to different mediums is to alter the pacing of events, are you familar with anime? you usually have several chapters that comprise one episode, and there's a scene that probably gets dropped

Honestly, the PJ movies fucked up the battle so bad... first part was fine, dwarves and elves were acting like stereotypes set by people AFTER Tolkien, which I found funny, but the strategy shit halfway through was just depressing.

No it's just a studio thing. They actually had some really good orc costumed characters but they didn't make the cut as much. Pic related was supposed to be Bolg if I recall. The production for the trilogy was a mess. Scenes in the trailer not even in the film, multiple reshoots, unused footage, cut sequences. It was doomed from the start. It's actually surprising it turned out somewhat mediocre, instead of just being a 1/10 botched mess.

Attached: 1642887346188.jpg (545x574, 71.56K)

I enjoyed them. Didn't need to be a trilogy, thoughever.

>There are moments which will change a Hobbit-poster for all time... I wondered if I would ever see another Hackson-Hobbit post again... I wondered... If I actually wanted to...

Attached: hobbit-butterflies.png (1020x754, 730.47K)

Also, why don't people talk about the fact that in the movies, Azog survived, whereas, in Tolkien's actual works, he was killed by Dain? Why the fuck was this even done?

Man, I really liked the scene in that one, where he just peaks out, the music swells, great moment overall really. youtube.com/watch?v=XHb1i6ktm4I&ab_channel=AaronJones

Sure they can do that, but like another user said, it'd just be a slideshow. The scenes we get between Bilbo and Thorin were great. 3 movies make sense. There's 19 chapters in the book and if you split it into sections of 6-6-7, then you get 3 movies with a climatic point at the end of each section. We actually do need some "anime original scenes" in this case, otherwise we'd just get a mindless travelogue where characters go to place A, fight monster A, go to place B, fight monster B, and so on. Except it goes all the way from A to K. The audience will get exhausted even if it's a short movie. The trilogy thing wasn't the issue. The issue is all the bullshit that they stuffed into it. The only original content they should have added was scenes relating to Thorin and Bilbo. No Gandalf side quest shit, no Elf love triangle shit.

I remember they released a model for this guy for the LOTR strategy battle game after the first movie came out so I spend the next two movies waiting for him to show up.

exactly, anime is usually an episodic format adapting episodic manga, 25 mins an ep. the hobbit is very 'episodic' in its construction, probably so young readers can do one chapter a night before bed

>The scenes we get between Bilbo and Thorin were great. 3 movies make sense.
Not sure if I just don't follow your wording, or if you're saying PJ did this well, but I disagree if it's the latter, Thorin was handled really poorly in PJ's films in my opinion.
>The issue is all the bullshit that they stuffed into it.
I can kinda agree with this, yeah, but I genuinely don't think the vibe is right overall either.

I remember in the trailer for Desolation of Smaug, they showed Azog popping up in Mirkwood. In the movies, it was Bolg. And not the cool costume version of Bolg , but the shit cgi version.

Attached: 1619434774644.jpg (941x390, 75.63K)

The Rankin-Bass Hobbit really is something precious.

Attached: 1627391221950.webm (960x400, 2.86M)

>3 movies make sense
but not really no, the hobbit simply isn't that lengthy! the reason this trilogy of movies sucks is they just started making up shit to shoehorn in and stretch out what is a straightforward children's book

youtube.com/watch?v=Lg4NCfuUA9M&list=PLfFmVLHrjjI0eSRBSaeH4snjbjXgDfN2-&index=1
I just found this and it looks pretty cool. I remember someone doing something like this with LOTR as well.

I actually kind of liked Legolas in the PJ films, despite him saying literally half a sentence to Bilbo in the ENTIRE TRILOGY, and his general lack of growth other than being a catalyst for the far more interesting (though sadly turned into comic relief) Gimli. However, the Hobbit movies really did just turn him into... that... ew...

Reminder that the climax of The Hobbit, is not the battle of 5 armies or even the killing of Smaug. It's the climax of Bilbo's heroic arc, where he chooses unequivocally in cold blood, rather than the heat of action to become a hero. That occurs explicitly during his long walk, alone, down the secret passage to confront the Dragon Smaug in his lair.

>here is where you fight your real battle, Mr. Bilbo Baggins. Whatever happens afterwards is nothing. But to go forward. To take those steps. That would be the bravest of all things. Do you go back? NO!

Hackson's movies despite being 12 hours long total completely skip this moment. They do this because they artificially resolve Bilbo's hero's journey at the end of movie 1, to give it an artificial ending fighting an OC ebil White Ork who Bilbo never meets in the book, thus giving Bilbo no room to improve or have an arc or do anything but execute the plot for 2 more movies.

It's a fuck up so huge that it is unexcusable. All this to shoehorn shitty OC Mary Sues and love triangles into a story that absolutely does not need them.

Attached: Bilbo internal struggle climax of his heroic arc.jpg (749x607, 56.84K)

He briefly appears in The Battle of the Five Armies. Not sure if he's in both versions, as I've only seen the extended cut.

Attached: bolg-old-design.jpg (1116x464, 95.1K)

Well then the alternative is an extremely bloated single movie or an awkwardly paced duology with no climatic end in the first film.

Fuck, corrections. I meant in the LOTR trilogy and to Frodo. FFS.

trim it down
>trolls 15 minutes
>rivendell 15 minutes
>misty mountains 15 minutes
>wolves 3 minutes
>beorn 3 minutes
>mirkwood spiders 3 minutes
>barrel riding 3 minutes
>laketown 10 minutes
>smaug conversation 3 minutes
>laketown burning 10 minutes
>battle of the five armies (there's 50 minutes left to allot wherever you want)
don't know why this is perceived to be a problem
or just do a nice 3 hour movie, one and done
i hate that they turned a good book into 3 drawn out movies.

Like I said, it's not the length, it's the pacing. You can't have too many set pieces in one movie without it turning into a montage sequence.

Brilliantly worded, user, said it better than I ever could.

Attached: Capture.png (781x674, 393.17K)

i don't understand what you're getting at though, it's a journey and all these things happen in sequence, you can clearly alter any amount of time these things are presented as you wish in script & editing

Why the hell would you need 15 fucking minutes for the trolls when they didn't even take anywhere near that long in Hackson's film?

>Smaug was good
lmao. Benedict Cumberbatch fucking sucked as Smaug. Everything sucked about Hackson's Smaug from not being a true dragon, to giving him Sauron's eyes and connecting him to Sauron's plots. Cumberbatch fucking sucks. His Boasting monologue is ruined by turning it into a gay Michael Bay action scene running around a gold avalanche. The Rankin Bass version is much much better, both because it is more faithful AND more importantly because it actually feels more intimidating than a Michael Bay scene of CGI bullshit.

Unfortunately these YouTube clips are missing a lot of the sound effects and for the true experience I recommend the Hi Fi version of The Hobbit that is floating around here somewhere.
youtube.com/watch?v=17kvIcRtMhM
youtube.com/watch?v=Or8G_jDcLNo

Attached: Smaugs Boast.jpg (480x360, 18.38K)

I was going te rewatch them, since I barely remember them, after I finished the book.
Under halfway through the first one, I realized I just didn't need to. Once you know the source material, adaptations are pointless.
I did still watch the cartoon, and it was okay. Not great.

It would take an extremely skilled editor. What you will most likely end up with though, is a mess of a movie that doesn't have any character development because you're focused on squeezing all of the set pieces into their allotted timeframe.

>They named the troll?
They have names in the book you retard.

Attached: Trolls find bilbo.png (597x444, 357.39K)

Just remember Jackson was brought in right at the end when the previous guy quit and was not allowed to do reshoots and had to work with what he had

rearrange when dialogue happens, it's not magic, it's directing
it doesn't need to be 1:1, but it's great to get as much plot representation as possible
you could even make up more dialogue as you see fit

just no to the 3 movies, these were bad.

And yet somehow Rankin Bass fucking nailed it in only 90 minutes.
Hmmmm...

Attached: Erebor Kingdom Under the Mountain 2.jpg (2560x1365, 479.31K)

kinda proves my overall point, you could easily do the book in a single movie, without a hitch

I mean, I never said Cumberbatch's was better than the '77 Smaug, I prefer that one, as his boasts came off better, and his rising to anger felt more natural, even though it was shorter.
>His Boasting monologue is ruined by turning it into a gay Michael Bay action scene
Yeah, this pissed me off too, a lot really.
Obviously, the book will always be superior, Tolkien's penned words are sacred to us autists.
Pretty sure the previous guy was Guillermo del Toro, ffs, I would have liked to see his take.

Also don’t forget that Bilbo is the one who found Smaug’s weak spot in the book. In the movie, Bard already knew about it, making Bilbo’s confrontation with Smaug pointless.

But what really bugs me about TDoS is that Smaug RAN AWAY after the gold statue gimmick, because he couldn’t kill a single one of the dwarves or Bilbo. What the fuck.

>fucking nailed it
No he didn't. It was a speedrun montage, the pacing is terrible.

It worked well enough in the cartoon, and that was only 90 minutes. They could do plenty in a well-written 3 hour film that had more time for the scenes to breathe.

Fellowship of the Ring was a 3 hour film and that had 8 set pieces. Hobbit has 11. You won't have space to breathe, trust me.

how much space do you guys need to literally stay the fuck alive?!

The fact that they basically danced circles around Smaug made me doubt that they couldn't fight the guy.
I disagree, it's fast-paced, but the pacing isn't bad per se, even when it can be iffy, it's enjoyable ironically like the dwarves just hiding behind bushes in the intro, that was funny.
The setpieces in the Hobbit aren't nearly as grand, or large in the Hobbit, so this isn't comparable.

Then just cut out a few. Fellowship did the same. And who says the setpieces need to be exactly the same length as in Fellowship? Most of them are shorter in the book as well.

>And who says the setpieces need to be exactly the same length as in Fellowship?
I didn't. That user did, when he said he wanted to give the film room to breathe.

>That user did, when he said he wanted to give the film room to breathe.
Wrong. That's a false equivalence.

Sneed

Who gives a shit, you faggots?
Only one Orc needs a fucking name in this story and it's the Great Goblin. The rest are all just monsters or referenced in passing. Focusing on this gay shit completely misses the point of The Hobbit, which is about Bilbo's heroic journey, not lorebuilding in Hackson's LotR-verse. Doing so perverts the story, making the story subservient to one Director's vision for consistency.

Prime example of this is how the Ring uses the same effects in The Hobbit (making everything look weird and sinister and ghostlike) in order to keep it similar to how wearing the Ring is portratyed in Jackson't LotR. This is a mistake. Bilbo wears the ring for weeks at a time in The Hobbit, and it never hinders him, except maybe one time it slips from his finger when leaving Goblintown, which was arguably the Ring betraying Bilbo.

Attached: Bilbo finds the Ring.png (448x250, 148.08K)

I know, I was just using the Azog and Bolg thing as an example to show how fucked the production was.

I agree. Tolkien did write about Azog and Bolg, but they hardly actually factor into the story. Thorin is not the main character, PJ forgets this constantly. The book is called "The Hobbit" not "The Dwarf" ffs.

>Hi Fi link
>Here is the key. I have chosen my own time to hand it over.

magnet:?xt=urn:btih:eea71edb97cc7ba208b14fa96a3781e1ff8d7b92&dn=The+Hobbit+1977+Hi-Fi+v6.5+Restoration+1080p+2chX3+Subs-EN-FR-ES&xl=9983365533&tr=udp%

Attached: Thorin here is the key.jpg (720x540, 65.93K)

You're a blessing, user, thank you very much. Gonna get real comfy and watch this a bit later.

>9 gigs
what the fuck

>9 gigs
>There's plenty and to spare

Attached: Smaug Rare and wonderful.jpg (400x300, 50.29K)

>Better yet, how does it compare to the book in your opinion?
Terribly, they added a lot of unnecessary garbage to stretch it to three parts and for supposed fan service. The book is a very clear and concise story, the movies go off on dozens of tangents that don't really matter, add characters that weren't in the book and all sorts of stupid drama and goofiness.
I recently discovered that fan-cuts are a thing, I wish I had earlier. I saw all three parts in the cinema, and never watched it again afterwards since The Hobbit is one of my favorite books and PJ just totally butchered it.
I watched this one and absolutely loved it: ifdb.fanedit.org/hobbit-the-battle-of-the-five-edits-the/
All the crap is gone, it flows perfectly just like the book. The runtime is almost cut in half. There are others as well, but I didn't look any further.
If you disliked the movies because of all the additional filth, do yourself a favor and watch a edited version.

Attached: asd.jpg (1600x900, 339.44K)

>Hobbit thread
Time to get comfy

Attached: Bilbo comfy reading.jpg (320x180, 9.62K)

Around 2012 it started to be seen as problematic to have black villains.

I'm sure this fan edit is great, but the flaws of the PJ films for me at least, are sort of stuck there. It's with how the film looks and even sounds. The music takes itself too seriously. The action too, but when it decides to be comical, it can take such turns that I get jetlag. I'll stick with the book myself, literally grew up with it, hearing my old man whisper it to me in deep and mysterious tones, a chapter a night before bed, every night.