[url=http://meincmagazine.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=28182961#p28182961:1ydwwldq said:
Wickwick[/url]":1ydwwldq]
[url=http://meincmagazine.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=28182931#p28182931:1ydwwldq said:
tombraun[/url]":1ydwwldq]99% of the reviews of this film that I've seen, including this one, basically go in determined to dislike it because turning this book into three movies is, by geek consensus, a money-grubbing cash grab.
Well, maybe.
But that aside, I enjoyed this movie quite a bit. More than the second by far, and at least as much as the first. The conflict between Thranduil and Thorin actually IS at the heart of the last section of the book, so the fact that the movie focuses on it is quite accurate. And I thought the battle scenes were top notch for the most part (though I didn't care about the Laketown Master's cowardly sidekick - ugh). The climactic fight out on the ice was stunning.
I think this is a fine wrap-up to a trilogy that is not as good as LOTR but not as bad as people have made it out to be. YMMV.
My 13 year-old son (who's never read anything written by any of the Tolkiens) likes the three Hobbit movies as much as he loves the LotR movies. I think the clamor amongst us nerds is how little the movies share with the book beyond the name.
Which isn't that surprising - the Hobbit seems to me with its numerous and overexaggerated action sequences and in most cases somewhat immature humor essentially a kids version of the LotR trilogy. So I am not at all surprised that kids like it. But many adults don't.
And anyone who is responding to this with stuff like "They just do not like that the book is split up / not portrait accurately.", like you and the person you quoted did, are utterly HUGELY missing the point. Have you even read the article? That was at most 10% of the criticism in it.
Personally I do not care in the least about this.
What I do care about:
- Completely over-the-top action sequences with rather bad CGI. Which kills my immersion twice.
- Bland unmemorable characters. XY dead? Meh, who cares. What was his name again?
- So...much..padding. The problem isn't that they made 3 movies out of one book. The problem it is very noticeable that they did this. People are not saying they should have made 1 or 2 movies instead because it was one book but because it takes ages for stuff to happen in the trilogy.
1st movie - went in with a positive outlook, went out with a slightly negative one
2nd movie - went in with a "meh" outlook (prolly wouldn't had watched it if friends wouldn't have wanted to), went out with a moderate negative one
3rd movie - myself and my friends skipped it
