The Hobbit Trilogy... 10 Years Later

[@thegoldman25]

Major sources for this video were Just Write's Hobbit videos and Linsey Ellis' videos on The Hobbit. I credited them in the description of my video, but it was a mistake not to credit them in the video itself, a mistake I will fix in my videos going forward. Here are some links to those videos: kzbin.info/aero/PLaWLiMKNuKMlJ91m0Mgf-qyWKWiTyR4qo kzbin.info/www/bejne/q4W1hoRjh7CZi9Usi=MDgfn38iT2N9Tsch

[@fgdj2000]

At least you are crediting them. There are other who don’t even do that and get millions of views and just repeat what others have said and sell it as their own ideas.

[@dillonkoestler3065]

This trilogy is what got me into watching fan edits. There's a great four hour movie within the nine hours of screen time we got.

[@thegoldman25]

I should watch it

[@fistthesis2593]

Where can one find these edits

[@dillonkoestler3065]

@@fistthesis2593 My favorite is the M4 edit. There's also other options. Look up Hobbit fan edit

[@FeeriiEekii]

Agreed, the M4 fan edit is far Superior to the trilogy

[@FeeriiEekii]

​@@fistthesis2593just Google Hobbit M4 fan edit.

[@copingdoping1170]

Also, it's unfair to call Peter Jackson greedy regarding the Hobbit’s shortcomings. It would help if you had done better research. Peter Jackson was given a very hard task by the studios and was brought on relatively last minute to write and direct it. He went through a lot of stress making the 3 films. Making it into 3 films was also more of the studio insisting on it, more so than Peter Jackson. Yes he could have declined to do the job, but you can’t blame someone for merely taking a good job.

[@LightSourceTemple]

It edits down nicely into 3 movies with the last two having a runtime of about 2.5 hours

[@TheTruMan196]

For me, the Hobbit is the perfect example of how large studios (most infamously WB) like to meddle with projects and set unrealistic expectations for their directors, and then when the final product is unveiled the fans mistakenly choose to blame the director and crew members rather than the studio executives. So many people failed to realize that if Peter Jackson wasn't at the helm (and he wasn't originally involved in the first place) then the Hobbit movies would've turned out FAR WORSE than they actually did. Zack Snyder's DCEU is another great example of studio meddling completely butchering the story. Instead of letting the filmmakers build up the DCEU, Warner Brothers rushed them straight into the team up film to piggyback off of Marvel's success, and then also forced Zack to include Doomsday and the Death of Superman plotline in only the second film, whereas Zack originally wanted Metallo to be the main villain. It's really frustrating to see fans constantly push the blame onto the wrong people whenever a movie/show is poorly received, because it doesn't solve anything: in fact, it usually makes it worse.

[@thegoldman25]

Yeah WB has issues

[@thomasdeen2099]

I find it ironic that The Hobbit, a cautionary tale about greed is created with greed in mind from the producers, director, and consumers. Warner Bros. was greedy by giving Peter Jackson and Co. very little time to prepare and pick up the reins from Guillermo Del Toro after the latter departed from the production in order to get more money, Peter Jackson himself from wanting to do so much with what little he has (Time mostly.) and trying to do his own version of The Hobbit connected to his own LOTR films instead of adapting the book as it was, and us the consumers/fans for wanting more and feeding Warner Bros.' greed to get money from the fans which resulted in this messy trilogy. Don't get me wrong, personally I LOVE The Hobbit trilogy, even more so than the LOTR movies because of how much I relate to Bilbo and find entertainment in whatever hijinx the dwarves find themselves doing. But we have to acknowledge the flaws that everyone contributed to that ultimately resulted in an experience that only few could enjoy.

[@ComeOnIsSuchAJoy]

@@thomasdeen2099 For me, the "Hobbit" trilogy was never going to live up to the LOTR trilogy mostly due to parameters already defined by Tolkien himself: the book itself was highly episodic, far less detailed, far less epic, and more tonally light-hearted and whimsical than LOTR. It was never going to naturally reach the same heights, even in the right hands.

[@jackreacher7495]

We can at least be certain that all the blame lay on the David and Dan rightfully when it comes to Thrones.

[@wyattcole5452]

The thing is the prequels were better in some ways for how different they were, that’s not the case with the hobbit

[@LordSluggo]

The problem with Bilbo earning Thorin's respect at the end of the first movie is because in the novel, that happens when Bilbo rescues the party from the spiders at Mirkwood.

[@LightSourceTemple]

They needed a hero moment to end the first movie with

[@ngbernie-x7s]

Honestly they have grown on me. Extended editions are weirdly better cause the added scenes are pretty good.

[@Optimegatrongodzilla]

@ngbernie-x7s The live-action 'The Hobbit' film trilogy doesn't deserve the hate it gets at all! The biggest problem with it is the forced "Kili and Tauriel" thing. If the dwarves had been held captive by the wood elves for 2 weeks, like in the book and the animated film, as opposed to however many hours, it would have made sense for Kili and Tauriel to have developed romantic feelings for one another. People complain about other story elements in the live-action film trilogy that weren't in the book, but some of those added story elements, those being the story elements involving Gandalf & Radagast's sidequests, and the White Council confronting the Necromancer(AKA Sauron) at Dol Guldur, actually weren't made up for the live-action film trilogy, but were pulled from the appendices of the book 'The Lord of The Rings'[1954]. JRR Tolkein wrote said story elements to explain why Gandalf kept leaving Bilbo and the 13 dwarves in 'The Hobbit'[1937], and it's surprising that he never added them into the book 'The Hobbit'[1937] for future printings of it. Even if those story elements weren't part of the original Arda Legendarium created by JRR Tolkein, their presence in the live-action 'The Hobbit' film trilogy would be very welcome, as without them, Gandalf comes off as a douche for repeatedly leaving Bilbo and the 13 dwarves when they could(and, as we know, they do) find themselves in dangerous situations again. People also complain that the live-action film trilogy isn't lighter in tone and that it's epic in scale, which is dumb because we're talking about a story in which a group of characters go on a quest to take back a stolen home & stolen treasure from an evil fire-breathing dragon with human-level intelligence, said characters find themselves in perilous situations, including an encounter with said dragon, and there's a grand battle between 5 armies via which some of the major characters die. Should the live-action film trilogy have had some additional lighthearted moments involving Bilbo and the 13 dwarves? Absolutely. But, people act like these films don't have any lighthearted moments when that simply isn't true.

[@ngbernie-x7s]

@@Optimegatrongodzilla I aint reading all that I know the books better than you so your opinion is unimportant to me

[@Optimegatrongodzilla]

@@ngbernie-x7s It isn't much to read. It would only take you a few minutes to read. You're being extremely lazy.

[@dannypalin9583]

It's funny. Whether it was Jackson or Warner Bros wanting to turn a children's book into an adult fantasy, it reminds me of the brief conundrum Tolkien himself went through. While he was writing The Lord of the Rings, he went back to The Hobbit to tweak certain aspects of the story so it fit in line with its sequel. One of these included an attempt to make The Hobbit a more serious and mature story. When he shared the manuscript with his peers, they loved it. But they all made the same observation: it's not The Hobbit anymore. That's the exact same problem The Hobbit Trilogy has.

[@c17sam90]

Was it that much more adult though? I look at stuff like the battle chariot and think that’s what 10 year olds would love

[@kabura8742]

@@c17sam90 Well we are talking about a much older generation here, what was mature for them at the time is downright child play to us now

[@c17sam90]

@@kabura8742 i don’t know I am in my mid 30’s and I look at the battle chariot and think 10 year old me would have loved it

[@primal1233]

I really like The Hobbit trilogy. They are definitely not as good as the Lord of the Rings trilogy, but I still enjoyed them, and I always will

[@moalzaben5554]

Yeah I agree, lotr will always be better, but the Hobbit trilogy wasn’t terrible, at least the hobbit trilogy is better than rings of power

[@MuhammadDanyalKhan]

Now that we know cRingE of power exists.... Hobbit is probably the best work of art behind LOTR :P

[@moalzaben5554]

@@MuhammadDanyalKhan pretty much bro

[@tomthecookieking167]

Can we just rectify that it was not Jackson’s decision to make it into 3, if you watch the behind the scenes you can see that after Del Toro departed, Jackson wasn’t given the time to do all the pre-production like he did on LOTR and was being forced to complete things on a schedule, he made them into 2 and was then told he had to make it into 3, that’s where all the filler comes in… he was even sent to hospital due to a stomach ulcer from all the stress. I agree it was done poorly, but to blame it equally on Peter Jackson is unjust. I do love your work though and have pretty much always agreed with your points😊

[@georgj6304]

Jackson however, has since made films that were more than forgettable and that were also massively geared towards maximizing profit.

[@vjbd2757]

​@@georgj6304Like what? The Hobbit films were the last time P.J. hs directed a film.

[@3thosmusic22]

I think we all owe The Hobbit an apology seeing how Amazon screwed up the Lord of the Rings franchise

[@Shonras]

Ironically, they both are corporate products, The Rings of Power just doesn't have (yet?) the nostalgia factor.

[@dante6985]

​@@Shonrasi hold that the Hobbit trilogy is MUCH stronger than Rings of Power, nostalgia be damned. Smaug was masterfully realized. I loved Martin Freeman's performance, and Ian McKellen's of course. There's a great 4 hour cut of The Hobbit there. Rings of Power looks great but just has so little redeeming value otherwise. There is an interesting story about how Sauron created the rings and the one ring and used them to manipulate the races of Middle Earth. Amazon didn't touch it.

[@TheXboxlive5]

Reminds me of the Star Wars prequels effect after the sequels came out 😂

[@Shonras]

@dante6985 I think I have a different relationship with The Hobbit and The Rings of Power. First of all, I haven't watched The Rings of Power. I know some people who really hate it but other who really enjoy it. I think it looks like a high budget fanfic and typical corporate exploitation of a known IP that would have been more interesting if they invented their own fantasy universe, but they didn't want to take risks. As for The Hobbit... I'm afraid that while it has its charms, contrary to the Star Wars prequels, they didn't grow on me. I was highly defensive of them when I was a teenager, perhaps because I was in denial. It has its qualities because the same people that brought us some of the most beautiful and well crafted movies ever made (The Lord of the Rings) were involved, and I'm sure they did their best under pressure. I enjoy the first Hobbit movie (just too stretched out and Azog's return wasn't necessary). The second was more mixed but had its moments (especially Smaug). But the third one? An utter embarrassment. Oh, it is fun in away, but also the biggest insult to Tolkien's work. Without watching the Rings of Power, I'm pretty sure that there won't be any scenes as cringe as Alfrid's ones. So for me The Rings of Power just shows that big studios don't learn from their mistakes. Perhaps The Lord of the Rings was the outlier: Hollywood allowed such a high risk, big budget movies to be done with creative freedom and an insane amount of pre production time. That's why LOTR must be even more cherished about how exceptional it was.

[@dante6985]

@@Shonras I mean, I'd encourage you to watch fan edits of the Hobbit. I'm forgiving of it because the story is there, it's just so bloated and meandering that it's diluted into mush. (It's like a really good glass of lemonade that's over half water.). Agree about the third movie but that makes sense: Killing Smaug is the climax of the story but it was made into this treasure dispute. So a 4 hour edit of the 9 hour film solves most of The Hobbit's problems because the Hobbit isn't a 3 part epic nor a LOTR prequel. Rings of Power you have to watch to "get" why it doesn't work IMHO. If you forget the sacrilege of the lore, the liberties like Gandalf being on Middle Earth eons early (which were also extensive in LOTR)... It's still boring AF. I can't think of anything exciting, interesting, surprising, or otherwise redeeming about it. It exists to exist and as an answer to the question "if I wanna make an IP TV series, and I throw enough money at it, will it be good?". It's the problem with all the Disney Plus Marvel / Star Wars blah blah blahs: no one has anything to say, artistically. No one had a good idea for a LOTR show that they were stowing in their back pocket. It's there because Amazon wanted a LOTR show after the popularity of Game of Thrones.

[@over_sleezy5480]

Ian McKellan actually broke down crying on set because he was alone and surrounded by green screens in half his scenes, and for that I will never forgive this trilogy

[@ComeOnIsSuchAJoy]

But still carried on after a pep talk from PJ. Only a Sith deals in absolutes. 🙄

[@alexwallar8608]

They are definitely not as good as The Lord of the Rings trilogy, but I still enjoy The Hobbit trilogy

[@thegoldman25]

Is anything as good as LotR?

[@ComeOnIsSuchAJoy]

@@thegoldman25 It's like faulting Mt. Kilimanjaro for not being Mt. Everest.

[@untipoxddd5784]

​@@thegoldman25It depends on each person's personal tastes.

[@wavetactics13]

One could argue that Balin's payoff was in the 2nd movie not the third. In the first he is the dwarf most openly opposed to the quest, pointing out the obvious flaws of the plan and even telling Thorin he doesn't have to do this. His confrontation with Thorin outside the hidden door is what I see as his payoff as he is openly questioning Thorin's decision after supporting him throughout the quest. I also see Dwalin being the one to confront Thorin in the throne room as the right thematic choice. Dwalin and Thorin don't have a big talking scene of just the two of them beforehand, but the two are constantly shown interacting in small scenes throughout the movies showing Dwalin to be Thorin's most trusted and loyal subordinate. Dwalin is even the one to rip into the Laketown folk when they indirectly insult Thorin and reveals him to be no petty thief. The setup of the third movie is Thorin's madness driving the other dwarves away which culminates in all of them defying his order to cast Bilbo off the rampart. Dwalin openly berating Thorin is the turning point in which Thorin realizes how far he has fallen after threatening his most loyal supporter.

[@thegoldman25]

good point!

[@ComeOnIsSuchAJoy]

Of course, Balin has a greater arc if you watch the saga in chronological order and realize he's the one in the tomb that the Fellowship encounter in Moria...

[@wavetactics13]

@@ComeOnIsSuchAJoy And Oin is killed by the watcher and Ori wrote the page Gandalf reads that ends with "they are coming". Not exactly sure that counts as an arc though.

[@futureboy314]

The worst part is, from a studio perspective, they were right. They made a billion more dollars doing three movies over two, and so here we are. No lessons were learned, and art was made worse.

[@daniodanny4485]

This is what I've tried to tell people who really hate these movies, is that despite the critics including the fans WB was 100% right when they thought "Do what we tell you because we know they will just watch it"

[@superxblackpanther]

I'm glad somebody mentioned it Lord of the rings is not a sequel to The Hobbit, I've always compared them like this The Hobbit to the Lord of the rings is what the Iliad is to The Odyssey, takes place after the events of the previous story play some returning characters but overall it's a different story and shouldn't be considered a sequel

[@thegoldman25]

very true

[@ComeOnIsSuchAJoy]

Of course, LOTR wouldn't exist without _The Hobbit._

[@beatrixwickson8477]

I know there's some fan edits around (M4's is apparently the best) but I would honestly love for Peter Jackson to get a chance to come back and re-edit these into a true DIrector's cut of one or two films.

[@chasehedges6775]

I loved them. They’re not as good as LOTR but they’re good enough

[@thegoldman25]

I’m jealous

[@Christo_Trismegistus]

Not good enough to watch more than once or to show another human being

[@jarskii11]

Lotr literally Best trilogy ever made. These are literal d tier movies. First one maybe c tier, but literally once watch movies as lotr is yearly rewatch

[@untipoxddd5784]

​@@Christo_Trismegistus I think I have watched them the same amount of time as the lord of the rings and everyone that I know that doesn't like the hobbit they also don't like lord of the rings.

[@superdave3506]

The background or pretext to these films being made, is what contributed to its problems: 1) PJ actually stated he didn’t want to make the Hobbit not only because of having to flesh out 13 dwarves, but mainly because he would constantly be trying to “outdo” what he did with LOTR….talk about a self fulfilling prophecy 2) Yes, making it a Trilogy was problematic, but what made that decision worse, is they scripted and started filming it as only two films….They(WB) decided to extend it to a Trilogy after Guillermo Del Toro left(it’s pretty obvious he was fired). They made a trilogy out of a two structure film foundation. Originally the third film was going to be a bridge film(between the Hobbit and LOTR). 3) PJ was put in the hospital with a bleeding ulcer during filming…The poor man was literally working 24hr sets without sleeping at times… 4) After Guillermo Del Toro left(he was forced out), WB wouldn’t push back the release date…PJ had six weeks of preproduction…LOTR had almost two years…This is why so much CGI was used, they didn’t have the time….They would show up to film without story boards… 5) The love triangle was WB mandated during reshoots for DOS…There’s an interview with Evangeline Lilly where she was promised this wouldn’t be the case. WB forced the issue… I enjoy these films for what they are, a flawed trilogy made under the worst of circumstances…It’s honestly a miracle they were ever completed…..

[@MalachiSouth]

Your second point is something I only found out about recently, and I totally agree that the decision to go from two to three movies midway through is what killed the story. Three movies could have been good, but because they originally wanted two movies the pacing is weird, lots of story beats had to be swapped around, and tons of filler stuff because they didn't have time to craft a full story.

[@StoobsPitt]

I absolutely love these films but I agree with you on Legolas, Tauriel and Alfred. They had too much focus and drew screentime away from the dwarves. And tbh removing them is the only change i would make with these film ( and retoractively all the scenes with Bolg, e.g orc attack on mirkwood, lake town etc) Legolas as a cameo would have been much better. Keep him as the one to capture the dwarves from the spiders and use as a stopgap to introduce his father for people only familiar with the films. Then have Thranduil lead the army to the mountain, leaving Legolas in command of home

[@hazimhasmat7728]

I love the Hobbit trilogy but my issue is that the extended editions of the movies make the story better, especially for the Battle Of The Five Armies which have deleted scenes that make the movie better and completed, compared to the theatrical release. Compared to the Lord Of The Rings, the theatrical versions still make the story complete. The extended editions aren't necessary for the story.

[@thegoldman25]

agreed

[@untipoxddd5784]

Yes

[@juliencarson2627]

The original pitch for these movies was that it was going to be a single movie by Guillermo Del Toro and then, as they were a month or so into pre production, the studio said make it 2 movies. Del Toro apparently pushed back pretty hard and didn’t want to make them spectacle movies but between that and some financial issues Del Toro was like nope I’m not dealing with this and pretty much walked. But pre production was already going and based on what I’ve read Peter Jackson didn’t actually want to do them, the studio basically roped him into it with incentives for Weta workshop. There was like 5 studios involved, they rushed the production and vetoed a lot of Jackson’s ideas and then ultimately told him they wanted 3 movies. I blame almost none of the hobbit movies on him and will forever curse the studios for killing a Del Toro hobbit movie which would have been INCREDIBLE

[@YodaOnABender]

This was my first introduction to Jackson’s middle earth and I love it very dearly

[@smithyemerald5499]

i loved Bofur just because of that one interaction he has with Bilbo, it added so much

[@Nick-4K]

I once heard that the Hobbit Movies is Sam reading Bilbos part of the Journal after Frodo gave it to him. Thats why everything seems like the Lord of the Rings, but its a different enough that it also feels like its more fantastical. Which explains why it feels both the same and different from LotR. It may just be cope. But i dig it.

[@chickendrawsdogs3343]

I actually have a soft spot for The Hobbit trilogy. The spirit of Tolkien's writing is, for the most part, very much intact - especially where Bilbo and Thorin's relationship is concerned. Unlike a very recent "adaptation" that masquerades as Tolkien's but betrays everything his books, his work, then Peter Jackson's movies worked so hard to establish.

[@kabura8742]

I for one love the Hobbit trilogy ever since I first watched them in theaters when they came out. Not once did I believe they were going to be better than the original LOTR trilogy but that was what made me enjoy them because I knew what I was going in to, I didn't need them to fill in those big shoes. Could they have been done better; yes, but were they unwatchable and betray everything that Tolkien stood for? No, to me it still felt like Middle Earth. It still took me to my happy place and that's something that the "Rings of Power" has not been able to do because it strayed too far. I trust Peter Jackson, I'm not sure how well the "War of the Rohirrim" movie will be but I will give it a fair shot in the hopes that not all will be lost with these modern spinoffs

[@mystic_mimi21]

Summary of good things 1) casting, I think the actors are all doing a great job despite the hardships, my faves Martin Freeman, Richard Armitage, Lee Peace (chief’s kiss), all perfect. 2) I loved the depiction of the woodland elves’ kindom, Mirkwood and the spiders’ scene, laketown. All the practical sets looked amazing and really felt tangible and real. 3) the three trolls scenes 4) I loved the first film so much and wouldn’t change a thing other than the drawn out goblin scene, shorten that and then end it with them opening the door to the mountain as was intended.

[@queenb2450]

I know every dummy hated on Tauriel, but there was this behind the scenes were you had people talking about the creation of Tauriel and how they REALLY thought deeply about her (such as how would she hold a weapon, how her design would be). This is why I don't care for the criticism of the trilogy, they has passion in what little resources they had from the ugly studio.

[@Surllio]

Pretty much everything wrong with the Hobbit Trilogy can be summed up with "Warner Bros is greedy and pretty much had control over Jackson in the filming process." Thats before you get into basically threatening the New Zealand government to pass a film worker law the vastly benefited them and stripped workers of their rights. Nothing in these films feels like Peter Jackson had any kind of control. He was simply brought on board to have his name attached. They ran off Del Toro because they wanted him to mimic Jackson's style in 3 movies, and he wanted his own look and 2 movies. Remember, New Line let Jackson be Jackson, but they hemorrhaged money and WB stepped in, absorbed the company, closed them, and assumed all rights went to them, which is where they started low balling the Tolkien estate.

[@isaacmapes]

While this trilogy is not perfect, it is what introduced me to Tolkien book’s and the films. I remember seeing the trailer in front of Pixar’s Brave and immediately wanting to see it and read the book afterwards.

[@thegoldman25]

that's aweomse

[@levoyageur1376]

Well, I know this trilogy has issues with the adaptation, the full amount of CGI and the plot totally low compared to LOTR. I love this trilogy but the third is problematic, the vibe of adventure, the music and especialy Smaug. The storytelling lacks so much but I keep this trilogy in my heart

[@chasehedges6775]

Well said.

[@thegoldman25]

The first one has heart

[@kdusel1991]

​@@thegoldman25 it should've just been two movies!! Stretching it out into three and including stuff that doesn't happen in the original book (legolas and sauron being involved) made no sense!!

[@MatthewCaunsfield]

​@@thegoldman25The first one also had PJ doing BTS vids on KZbin as the production went along. It all had a very optimistic vibe, which promptly vanished after Hobbit_1 was released

[@untipoxddd5784]

​@@kdusel1991 they were going to be two movies but the two movies edition would probably be the same but more short I think that the only big changes are almost all the Battle of the five armies and the ending of the desolation of smaug, actually peter Jackson decided to make three instead because they don't have time to finish two movies in two years and Many things wasn't done yet so they decided this to make more short an unexpected journey, to put the ending of the first movie and the beginning of the second one in the desolation of smaug and the ending of the second one in the third one

[@DanteDamfam]

10 years ago!? Damn I’m getting old …

[@thegoldman25]

Yeah so am i

[@augustgeary5538]

I love the hobbit movies. And I love them because I don’t focus on them as showing the story of the book on screen, rather a dive back into middle earth and exploring new parts and stories of it (the necromancer etc) with the hobbit story keeping it together. The liberty of resurrecting azog is fine for me as it serves that purpose

[@ComeOnIsSuchAJoy]

First off, I'll just say that Thranduil encouraging Legolas to seek out Aragorn *does* make sense in the movie-verse, given that Legolas was the one who outed Aragorn at the Council of Elrond in FOTR. I still feel a fair amount of the issues in the "Hobbit" movies can be placed squarely on the shoulders of Tolkien himself (even if he wrote it without ever knowing it would result in him also eventually writing LOTR, since his publishers wanted another Hobbit-centric story from him rather than what he'd already written at the time for what would ultimately become part of _The Silmarillion_ ). The book itself was highly episodic, far less detailed, far less epic, and more tonally light-hearted and whimsical than LOTR. It was never going to naturally reach the same heights, even in the right hands. That said, I *do* actually like some of the liberties Jackson & Co. took with the story: 1) Having the one Orc pack pursuing the Company from nearly the beginning of its journey. I felt this helped raise the stakes of their quest, given that, in the book, they often seemed to amble on with little to no urgency. I will concede, though, that Azog should've been left dead at the Battle of Azanulbizar and his spawn Bolg should've probably been the main baddie from the start (i.e. still seeking revenge for Azog's death). 2) Actually giving *some* character to Thranduil, Bard, and the Master of Laketown, who all largely feel more like mere plot devices/cardboard cutouts in the book. I will concede, though, that Legolas and Tauriel, as well as Alfrid, probably shouldn't have been as prominent as they were (the former 2 especially in the second movie, and the latter especially in the third movie -- though Jackson and Boyens claimed in their audio commentary they were using him as a stand-in for the Master at that point; maybe they shouldn't have been so hasty to kill him off, then?). 3) Having the Dwarves actually confront Smaug. It always felt like a bit of a cheat to me that the Dwarves never actually had to do so in the book; that they basically ended up getting their kingdom back by sheer dumb luck (i.e. Smaug assuming Bilbo came from Laketown and Samug then flying off to Laketown to have his 'revenge' on them, only to be ultimately slain by a bowman living there). 4) Actually seeing the Battle of Five Armies play out. In the book, Bilbo is knocked out and we only get an aftermath highlight reel, so to speak, before going to see Thorin before his death. 5) Integrating the whole 'Return of Sauron' arc into the story. Yeah, they may have played with the timeline a bit to get it across, but I still consider it integral to the whole 6-movie saga. Ultimately, this a franchise where I *want* feel as though I'm experiencing everything in real time. My only real gripes with the trilogy is how underwritten Fíli (given his fate) and Glóin (given his ties to LOTR) were (even so, you can still identify each Dwarf by a personality characteristic... *if* you're actually paying attention; still more than what Tolkien did for many of them), the lack of closure given to Tauriel's character, and the utter lack of explanation as to how Radagast ended up being MIA during the events of LOTR. I'm all for a single, live-action adaptation of it at some point, but to do so so soon after LOTR and with largely the same cast and crew would've just felt weird. 🤷‍♂ And you can't deny that this trilogy still looks like a masterpiece compared to the shitty fanfic that is Rings of Power...

[@MalachiSouth]

Your not wring about part of the blame lying on Tolkien. The story was a collection of tales he told his children, and it's thus more of a fairy tale than anything else. Personally, I wish they had made the movie feel that same way. If they hadn't made the one orc pack pursue the company, hadn't developed background characters, and hadn't integrated Sauron I actually think it could have been a very unique and magical film. If they had just put their focus on Bilbo alone, then I feel it would have been light magical adventure, which is what the Hobbit is. Or they could have done the opposite and made it an epic like LotR. Give all the dwarves character development, make Thorin's death really heart wrenching, and make the final battle between him and Azog legendary. That also would have been a good movie. The problem was that they tried to do both. They tried to make it light and adventurous like the Hobbit, but also tense and grand like the LotR.

[@ComeOnIsSuchAJoy]

@@MalachiSouth I'm all for a single-movie, live-action adaptation of the book that's closer to its tone, but one still relatively coming off the heels of the LOTR trilogy _and_ with mostly the same cast and crew would've felt weird to a lot of people (especially average moviegoers), I feel. They kinda _had_ to make it feel more like LOTR. But I personally think they found a decent happy medium.

[@MalachiSouth]

@@ComeOnIsSuchAJoy fair enough. Your probably right about the film coming directly on the heels of LotR. I think by standing in the middle they both helped make the movie as true to its original material and still appealing to fans as possible, but at the same time probably forced themselves into a corner.

[@ceo.of.cinema]

I will always love this trilogy. I know it isn't perfect. I know it isn't as good as LoTR. I know they are terrible adaptations. But these movies got me into Middle Earth and I love them!

[@thegoldman25]

That’s awesome!

[@andrewvincent7299]

The Dwarf you're talking about having a nice conversation with Bilbo is named Bofur. And there is actually a pay off to that conversation they had towards the end of the first movie. Sadly that pay off happens only in the extended edition of the final movie. Bilbo and Bofur have a conversation when Bilbo is trying to sneak out of Erebor. The problem with the Extended edition of the Hobbit films is that unlike the LOTR EE versions, they took important plot elements and payoffs and put them back into the movie that should have never been taken out in the first place. The LOTR EE added more quality but the theatrical versions didn't suffer in plot for not including those scenes. It's the complete opposite with the Hobbit EE.

[@vocad808]

To me, it's only the 3rd movie of The Hobbit which I consider truly bad. The first movie is actually very good in my opinion and the second one is enjoyable for the most part. There are several scenes which are unecessary, but overall I like the movies. The Lord of the Rings will be unmatched, so just enjoy the movies and stop comparing them

[@thegoldman25]

I like the 1st but not the 2nd or 3rd

[@henrymockingbird9645]

Say what you will about the hobbit trilogy but at least you can call it a trilogy unlike the sequel trilogy

[@thegoldman25]

i don't know what this means

[@henrymockingbird9645]

@@thegoldman25 it’s like you said a trilogy has to have a beginning middle and an end. The hobbit trilogy has a beginning. It has a middle and it has an end and they all feel like they’re part of the same story they feel like they have the same vision. The Star Wars sequel trilogy did not have that

[@iirose7]

period

[@GabiMesser]

Loved the new format of this video!

[@thegoldman25]

Yay, thank you!

[@GabiMesser]

@@thegoldman25 thank you for all the good content!

[@marqusmedina5983]

*SMAUG WAS PEAK* Say what you want about the movies but give the dragon his dues

[@skylarwaite]

I don't know if someone has already said it or not, but Fili did have a pay off with the knife bit at the barrel scene. It was very small, but it was a payoff.

[@ElladanKenet]

Well, it's NOT the LOTR trilogy..... but compared to Rings of Power, it might as well be a masterpiece too.

[@SchlumpfMitDemHerpes]

Haha, before start of season 2 i wanted to rewatch season 1... Stopped after half an Episode and started watching LotR again. Now i am at the Hobbit, and it is still upliftig 😅

[@darganjames2943]

For me these are the Star Wars prequels, I know they’re incredibly flawed and no where near as good as the original. But I still enjoy them and watch them every now and then.

[@ComeOnIsSuchAJoy]

The issue with the SW prequels was strictly execution. The story was there. The world-building was there. The lore was there. The mythology was there. The concept/art/production design was there. The costume design was there. The sound design was there. The music was there. The attention to detail was there. And, overall, the imagination was there. All that was really needed was a more deft screenwriter and a more actor-friendly co-director working closely with Lucas on all 3 movies. With those, the PT would've been pretty much on par with the OT, as far as I'm concerned. But, really, even as they are, it's really not that difficult to read between the lines. And, meanwhile, virtually everything put out under Di$ney has been conceptually shit from the start -- all because none of them fundamentally understand Lucas' vision of this galaxy far, far away that he created. 🤦‍♂

[@Shonras]

@ComeOnIsSuchAJoy The two first seasons of the Mandalorian? The last season of the The Clone Wars? Andor? Star Wars Fallen Order and Jedi Survivor? I prefer not to start with unpopular opinions because I actually liked the Last Jedi and even enjoyed The Acolyte despite its flaws - which were actually the same as the prequels (good concept and bad execution). Not everything was perfect under Lucas' supervision either. Remember the Holiday Special? The Ewok cartoon? The Clone Wars movie? All these forgettable and contradictory comics and novels, plus the video games that were just bland copy and paste from other genres (with a few exception like KOTOR)? I too have criticisms on how Disney is handling Star Wars but it is far from being black and white.

[@ComeOnIsSuchAJoy]

@@Shonras As far as I'm concerned, the 'core' saga *_WAS_* Star Wars (i.e. the Skywalker family, the Force, the Jedi/Sith, and the galactic government). I was never going to be interested any of these side story movies and TV shows (though I was fine with them existing). The problem is, thanks to Di$ney completely botching Eps. VII-IX (essentially phasing out all of those 4 elements except the Force -- though largely changing its nature in the process), and, thus, leaving no viable path forward for Episode X and beyond, that's all SW is now. I know _Andor_ has its fans, but even many of its supporters consider it too dour and gritty to truly feel like SW (centering it around a character from "Rogue One" that few people genuinely cared about - and already knowing where it's going to lead - didn't help its cause). The problem from the start has been the fact that the people now running Lucasfilm don't fundamentally understand George Lucas' vision of this galaxy far, far away that he created -- and they couldn't be bothered to learn everything they could about it from him (or, perhaps even worse, they never actually cared). Di$ney Star Wars can best be summed up in 2 quotes from the dreadful sequel trilogy: "Let the past die; kill it, if you have to" and "That's not how the Force works." It's all just glorified fanfic now. Maybe I have the advantage of not being a 'Tolkien fundamentalist,' but I could at least appreciate some of the liberties Jackson & Co. took with the "Hobbit" trilogy in terms of how it relates to the LOTR trilogy that they also made (I've already made another post elsewhere in this video's comment section going into full detail).

[@baierogers5096]

I feel like The Hobbit Trilogy, arguably, started the studio trend of prioritizing "fan-service" and nostalgia over a coherent, compact, and rich story (*see the Star Wars sequel trilogy, Terminator franchise, Fantastic Beast series*)

[@matrix-5466]

I don’t think anyone though the Hobbit Trilogy was bad when it released, and I still believe people generally appreciate what it was trying to do. I get there are a lot of problems, but a Tolkien adaptation requires years to do while PJ only had a little over 13 months.

[@justlivin2499]

I recognize these movies are flawed but goddamn it I can’t bring myself to dislike them, I still remember watch BotFA in the theaters as a kid

[@greysonberry5055]

“All he did was tackle an orc” Bro that’s basically a death sentence for a hobbit he got saved by plot armor

[@LibertyLocalizer]

14:42 Dwalin is the most loyal to Thorin. It was very intentional that he was the one to confront Thorin

[@Shadowsmoke11]

It's amazing how he didn't mention the special effects. Everything in The Hobbit trilogy felt so artificial and unreal. The stark contrast to LOTR where it feels lived in and I'm not watching a video game.

[@alexandertkachenko1432]

I would do anything for a modern animated hobbit movie, which only exists to adapt the book!

[@fgdj2000]

I initially didn’t like them until a rewatch just before BotFA came out… and since then I‘ve loved them. Sure, they are bloated, cartoony, have pacing and tonal issues and don’t quite feel as gritty as LOTR, but overall I think the good far outweighs the bad. The big dramatic moments they always nail: Introducing the dwarves in Bag End, Bilbo gaining Thorin‘s acceptance, Bilbo helping the dwarves with the spiders and elves, lake Town, Bilbo‘s encounter with Smaug, the destruction of Lake Town, Thorin‘s madness and his falling out with Bilbo (save for the detox sequence) most of the battle of the five armies, especially in the extended version (dwarves vs elves, chariot sequence) and the climactic duel between Azog and Thorin, Bilbo‘s grief for Thorin and his return as a changed man. People also forget that it’s supposed to work as the first three parts of a six part series and watching both trilogies back to back, I think it really works still. I don’t know how future spin offs will turn out but The Hobbit Trilogy to me has become an essential companion to Theh Lord of the Rings Trilogy and the two are one six part saga, like Star Wars under George Lucas.

[@lukeluke333lukeluke]

My short answer. Really wish they made them into two movies and tighten things up. I somewhat enjoyed the movies but I rarely rewatch them vs I almost always rewatch Lord of the Rings every year.

[@thegoldman25]

Or just one 4 hour movie

[@NimbusAngelo]

You should watch the M4 Hobbit Book Edit if you want a great version of the trilogy. The lead editor, M4, teamed up with talented digital editors to make a single film version of the trilogy. They desaturated, removed the glossy overlay, corrected the color grading, digitally omitted characters, and added film grain to make this version match the appearance of the LOTR trilogy! And they cut out all the excess stuff that wasn't in the original book. It corrects 90% of the problems of The Hobbit. This M4 fan edit transitions seamlessly and is more faithful to the spirit of J.R.R. Tolkien.

[@untipoxddd5784]

​@@NimbusAngelo I watched it but felt like something was off and I tried to watch other fan edits but noeone like the exact things that I like so on that moment I realized that I like trilogy and I probably only dislike 20-30 minutes of the hole trilogy.

[@untipoxddd5784]

well, the M4 edit is very good

[@LEG10NARE]

This is why i wish we would have gotten Del Toros Hobbit films. His films would have been unique and stood apart from the LOTR trilogy. Now whether they would have been good films that remains to be seen.

[@_sim0nn637]

My thoughts (dumbed down* cause this is just a youtube comment) An Unexpected Journey: Relatively faithful to the book, it keeps the innocence of the book which none of the other films did. Gollum is great, the dwarves and gandalf have alot of moments that puts a smile on my face. Overall a fun fantasy flick. 6/10 The Desolation of Smaug: Kind of cool with the dark fantasy theme of it, and Smaug has his moments. But honestly, meh. 4/10 The Battle of The Five Armies: A cynical misreading of Tolkien, pared with some random plot points that are dead ends, an uncomfortable amount of refrences to LOTR, and some beautiful cgi muck. 3/10

[@Thesassyfish]

nice new video format

[@thegoldman25]

Glad you like it!

[@enderemp]

STOPPING PEOPLE WHO ARENT IN FULL SCREEN FROM HAVING TO READ AI COMMENTS

[@thegoldman25]

I don’t get many ai comments

[@vocad808]

Video idea: True detective - 10 years later

[@FeeriiEekii]

There's the M4 fan edit; 1 4 hour movie combining all the best (book) bits and cutting out all the extra nonsense. Extraordinary work with great (re)editing and even some musical and CGI rework, really incredibly work. It fixed nearly all the problems I have with the Hobbit Trilogy, I absolutely adore that version. When I rewatch the Extended editions of LotR I pick the M4 fan edit as a companion piece.

[@sayking1245]

The hobbit movies aren’t perfect but i enjoy them a lot still on rewatch. The story doesn’t completely follow the book at points but all the movies have heart and the acting is really good. The 1st one is my fav but i think the other two are still great fun. The first two hobbit movies have an 83% audience score and the third one has a respectable 74% audience score and people still talk about it so it clearly hasn’t been forgotten or not enjoyed by people anymore they still sell a ton of digital hobbit copies and 4k discs

[@sayking1245]

Also its 10x better than rings of power

[@thegoldman25]

I somewhat enjoyed watching them

[@MRdaBakkle]

You know it's hard to believe that this trilogy is 10 years old. Wow. This video really makes me sad we never got to see Guillermo's version of Middle-earth.

[@mickieg1994]

To put it simply They had no intention of making a good show and that's why it wasn't good.

[@thegoldman25]

This seems to be true

[@redzoro92]

You make a really good point on how the Hobbit focused too much on being prequels so it set up a lot of unnecessary stuff. But since you mentioned Star Wars, I had an epiphany w/ Star Wars the disney trilogy. They had the opposite problem of being too much of a sequel & as such spent too much time recalling the old stuff & not actually trying to craft anything really new. The bad guy was supposed to be Snoke & Kylo, but then it was Palpatine. The planet destroyer was basically the Death Star. The old characters kept coming back to the story w/out doing much even though they should be the most active. At least that's how I see it.

[@vinogr00nko93]

sequel's problem is that the one sequel that actually tried to be it's own thing met with THE WORST FAN DISCOURSE EVER KNOWN TO THE INTERNET and disney panicked and made the final one more like tfa, just a safe "remember the OT" type movie

[@LibertyLocalizer]

14:21 That conversation is an extremely good payoff to their first conversation

[@Sapoairsoft]

I watched them when they came into cinema. Man I'm old...

[@forlornhauntedghost]

I love the hobbit movies, prob because I saw them many years before finally watching the lord of the rings movies 😅

[@jesussalazar1901]

Keeping in mind and people seems to ignore completely this fact, J.R.R. Tolkien, himself was not satisfied with the original Hobbit book, in fact he was going to reconstruct the book story to fit it more with the Lord Of the Rings, and it was going to be call The Hobbit The quest of Erebor. I think Peter Jackson with the movies he accomplish that unfinished vision.

[@creategreatness8823]

I would LOVE for Peter Jackson to edit some kind of "special edition" or "alternate cut" of the Hobbit trilogy. I think between the finished films and all of the alternate or deleted material...that somewhere in the editing room there is a leaner, meaner, more effective and quality version of this story to be told. I don't know if that is 3 shorter, more focused films, or 2 films that are long and epic...but I think there are adjustment and tweaks that could be made that could REALLY minimize the flaws and faults of these films while maximizing and enhancing the qualities and highlights.

[@MoldyMojoMonkey]

Calling Jackson greedy seems a bit harsh considering how tumultuous the creation of this trilogy was. Bloke only stepped in to direct out of a sense of loyalty to the world after Del Toro left and all pre production was scrapped.

[@laurence2424]

Legolas' dad saying he needs to find strider makes absolutely no sense since aragorn was a little kid at this point.....

[@broncojuan]

Nice work. You pointed out a lot that I missed, but I would still rather watch this trilogy over episodes I-III.

[@thegoldman25]

Thanks!

[@eduardomayol3214]

I loved them. They’re really good movies, something that is hard to find today.

[@Revenix]

People are too picky, yes it has all its faults but they are still great films.

[@iirose7]

yes

[@paulkerr2654]

Having just finished watching them with my daughter, i actually think they've aged pretty well. Not too complicated, plenty of humor and action. Could the films be shorter? Absolutely, still doesn't take away from the enjoyment of them.

[@LukeLovesRose]

This may suck next to the original LOTR trilogy. But everything out there today sucks next to The Hobbit trilogy

[@1stDragonlord]

Beorn's unresolved plot is a bit sad to me, because he was the one who killed Bolg and carried Thorin to safety, after the dwarf got fataly wounded.

[@Megrez-Alberich]

Great video, but I would say that most of the problems with these movies (shallow, transparent characters, build-ups with no pay offs, no real sense of tension, etc.) come straight from the original book. The movies only magnified those problems and made them more noticeable, but they where always there in the source material. What works just fine in a book (especially in a children's book) might no work as well on the big screen.

[@johnpfaff7532]

18:20 "unrealistic Elf shit." Lol

[@wildhunt6350]

The Legolas bridge scene lools unrealistic, but it has lore behind the „physics" of it. The shoes Legolas wears makes him loose his mass in other words weightless. That explains it and also explains how he walks OVER the snow during the Fellowship of the ring. It's just magic shoes with magical proportions.

[@Arkus]

It's a flawed Trilogy, but I still enjoy watching it to this day. Those little moments between the characters and the Smaug scenes give me joy.

[@chasehedges6775]

2012 - 2014 was a good year for movies

[@thegoldman25]

2015 was better

[@chasehedges6775]

2015 was GOLDEN!

[@rezoannur2333]

I was never able to get through the trilogy in their original release. However, I did watch a fan edit by Maple Films that combined all 3 movies into a 4 hour 20 minute movie that resembles the book more closely. That was a lot more fun.

[@thegoldman25]

I should watch it

[@wattsnottaken1]

Not as good as Lord but still I fucking love the Hobbit Trilogy!

[@studentstudent5044]

The Hobbit films are very good movies, are they The Lord of the Rings? No. But they are really good movies that are very well made and has alot of heart in them❤️

[@JackSmith-ns1uq]

I really feel this trilogy - not only because theres clearly some incredible scenes & casting amongst some messy story decisions, but because the tragedy what couldve been. I do feel like if your gonna examine these movies and critique them a decade later you couldve at least discussed all the behind-the-scenes reasons as to WHY so much of these films are the way that they are… like how PJ wasnt even supposed to direct them and then when last minute decisions were made he had a few months of pre-production before filming began (most movies will have literal years). Certainly PJ deserves some blame, but the fault of the hobbit films was not mere “greed & poor decision making” at least on PJ & teams end… on the studios end it is.

[@anakinjaywalker584]

Great video, what do you think is the best Hobbit film? My personal favorite is Unexpected Journey.

[@thegoldman25]

Mine too!

[@thegoldman25]

Anakin Jaywalker is a really funny name btw

[@johnkross3469]

Everything you said is valid BUT let's not overlook the key detail that PJ replaced Guillermo del Toro half way through. The movies had a 2yr production contract. PJ with only ~12 months to make the hobbit films. He couldn't reuse any of GDT content because they have VERY different ideas of middle earth. I believe that if PJ was given the full 2 years The Hobbit films would have been a drastically different movie with a much better quality to it.

[@cozyburrito686]

It's so odd that I will always automatically watch the LOTR trilogy, probably at least twice a year, but the Hobbit doesn't even enter my brainwaves. I don't even ponder it. I think I've only ever watched them twice, and that is just such a weird thought.

[@thegoldman25]

yeah it's like the uncle no one likes to talk about

[@michaelfeeney9147]

A lot of people expected the hobbit to be the lord of the rings. But it isn’t. The hobbit is a short book for children and I always thought it apt that the movies have a silly lightheartedness to them.

[@LightSourceTemple]

The movie is AMAZING when edited down a bit

[@Jp421JP]

Sauron was the necromancer. At least his growing spirit.

[@A21_Edits]

I love the Hobbit movies. I never saw anything wrong with them. I saw all of them in theaters. And they were incredible.

[@Oni_Evergarden]

I love the Desolation of Smaug. It's my favorite non-animated movie of all time. I don't "love" Battle of Five Armies but I think it's still decent. On a recent rewatch I liked it a little bit better for sure. I still love An Unexpected Journey but still love Desolation of Smaug more though. I obviously don't think the movies are perfect but I love them and that's what matters. You touched on it a little bit but one of the few issues I have with the trilogy is probably the party of dwarves doesn't come off too great.

[@CheddarMannn]

Can't really blame Jackson for not giving every single dwarf an intricate personality since even the book doesn't bother; Bombur is fat, Oin and Gloin are good at starting fires, Balin is much kinder to Bilbo, and Filli and Killi seem to look up to Thorin - that's it.

[@tbking9852]

About the Mithril situation with Frodo...I agree with your statement, but we were shown so poorly how it actually works/protects the bearer. Frodo gets stabbed, and then proceeds to "die" or act like he's dying. So...is Mithril an impenetrable armor, or does it heal? So no, it doesn't show us "how strong the armor is". It confuses the viewer about wether or not it works like actual armor. My argument here is, how does it help that we were shown Frodo receiving Mithril earlier, if we were just gonna get tricked into thinking he died, because we forgot it happened? For the record...LOTR is my favorite movie trilogy of all time, and is a hundred times better than The Hobbit

[@Optimegatrongodzilla]

5:17-5:55. 🤦‍♂️ Yes, that *is* what a sequel is! It takes place after another story that it is directly connected to in some way. 'The Lord of The Rings' is a sequel to 'The Hobbit' because it has some of the same characters and involves the nephew of the titular character of 'The Hobbit'. The live-action 'The Hobbit' film trilogy doesn't deserve the hate it gets at all! The biggest problem with it is the forced "Kili and Tauriel" thing. If the dwarves had been held captive by the wood elves for 2 weeks, like in the book and the animated film, as opposed to however many hours, it would have made sense for Kili and Tauriel to have developed romantic feelings for one another. People complain about other story elements in the live-action film trilogy that weren't in the book, but some of those added story elements, those being the story elements involving Gandalf & Radagast's sidequests, and the White Council confronting the Necromancer(AKA Sauron) at Dol Guldur, actually weren't made up for the live-action film trilogy, but were pulled from the appendices of the book 'The Lord of The Rings'[1954]. JRR Tolkein wrote said story elements to explain why Gandalf kept leaving Bilbo and the 13 dwarves in 'The Hobbit'[1937], and it's surprising that he never added them into the book 'The Hobbit'[1937] for future printings of it. Even if those story elements weren't part of the original Arda Legendarium created by JRR Tolkein, their presence in the live-action 'The Hobbit' film trilogy would be very welcome, as without them, Gandalf comes off as a douche for repeatedly leaving Bilbo and the 13 dwarves when they could(and, as we know, they do) find themselves in dangerous situations again. People also complain that the live-action film trilogy isn't lighter in tone and that it's epic in scale, which is dumb because we're talking about a story in which a group of characters go on a quest to take back a stolen home & stolen treasure from an evil fire-breathing dragon with human-level intelligence, said characters find themselves in perilous situations, including an encounter with said dragon, and there's a grand battle between 5 armies via which some of the major characters die. Should the live-action film trilogy have had some additional lighthearted moments involving Bilbo and the 13 dwarves? Absolutely. But, people act like these films don't have any lighthearted moments when that simply isn't true. Also, turning an 8-hour-long book into a single film or even 2 films wouldn't have done the story enough justice. It's bad enough that there are 3 'The Lord of The Rings' films when there should be 6. I have never read 'The Hobbit'[1937] or 'The Lord of The Rings'[1954], but I know that with the live-action 'The Lord of The Rings' film trilogy, they had to cut out a significant amount of stuff from the book, even with the overly long extended cuts of the films.

[@pavelplsek2000]

Before I watch most of the video - i like your vibe, here is comment for algorythm.

[@MonicaMoraal]

They needed the Arkenstone to unite the dwarves and kill Smaug (this was a Jackson invention). By the time they got the Arkenstone Smaug was already dead, so they didn't really need it anymore.

[@Krayd-q5j]

There is payoff to the Bilbo Bofur scene, but only in the extended version

[@catalinacaro8183]

The first two movies were nice enough for the 14-15 year old me, they were entertaining, had a good time, and the end of the second I was like I CAN'T WAIT FOR THE NEXT ONE TO COME OUT... next year the third came out and don't really remember it, it was such a let down, to my uncritical 15 year old mind it was so terrible.

[@steventalvinzvestal420]

Smaug was quite something else thou.

[@notoriousnatetalksabout]

Honestly, even though the Lord of the Rings are my favorite films of all time, I’ve yet to watch the Hobbit films! I guess all the negative buzz and the fact that they changed a short book that I read as a kid into three movies never enticed me to watch them

[@thegoldman25]

it took me a long time to watch them as well