Don't Invest in X-Men!

Don’t cry Greenie…

^No worries, mate. I’m not into comics. I had a hard time getting them delivered to me out here on Dagobah.

If it’s not Star Wars or LotR, I’m probably not into it.

I just watched the Hobbit a couple weeks ago. I didn’t think it was as bad as everyone was saying. Three movies is probably going to be a bit too much though.

^ I watched The Hobbit on HBO a couple of weeks ago as well. It’s been a long time since I read the book, so there was a bit that I had forgotten (maybe it wasn’t even in the book) which was nice. Agree though that 3 movies is way too much for what was in the book. Given how much they left out of LOTR, I think it would have worked better as 5 movies in total, with 1.5 for The Hobbit and 3.5 for LOTR.

Yea. Some of the chase scenes in the Hobbit are ridiculous length. I like LOTR extended movies but I’ve never read the book. When I get sick and stay home I watch them!

Seen both versions of LotR and read all the books.

LotR books suck. Most boring books I’ve read–maybe ever. Maybe that was the writing style in 1950’s England, but it didn’t do much for me.

Hobbit book was OK. But it has the feeling of “We started a journey. Then this happened. Then this happened. Then this happened. Then this happened. The end.” There wasn’t a lot of continuity to it.

LotR movies - the extended version is definitely better than the regular version.

Hobbit movie - didn’t particularly like it. It differs too much from the book.

You farking bastard.

Before you say any more, let me ask you one question–have you read the books? That is, have you read all three books from beginning to end?

Not enough sexual tension between brother and sister?

I never quite finished Return of the King when I was an early teenager. I got to the point of Sauron being defeated, and then there was this bit about the Elves going off to the west and the hobbits growing a little taller with each generation and merging into the line of men and I never really got what that was all about so stopped. Other than that, I read pretty much all of LOTR.

If movie length were valuation multiples, I’d say that Hobbit is quite overvalued and LOTR is undervalued. I don’t think I’ve seen the extended versions or director’s cut of these - that would be nice for a snowy weekend, because I wonder what scenes I’ve missed.

The Hobbit just isn’t that long or sophisticated a book. Perhaps they could have (barely) divided it into two movies, but I really feel like three is just trying to milk us.

A few times. I’ve also read The Silmarillion several times, as well as Unfinished Tales and Morgoth’s Ring. The Hobbit is probably Tolkien’s weakest book.

^Okay. I will listen to your criticism then. I may not agree with you, but I will listen.

I don’t really have anything to say. Different strokes for different folks. Tolkien’s writing style certainly isn’t perfect, but he was the best at creating amazingly deep, detailed worlds. Even George RR Martin doesn’t come close. What makes fantasy and sci-fi books so great is the ability to create such immersive worlds. No one did that better than Tolkien.

The Hobbit is a children’s book, and this is maybe why adults don’t like it. Of course, nowadays, kids all seem to have 5 second attention spans, so the kids probably won’t like that book either.

Also, as people have noted, the Hobbit movie(s) is only generally based on the book. I don’t remember all this White Orc crap in the book. They added a bunch of stuff to the movie as filler, and to make the story more interesting. If they made a direct translation of the book, the story would be quite boring and even inane.

Wrong!!! You must never have read Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman’s books.

What is worth noting about Tolkien is that he created the LOTR world first, and then the stories after that. The stories were a subset of his work in creating the fantasy world, and this is why everything has a backstory and half of Return of the King consisted of detailed footnotes about improbably detailed history that normal humans could not care less about. The books were just a way for him to play in the sand box world that he had conceived. I still have not decided if this is the work of obsessive genius or an insane person.

Yeah–the White Orc wasn’t in the book. PJ added the “battle-with-the-orcs” storyline to have some continuity in the movie. Otherwise, it would follow the book’s style of “this happened, then this happened, then this happened, then this happened, the end.”

Also, PJ decided to make the dwarves a little more “aesthetically pleasing”, which is why some of them have goatees, some are clean shaven, etc. He thought that if they had 12 Gimli’s running around, the film would be “ugly” (and he’s probably right).

But the real failure of the Hobbit movie (IMHO) is the action. It seems too much like a “filler” movie, and not focused enough on the plot. Action scenes are good, and LotR did them well. But the Hobbit went overboard with its action scenes. Hopefully they tone it down in the next two movies.

“Wrong!!! You must never have read Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman’s books.”

Chronicles and Legends rocked. I made the mistake of starting Preludes after them… those are some of the worse books ever written. Can’t read anything unless its by Hickman & Weis in that universe.


LOTR books are boring? are you kidding me???