See it in

Tolkien paired with Jackson still a proven combination

By elemperador
Written December 18, 2012
I admit I was a bit worried hearing that the Hobbit was going to spawn three nearly 3 hour movies. I was pleasantly surprised that instead of feeling stretched, it felt natural and the time passed before I knew it. The visuals, as always, were spot on and the 3D helped immerse without feeling gimmicky. I loved how it started, tying in nicely with the start of the Fellowship of the Rings. I highly recommend.
10 out of 12 found this helpful. Did you?

Expectation exceeded

By artsupplyz
Written December 16, 2012
I am an avid fan of Tolkien and this movie has something for everyone. I saw the 3D version and was not disappointed. Peter Jackson has done an end to end great job while staying true to the story.
10 out of 12 found this helpful. Did you?

The Hobbitt

By Gwendolyn-1
Written December 16, 2012
What a pity Jackson forgot the very things that made the three films of the Ring Cycle awesome: A complex tale told in many many simple layers. If he had, then The Hobbit would have been the mirror reflection of the same: a simple tale told simply. Instead, the movie I saw tonight was gimmicky, with gratuitous and very silly battles going on all the time. No attempt at sense. 40,000 Orcs aganst 13 hero dwarves --and the dwarves won. How? Because Gandalf bounced a light flash in the enemy's eyes and shouted RUN! By the end, he had shouted RUN!! more times than I could count. Things have to get pretty awful to make Ian McKellan look like a bad actor. But Jackson did it! If it were only a silly movie, I might not have been so appalled. But it was worst than silly. It ruined a great story. Jackson could have done otherwise--as he showed in the few quiet, elegant moments of this three hour Rivendale, in the first Bilbo/Gollum encounter, the flash forward to Frodo. BAD BAD MOVIE
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Did you?

The Hobbit it worth watching

By cameron398
Written December 23, 2012
I will admit that I was a little worried when I heard that Peter Jackson was turning the smallest book in the series into 3 - 31/2 hour movies. This may annoy people who say that it doesnt follow the book series. After watching the movie I realized it was an amazing movie and I will go see it again.
10 out of 12 found this helpful. Did you?

I Thought We'd Come to See "The Hobbit"...

By Jeremiah_Cornelius
Written December 16, 2012
Not "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" or "The Transformers". What a piece of garbage. Charmless and brash. This is the McDonald's version of Tolkien. Eat it up! This adaptation should have been billed as "inspired by an idea by J.R.R. Tolkein. "The Hobbit" is a simple, straightforward tale, written more for the sensibility of children. The implications for "Lord of the Rings" should be just that. Implications - not effects-laden back-story and narrative train-wreck. This affair is not improved by the fact that Jackson couldn't direct a wet paper bag. Instead of getting anything from his actors, he leans on the volume of the soundtrack - pumping romantic orchestration as a cue. Hitchcock could manipulate with music. Mr Jackson is no Hitchcock - and his orchestral dreck was composed by no Bernard Herrmann. If the arts and culture mean anything in the cosmic sense, then there's a place in hell, to welcome Mr. Jackson.
10 out of 18 found this helpful. Did you?