This movie was an unforgivable abomination.

>How could this happen?
a super short children's book (one hour of content) made into three 2-hour movies

>>82785060

>What was peter Jackson thinking

Probably stress and producers with cigarettes wiggling his contract.

success seems to kills quality in every art

>>82786785
The only real motivation is sex. The next step down is money/power to acquire sex.

Once you have money/power/sex you have completely lost your motivation you once had and have to try and pretend you still have it.

>>82785060
my nephews are 8 and 12 and they hated these movies. i have yet to encounter someone that likes it.

>>82786908

The first two were fine. Little slow at times, couple iffy parts, but overall enjoyable. Third one was just a steaming turd though.

>>82786944
the first two were exceptionally mediore with both highs and lows. the ending of two in particular was exceptionally bad

the third was just so bad that nobody can ignore it

File: hobbit4.png (2MB, 1872x782px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1872x782px

>>82787117
>the third was just so bad that nobody can ignore it
i wish i could

What ultimately killed this trilogy is that it was a trilogy. They intended to make it two films, but in the middle of filming, (((someone))) decided to make it three. There wasn't enough content in the book to make three quality films and it showed.

>>82787169
>five hours in ms paint

>>82786875
found the virgin

>>82785060
the issue is that they attempted to spread out one book's worth of content into 3 movies for money instead of any sort of creative vision. i dont think peter jackson was thinking about anything other than his contract and his wallet.

File: hobbit-2[1].jpg (396KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

396KB, 1920x1080px

There's nothing wrong with the Hobbit Trilogy, it's my favorite series of PS2 games ever.

>>82787198

I don't think 3 films is what killed it. Certainly it didn't help, but I think the real problem was trying far too hard to tie it to the lotr trilogy. So many of the callbacks just ended up being terrible.

It really should have been just one movie.
Some people say two, but even that's really stretching it.
What makes me sad about the Hobbit trilogy is that there are good things with it - the acting's good, the characters are likable, the music's nice, but then it covers the good parts up with more and more shit.

File: Giant_new_logo_1433243986.0.png (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

>>82787269
>its literally the model from the giant on Total War: Warhammer

JUST

>>82787396
One 4 hour movie or two 2 hour ones.

>>82787450

No, not really. The warhammer model does look cooler though.

File: 50shades of enough.jpg (24KB, 290x305px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 290x305px

>>82787800
>The warhammer model does look cooler though.

>>82787169
Did the elves buy their army on Kamino?

>>82787396
Go watch the Maple Films Hobbit Edit. HD all the way through, cut at the right places, some 4 and a half hours long (intermission at 2 hour mark)

Rock solid 8/10 fantasy movie

>>82788755
ehh, that one is ok but still not much worth watching IMO. The color grading is especially egregious. I actually wrote a review for it on letterboxd

>>82789177
>>82788755
posting the review
Ever since I saw the first Hobbit film in theaters years ago I yearned for a fanedit; not because I felt that the film was poorly pieced together, but because there was a significant and noticeable quality gap between material in the film from the books and original material; nearly all of the original material, including subplots, scenes, jokes, and character arcs were nearly despicably bad. This is especially noticeable in stark contrast to the great adventure story they were littered throughout and in light of the fantastic and enduring Lord of the Rings trilogy. Since then I have seen two fanedits made using all three films; The Spence Edit and this one (Maple Films edit). I have to say that I am impressed by neither, and both have convinced me that this trilogy of movies may be beyond saving.

For this one specifically, it is misguided in its attempt to make the Hobbit films more like LOTR. It cuts out goofy and comedic action sequences and does color correction to desaturate the image, resulting in an ugly and improper image that lasts the entire time. It also tries to balance the edit to include, on average, an equal amount of runtime from each film, even though the quality of them drops significantly. For instance, the first film covers about half of the Hobbit story and, if edited down properly, would still last about two hours. I would keep about an hour and a half from Desolation of Smaug and less than a half hour from the abomination of the third one. This edit seems to enjoy far, far too much of the dreadfulness that is the third one, including nearly a whole hour of horrifyingly terrible action sequences, contrived plot motivations, and as you all know the terrible CGI. After sitting through 3 hours of an off-tone version of the boring parts of the first two movies, I then had to sit through another hour of some of the worst film I had ever seen.

...

...

To give credit where credit is due, however, the worst offenses of the original movies are gone; to me the big three are Bilbo's artificial character arc in the first film, where he is a battleborn hero and accepted by the dwarves before they reach Mirkwood, the inclusion of Azog as a main antagonist, and the Elf-Dwarf romance in the second and third movies. All are removed without an ounce or trace of existence in the edit which is quite astounding considering how large a role they played in the original movies. The other impressive aspect is the sound, and especially the soundtrack. It flows together as naturally as if it were professionally scored and edited. It's one of the most difficult things to pull off in a fanedit but Maple Films delivered on this front.

All in all, despite the good cuts and editing, I felt that too much of the good stuff was cut out, too much of the bad stuff was left it, and the entire picture was bland and disinteresting to look at from beginning to end, and it ended with the most drawn out sour note I've ever sat through. A good effort, but absolutely not the one to save the trilogy; if it can be saved, that is.

p.s: their website and releases are very, very professionally done. Most fanedits are difficult to get a hold of at all, let alone in decent quality. The fact that they took the time to work on multiple releases, including full BD isos and artwork is definitely impressive, and if that mattered at all in the final product I'd give them a whole nother star just for it.

File: 1492244823511.png (300KB, 600x476px) Image search: [Google]

300KB, 600x476px

one word, $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$44

>>82789468
>"Oy Vey, Mr Jackson, we've been hearing rumours you plan to make the Hobbit in two parts and not three?"
"Yes, it's a short childrens book"
>"Oy Gevalt, what a holocaust, Mr Jackson, we are missing out on a third film worth of shekels here"
"It'll be hard to make the source material last two films, let alone 3"
>"A shoah, right here in my office, remember the 2 billion, Mr Jackson, we demand you make stuff up, invent new characters, show popular characters from Lord of the Rings, lots and lots of CGI"
"Yes, my chosen one"
>"One last thing you Goy animal, we hear the dragon has 4 legs... it only needs 2 to walk, many shekels will be saved"

>>82789499
ignoring the jew memetalk parts, this is probably how it actualy went
sad!

Can't for the life of me understand who thought it was a good idea to omit the iconic arrival of the dwarves at Beorn's house (two by two while Gandalf spins Beorn a yarn to keep him interested) in favour of the dwarves cart-surfing on rivers of molten gold and making a giant statue that defied physics in order to try and BURN an animal that BREATHES FIRE.

>>82785060
>What was peter Jackson thinking
Cha-ching, Cha-ching, Cha-ching

File: frown.jpg (11KB, 318x325px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 318x325px

>>82785060
What was he thinking??

>>82788755
>HD all the way through
Spoonfeed now
All I have got is a dvdrip quality from Tolkienfan or something like that
Solid context though, its probably the same parts

I like the first Hobbit movie desu

jackson didn't want to do this but the studios offered him so much money that he couldn't turn it down.

>>82785060
>What was peter Jackson thinking

>"Do I want another 10 million dollars for squeezing out a slippery turd? Why yes, yes I do."

>>82786785
Has there ever been a director/musician/artist/whatever who made a great work after becoming successful?

It seems like they "make it" and then just stop trying

>>82787169
I hate the "shiny" look on it all
I hate to quote CinemaSins, but he described it accurately as it looking like someone took a radioactive piss on everything

>>82790248
>ignoring the jew memetalk
>proceeds to /r/thedonald memetalk

>>82790845
>director
Tarkovsky - zerkalo
Spielberg - raiders of the lost ark
Bergman - Fanny and Alexander
Malick - literally everything he's ever made after Badlands
Michael Mann - Heat
James Cameron - Titanic
>musician
Trent Reznor - The Fragile
Soundgarden - Superunknown
Led Zeppelin - The Houses of the Holy
The Beatles - White Album
John Mayer - Continuum

bottom line is that line of thinking is kind of retarded. Most masterpieces are refined works that are not first releases. Great artists first releases are always impressive albeit amateur, which increase in depth and production quality over time

>>82785158
The Hobbit is actually decent in length but a single three hour movie probably would have sufficed.

>>82790984
literallly none of them surpass the earlier work

>>82791126
who said anything about being better? they are simply great works that rival the earlier work, and yes in some cases they are better. especially when it comes to Malick. I mean fuck, if you don't see how even Days of Heaven is a masterpiece compared to Badlands you're a ridiculous pleb

>>82790984
>Titanic
>great

Otherwise fairly accurate list

>>82791192
Titanic fucking rules dude. I'll defend it tooth and nail.

>>82787269
jesus the first Harry Potter movie had better CGI than this

the first harry potter psx game had better graphics than this

File: 1452016261530.jpg (27KB, 306x306px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 306x306px

Someone tell me right fucking now why Peter Jackson doesn't go back to making horror-comedy kino.

>>82791277
Because he's an obese, lazy hack on par with Lucas or Del Taco

>>82785060
>It's appalling just how bad this is

I'm not even sure if it is a movie. It's just a long CGI sequence.

I legitimately liked the first one. 2 and 3 were aids though

>>82785060
>get into audiobooks while driving
>LotR trilogy (50 hours)
>Hobbit (11 hours)

Jesus fucking christ this really put it into perspective

>>82791381
Everyone liked the first one
That was the trick

they didn't have a storyboard, jackson said they literally made it up while shooting the scenes

I can't bring myself to really blame Jackson. There was no helping them milking it into a dried corpse

>>82789315
>>82789330
I dearly hope no one paid you for this.

The hobbit tried to be an action movie because thats why every big budget movie need to be these days. And it's not an action story, so it becomes this mess we got

>>82792416
it was a letterboxd review, and there's nothing wrong with it

>>82791075

I'll one up that, and say that two movies also could have worked.

The noticable drop in quality happened after the decision to split There and Back Again into two movies.