How boring is The Hobbit?

Of course it's not as epic, I mean, the material just isn't there. People can't expect the Hobbit storyline to be as good as LOTR's. I mean, let's face it, the LOTR books are better. The Hobbit is still excellent. Either way, this movie kicks ass, best movie of the year. Oh, blasphemy, it's tied. Dark Knight Rises!!!!!brucewayne69

I agree 100%. Except for the TDKR part as the Hobbit has the top for me without any doubt.

Not boring at all. Even the beginning is interesting if you're a Tolkien fan.

[QUOTE="brucewayne69"]Of course it's not as epic, I mean, the material just isn't there. People can't expect the Hobbit storyline to be as good as LOTR's. I mean, let's face it, the LOTR books are better. The Hobbit is still excellent. Either way, this movie kicks ass, best movie of the year. Oh, blasphemy, it's tied. Dark Knight Rises!!!!!johnd13

I agree 100%. Except for the TDKR part as the Hobbit has the top for me without any doubt.

I still cant believe they made that one book into 3 movies.

Unrelated question but still about The Hobbit;

Does it have any spiders in it?

I just felt like asking without making a whole new thread about it. My buddy's wife wants to see it but she will not go if it has spider-like creatures in it :P

Amster_G

[QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

if you can survive the frodo and sam and pippin and merry parts of lotr you can surely get through this.....

Laihendi

Personally I spent the time wondering when they were finally going to climb on top of each other. But whatever.

Unrelated question but still about The Hobbit;

Does it have any spiders in it?

I just felt like asking without making a whole new thread about it. My buddy's wife wants to see it but she will not go if it has spider-like creatures in it :P

Amster_G

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

if you can survive the frodo and sam and pippin and merry parts of lotr you can surely get through this.....

Storm_Marine

Personally I spent the time wondering when they were finally going to climb on top of each other. But whatever.

The only time I got impatient was in the beginning, when they spend like 35 minutes in the shire basically just establishing that Bilbo is reluctant. Other than that I thought it was pretty well paced. I do think it could have been done better in two movies though.

The only time I got impatient was in the beginning, when they spend like 35 minutes in the shire basically just establishing that Bilbo is reluctant. Other than that I thought it was pretty well paced. I do think it could have been done better in two movies though.

Brendissimo35

I still cant believe they made that one book into 3 movies.

sonicare

[QUOTE="Brendissimo35"]

The only time I got impatient was in the beginning, when they spend like 35 minutes in the shire basically just establishing that Bilbo is reluctant. Other than that I thought it was pretty well paced. I do think it could have been done better in two movies though.

dkdk999

That's what I mean, two movies would have been fine. Three seems like overkill, bit of a cash grab.

[QUOTE="sonicare"]

I still cant believe they made that one book into 3 movies.

worlock77

[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="sonicare"]

I still cant believe they made that one book into 3 movies.

Laihendi

The hobbit animation way back when was way better.

I can't see why anyone would be bored. It didn't feel dragged out all that much at all.

It was fine. The pacing could've been better, but if you can sit thru the endings of ROTK you can sit thru The Hobbit

[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="sonicare"]

I still cant believe they made that one book into 3 movies.

Laihendi

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="worlock77"] There's enough in the book to fill a couple of three hour movies easily. Add in the supplemental material they're using to bridge the 'Hobbit' with the 'Lord of the Rings' and three movies is not unreasonable at all.worlock77

which book is the one with the rabbit sleigh?

[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] I don't think there was even supplemental material by Tolkien used in this first movie though. Just a bunch of stuff made up by PJ and Fran Walsh.Storm_Marine

which book is the one with the rabbit sleigh?

[QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

[QUOTE="worlock77"] Then you haven't read much Tolkien.worlock77

which book is the one with the rabbit sleigh?

[QUOTE="worlock77"][QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

which book is the one with the rabbit sleigh?

dkdk999

Not boring at all. There is about 30 minutes at the begining of the movie where there is little action, but in a 3 hour movie, that really isn't unreasonable. The Fellowship of the Ring took about the same amount of time to get going as the Hobbit, so I don't see what the issue is. Once it gets going, the film really doesn't stop. To be honest, The Hobbit far exceded my expectations. There was very little if any filler material, I don't know what people were complaining about. The story was actually pretty epic, which surprised me considering The Hobbit (novel) storyline is so much smaller in scope and length than LoTR. The characters were really engaging, Thorin was awesome and I prefered the actor who played Bilbo (forgot his name) over Elijah Wood as a lead. Overall, I really enjoyed this movie. I've seen it twice and I would be fine with seeing it again.

It it as good as the Lord of the Rings Triology? probably not, but is not boring at any minute.

I absolutely loved it and I don't see why some reviewers are bashing it. The first film of a trilogy is obviously going to have to lay quite a bit of foundation down.

I thought it was great. Honestly I don't see how people can find it boring. Everything felt evenly paced.

The Hobbit was quite possibly the dullest thing I've had to sit through this year, evenmoreso than Lincoln starring Donald Day Louis.

The Hobbit was quite possibly the dullest thing I've had to sit through this year, evenmoreso than Lincoln starring Donald Day Louis.

TheFallenDemon