Saw it. AMAZING.
Thank god. Now the next one who tells me that the movie sucks will see me saying. "Bosk1 liked it. Your arguement is invalid"
It was truly great. I did find myself much more easily picking up on where Jackson deviated from the text than I did for LOTR, but I am not sure whether that is because the deviations were more blatant, or simply because there is less material in the Hobbit, which made the deviations more obvious. Generally, I trust Jackson's vision. He handled LOTR very well, IMO, and his deviations from the text really were justified. One in the Hobbit that bothered me a bit was how the whole troll scene unfolded. In other places where he deviated, it made sense. I didn't see any point to changing how the troll scene happened. I think that should have been left well enough alone.
Perhaps the other biggest change is more general. Bilbo is just more...deliberate once he makes up his mind about something. To me, this is a pretty big character shift from the Bilbo of the book. But the one problem I have with the book is that when Bilbo takes the Arkenstone, it has always felt so out of the blue to me. That is one thing about the book that I have never really been able to connect with. On the other hand, I can see the Bilbo of the films making that decision once we get to it.
I thought the other additions were nice and served a purpose, whether they were additions from the appendices or Jackson's own embellishments. The Pale Orc, for example, really doesn't fit with the book or appendices. But given that the battle of 5 armies will likely play such a prominent role in the third installment, his addition is a great subplot that should give an added dimension to the battle and Thorin's ultimate demise.
Topic: The Hobbit movies (Read 175101 times)
