Want to help support this channel? Check out my books on Amazon: www.amazon.com/Will-Jordan/e/B00BCO7SA8%3Fref=dbs_a_mng_rwt_scns_share Subscribe on Patreon: www.patreon.com/TheCriticalDrinker Subscribe on SubscribeStar: www.subscribestar.com/the-critical-drinker

You are wrong on this.

This is one of those "what if" type movies experiences: what if they´d made it a decade earlier, when the LOTR buzz was still detectable; what if they hadn´t forced the film-makers to pad the slender narrative out to three saggy, elephantine snooze-fests; what if the original writer/director Guillermo Del Toro had been allowed to create his own original vision, free from studio interference with (a creatively exhausted and clearly disinterested) Peter Jackson producing; what if they´d cast a better actor as Bilbo, instead of trying to parlay Marty Freeman´s popularity from Sherlock into better box-office receipts; what if any of the dwarves had been given a proper character arc, without shoe-horning in a ludicrous romantic subplot (I mean, does Tauriel have a short man fetish? Does it count as pedophilic if she´s supposedly immortal and hundreds of years old already? Just... no); what if New Line Cinema had played it straight with the returns from the original trilogy, thereby avoiding the long and bitter court battles that delayed production for years and soured the relationship with the director, and hadn´t blown out the original two-picture format to three mid-production; what if Cate Blanchett, Hugo Weaving and Christopher Lee hadn´t apparently forgotten how to act in those cheesy insert scenes around the council table... In the end, nothing but a cautionary tale of studio greed, artistic hubris and colossal levels of mismanagement.

Dwarfes are the most awesome fantasy creatures! They mine for fortune, drink beer and are fierce warriors.

ive only seen something like this happen only once GOT season 8, same crew from this first, but somehow screwed up

this trilogy is on par with CW television, thats not a comparison you want

the 60fps thing was such a huge turn off. it literally looked like a home video. how some people claimed it would be the future of cinema is beyond me.

So it sucks because you didn't like it, man STFU

I am in agreement. Well analyzed and a good digest of failure.

Now watching the Hobbit trilogy as a massive fan of LotR as well as the original Hobbit book was one of the worst things that ever happened to me, but you have to admit, Smaug was amazing, at least in the scenes with Bilbo in the treasure room. Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman were the best this trilogy had to offer.

Thank you for expressing my thoughts🎎

Yea was way too long

Have to disagree. I've seen WW 1981 hobbit was a masterpiece compared to

yes, how did those dwarves do all those dishesz without breaking them hmmm...because they are especially hardy

The only good things were Martin Freeman as Bilbo ,Ian McKellen as Gandalf and Benedict Cumberbatch as the Smaug.

I didn't mind the first part. But the second two could and should have been condensed into one. After doing some reading it seems like Jackson was a last minute replacement and wanted to do 2 films but hands were tied. So I'm not suprised it was so drawn out

My advice to anyone who hasn't seen these movies: just watch the animated film. It's a lot shorter for one, and more pleasant to look at

I kinda like Hobbit.. Obviously LOTR is better in every way.. and Hobbit is definitely bloated AF.. 3 movies was too much. It could have been a great 1 solid movie. Also.. light hearted is not always bad. Even if the original is a serious epic. LOTR: Original starwars Hobbit: prequels Amazon LOTR: sequels Just wait, mr Drinker. You will learn to love Hobbit soon 😂 But that is just my personal opinion :-)

I actually love Smaug. He's FUCKING AWESOME! and Azog and Bolg were FUCKING BADASS as well.

I actually love The Hobbit Trilogy The only thing I ABSOLUTELY HATE is The RIDICULOUS Love Triangle between Fili, Tauriel, and Legolas

Legolas looks way weirder than I remember lol. Great video, glad to have found this channel

Yeah, yeah. I know... I know. But for some mysterious reasons I like it. Sorry Watching it with some drinks is my guilty pleasure

Lmfao.. Ouch .. I liked The Hobbit.. oh well .

the book "the hobbit" was a nice read D: the movies are "falling asleep to"- material

10:12, Isn't that the point? He's a terrible mayor and so he has to resort to Strawman logical fallacies to reduce his opponents credit with the crowd. And as you said, that's all you need because the town is too stupid to get rid of him.

i disagree with the dragon villain (he is the same in the book) but the rest of your critique is on point

3:43 said with such contempt - brevity is the soul of wit

Drinker at 13.5 minutes: “this video’s getting long as fuck” Me: laughs in EFAP

well the issues are simple, its a children's book with not enough material for a trilogy but too much for a single movie, and nowadays you aint gonna get 2 movies especially not if the predecessor was a trilogy, you gonna get 3 or more so obviously it would be a trilogy, now another issue is people go into this expecting the same thing they got with LOTR, which is silly, this was always supposed to be more lighthearted and play more with the fantastical elements, giving zero fucks about realism, its about having fun, its not supposed to be deep or complex, its supposed to be cartoony, plus you are working with material thats even older than LOTR, if this came out before LOTR I guess it wouldnt be treated this way cause people would simply see it as a fantasy adventure mainly aimed at younger audience that is just fun to watch, its like saying the first trilogy of Star Wars is garbage cause unlike the next one its super straightforward and simplistic, its just black vs white, there is not much to it its a very simple adventure, but that works, its fine as it is, its really old and it didnt try to do too much at the point it was made, just to do something cool and interesting, the Hobbit was made as a book for children which then evolved into the epic that is LOTR, thats the way you gotta be looking at it, they give you a bit of grandness and seriousness so that you can enjoy yourself even as an adult but fundamentally its a kids fantasy, its a bit of a shame that this didnt come out even before LOTR was made cause maybe then it would have been judged differently, nonetheless this trilogy is still enjoyable and has some undeniably great and memorable moments, the scene with Gollum and Bilbo is great, Saruman, Galadriel and Elrond vs the Wraiths is an amazing scene, the barrel scene is fun, the final battle is cool, yes there is a lot of silliness and fantasy but thats the point its not trying to be grounded at all, Smaug is great, you might say he is simplistic but ffs its a dragon what do you expect from him, its about the way he acts and how imposing and grand he is, how you feel small and insignificant in front of him, he is a huge threat and Benedict Cumberbatch does a great job playing him, he is definitely one of the best dragons in cinema history, Azog and Bolg are pretty simple villains but thats enough they dont need to be more, they are menacing and pose as big obstacles to be overcome, they are cool and make sure they show off why you shouldnt be messing with them, unlike in LOTR where the villains are practically nonexistent, Sauron is an eye on a top of a tower, Saruman is just sitting in his tower producing orcs, the Witch King is cool and menacing but isnt given enough screen time to be that significant and in the end gets taken out by Merry and Eowyn, Im sorry but thats pretty lame, Wormtongue is just annoying and pathetic, Lurtz was cool but he again had barely any screen time so cant rate him too much, all in all the villains in Hobbit are more prominent and actually act to make themselves be threatening, plus you talked about how worried you are about the characters, well Im sorry but in LOTR the Deus Ex Machina is 10x stronger than in Hobbit xD the Eagles for Gandalf, then at the end to fight and save Frodo with Sam, Gandalf can just be resurrected, Aragorn can fight thousands on his own and be fine, Gimli as well can get through anything, they all make it just fine apart from Boromir, the Hobbit actually killed off more characters than LOTR so in that regard its more ruthless, also I think you are selling Bilbo and Thorin short here they arent so shallow there definitely is complexity and character arc there, sure the others are just there to support and do the job but the main ones have something to them :) the main thing here is its just dumb to be comparing the two when both are done in a very different way despite being connected by the story, going into them you gotta realize what you are getting into and what kind of experience you can expect, its like saying the Fifth Element is garbage cause its super weird and wacky and over the top but its self aware and it knows what its doing, or saying that Fury Road is trash cause its pretty much just one big action scene, overall you have given a very grumpy old man view of the Hobbit completely ignoring what it is and what its qualities are, its a shame but maybe at some point you will realize that its not just simply bad, is it inferior to LOTR? ofc it is, does it now automatically mean its dogshit? no :) I really enjoy your content so hopefully you wont feel like Im trying to be simply hating on you :)

you should see the interviews with ian mccullen where hes almost crying because he had to act with a green screen instead of actual actors

The movie is from the point of view of bilbo reading his book, so I'm not sure but that might be why it's so whimsical

Unfortunately you are exactly correct Critical drinker the 3 hobbit movies that they made or all garbage Lord of the rings was far superior and always be far superior nobody wanted a backdrop story least of all me to see how bilbo Got the ring and all the other ridiculous garbage but they made it anyways Unfortunately And all I can say to the people who decided to do it and the writers who actually wrote the scripts is simply fuck off writers

For the record I do know the names of all 13 dwarves (the hobbit is one of my favorite books tho)

It just doesn't fulfill its promises. Each of the LOTR, has a set promise: the fellowship, the two towers, and the return of the king. Each one is setup and each one is fulfilled. Fellowship happens and dies. Two towers engage their powers and fall. The Return of the King is matched by the fall of two kings, Theodan and Sauron. All very Yin and Yang (though in the books, Saruman dies in the Return of the King for a trifecta) For the hobbit movies, there wasn't. Love plots aren't wrong to include, you can add a romance, just needs the proper setup. Here there wasn't really a romance thread until there was a 'wham' romance thread, a bit of the old surprise. It might of changed things if in movie one, we introduced to our lover boy dwarf as a Don Jaun/ casanova, maybe seduce a halfling for sport, then trying to get with the Elf he mellows out a bit. Or rather he's got his eyes in the clouds, then meets a down to earth elf woman, and starts thinking skirts make better adventures. Or he beds every pretty girl that blinks yet she doesn't jump in the saddle, dwarf man has to actually pursue elf girl and show some character some spine, then he dies tragically proving that he's worth loving, and her being an immortal character Goes into the West. Instead it comes out of the blue with the first major female character in the story, so it starts wrong, matures sour, and burns all the way down, don't you love vinegar straight no chaser. (honestly there's only two or three arc endings for an elf character: Goes Into the West, becomes Mortal, befriends mortals in a Tom Bombadil sort of way) The whole Legolas, Annoying Elf King, it's all material, like exposition stretched out into a conversation that doesn't start or finish anywhere. The king doesn't learn anything, it's not like he suffers the death of oakenshield, feels responsible, and Goes Into the West, that might actually say something about how the determination of the dwarves changed his life. Legolas isn't going to have his arc until the next story, so he can't really befriend the dwarves or anything. He's just going to take up run time flipping around like a surfer with a scar down his back. -Might have been better getting him to adventure with the human (Bard?), bringing that relationship into a better light. So when he's with Aragon in LOTR, we can see that Legolas is dropping the Elf xenophobia. -Or Legolas was on mission from Aragon ? (nope the age would be wrong) Maybe Legolas should've been brash, headstrong, like eighteen wants to fight a dragon, macho elf. -Legolas the lover left at the altar, meh, not so much. It's like a poor man's Sweet Home Alabama, just without the gay cousin. Bear man is a wooden plank, alright that was harsh, tissue paper is more accurate. Even the wonderful dwarves don't get a chance to become something, then change, or just make themselves into specific/ iconic roles. Though we kinda get it, there's a leader (Oak Man Du), Sage-boy, twins, Heavy hammer, fatso McGee, deaf-bloke, nail-head, and there's not enough whiskey to remember the rest. Still if you're going to pad the run time, spend every last second of it with the DWARVES! Should've been three or four team building sub-plots where the dwarves are at loggerheads for something, and then Bilbo can win them over in their disputes. Showing that the best thief of all, is the thief that can con loyalty without even trying to con. Everything is just moving, sprinting to the next bit. There's a travel plot that just doesn't end. There's a macguffin plot that just doesn't end. These need a start and a finish and a restart. Finish the travel by arriving at X. Restart the travel for reason Y. Hopefully you can not put X and Y so close together that everyone conflates the two as one thing. Though of course, unless that needs to happen, because you're running a short story, or a thriller, then fine. But Hobbits was three movies, three short stories, make some breathing room, to experience the world. That's the thing about these three movies, it almost doesn't feel like you go anywhere, because there isn't a lot of time in those places with those people before you go flying off to the next place to meet person B, who has information or story Q, that will advance everything to spot ZZW. I mean it's like they took LOTRO, and tried to make the MMO the movie. Just one endless quest. I mean for Hobbit one, there is the Bilbo-Oak distrust. Fine, but that distrust wasn't strong enough to carry through one whole movie as it was. There needed to be more with solid progress instead of no trust, no trust, some trust, no trust, lots of trust, respect achieved. Again if that was the plot, then it needed to be present. At every step of the Fellowship, Boromir and Gimli are tearing the Fellowship apart with their attitudes. Boromir breaks the Fellowship. Gimli puts his trust in the Fellowship after sorta killing Gandalf, incidentally by going through Moria. Hobbit two is a blur to me. Places, people, barrels, and Stephen Fry. Gandalf is absent, but not dead. So that doesn't carry as much weight as it did in the Two Towers. What needed to happen was that after Biblo is trusted there needed to be some sense that they couldn't actually reach the mountain. Political machinations after Goblin town ain't it chief. Being imprisoned by elf king wasn't it. these all seemed like small diversions, like a hero getting kidnapped over and over again to break free. Once okay, twice maybe, but I think its three times in Hobbit two: spiders, elves, lake town. And hobbit three of course is just one long action sequence without breaks that mean anything, and a useless standin for Worm tongue. I mean come on, if you're going to redo the character give me creepy, not coward in a dress. Oak's defiance comes off as petulant and gold mad. Biblo-Oak with the mad king plot, just rushed, certainly set up from the beginning just not progressed. The end of Hobbit one made it seem like itd gone away, and that it was just a sign of his distrust with Bilbo. Oak's willingness to turn away from the stone, just didn't fit with the gold mad king. His using gold to try and kill the dragon, that didn't even seem right with the gold mad king. Like in LOTR, Tolkien ends the fellowship and break into two travel plots. Here (the hobbits) there's no breaking of the fellowship, there's no reforging of two groups with different purposes. Two towers isn't just about two evil lords, but two fellowships opposed to the evil lords, and how they while separated still manage to overcome both towers. Hobbit movie two is a continuation of the first story, so it all comes as distraction, because you know they won't reach the damn mountain until the next movie. So what's the bloody point? No progress, or no real progress, just hey look at the clown, look at the clown, isn't the clown cool? (you just wanted the elephant march, not six bloody hours of clowns) The whole addition of the Angmar stuff was all reference material, like there wasn't an arc or a plot. People kept getting captured, oh it's Sauron. Like, that doesn't really do anything. Even the extra credits with the previous dwarf king were lackluster. Captured mad man goes more mad, ya think? Gandalf is captured, but this is Gandalf, people know there are more books, more stories, you gotta work with the notion that the audience has as many pennies to rub together as they do brain cells. In fact the more pennies, the more brain cells. Brainlets only have other people's money to burn, and that ain't enough to make good on investment. Just ask Lucasfilms and Sony, TLJ and MIB whatever. Hobbit the book is comfortable homebody goes an adventure for some gold with a tribe of dwarves. A sort of mix of Abraham and a heist (for those who say nay to the Abraham part, ya forget when Abraham fought his own battle of the five armies, kinda makes the connection even more interesting).

I was chilling while watching this. Then you reminded me the existence of the Amazon prime series WHYYYYYY

Let greed reign. Instead of one great movie we got a made for tv miniseries. 310 pages turned into 8 long hours. So sad.

My favorite part of The Hobbit was where Tolkien worked his literary magic to describe how the Dwarves were all stabbed to death slowly in the Battle of the Five Armies. You could almost see the knives piercing their supple flesh, penetrating their vital organs as they moaned and weeped in pain. There's a reason why he's considered one of the greatest authors in the history of the English language. Oh wait, that was the shitty movie.

Meh I like all the hobbit and lord of the rings but I understand your points

I feel like I am the only person who likes the hobbit movies.... I don't know if it's because I saw them in theaters from the beginning ob and that I like the music a lot and the scenery so... I don't know... I like it.... And I like Martin freeman 😂

Agree completely, shite movies though admittedly I never saw the 3rd one for this reason haha. Never understand all these Jackson defenders either, for fucks sake he was not forced to direct these movies

Unpopular opunion: lord of the rings was bad too

Whelp. You've done it. Earned a dedicated thumbs down from me. This week the Drinker shits on yet another production "he doesn't like". Fuck off ITputr.

better title: “why I THINK DUE TO MY OWN OPINIONS that the hobbit sucks”

Brushing over the fact that The Hobbit was just a bloody terrible book in the first place.

I disagree

The comment section is plagued with idiots defending this shitty trilogy. T__T

I agree with live action movie being bad. The cartoon movie was better. It was a little hard to read the book, so I read the comic version instead.

I do get your point of view but still I always watch the Hobbit together with the Lotr films eventhough I watch those more often. To be honest I liked the way the Hobbit films were done. They definately had some rediculous moments like that when Legolas is jumping on the falling debris but as a very dedicated Tolkien fan that didn't bother me THAT much. Yes the movie was not very serious at some points and I didn't like the idea of Elves being vegetarian as that isn't stated anywhere but if you think about it the Hobbit book does have a much lighter tone compared to Lotr and of course the Silmarillion (this book is totally "bring out your flashlights" but I love it). Also I like the romance between Tauriel and Kili and let people laugh at me for it. I actually sympathised with them and it was something that could totally fit in the whole universe without defying the lore. The Lord of the Rings of course will always be masterpiece films but the Hobbit movies gave some very iconic and epic moments aswell (let people whine about the Battle of the Five Armies. In the book it was barely a chapter so I did like that they gave it shape and form in the films without disrespecting Tolkien)

TLDR: it just does fin 🥀

Mr DRINKER SIR ,you should start selling your own whiskey mate.

I OFTEN wish to debate your opinions, but I Sincerely LOVE hearing your well-thought criticisms. Thanks, man.

Ur just full of shit n ready to hate aren’t ya there lad. Hobbit movies are good until the last one which IS bad

This trilogy is the film equivalent of a phrase “I survived another meeting that should have been an e-mail”. It had its moments, but not enough to justify the effort.

Hey! The songs weren't that crappy! Plus there's evangeline lilly and she's hot so that has to count for something, right?!

The Hobbit (the book) was a children's book. Wacky stuff and a sort of lack of darkness and danger are somewhat appropriate in that situation. The 8 hour runtime, however, fits this premise about as well as a rape torture scene in Sesame Street. The book knew that, and stayed short. This is another of those attempts to make something both children and adults will want, but ends up being disliked by both. By adults because the tone just doesn't fit, and by kids because they don't have the attention span to follow something for 8 fucking hours. That's why cartoons tend to be quite short and children's movies rarely even hit the 90 minute mark.

"There wasn't enough story to justify an entire trilogy" That's like saying "the ocean contains several bucketfulls of water". There's understatements, and there's UNDERSTATEMENTS. Considering that the Hobbit (the book) is (appropriately) about half the size of a single Lord of the Rings book (of which there were 3, though the story actually consists of 6 parts, the books just each take 2 of them), going past, say, 90 minutes with the material is stretching the source like butter scraped over too much bread. Making it the same length as the LotR movies is just greedy.

Anyone know who that twitch streamer was? Asking for a friend...

Say what you want, but the Convo with Bilbo and Smaug was by the book and beautiful

The Ranken-Bass animated Hobbit move was 10 times better.

I cant comment on the validity of all your arguments because I turned the first movie off once the drawves started the barrel rive ride. Everything i had seen up until that point seemed like a disneyesque attempt. Ridiculously cartoonish and slapstick, and i hated the costumes and makeup/hair. I have never made an attempt to try again.

11:24 Sounds like the nightly news for the lat year or two.

Woah woah woah. Just about any video game would be much more entertaining to watch.

Drinker who hurt you? Or how drunk are you? These folks aren't that bad. Not gonna lie I wept like a baby at the end of the battle of fife armies. But that probably had more to do with crying I hadn't finished at the end of LOTR. Either way these were entertaining and ridiculous. I love both of those things.

Wait... 5 different endings ?

don't forget about taht one point where we had damn near 30 minutes sequence of mountains throwing literal rocks at each other for no reason. They legit didn't even bothered trying to explain, its just something it happens and you have to get a long with it

Guillermo Del Toro was supposed to direct the Hobbit films (2 of them) then WB canned him, turned it into 3 movies and asked Pete to take over when he hadn't wanted to. It's a real shame what happened here. I will say that Smaug and the Eagles were done kind of exactly the way to book was, except that the Dwarves didn't jump in to help Bilbo, but we definitely didn't need the Orc Chases and the terrible looking CGI trolls, of which there seem to be like 15 diff models that have been recycled over and over. :l overall quite disappointing and hard to watch

Point 2 of this video is my biggest reason (among many) why I couldn't get into the new star wars films. Too much pointless action filler.

"those fucking eagles" are in the book dude. I don't understand this gripe. They literally bring them to the edge of mirkwood forest and take gandalf away from the party in the book. Why does everyone bitch about this? They make a big point of this scene in the book to make bilbo feel alone and abandoned. It's actually one of the better parts of the story cuz he ends up in a spiders web and then having to sneak into the elves home and free his captured friends and get them outta there. It's one of the best parts of the story right before the climax.

Because they never tried to make it about the Hobbit; they were going after LOTR: The Prequel.

Thank you for not including any scenes of the spiders

You were spot-on with your Kathleen Kennedy video, but I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one.

Looking into the production of these films, I'm honestly surprised it even got made. First del Toro gets canned, for reasons we'll never know. Jackson never wanted to do the Hobbit, but he pretty much had to. He had 8 months to do the movies and they had to shoot at a rapid pace, utilizing tons of CGI to save time. For reference, they had 2 years just for pre-production on the LotR trilogy. Then there was some sort of strike in New Zealand that complicating filming. No wonder it sucked.

Out of all it's problems I feel the singing was the least of it. Considering all the songs are part of the book.

Despite how bad this movie is I still love it

"I have a problem with Martin Freeman." Drinker, you're my hero today. Freeman is the most over rated English actor of all time. I hate that they picked him for the Hobbit. I knew we were in for a shit ride when he screwed up the "Good Morning," scene.

You're not wrong....but I still love this trilogy XD

when you think hobbit is bad but was made in 2013, imagine how is gonna feel when the amazon lord of the rings come out lol

But should they have made a film that is true to the book? That film would have been tonally completely different from TLOTR. A sometimes terrifying (spiders), sometimes silly (drunken elves!) road movie for kids. Is that what you would have wanted to see? I agree that the trilogy is way too long and has too many, too long, too over the top action sequences. I had to laugh at basically all Legolas-Action-Scenes - and not because I was having fun, but because they were so ridiculous. But the main problem is that the story builds up to a showdown with Smaug that never actually happens, because the dragon is killed by someone else and only after he is killed, a huge battle comes basically out of nowhere with a horde of faceless orcs. And in the book Bilbo gets knocked out and misses most of it! Is that a good story-arc for the protagonist? Maybe they should have changed the source material more radical for it to be consistent with TLOTR-films, but then everybody would complain about that not being faithful to the book.

It doesn't suck, that's your alcoholism talking, ya prat. Oh, it's certainly got warts, but it has its charms. Like that gal you hooked up with last Friday.

Oh it's bilbo and Gandalf from lord of the rings! It's a prequel??? Guess they aren't dying since we just watched the future.

Every time i hear the name Peter Jackson my brain is like "WHY ISN'T PETER JACKSON DOING A TEMERAIRE ADAPTATION???? WAEBAÄLWEHAEPWAÜÄO"

I use to like the Hobbit movies. Right up until the moment I watched this.

This is what happens when you stretch a 300 page book into 9 hours of screentime

Just watched fan vid that cut down to 3 hours and focus on the book story and the hobbit. Look up on ITput CANARY WEST. WOIRTH TIME!

I feel sorry for you mate , cause you are very wrong about the Hobbit series cause they are Great to watch any time. You are the one who SUCKS !!!!

Someone made a fan edit, cutting all the bullshit out. It ends at around 3:30 and is relatively enjoyable.

This trilogy is exactly what Tolkin feared would happen when he said Hollywood will butcher his work.

if they made it one good movie instead of 3 bad movies, we woulve been clamoring for the silmarillion, unfinished tales, beren and luthien, fall of gondolin, children of hurin, etc etc etc. 😔

Bottom Line: Watch Ralph Bakshi’s “The Hobbit” instead

Have to disagree on the Martin Freeman take. To me he was one of few bright spots in the movies and brought a lot of relatable charm and awkwardness to table. His story arch and character development was also handled fairly faithfully to the book. But ya as for the mishandles dwarves, side plots and romance these movies can just fuck off

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that every film in the Hobbit trilogy sucks.

Dude, why so serious ? This is a tale, a fairy tale so anything can happen. Having problem with this is a kindergarten level :] unsub

The one thing that truly ticked me off about this movie series is that Peter Jackson decided to have Gandalf ride into the human camp instead of appearing between the armies of the Dwarves, Men and Elves and when Thorin calls him an old fool and to get out of the way, then Gandalf turns around and asks, "Old fool?" Considering the amount of crap that was added I can not for the life of me figure out why Jackson decided not to use that scene.

They, the Hobbit Movies don't suck. They were fun.

The critisms you pointed out can be made to the book itself.The hobbit is a boring bed time story.PJ made a great job.3 movies was a stupid idea but PJ objected to that as well.

Smaug was like that in a book. Him and Bilbo was one of the few scenes I liked (mainly because of Benedict's performance).

The Hobbit book was so slow moving as to be unreadable. I faked reading it in school.

I gotta tell ya, I kinda miss the old heavy, dark, brutal yet perfectly lined with humor cartoon adaptation....you know..."where there's a whip there's a way!"

I love the first two Hobbit films -- they transport me into a beautiful, dangerous, and exciting fantasy realm. And the performances of Martin Freeman and Richard Armitage are wonderful. I found the third Hobbit film to be a huge disappointmemt. Martin Freeman's character was overwhelmed and pushed aside and the war didn't interest me. I was enjoying following one individual on an adventure -- suddenly there was nothing but battles scenes. When it ended, I was glad it was over and felt very much let down.

Lord these movies were awful. It’s almost like Peter Jackson took the concept of the dwarves from Snow White and tried to inject some of that into his dark serious trilogy. A friend of mine joked calling pt 2 ‘the desolation of Aran’s favorite book’ fitting.