Originally Posted by
badwhale
I tend to agree with your wife on this one. If they made the hobbit just based on the book, it would have just been one movie, instead of three. In fact, I'm reading the Hobbit at beddtime, and I'm kinda finding it dull compared to the movies. Usually it's the other way around. I think they did a nice job backing into LOTR storyline, and I gather that Tolkien was a big fan of appendices that had more info than the basic book.
On that same note, you took no exception to a major plot change on Malificent?
I've never read the book Malificent so I wasn't aware there was a difference between it and the movie.
As for The Hobbit, I figure it would have made two very good 3 to 3+ hour movies without the extraneous stuff. Sure they tied it into LOTR but really, they had to otherwise the appearance of Legolas would make even less sense.
Again, it's just a pet peeve of mine. You and my wife aren't the only people to tell me they have a differing opinion. My best friend came up to visit for a few days between x'mas and new years and he agrees with you two as well............LOL
It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll.
I am the master of my fate:
I am the captain of my soul.
***William Ernest Henley***
Bookmarks