dvd screener got leaked.

Was not even out for a full month. There goes $ income.

I am sad because all the people involved in LOTR work so hard.. The amount of time, effort and perfection put into production is insane..

This post was edited by TonyAbbott on Dec 29 2013 03:32am

=/ I think they would lose a small % due to this. Too many people out there are terribad when it comes to streaming movies online...I'd say a good % of the population nowadays uses smartphones and tablets more than laptops and pc's...thus they aren't really adept at internet research and finding stuff online.

This post was edited by PartyInMyPants on Dec 29 2013 04:27am

you got mad here, same old antagonising pixel seeker

he is dead on.

why can't people accept other opinions though? i take it you love this movie? that's fine with me...
why assume everyone who doesn't like the movie or thinks its bad is measuring it up to Kubrick? simply wouldn't be fair on any other film ever made!

explain why it was bad. all you said was "ya was bad" ...

did you like LOTR? if no, then why did you watch this. do you like the Hobbit/LOTR story (e.g. the books)? if no, then no point analyzing this movie.

honestly...a lot of movies nowadays are based on books, and if you don't like the books, then don't be surprised if you don't like the movie.

if you don't like a certain movie genre...don't go around saying that movies that fall within that genre are "bad"...

This post was edited by PartyInMyPants on Dec 29 2013 05:10am

Blah pretty much nailed it.

I enjoyed the first movie so I was happy that this one ended up being better. Disliked the cliffhanger but I knew one was coming because it has to set up the final movie.
Got a kick out of the people whining about how they portrayed Gandalf as weak.

This post was edited by Arsenic_Touch on Dec 29 2013 05:21am

first one was delightful, I bet 2 ND will be good too.

People saying Gandalf is weak clearly are clueless about the role of gandalf in this world.

This post was edited by Lensherr on Dec 29 2013 05:31am

again why do you assumed many no's in your questions?

I love the book, have you read it?

I'd say this movie can only be described as being loosely based on the book - if you have read the book then there is no chance you could disagree with me.
Peter Jackson has embellished, re written or simply made up his own story in order to fill a 3 movie trilogy and to try and make this almost a direct prequel to lotr, with the ring's dark addiction and the rise of 'the enemy' being the main focus throughout. Lets not forget the Hobbit is a short book, and a simple tale really and the only real protagonist between this and LOTR is gandalf, the ring plays a small part in the hobbit book as much as bilbo plays a small part in the lotr book. The ring is the hobbit book is more of a tool for bilbo which he uses to go in and out of visibility, that's it as far as the book is concerned... so i guess i have issue with the changes and made up nonsense Jackson comes up with, im not saying its necessarily wrong, im saying it takes away what 'the hobbit' is
The addition of Legolas as a main character joined by a completely made up elf with her own deep meaningful story arc? cluttered things up to say the least, again, in my opinion not needed
Then theres the action scenes! cartoonish and quite frankly ridiculous , in particular the elf/orc fights? behave.
anyway it doesn't really matter why i said its bad
why do you think its good?

The only made up part if the female elf. Everything else in the movies are canon in the Tolkien universe. Jackson included a bunch of things that happened along side the Hobbit as described in other works such as the Similarian to fill out the story a bit.

The main aspects of the movie have been pretty damn accurate so far. The side stories have also been fairly close to the Tolkien essays concerning middle earth.

Oh also azog was sort of made up. In the book he died and his son hunted the dwarves. Showing up at the final battle.

This post was edited by Blah58 on Dec 29 2013 06:10am