• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

    Read BEFORE posting Trades & Request

The Hobbit

I'm all for a cinematic adaptation that strays from the source if it's appropriate and CINEMATIC. I've always said the multiple endings of the LotR works in the books but isn't appropriate or cinematic for the theatrical film. For the extended? Sure knock yourself out. But the Hobbit had issues that weren't about length, they were about how appropriate they were for a cinematic experience. The Goblin Town, Barrel chase, molten gold, and the (I don't even know how to characterize it) physics defying awful stuff from BotFA were all unnecessary and detrimental to the film. Excise those scenes alone and you have two movies. Add some depth of character and keep it at three movies and I'm fine with that.
 
^ I don't get it?
 
Yea, it's more goofy-funny than smart-funny, and I didn't think much of it the first time, either, but it charms me more every time I watch it. It's wryly stupid - IMO. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom