A friend of mine and I are planning to watch The Hobbit trilogy soon. But we're not sure whether we should watch the theatrical cuts or extended cuts of each movie. Keep in mind he's never seen them before. Which do you think we should watch /tv/?
The Hobbit trilogy is pure garbage
>>70443177
I'll drink to this.
only the extended edition contains this absolutely masterful sequence
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7azdH5Is5C8
>>70443137
At least the theatrical cuts will end before you kill yourself
>>70443137
The edit that makes it into a single four hour movie.
Or LOTR instead
>>70443137
reading the book would be shorter
Is it really that bad? Im the friend who's never seen them.
>>70443137
Neither, just watch Lotr instead
>>70443298
none of them are as good as LotR, but the first two are pretty good. the third is an absolute travesty, though - the drop off in quality is unbelievable
>>70443300
We wanna see both trilogies.
>>70443221
the dragon was honestly really cool most of the time. i wish they'd done more with it but i guess the source material wasn't for it.
the fight with the dwarves was stupid tho
>>70443177
Its not. Still better than capeshit.
>>70443137
Whatch all extended cuts except for the last one.
>>70443341
Watch LoTR twice.
>>70443261
This 100% jesus.
>>70443298
They're quite bad. The first moves so slowly that you can actually get ahead in terms of plot faster by reading the fucking book.
Cinematography is alright with the trolls and the mountain golems but its cartoony and same-y. Second is pretty fucking stupid with even more cartoony shit and a bitch ass smaug. Third is utter shit. Embarrassing.
Its a huge waste of time.
>>70443341
The hobbit is fucking garbage so watching the hobbit first then LoTR will be an awful experience, so best to watch LoTR first then the hobbit if you really want to waste your time watching fucking garbage with your normie friends. The hobbit trilogy is comparable to the star wars prequel trilogy, awful dialogue, shoehorned characters, terrible pacing and all acted behind a green screen that looks painfully fake. But you are retarded so watch the hobbit first, then LoTR.
>>70443253
jesus christ
>Go north. Find the Dunedain. There’s a young ranger amongst them. You should meet him. His father Arathorn was a good friend. His son might grow to be a great one. He is known in the wild as Strider. His true name... you must discover for yourself. Legolas! Your mother loved you.
>>70443375
>shit taste: the post
>>70443253
Holy shit i cant believe this got greenlit.... all those other "legolas moments" were always some of the most hamfested in both lotr and hobbit films... even the one with him stepping on the stones... but this.. this is simple jack... hackson took it way too far
>>70443137
Theres a fan edit that cuts the movie to be more in line with the book, if you have to watch the hobbit do it this way. Other wise watch LOTR then the apendicies
>>70443137
Just watch the original trilogy the Hobbit movies are pure dog shit
>>70443375
Capeshit is better
>>70443253
MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP
>>70443137
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQkygZdZ_Vk
Its not his fault guys!
>>70443298
Martin Freeman is very entertaining, the dragon is cool as fuck in my opinion, literally everything else is shit.
>>70443642
thats what you get when you split a 200+ page book into 3 movies
>>70443656
Also Gandalf is still on point, and there are some moments in the first film that "feel right". But yeah that's it.
>>70443375
>Still better than capeshit.
you act like thats saying anything
Watch the third movies battle scene on youtube, it's great for a laugh due to the level of how much of a shitty job they did with it. They didn't even bother to render certain sections of it.
The first Hobbit movie is pretty good
Second one is very uneven, some very low bad points, some very high good points
Third one is awful
Compare this
Marathon the fellowship of the ring instead
>>70443977
to this
>>70444008
that fucking headbutt made me burst out laughing in the theater
>>70444008
The Hobbit really didn't need a fucking battle sequence
>>70443354
Even using the source material they could have. There is a part of the book where the Dwarves are camping in a chamber right through that door in Erebor. Bilbo had already had his first visit with Smaug and tipped him off that they had a camp somewhere on the mountain. So Smaug is scouring the mountain looking for them. Back at their camp, the secret door was kept open slightly because there was no way to reopen it from the inside, and Bilbo says they should close it (and they do) right as Smaug sneaks up on it from the outside. This could have been adapted into an amazingly tense scene, but no, we got a dragon vs dwarf clusterfuck.
>>70443298
They're """"""""""passable"""""""""" if you've never read the books but honestly I'd just read the fucking books
>>70444034
my memory on the book is fuzzy (it gets really hard to tell lotr from the hobbit if you ahven't read them in a while), was there even a battle in the hobbit?
>>70444118
The Battle of the Five Armies, friend
>>70444118
sort of. the battle happens, but it's not described in any detail because Bilbo (the perspective character) is unconscious while it's happening.
>>70444118
Yes, but it wasn't show in the books at all. Bilbo literally slept through it
>>70444034
There's a way to do battle scenes and I think the one in the Hobbit could've definitely worked if they'd approached it right and had enough time to film it
The Lord of the Rings movies practically reinvented the concept of a 'battle scene'. They were almost perfect. Completely flawless understanding of the editing and composition that battles need to look convincing. Look at any battle scene in a movie before 2001 and compare it to one made after 2003. Lord of the Rings really changed it up in a big way.
>>70443137
>watching the extended version of a bloated trilogy made from a 100 page childrens book
no anon
>>70444175
THIS is not how to do it
Weightless, floaty CGI automatons jumping at each other with sweeping, lingering camera angles that just draw attention to all the imperfections
>>70443977
ROTK was awful, was totally uneven.
gandalf said in the movie itself that "orcs of mordor have no love of sunlight" and that sauron sends a plume of smoke to block the sun, looks pretty fucking sunny to me.
they started strong, jackson got cocky as time went on. time restraints this, budget that, del torro the other, the six films still went further downhill with every minute of film that passed.
Fellowship: 7/10
Two Towers:6/10
Return of the king:5/10
the hobbit:4/10
desolation of smaug:3/10
battle of the five fags:1/10
>mfw no psycho saruman charming grima to murder and eat hobbits
>>70444248
What's the point of the phalanx if they're just going to fight in front of it?
>>70444521
theyz elves yo
Just watch the animated Hobbit movie from the 70s.
You guys make it sound like its the worst shit ever, worst that The Room.
>>70443261
>>70443527
Can you guys link me to the fan edit?
Is the Tolkien edit really the best version to watch?
>>70444821
It's not that bad but the third one is legitimately a 3/10
>>70443298
yes
>>70443137
>movie about a dragon
>it's actually a wyvern
EVERY TIME
