BOX OFFICE: THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY Expected To Cross $1B Mark By March

Suck it Haters! Say what you want, but this monster of a franchise does make the cash... And i for one Loved The Hobbit!!!

Are these "ites" part of some other language?

#sarcasm

Mostly agree with LEVITIKUZ. The Hobbit was incredibly underwhelming and, coming from a big fan of the LOTR movies and books, disappointing as well. Looking past the 48 fps complaints, the pacing problems, and the run time, it was kind of a mess. With Radagast, the entire Azog storyline, and the awful cheesy and cliche' parts, the only reason it's doing so well is because of the still strong LOTR following. This movie is nowhere near the same league as that trilogy. Martin Freeman's great performance saved it, along with the Riddles in the Dark scene. Hopefully the next two movies redeem it and do a much better job of telling Bilbo's story.

Django deserves a billion though!

This movie was alright but nothing special. Never was much of a LOTR guy. Peter Jackson's a good director but they should have had someone like George Lucas or Ridley Scott do it. They know prequels.

OhThePurdue

So you're just another caricature. Why do we have so many people who feel the need to craft a persona just for this site.

Caricature? How am I so? Maybe these are just my opinions. Maybe I would prefer someone other than Jackson to do Hobbit, OK?

most underrated movie of 2012,miles better than the 65% rotten tomatoes score.

@ckal I completely agree. There's also no reason why Radagast (and Azog, for that matter) should have been in the movie in the 1st place. Completely pointless, and don't even start with his idiotic bunny sled. WAY too many action scenes that were there just for the sake of action. Fair to say that my expectations are a lot lower for the next two movies.

I saw it again today. Epic.

What are you people smoking? Really? Peter Jackson is a hack? Ok. So let's look at these complaints. 1) Azog. For those that haven't read the appendices, they nailed this part of the backstory of the dwarves(with a small exception). Seeing Thorin's backstory is crucial to the success of the other films. If its just about Bilbo the Battle of Five Armies is almost meaningless. Now the addition of Azog to the main story was put in to add some drama in an otherwise less dramatic half of the book. Understandable. I think it was a bit much, but from a pacing point of view it is necessary. Also builds up for a big showdown at the BOFA.

2) Radagast. A little overdone, agreed. But in the books he's rarely mentioned, and of that he's regarded as a bit of a cook. So they're not far off. PJ made him a lot more kid friendly and a comic relief, adding to the overall lighter tone of this one.

3) someone said too much unnecessary action? Sorry but had they not you'd be saying it was too slow and boring.

Basically, of course they made some changes, we knew that was going to happen. If you're a fan at all of the books you'll appreciate it all regardless of some minor inconsistencies. I didn't like the stone giant scene, it felt forced for 3D purposes only. But I didn't let it ruin the movie. Ok, sorry I'm ranting. I'll go back to watching South Park.

But crap movies don't make 1 billion...

@Super 12 Nobody said Jackson was a hack, but he's not a genius filmmaker by any means either. Take a look at his resume', all he was known for before LOTR were awful, B-movie horror flicks. Ya, he struck gold with LOTR (and even then, there's a lottt of problems with them. Still good movies though), but you can see so many of his deficiencies in The Hobbit.

For one thing, they didn't nail anything with Azog. In the book, Azog's dead already. And it doesn't even happen in the same battle that we're shown in the movie. It was a completely different battle that Thorin became known as "Oakenshield" and Azog was killed. Completely unnecessary, forced drama just to spice things up when it didn't need to be. Come on, the whole 'revenge' storyline was contrived and cliche'.

Radagast was just ridiculous. From reading the books, I'm pretty sure Tolkien never envisioned a wizard with bird crap on him, driven around in a bunny sled, healing hedgehogs and fending off spiders somehow. Jackson didn't need to add to the overall lighter tone, if he stuck with what happened in the book, that would've shown through anyway.

And by unnecessary action, you mentioned one great example yourself: the stone giant scene. How about the characters constantly chased by Azog and having Radagast save the day in the most ridiculous way possible (not to mention it looked like absolute garbage CGI)? And of course, the completely contrived "epic fight" at the end. "I know my friends are hanging on for dear life on the tree that's about to fall over the cliff, but hey let me go kill my mortal enemy for kicks!" Even though if he actually put up any fight at all and killed him, he still has a bunch of orcs and wargs to deal with. Yep, great character development right there.

Again, had Jackson stayed true to the book, it wouldn't have been slow or boring even without any of that extra crap.

Bottom line, anyone who loved the LOTR movies and the books shouldn't really have a lot of good things to say about this movie. And as LEVITIKUZ correctly pointed out, ya there's many crap movies that get to 1 billion

Numbers on rottentomatoes.com don't say whether a movie is good or bad. They simply say how many people like it. The movie being good or bad is still subjective to each person, Levitikuz.

This site has been infected with whingy morons, someone actually said that Two Towers is the worst LOTR. What has this site come to?

@SotoJuiceMan - need to get your facts straight. The clip with Thanos in the Avengers was midway through the end credits. The "tease" as you call it with Smaug actually was the last scene of the movie before the end credits began.

Peter Jackson didn't say he didn't want to do the Hobbit, he just couldn't devote all the time to it as he was planning to develop Naiomi Noviks "Temeraire" which he aquired the rights to back in 2006. He signed on as Producer and trusted G.Tel Toro to do the directors duties till MGM went bankrupt and G.Del Toro had to move on to his other scheduled commitments. The time it took to save MGM meant that Peter decided to push back his plans and do it himself as Del Toro was his only choice to take the reigns of the Hobbit.

The reason Halo wasn't made is due to it needing to find a distributor, films don't get made out of Directors own pockets for crying out loud. They get made by Studio's who in most cases pay for distribution. The Hobbit was a joint venture with W.B and MGM who held the production rights. Halo will also be a joint venture with Microsoft, Dreamworks and whoever they make a deal with to deliver distribution.

As for the Hobbit being made into three movies, well anyone who has read all that Tolkien wrote surrounding the Hobbit doesn't need convincing that the movie needs three films. For the rest of you like yourself however well you need to understand he's not just adapting a book, he's adapting a time-line. The Hobbit as a book is written from one persons perspective of events, Bilbo's! It's written as a childrens book and although it has lots of events, it has lots of inexplicable disappearances by Gandalf and very light on dramatization. When Tolkien decided he wanted to make it more serious the publishers wouldn't let him so he rewrote sections of it to fall into line with Lord of the Rings which he originally started as a rewrite of the Hobbit and then took shape as The Hobbit part 2 before finally becoming the three books we know now. He had so much more he couldn't fit into the narrative of LOTR that he put some in the appendixes of Return of the King but he died before he could finish dramatising The Silmarillion and fitting the rest in there too. His so Christopher released most of his works in The silmarillon and Unfinished Tales, both of which most people never bothered to read. Jackson did!

So to those who think the Hobbit is just a single book being beefed up to three movies simply for a basic cash-cow, there's never going to be a way of making them understand that Tolkien wanted more for that little kids book and that's why he wrote more for the events surrounding it in Middle Earth hence Jackson's desire to take the one chance he'll ever get in his life to deliver as much of that narrative on screen to fit in with the greater vision of the Middle Earth movies he's delivered so far.

So let's face it, The Hobbit disappointed YOU, not US, $920 million and rising is not a disappointment! I've seen it 5 times and going again a.s.a.p.

I wasn't disappointed in the film, so if some of you were, that is your opinion. I am very glad they are doing three films because they are tackling a major battle in each, which is enough to me to warrant making it into three films. Different strokes.

@Levitkuz...because you (and a minority of RT critics) didn't like Hobbit doesn't make your statement a"fact." So not only are you a hypocrite, but you're also not as funny as you think you are...and that's a fact!

@Levitikuz

So now, not only are you discounting numbers (which was he whole crux of your broken argument in the first place), but you're still calling opinions facts.

This is hilarious.

@Sotojuiceman are you going to rant for 5 pages, repeating yourself over and over again in the process again? We get it you don't like the movie, you only need to tell me once. And if you plan on insulting me come up with something original other than "get a girlfriend" or "get out out if your morher's basement", because I hate to break it to you but I have a girlfriend, and I live with her not my mother.

@SotoJuiceMan...had no idea he was 17, but that certainly explains A LOT! And by picking on him, do you mean calling him out for being a hypocrite?! Seriously?!

Are you over 18? Is it safe to assume I can pick on you without being called out for being childish? LOL. My wife knows I'm childish simply for frequenting CBM...you?!

@Spideyguy94...in all fairness, I'm not wrong in suggesting Lev meet a girl. He should! I use CBM as an escape from my real life/wife ;D If he's 17, he should be living in the real world NOT CBM!!!!

@Soto...nice to meet you, man! Sounds like you made a good decision for your family. I have a 10 yr old son and work assembly (I have 2 college degrees, which pay considerably less).

My beef with Lev was based purely on his slam on someone's article for a movie he clearly doesn't like (trollish) and then later asks why we can't all get along. I've read a few of his articles and he has the potential to be a quality contributor once he's seasoned a bit (something you've apparently discovered young, too).

I think it's imperative that we be held accountable for our actions on the internet, because, too often, people hide behind an alias and behave horribly, which I believe contributes to the downfall of our society and carries into real life.

Sorry for the soapbox rant, folks.