We are leaving the 48fps discussion out of this one, and just asking what you thought of the actual movie - regardless of which format you chose to watch it in. So click on to cast your vote on the first installment of Peter Jackson's new Middle Earth trilogy..

It seems a good lot of you went to see The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey over the weekend, so we thought we'd get your take on it now. The movie has met with somewhat of a mixed response from critics, definitely moreso than Peter Jackson's previous Lord Of The Rings trilogy anyway, but has this slight - and in some cases slightly ridiculous - backlash been warranted? Here's your chance to have your say - vote below and then sound off it the usual place.

And just for fun..

Posted By:
Mark Cassidy
Member Since 11/9/2008
Filed Under "Fantasy" 12/16/2012
DISCLAIMER: ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]
1 2
Darth258 - 12/16/2012, 5:34 PM
InFamouslyCool - 12/16/2012, 5:35 PM
Got a bit boring in the middle.
Darth258 - 12/16/2012, 5:36 PM
ToTheManInTheColdSweat - 12/16/2012, 5:41 PM
It was okay. But I can't help feeling disappointed - this wasn't a patch on any of the LOTR movies.
gregmeister - 12/16/2012, 5:45 PM
Most excellent film!
jimpinto24 - 12/16/2012, 5:50 PM
The Hobbit was epic!
THEDARKKNIGHT1939 - 12/16/2012, 5:51 PM
Didn't see it.
Darth258 - 12/16/2012, 5:58 PM
totally agree with @imadick

Also voted Thorin as favourite Dwarf of course, followed by Bofur and Balin
RorMachine - 12/16/2012, 6:04 PM
Some may this this blasphemous..but I actually think Jackson was hindered by the novel at times, especially when it came to the Dwarves. I always thought Tolkien seemed to have so many in the group simply for the initial gag at having Bilbo flustered with so many of them turning up to his house - cos lets face it, aside from Thorin, Fili, Kili, Balin..and maybe Bombur, the others hardly even spoke a line of dialog in the book. Now granted Tolkien was very much about descriptive txt, but they got [frick] all to do too! That's why I'm glad theer are 3 movies now, some more of teh little bastards will be fleshed out.
DaenerysTargaryen - 12/16/2012, 6:06 PM
I'm very torn. Some parts were good while others weren't so good *some parts I was literally gasping at how bad it was*. I did love Thorin, Gandalf and Watson *opps I mean Bilbo* though. Can't wait for the sequel.
I have The Hobbit part one a 7.5/10
StarkAnthony - 12/16/2012, 6:07 PM
I felt like they tried to add in too much junk that messed with the pacing and focus of the movie, while at the same time not taking their time with more important aspects. Parts felt rushed (for example, the riddles in the dark scene was fantastic, but they left out four of the riddles and Bilbo escapes in like 2 minutes), but I still feel they could have made an excellent Hobbit adaptation in two films if they would have just had some focus and not added junk about Azog that they made up or the stuff about the Necromancer which took place in the appendices but not in the text of the Hobbit. The film kind of works as a LotR prequel, but not really as an adaptation of The Hobbit. Especially with Azog, it felt kind of unfocused and all over the place. That said, I did enjoy the movie, there was a lot of good stuff between acting and characters and designs.
Goggles - 12/16/2012, 6:18 PM
Should have been two movies instead of three. And it shows with the amount of unnecessary scenes/stretched out scenes thrown into The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey.
Bodwulf - 12/16/2012, 6:55 PM
Loved it. Peter Jackson did his usual great job of delivering the book to film. Plenty of plot to build up and make you care about the characters. And cameos of favorites from Lord of the Rings added for fun. And ending on a lot of heartfelt emotion with Thorin and Bilbo and Gandalf. A+
Fogs - 12/16/2012, 6:55 PM
Loved it. Didn't seemed to be stretched out to me. The dialogue-story is great. And I loved the silmarillion references, the necromancer bigger role (I called it).

But the action scenes... Way too much. Too much CG, too many characters, too many physics-defying situations. Guess they got a bit carried out there.

Great movie nonetheless.
SauronsBANE - 12/16/2012, 6:56 PM
For the most part I agree with StarkAnthony. I had no problem with pacing or length, only the unnecessary additions that Peter Jackson made up to, among other things, give the 1st movie a "secondary villain," the same role Lurtz had in the FOTR and Saruman had in TTT, with Sauron of course being the main baddie in ROTK. The whole vengeance thing is so played out, and was really not creative at all. Also, Azog is already dead 60 years before The Hobbit in the book. It seemed like a lame rehash of FOTR, which had a MUCH cooler looking villain because he wasn't ALL CGI, which was what 95% of the movie consisted of. All the cliche's and over the top moments that was spread throughout was really tiresome, and not very faithful to the book (even if they did use many quotes straight from the text). I was definitely disappointed, and while I'll still watch the next two on their opening midnight showings, I'm holding my breath to see if they can improve on a lackluster beginning.
ThatOneDude - 12/16/2012, 7:27 PM
I've never really been a fan of LOTR (Don't kill me!!) but I thought this was actually pretty good... Longer than needed but still good
JDUKE25 - 12/16/2012, 7:29 PM
Very good, but I didn't really have any issues with it. I didn't read The Hobbit, so..
JDUKE25 - 12/16/2012, 7:30 PM
And I chose Thorin, because he's the only name I could remember and associate with a character lol.
digymastr - 12/16/2012, 7:31 PM
I thoroughly enjoyed this film! Unlike most people, I actually didn't mind the passing of the sequences. It took it's time to introduce the characters and offer some interesting backstory. Talking about backstory, I was really happy with how they handled Thorin, he truly felt like a fallen prince trying to reclaim his throne (kind of reminds me of Loki, of course I mean that as a joke). It wasn't a perfect film, I could have used more Radaghast and Goblin King, but I felt fully satisfied when I walked out of the theatre (fully knowing it was better that Phantom Menace).
digymastr - 12/16/2012, 7:38 PM
Alvahnomicron - 12/16/2012, 8:31 PM
It was solid. I liked the pacing, and I enjoyed the tweaks to the novel. It's a big deal to try and bring "The Hobbit" to the level of LOTR. Tonally, they're way diff, and, TH is nowhere NEAR as epic in scope. Also, LOVE the new score.
I did have a few issues, but, subsequent viewings will take care of them...
MCMLXXXII - 12/16/2012, 8:37 PM
the movie was great, i actually thought they should have told more of the backstory for the war of the dwarves and orcs.. could have done without radagast.. and im still dont get why they cant even give glorfindel a cameo in this movies, c'mon!
TheGambitFreak - 12/16/2012, 8:49 PM
It was phenomenal! Martin Freeman was down-right astonishing as Bilbo.
Having seen the extended cuts of the LOTR trilogy, multiple times each, I can genuinely say that The Hobbit, quality, scenery, visuals, special effects, and especially action, and hell even ACTING wise makes LOTR look so aged and senesced.

The Hobbit is with-a-doubt in my top 3 films of 2012 and I do not see how I will make it all the way until December 13, 2013 to venture into Middle-Earth once more to share in an adventure with some of the most incredible and funny characters I've come to love.

Only thing I have to say about the film that is negative is that there seems to be too many "TDKR" incidents in the sense that there is quite a few convenances where Gandalf happens to save them in the nick of time. But it is overlooked by me because of why it happens and what he does to save the group; It is so beautiful and smart.

Despite all the reviews, The Hobbit shines brightly in a year chalked full of great films. The 48 frames per second just adds to the movie's aura and the score, surprisingly, is as good and even better than it was in Lord of the Rings. Peter Jackson's Unexpected Journey has finally arrived, and it has landed with a thunderous boom.


And the banner on this article, of Thorin, is probably the best scene in the film because of what he does, it was so heroic and badass. That whole fight scene was just.... Sick.
TheGambitFreak - 12/16/2012, 8:58 PM
And I would just like to say, thanks to all of the @Users that voted on this poll.

Viewing the results, it doesn't seem like a bunch of immature assholes have cheated by voting multiple times like on the "Favorite Hero" and "Favorite Villain" polls...

JCortez7 - 12/16/2012, 9:16 PM
Wow what a movie!!! Amazing! Also, did anyone notice tauriel in this movie i missed her:(
MCMLXXXII - 12/16/2012, 11:04 PM
@JCortez7.. i dont think shes in this one, shes from thranduils people so she probably appears in the next movie..
95 - 12/16/2012, 11:12 PM
I could never jump into The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy. However, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey was great fun. I enjoyed the hilarious personality of every Middle Earth creature, the motion capture really helped.

On top of that, I got to experience it in 48FPS with Dolby Atmos surround sound. The stereoscopic 3D was endurable and actually immersed me into the environments. It was the only 3D film I never had to adjust my glasses for (and I usually dread Dolby 3D). I think the risky technology choices really enhanced the escape from reality and into that beautiful world of magic. Howard Shore's score was down right majestic and triumphant. And I definitely had no problem with the dialogue, I'm especially glad that it ended the way it did (not abrupt, and without "to be continued...").

Balin was my favorite, followed by Thorin.

JCortez7 - 12/16/2012, 11:43 PM

p.s... Mountains fighting boxing style?!?! EPIC!
spidey1994 - 12/16/2012, 11:44 PM
Loved it! Loved all the characters, the story and the acting (Martin Freeman, IMO, should get an Oscar along with Andy Serkis!)
CoulsonLives - 12/17/2012, 12:09 AM
I screamed inside with joy when I saw Smaug's eye
MCMLXXXII - 12/17/2012, 12:23 AM
bilbo is my new favorite hobbit.. used to be merry.. but bilbo is awesome!
BAIKINMAN - 12/17/2012, 12:24 AM
The story of the Hobbit can't be told any better.

I don't understand why people have "pacing issues" with this film. The book is not supposed to pace like a movie.

This story IS AS CLOSE to any "BOOK to MOVIE" conversion so far.

"We got to watch the actual BOOK of the Hobbit. :D"

48 FPS in 3D is amazing. "Everything was SO CLEAR!"

relentless1 - 12/17/2012, 12:30 AM
@TheGambitFreak ...so let me get this straight, people are immature assholes because they voted for who they liked as fav hero/villian? im getting the feeling that the polls didnt come out the way you wanted to? i think you are the immature one here buddy
EarOne - 12/17/2012, 12:48 AM
PLEASANTLY surprised... what, with all the somewhat negative early reviews, i must say..that The Hobbit actually succeeds in meeting MY expectations AND more. and all the complaints bout the 48fps stuff just goes to show that technology progress doesn't necessarily always mean for the better. what it comes down to, at the end, is..THE STORY. and on this, i think Jackson & co. do NOT disappoint. at all.

i don't get some of the comments here that say it gets to be boring in the middle. well..unless you're a toddler then that might be the case. but for the more adult viewers like me...everything works fine. it even feels..the pacing feels really smoothly flowing and swift.

i gotta say though..i think this is the rarest time where i think it's good that Jackson made The Hobbit AFTER TLOR. cuz, i can imagine the expectations and disappointments (by the general audience, especially those who don't read the books) that would result in the Lord of the Rings trilogy by the lack of magical creatures and characters (1 dwarf instead of 13..no giant bunnies-pulled sleigh, no talking trolls and NO dragon) and a much slower pace.

with TLOR, Jackson overcame the absence of all the more magical aspects of Tolkien world by presenting it as a WAR epic..in a more traditional classic hollywood sense WITH some magical characters and creatures.

here..with the hobbit, he seems to be able to just let loose and go a bit crazier with the more 'crazier' elements in the middle earth. characters like Smaug, the talking trolls and radagast might be 'too much' for the non-initiated general audience, PRE-lotr. but, now that we've been introduced to that world, i think it's 'easier' to just go along for the ride on this new (and earlier) story.

The Hobbit is REALLY fun, without being lightweight. it's my second favorite movie, this year, after Marvel's The Avengers. the third would be The Life of Pi.
NeoBaggins - 12/17/2012, 2:00 AM
I always wondered about critics being pretentious, malicious, bias, with agenda and lacking integrity when it came to reviewing movies. But never really became a conspiracy theorist on it. But as I sat and watched The Hobbit, it became clear... they are full of shit.

Going to see it again in IMAX 3D this week.
HavocPrime - 12/17/2012, 2:55 AM
Loved it, only problem I had viewing it though was I listened to this, and had it in my head everytime a sword was on screen.
HulkleBerry - 12/17/2012, 4:56 AM
Going to see it tuesday CANT WAIT!!
NeoBaggins - 12/17/2012, 5:23 AM
Best casting of 2012.
PapaEmeritus - 12/17/2012, 5:36 AM
@NeoBaggins, i completely agree with you. I loved every single moment of the film! I think people and "critics" have reached the highest level of cynicism nowadays.
TheIronPrice - 12/17/2012, 6:06 AM
My husband and I loved it so much, we saw it twice. Props to the TheOneRing.net for being at our mid-night showing! You have shown your quality! I love my Legolas t-shirt! XO
1 2

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.