- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Hobbit vs LOTR
Posted on 9/17/17 at 8:16 pm to brmark70816
Posted on 9/17/17 at 8:16 pm to brmark70816
It should've been called The Dwarf. Those movies were way too focused on Thorin, who also looked like a sad version of Aragorn.
0
Posted on 9/17/17 at 8:52 pm to brmark70816
Look at how many downvotes you have. Do you feel good about yourself, brmark?
Posted on 9/17/17 at 10:14 pm to LSUDAN1
quote:
LOTR made Frodo and Sam look like they were fudge packers.
Show your insecurities or ignorance here. Tolkien was a WW I vet and he approached them as brothers in arms. Vets can attest the feelings they have for comrades are only really challenged by that to a mother. There was nothing gay about it.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 4:04 am to brmark70816
quote:
its darker than LOTR. There is more violence and better action
Dude... come on. Are you trolling?
Posted on 9/18/17 at 5:25 am to red_giraffe
quote:
Look at how many downvotes you have. Do you feel good about yourself, brmark?
I've been on this site long enough to not care at all about down votes. I'm always happy to spark a good debate or go against the grain if it's something I really believe. All I've learned so far is that the book readers really don't like The Hobbit. Almost everybody that has commented has read the books. I haven't. I'm guessing that has something to do with it..
Posted on 9/18/17 at 6:49 am to brmark70816
You said it was more violent, that's 100% not true. Nor is it darker...
Look how much scarier the left is to the obviously fake computer image on the right.
Look how much scarier the left is to the obviously fake computer image on the right.
This post was edited on 9/18/17 at 6:49 am
Posted on 9/18/17 at 6:51 am to shifty94
quote:
was hoping there Jackson was going to recreate the LOTR in doing the Hobbit but it just failed in a lot of ways
In PJ's defense I thought I read where he had years and years to develop LOTR and only a short period of time for The Hobbit due to studio pressure?
Posted on 9/18/17 at 8:18 am to brmark70816
The Hobbit movies were ok, I rather enjoyed The Desolation of Smaug. But they're not in the same ballpark as TLOR movies. The studio tried to stretch the story too far.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 8:19 am to LSUSUPERSTAR
quote:
It was clear that Jackson didn't want to make it and phoned it in
That's not true, nor fair to Jackson.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 8:36 am to BigOrangeVols
Overall, I like LoTR a lot more, but the Hobbit is just an excuse to jump back into that beautifully crafted world for three more films. I like a lot of the extra stuff they added that adds more to the Lord of the Rings films.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 9:20 am to brmark70816
LOTR > Hobbit, not close
Posted on 9/18/17 at 10:11 am to brmark70816
quote:
4. Ditto to LOTR. I could have edited that down to two 2 hour movies easily. Strange critcism to make. The 3rd Hobbit movie was barely 2 hours long.
The difference is that the LOTR is actually 3 books, whereas the Hobbit is only one book that they extended into 3 movies just for the money.
Also, I know you didn't read the books, so this is not as noticeable, but they did cut A TON of stuff out of the LOTR books to make them into movies. The books are just so full of information that even when cut down, it made for 3 long movies.
With The Hobbit, they did the exact opposite, they added things into the movies that were not in the books. They did this specifically to try to tie it more into the LOTR books/movies than the original was, and to lengthen it.
Overall, the Hobbit movies were ok, but not close to as good as LOTR.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 11:22 am to brmark70816
quote:
2. Didn't read the books,
Well there it is
Posted on 9/18/17 at 12:04 pm to TideWarrior
quote:
But the LOTR movies did not create a major plot line that was not in the book.
Guess you missed the Elves at Helm's Deep.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 1:12 pm to TexasTiger1185
The Orc you are showing barely leads the army for a third of the first movie, then sneak kills Ned Stark before getting his arse whooped by the Ranger guy. The Pale Orc is hunting the dwarves for all 3 movies, is incredibly menacing and ruthless. If you are just talking about make up vs CGI, I don't know what to tell you. They are both fake. I like animation and cartoons, so it didn't bother me..
I think it is darker and more violent. I'm sure there is a body count or rating site that can settle that debate..
I think it is darker and more violent. I'm sure there is a body count or rating site that can settle that debate..
Posted on 9/18/17 at 1:23 pm to brmark70816
quote:
Am I the only one that likes The Hobbit more than LOTR?
I bet you think that Episodes 1-3 of Star Wars was better than the original trilogy too
Posted on 9/18/17 at 1:30 pm to Tiger Prawn
I do think that Revenge of the Sith is the best movie. But no, the Original trilogy is better..
Posted on 9/18/17 at 2:18 pm to brmark70816
quote:
Am I the only one that likes The Hobbit more than LOTR? I didn't read the books, so maybe that has something to do with it. I just like the story and characters more..
I know people like to say no opinion is wrong but....
Posted on 9/18/17 at 2:22 pm to heatom2
Martin Freeman as Bilbo is about the only thing in the Hobbit trilogy that's on par with LOTR. It's a shame he was wasted so much. Wish Guillermo had stayed on board.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 3:02 pm to brmark70816
You're clearly trolling now.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News