Livestonth I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Helloturia I have absolutely never seen anything like this movie before. You have to see this movie.

DipitySkillful an ambitious but ultimately ineffective debut endeavor.

Neive Bellamy Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

Ziya Aliyev I think like everybody I watched the triology hoping to get the same affection as Lord of the Rings but did I get it: NO Because: the biggest problem is that it does not create the feeling that you are in the movie. I watched it as a cartoon. Another problem is that Gandalf does not have the control, even Aragorn in Lord of the Rings could not get before the role of Gandalf Scenes were created for the sake of the filling any gap, forexample in one scene suddenly an elf on the horse appears before Legolas summoning him to their country. Well at least they have showed him coming on the road in the far away camera before appearing. Another problem was composing, the music stole away the seriousness of the movie turning it into combination of the scenes where the outcomes were predictable. In the end, after watching the triology I had to check the director to see if he was the same Peter of Lord of the Rings.

bitomurder Unfortunately, The Hobbit did not know what it wanted to be. It jumped between being the fun adventure that the book is to being a dark brooding setup for the LOTR trilogy. Far too many extraneous side stories found their way into this overly long and bloated children's story. The film should have been cut down to one 3 hour or, at the most, two 2 hour movies. Filling up some extra minutes with some Middle Earth backround information was ok, but a lot of extra junk that was unnecessary was thrown into this trilogy and especially into the Desolation of Snaug. In all honestly the best parts of these films were the stuff that was taken directly out of the book.

Kirpianuscus I love the book, and the part of its adaptation is far to be uninspired. but, in strange manner, it is not more than...nice. a nice film , a decent try to use the succes of the first Peter Jackson trilogy. nothing unjustifid. except the difference between the two books and the sin of director to desire use the same tools and recipe. sure, it is a film who seduce. but the force of Lord of Ring is absent, the links between characters is fragile and the heroism has didactic aspect. result, a good choice for the young public. and that is all.

2karl- peter Jackson directed this even though gullimore del toro was meant so peter gave his magic to this big budget masterpiece from the books of the same name this was set before the lord of the rings I saw this in the cinema in 3d it was breath taking with a budget of 250 million I can see why this follows Bilbo bag-gins who along with Gandalf and 13 dwarfs led by thorin oaken shield is wept into an epic quest to reclaim the lost dwarf kingdom of erbor from the fearsome dragon smaug their journey will take them into the wild through treacherous lands inhabited by goblins orcs deadly war-gs the highlight here is under the mountain were there being chased by goblins in 3d with wooden bridges falling down hobbits fighting surfing wood down a rock side and Bilbo having a answer and question game with Gollum one of the highlights of the movie. there is another creature here necromancer along the way the dwarfs re led to riven dale a beautiful place were Elrond gives advice to Gandalf stunning place in 3d with waterfalls the Bilbo bag-gins not only discovers depths of ingenuity and courage that surprise even himself he also gains possession of a precious ring tied to all middle earth in ways he cannot imagine. we see they have to go the lonely mountain on their journey with a dragon in their way I gave this 9/10 brilliant film to start the new trilogy.