FearfulSymmetry: Oh oh. I'm going to see it tomorrow. Oh well, I've got a cinema subscription thingy, so I'll only be paying two euros or so to see it.
I guess many things suck because they stretched one book into three 3-hour films. That's just way too much, and it forces them to make up new things all the time.
The biggest problem isn't that they made it into multiple movies - although the original plan of two would've worked far better - but that they threw timelines out the window, added in stuff that was mentioned in passing IN LORD OF THE RINGS as having happened a century *before*
The Hobbit, and added a very badly-written original character and an unneeded (and unwanted) romantic angle.
Be prepared for a 2.5-hour movie, about 1.5 hours of which is the titular battle, and at least a third of the movie is actually about elves. Which is a problem in a story that, y'know, wasn't actually about them at all.
Durin's sons do not get their due.
I waited for something like five or six years to see this movie, from the first announcement that the movies were being made. I feel like I completely wasted my time anticipating this one.
*grumblegrumblegrumble*
j0ekerr: I mildly disagree in your assesment on the quality of the former hobbit movies. Even if I do completely concur with you on their gradual slippage.
I have not seen it, and probably won't. I was infuriated enough by the mary-sue Legolas, who has no bussiness being there, and the matrix-meets-kung-fu-hustle FIGHTAN on the former movies.
I liked the first movie. I was disappointed with the second. I'm pretty infuriated with the third. Legolas is a HUGE issue, especially as he steals quite a bit of thunder from the dwarves in the final battle. (My husband had to put up with a LOT of grumbling and "WTF??!?" during the battle, almost all of it centered around Legolas and Thranduil. And Tauriel. Let's not forget Tauriel. -.-)