The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
Warner Bros. Pictures | Release Date: December 14, 2012
8.0
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 3007 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
2,447
Mixed:
365
Negative:
195
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User scoreBy dateMost helpful
7
GreatbealloDec 14, 2012
I quite liked this movie, but it could have been better. The original Lord of the Rings movies did not use CGI unless it was necessary. The orcs were men in costume and makeup, which made Jackson's depiction of middle earth seem more realI quite liked this movie, but it could have been better. The original Lord of the Rings movies did not use CGI unless it was necessary. The orcs were men in costume and makeup, which made Jackson's depiction of middle earth seem more real somehow. In this new film, Jackson uses CGI as a crutch (nearly every creature is computer generated), and it hurts the continuity and flow of the story. This movie is pretty sweet in its own way, but if the creators had stuck with their original pattern (more make up and costumes, and less CGI) I would have thought it flawless. It's certainly enjoyable, and I'm looking forward to the next two installments, but I don't feel like this can be categorized as a classic.… Expand
16 of 19 users found this helpful163
All this user's reviews
7
FozzyOct 5, 2013
Sure, this movie isn't perfect. It's not as good as Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings Trilogy. However, to say that this film is bad is like saying that The Godfather isn't a good movie, or Lawrence of Arabia, or Ben-Hur. This film is good,Sure, this movie isn't perfect. It's not as good as Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings Trilogy. However, to say that this film is bad is like saying that The Godfather isn't a good movie, or Lawrence of Arabia, or Ben-Hur. This film is good, though not exceptional. The Dwarves break into a musical number at one point for no real reason whatsoever, probably to appeal to kids. I heard people laughing in the cinema when I watched this. I liked Lord of the Rings a LOT, and If I heard the audiences laughing AT ALL apart from the occasional moment between Merry and Pippin, or with Gimli, I would probably murder some of them, if not all of them.

However, if you consider this film on it's own, you will find that it is a very, VERY good film, and, though it definitely doesn't live up to The Lord of the Rings, it's undeniably worth watching. It doesn't have as much depth, it doesn't have as much emotion, it doesn't have four hundred hours of special thanks at the end, and it doesn't have the cast of the previous films (bar Hugo Weaving, Christopher Lee, Ian McKellen, Cate Blanchett, Ian Holm and Elijah Wood), but it does have the ability to carry itself, and it's great.… Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
7
AwesomeReviewerDec 21, 2012
0 of 3 users found this helpful03
All this user's reviews
7
potatoes351Nov 21, 2015
Peter Jackson returns to Middle Earth in his epic rendition of Tolkien's The Hobbit...however he's taking a 368 page book and turning it into a trilogy of 3 hour films...cue filler?
Set 60 years before The Fellowship of the Ring, AnPeter Jackson returns to Middle Earth in his epic rendition of Tolkien's The Hobbit...however he's taking a 368 page book and turning it into a trilogy of 3 hour films...cue filler?
Set 60 years before The Fellowship of the Ring, An Unexpected Journey follows Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman), Gandalf the Grey (Ian McKellen) and a band of 13 dwarves as they embark on a perilous quest to claim back the lonely mountain back from the evil dragon Smaug. Unfortunately across the nearly 3 hour run time we barely get anywhere.
As brilliant as the acting is, as good as the writing is, as beautiful as the film is to watch, it's just too little for too long. Andy Serkis' small reprisal as Gollum in an intimate and intimidating scene with Bilbo is one of the films best scenes and can even stand against many of the best scenes from the LotR trilogy.
However the unforgivably slow pacing and some awful looking CGI detrimentally effects the whole film. However the 3D works really well and the 48FPS (compared to standard 24FPS) is certainly interesting and a bold step forward for mainstream cinema.
Hopefully these stumbles don't effect the series as a whole, but out of the gate this trilogy seems more like half hearted fan service than a proper Peter Jackson Tolkien adaptation.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
sLmFeb 9, 2013
They stayed like 30 minutes of the film in Bilbo's house. FFS, I almost slept half of the movie until things actually started happening! After that, it turned a bit interesting, and scenes were also ok. About the eagles.... well, I stillThey stayed like 30 minutes of the film in Bilbo's house. FFS, I almost slept half of the movie until things actually started happening! After that, it turned a bit interesting, and scenes were also ok. About the eagles.... well, I still wonder why didn't they use them from a start... again.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
7
JunghovaDec 21, 2012
Not a bad movie by any means...but it felt a wee bit bloated with filler and some out of place comedic bits. I saw the high frame version and while some of it looked awesome, others it looked like the characters were moving at 1.5 or 2 timesNot a bad movie by any means...but it felt a wee bit bloated with filler and some out of place comedic bits. I saw the high frame version and while some of it looked awesome, others it looked like the characters were moving at 1.5 or 2 times speed and looked unnatural. Peter Jackson has two sequels to sort the tech out...… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
seancriswellDec 16, 2012
Talk about a movie that people are going into with preconceived notions. Has there ever been a movie that people have had so much to say about before they even see it? I was no exception to this, I loved the first trilogy and had read all theTalk about a movie that people are going into with preconceived notions. Has there ever been a movie that people have had so much to say about before they even see it? I was no exception to this, I loved the first trilogy and had read all the publicity about directors, how many films would be made, and the format Jackson chose to film in. After finally seeing the movie and reading many reviews I have to say there was very little about this installment to the franchise that disappointed me. Is this film perfect? No, but few film are. Is the pacing leisurely? Yes, but does anyone remember Fellowship. Does some of this feel more child like than the other three movies? Absolutely, just like the source material. I think what I love about this film and a lot of what I love about the original three can be summed up with two words: world building. Jackson does an unbelievable job building this world, every creature feels unique and in its place, every setting the same. The introduction of the dwarfs exemplifies this perfectly, I love how each set of creatures are are prone to certain characteristics but each character within that set have very unique personalities. This is just one example of his world building but can be seen across every element of the story. This of course is not just a testament to Jackson but also Tolkein's source material. I thought this movie had exceptional acting almost across the board. Freeman and McKellan in particular were fantastic. I think Freeman was a better Hobbit then any of the actors in the previous films. Like its predecessors this movie has many lighthearted moments, some stunning visuals, some pretty cool action sequences, and plenty of time to immerse yourself in it all. I for one will be looking forward to the next two films.… Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
7
RealMuthaFJan 22, 2013
I'm not a big fan of Tolkien and the original trilogy and I've read the book a very long time ago, so guess I'm being impartial here. I've definitely enjoyed the movie, it's well-filmed (no wonder in that), but it suffers from one thing, andI'm not a big fan of Tolkien and the original trilogy and I've read the book a very long time ago, so guess I'm being impartial here. I've definitely enjoyed the movie, it's well-filmed (no wonder in that), but it suffers from one thing, and that'd be the book being split into three separate movies. Not just that, but three two-and-half-hour-long movies. As a result, the story gains a bunch of unnecessary and often uninteresting details and the beginning feels awkwardly slow, the first half an hour of the film could easily be shortened thrice or so. But once the beginning's over, you'll get immersed in the world of Middle Earth. Another thing is I think that Bilbo is actually a better protagonist than Frodo - he's brave, modest and funny, another great performance by Martin Freeman. Anyway, it's a really good fantasy movie you definitely wouldn't wanna miss.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
normypDec 14, 2012
Standalone review (ignoring lotr) - good although the way the film was set up, the humour was an essential factor to capturing the viewer imo, in my viewing many of the clearly "funny" bits were very awkward and not quite sure if they wereStandalone review (ignoring lotr) - good although the way the film was set up, the humour was an essential factor to capturing the viewer imo, in my viewing many of the clearly "funny" bits were very awkward and not quite sure if they were meant to be funny, for example the bit where boffur tossed bombur a sausage and for no apparent reason the table broke. the thing is, the book was pretty weird, didn't really stick together like lotr, it was a very all over the place novel with barely any constant descriptions of characters especially the dwarves. i think that's where this film fell short, it had brilliant fight scenes, good character development and good back story but the characters themselves sucked and felt very transparent. they felt genuine and reused. gollum was the only beacon of hope, personally my favourite scene in the whole film, it managed to make me laugh properly and really built bilbo as being brave and humorous at the same time instead of being a bumbling coward. all in all, good little film, although it had no inspiration apart from lotr, lotr clearly took a lot of inspiration from shakespeare and some other films, this film clearly had none of that. think about the way the characters talked in lotr, it was much more medieval, at one point in the hobbit one of the dwarves ASKED FOR CHIPS?? REALLY? CHIPS? IN MIDDLE EARTH? YOU WANT CHIPS?! YOU THINK THEY HAVE DEEP FAT FRIARS IN MIDDLE EARTH????… Expand
6 of 10 users found this helpful64
All this user's reviews
7
anshimanDec 27, 2012
Though it packs visual grandeur beyond our greatest imaginations, it is a film whose pace is deathly slow and indolent - it slogs on painfully, resulting in the bloated, overlong film that it is. 'The Hobbit' has its resplendent moments whichThough it packs visual grandeur beyond our greatest imaginations, it is a film whose pace is deathly slow and indolent - it slogs on painfully, resulting in the bloated, overlong film that it is. 'The Hobbit' has its resplendent moments which remind you that Peter Jackson is the director, but these moments are too seldom found in the film. Furthermore, the conflicting forces of a demeanor of innocence (which is derived from the fact the book was written for children) and the epic tone that is attempted to be carried on from the Lord of the Rings trilogy results in an overall effect of inconsistency and general lack of acuity in the tone of the film. "The Hobbit" is satisfying because of the power of the on-screen spectacles and the near-hymnic power of the sound track, despite its obvious inability to even loiter in the same league as the Lord of the Rings Trilogy.… Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
7
MrAppleKinsDec 16, 2012
With only a 65% on RT and a rather mixed reaction from the critics, I was quite worried that this movie would turn out disastrously. Fear not, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is a great movie even if it isn't necessarily as amazing as IWith only a 65% on RT and a rather mixed reaction from the critics, I was quite worried that this movie would turn out disastrously. Fear not, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is a great movie even if it isn't necessarily as amazing as I expected. That being said, the movie is not without its flaws. There are some scenes that feel a bit too stretched out, and better saved for the extended edition. Also, the CGI feels a bit overused at times. Other than that, everything about this movie is great. The movie keeps the lighthearted tone of the book while also having epic battle sequences and decapitations. The character development is really good, especially with Bilbo. The performances are spot on, and the ending leaves you wanting more. If you're a fan of LOTR, fantasy, or good movies, you should definitely see this--preferably during some time in the day, as it is pretty long.… Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
7
nms1215Dec 29, 2012
Go into this movie making sure you do NOT expect it to be the Lord of the Rings. Unfortunately, the movie's biggest flaw is inviting that comparison (pay close attention and you can take screenshots that will nearly match LOTR exactly). TheGo into this movie making sure you do NOT expect it to be the Lord of the Rings. Unfortunately, the movie's biggest flaw is inviting that comparison (pay close attention and you can take screenshots that will nearly match LOTR exactly). The movie is great for what it is though. Exciting, funny, and adventurous. This is a movie about an adventure, not an epic quest of good versus evil. It also seems to be more Tolkein-ish, more like a fantasy. By that, I mean you see more creatures and they are not just "war things": you see a good amount of goblins and trolls and learn about how the creatures are outside of just using a weapon. There are also foreshadowing minor bits that hint at the events of LOTR 60 years in the future. All in all, this movie was highly enjoyable--especially with such a magnificent cast!… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
MouthofSauronDec 23, 2013
An Unexpected Journey is an overlong film, which seems to buckle under its own weight. The journey is beautifully imagined, but no so beautifully realized. There is some of the Middle-earth magic we have come to love (Riddles in the Dark),An Unexpected Journey is an overlong film, which seems to buckle under its own weight. The journey is beautifully imagined, but no so beautifully realized. There is some of the Middle-earth magic we have come to love (Riddles in the Dark), but it mostly falls flat.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
PaganostaghettiJan 23, 2013
Going into The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (or The Hobbit, as I will refer to it for the purpose of this review) I had very low expectations. When Peter Jackson announced it would be three movies, let alone two movies where I had alreadyGoing into The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (or The Hobbit, as I will refer to it for the purpose of this review) I had very low expectations. When Peter Jackson announced it would be three movies, let alone two movies where I had already felt the source material was being stretched, I cringed. I knew no matter what the reviews were, I… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
TheLastLaughJan 21, 2013
Despite the harsh criticism about how, "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" did not live up to expectations and how it was not nearly as good as "The Lord of the Rings", "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" should be looked upon based on itsDespite the harsh criticism about how, "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" did not live up to expectations and how it was not nearly as good as "The Lord of the Rings", "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" should be looked upon based on its morals, and not purely on comparison. It is simply not fair to base a movie on its sequels or prequels. A film should be based on how it stands as a film alone, nothing else.

This film is full of amazing set pieces and epic battle scenes that provide great entertainment. While nothing is R-Rated, there are some nasty bits of arm-cutting and head-rolling, but nothing too gruesome. After all, this movie is mainly a kids movie. The film has a much lighter side to it than the Lord of the Rings films did, rightly so.

The character performances in this film are mostly superb, even though some may be a bit corny. The CGI is great for the most part, and are surprisingly detailed. However, the best and most entertaining scene in this film is when Smeagol comes in. The game of riddles is highly entertaining and was one of the highlights of the movie. Sometimes, Smeagol can appear a little too real.

One thing that I did notice with this film, is that Peter Jackson decided to create it with the future in mind. Meaning that everything in this movie is designed to fit what is to come. I can't really give examples without spoiling anything, but when or if you've watched it, you'll probably know what I mean.

Overall, "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" is an unexpected joy to watch, especially for fans of the book. Even for those who aren't, there is still much to enjoy. While not a masterpiece and while it does suffer from some stupid scenes (SPOILERS), such as trolls dangling the dwarves and the hobbit from their fingers and for some reason deciding not to kill them... and Gandalf always popping in to save everyone last second, this movie is mainly a building block for what is to come. I would still watch this movie again just for Smeagol.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
MispeledStalionDec 30, 2012
If you go in thinking, Lord of the Rings, prepare to be disappointed because The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is inferior to all three of the LotR flicks. That said, it's still a well-composed, fun, beautiful and exciting film full ofIf you go in thinking, Lord of the Rings, prepare to be disappointed because The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is inferior to all three of the LotR flicks. That said, it's still a well-composed, fun, beautiful and exciting film full of light-hearted whimsy, which is refreshing for a fantasy film. The plot just lacks the stakes of apocalyptic doom, which is more of a downfall of 'The Hobbit' being primarily a children's story as opposed to Lord of the Rings deeper, darker, more symbolic narrative.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
7
MaidenEXPDec 23, 2012
Peter Jackson tried with this movie to satisfied all the TLOTR fans, without paying attention to the other people who don´t have any idea about what this movie is about. And because of that, if you haven´t seen the other movies orPeter Jackson tried with this movie to satisfied all the TLOTR fans, without paying attention to the other people who don´t have any idea about what this movie is about. And because of that, if you haven´t seen the other movies or if you don´t enjoy them, this movie would dislike you. The first half an hour of the film is a bit stopped, without action nor battles. The problem of the Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is that all the fantasy of the other movies and all the special senses comes at the end of the film, and the other 2 hours are a bit disappointing. I enjoyed so much this movie, ´cause I´m fan of the others and I love the movies. If you liked the others, you´ll enjoy this one.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
oblique15Nov 2, 2013
It starts out slow with some story telling, but don`t give up on it cause it picks up, and takes you into the adventure you probably expected.The thing is when I ask myself if I was really amazed, the answer is no for the most part, but itIt starts out slow with some story telling, but don`t give up on it cause it picks up, and takes you into the adventure you probably expected.The thing is when I ask myself if I was really amazed, the answer is no for the most part, but it was a good watch.… Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
7
TehBrawlerDec 14, 2012
I'm certainly not going to tell you to not see this movie. Peter Jackson proves that he's at a higher caliber of production than most filmmakers these days. However, compared to his previous works, especially The Lord of the Rings trilogy,I'm certainly not going to tell you to not see this movie. Peter Jackson proves that he's at a higher caliber of production than most filmmakers these days. However, compared to his previous works, especially The Lord of the Rings trilogy, The Hobbit is lacking. The pacing is jagged, and flip-flops between fast jumping thst rips you out of the plot and drags in many combat scenes. Beyond that, the writers have taken plenty of liberties with the plot that only weigh it down; keeping track of all the extra info can be frustrating. However, the acting is superb, and it's hard not to invest yourself in the characters as they trek through Middle Earth. It's definitely worth seeing, but don't expect to be blown away like the first three.… Expand
21 of 29 users found this helpful218
All this user's reviews
7
DarthnixaDec 14, 2012
And epic adventure of 13 unlikely heroes, The Hobbit is a great movie worthy of Tolkien's work, and one of Jackson's best movies to date. Watching in awe as the camera flies through the majestic mountain kingdom of Erebor was enough for me toAnd epic adventure of 13 unlikely heroes, The Hobbit is a great movie worthy of Tolkien's work, and one of Jackson's best movies to date. Watching in awe as the camera flies through the majestic mountain kingdom of Erebor was enough for me to be satisfied with the film... and that was only the first scene!… Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
7
RobbieWaltherDec 15, 2012
An undoubtedly well-made movie that is characterized by its immersive and enchanting effects. Not only that, the movie is very fast-paced and really gives an enjoyable time. Although there are a few problems in this movie, for instance, theAn undoubtedly well-made movie that is characterized by its immersive and enchanting effects. Not only that, the movie is very fast-paced and really gives an enjoyable time. Although there are a few problems in this movie, for instance, the length of the movie can really distinguish itself from other cinematics, due to its enormous length keeping you from going on the toilet - mainly because you are too immovable during the movie. I may not be the only one that finds it disturbing not being able to go on the toilet because of the abovementioned. Anyway, Peter Jackson did a great job on the movie, the 48 frames per second is just remarkable, and not to talk about the 3D, which gave an actual feeling of being in the movie. Since I have not read the book, I have nothing to compare with, except its previous movies (The Lord Of The Rings trilogy).… Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
7
NoNerfAuMar 25, 2013
I'm too tired to write a full blown review for this one. S if you're interested in whether you should see this movie or not. I will tell you this. This is NOT the Lord of the Rings. Do not expect a starting film of the same proportions. GoI'm too tired to write a full blown review for this one. S if you're interested in whether you should see this movie or not. I will tell you this. This is NOT the Lord of the Rings. Do not expect a starting film of the same proportions. Go into this movie expecting an adventure (Unlike Bilbo :D) Go into it, snuggle up and watch some really cool action sequences, some great dialogue between some of your favorite characters and see some great villains and plot points unfold. If you're coming from the book, you will be pleased to know it does an absolutely terrific job of displaying Tolkiens vision. It's a good watch and I'm sure the next two will be even better 7/10… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
FrostySnowDec 20, 2012
"The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" is a revolutionary film that has now expanded how film can be shot. Using the new 48-frames per second with stunning 3-D we get an absolutely beautiful picture that shows how real a movie can look. While"The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" is a revolutionary film that has now expanded how film can be shot. Using the new 48-frames per second with stunning 3-D we get an absolutely beautiful picture that shows how real a movie can look. While this is all great, I found that I really enjoyed the way Peter Jackson shot and filmed his original trilogy, with lots of makeup, huge sets, and limited CGI(Computer Graphic Images). I found that while this film is beautiful, I could tell when a creature was CGI and I found it heavily distracting. The original trilogy got Oscars for makeup! and now they were using CGI for most of their characters and back sets. I give it a seven because while it was very cool to look at, I found it to be merely entertaining;a good way to spend three-hours at movies.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
NiktDec 30, 2012
Lighter in tone than Lotr, the hobbit tries hard to remain recognisable within the screen world established so well in the first trilogy. And on the whole, it succeeds. It is, however, a weaker film. Martin freeman is no Elijah wood, he isLighter in tone than Lotr, the hobbit tries hard to remain recognisable within the screen world established so well in the first trilogy. And on the whole, it succeeds. It is, however, a weaker film. Martin freeman is no Elijah wood, he is simply not as strong an actor, although us likeable in the role. The story does not consistently revolve around his viewpoint. There is cgi overload, and although thrilling at times, too many action scenes in the second half with our heroes in perilous situations where we all know gandalf will turn up at the last minute and rescue them. Or eagles. Again. The story feels padded at times, and over stretched like butter over bread. Highlights were the shire opening, the trolls, and gollum. Some solid performances too from previous actors, as well as several strong newcomers. I suspect and hope this will be the weakest of the three films, overall enjoyable, not as hood as Lotr and unlike that trilogy, I found it left me cold, but hopeful.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
NofficaJan 3, 2013
The quality of the film is a far cry from that of "The Lord of the Rings"; but for the novel 3D format, the film would be insipid; so many sections of the film are predictable. The script and direction are ordinary, as is the dialogue whichThe quality of the film is a far cry from that of "The Lord of the Rings"; but for the novel 3D format, the film would be insipid; so many sections of the film are predictable. The script and direction are ordinary, as is the dialogue which is bereft of all poetic quality and thus utterly generic; since this isn't a silent film, it affects the very feel of the film.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
7
cokeaddictedJan 4, 2013
"The Hobbit" is a nice movie to watch if you want to fall asleep. Personally I've in it when it was released and I almost fell asleep. The action and everything else is pushed to the limit, in other words they should have made only a movie"The Hobbit" is a nice movie to watch if you want to fall asleep. Personally I've in it when it was released and I almost fell asleep. The action and everything else is pushed to the limit, in other words they should have made only a movie from the book and not 3. I do not think it is normal to take you less to read the book than see the movies. Of course it may be my fault for expecting too much from the movie and I was disappointed. Although it is quite boring, "The Hobbit" has some scenes that are worth seeing for the lovers of Tolkien's books as I am.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
7
SummersausageJan 6, 2013
It was good but lacked the structure and epic feeling of the Lord of the Rings. It was too long with enough songs to be classified as a musical. Half of this movie could be gone and it would be ten times better. It is a classic representationIt was good but lacked the structure and epic feeling of the Lord of the Rings. It was too long with enough songs to be classified as a musical. Half of this movie could be gone and it would be ten times better. It is a classic representation of how good Peter Jackson's storytelling ability and the Ian Mckellen's acting ability.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
7
JoSarahStanfordJan 7, 2013
Tolkien fans will know the story well. Many years before Frodo travels to Mordor in Lord of the Rings, Bilbo Baggins embarks on an adventure of his own. Hired as a
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
7
musedJan 11, 2013
I was very excited for this film to release but disappointed they decided to milk it through three films. I reread The Hobbit and even trudged through The Silmarillion to gain a better understanding of the world's mythology and backstory.I was very excited for this film to release but disappointed they decided to milk it through three films. I reread The Hobbit and even trudged through The Silmarillion to gain a better understanding of the world's mythology and backstory. When I saw the movie I was disappointed in how much literary genius was sacrificed for action scenes and how much the film was drawn out. Bilbo's wit is underplayed and Gandalf's involvement is overdone.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
7
RealityCheckkJan 12, 2013
I would rather review the mindset and mentalities of these self proclaimed "critics" that push their unhappy with themselves and/or life it self opinions as fact, rather than being exactly what it is. An opinion. And believe me, not allI would rather review the mindset and mentalities of these self proclaimed "critics" that push their unhappy with themselves and/or life it self opinions as fact, rather than being exactly what it is. An opinion. And believe me, not all opinions are created equal, especially the ones that thrive off of negativity and looking at and bringing out the bad in things (which may or may not even be present in the first place, but these unappreciative negative 'critics' always seem to find them no matter hat the subject). Of course the reality of it all is that we should be so appreciative that we even have the option to the many luxuries we have in this country. And beautiful, magical, masterful films are just some of the many. But that doesn't mean "take whatever they throw at you and appreciate that you even get anything at all!" No no no, it is much deeper than that, and anyone that I would even have to go further in depth explaining that fact to has already predetermined negativity in their own mind, and may be already lost. But we all (myself included) nowadays have a tendency to become so self-entitled and judgmental of literally everything we are so lucky to have in the first place. It truly saddens me to see all that negativity and stubborn mindedness draw evil out of such pure and beautiful things. If you could step down off your elevated steeds for just a moment and completely and selflessly observe all this trend of activity as a whole..........you would and should be disgusted with yourself and the way you have the potential to act and think (I sure have). And it is surely nothing short of amazing and freeing once you finally do. Of course I'm not saying you must love this movie in order to be a happy and good person, that is not my point at all. It's the whole aura and mindset of your being and the way that your brain processes things and events that is the root of these problems. And I have hope that we can turn this trend around and become a more positive, enlightened and inspired people as a whole. I wish us all luck on that journey, which may be an unexpected one in itself ;). I hope I did not offend anybody, and that this "review" will be taken as a positive read and not cause people to react in the very way I was wanting us all to detour from in the first place. And I am confident you all are very capable of doing so!… Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
7
NatshawJan 21, 2013
I don't think there's another way to describe this film than as sweet. Jackson has once more come back to our screens, reviving Tolkien's first dabble into Middle Earth with The Hobbit. The first film in the upcoming full trilogy delivers aI don't think there's another way to describe this film than as sweet. Jackson has once more come back to our screens, reviving Tolkien's first dabble into Middle Earth with The Hobbit. The first film in the upcoming full trilogy delivers a wholly different perspective of Middle Earth; one where returning fans can see a distinct rose-tinted view of Middle Earth, whilst new viewers will see a pretty landscape with comic and lovable characters. The film's plot centres around a quest, where once more it is not as simple as it seems; with the mishaps and adventures along the way affording maximum enjoyment and drama for the audience, whilst providing an insight into how things in LOTR came to pass. The film will attract viewers of all ages and though fans of the LOTR series who have not read any of the books, may find this film more simplistic and light-hearted, I must remind them that Tolkien's Hobbit was aimed at children and so the film remains more in-keeping with its original premise, as can be seen from the general feel of the film- it does just make you smile! Peter Jackson's Hobbit is everything it should be; didactic to youngsters and older viewers alike, entertaining and really good fun.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
CephalonJan 24, 2013
This film was visually stunning, but the plot was a little weak and as well as the overall choice of dialogue. The introduction was well paced. I didn't think it was too fast or slow. But it seems like the dwarves were saved at the lastThis film was visually stunning, but the plot was a little weak and as well as the overall choice of dialogue. The introduction was well paced. I didn't think it was too fast or slow. But it seems like the dwarves were saved at the last minute every time: the eagles, the elves when heading to rivendale, and Gandalf after being captured by the goblin king. Additionally, the presence of random humor used by the goblin king as pointless.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
TrilobiteGJul 20, 2015
For me. this is a good start to the trilogy. It's got the action, the characters, a sprinkle of humour all mixed in one for fans of fantasy epics. The length is a given to any lord of the rings fan but something about this movie was wasted.For me. this is a good start to the trilogy. It's got the action, the characters, a sprinkle of humour all mixed in one for fans of fantasy epics. The length is a given to any lord of the rings fan but something about this movie was wasted. Oh yes, the entire cavalcade of **** with the elves could've been cut down by 50%, it was lengthy, boring and felt like an unnecessarily long to include, there is too much dwindling time filling dialogue in this movie with non suspenseful meaning to it. Almost brought it down to a 6, but thank God for the impeccable action and some amazing scenes of humour and light heartedness.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
ExKingMay 27, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. now just to be clear i haven't read the book and i have no intention to do that so i wouldn't know what the story should be.
i do think that some of the scenes were a little bit too long it's like watching the extended edition when you're NOT.
however i think the bad reviews are related to not following the book
also the big hype and the fact that everyone was expecting an epic battle at the end just like the trilogy
NOW leaving all that aside you can see that you have another great movie by Peter Jackson with spectacular contents and i think that the vision will improve A LOT after watching the rest of the series.
even so the movie still solid and earn my spot for top 5 best movies of 2012.… Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
7
BrianMcCriticApr 29, 2013
Not as good as any of The Lord of the Rings movies but still a lot of fun. If you go in comparing this film to The Lord of the Rings films it's about a 6 but as a stand alone it deserves an 8.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
ArneeuhMar 19, 2013
It's one of those hyped movies that I might only remember because of the hype. If this story wasn't written by Tolkien, and Gandalf wasn't in it, this movie would've passed by as 'a better than average movie'.

Quite a good movie iIt's one of those hyped movies that I might only remember because of the hype. If this story wasn't written by Tolkien, and Gandalf wasn't in it, this movie would've passed by as 'a better than average movie'.

Quite a good movie i certainly did enjoy- but somewhat slow.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
iamadityaApr 8, 2013
Capturing the mood of the Story is very important and Peter Jackson isn't spot on this time. 'The Hobbit' is not a very serious highly complicated story. The Lord of the Rings was one. The Hobbit is not. Peter Jackson tried to make the movieCapturing the mood of the Story is very important and Peter Jackson isn't spot on this time. 'The Hobbit' is not a very serious highly complicated story. The Lord of the Rings was one. The Hobbit is not. Peter Jackson tried to make the movie sound like it's a very serious movie. It is not. The Hobbit is like an excursion that is rather dangerous and a burglary, exciting feel should run throughout the movie. Peter Jackson, on the contrary, tried to make it serious high fantasy. It's high fantasy, all right, but it's seriousness is not something to be openly exposed.… Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
7
HiddenGhulJul 25, 2013
I am a huge LotR fan, just putting it out there, and when I heard there would be a Hobbit movie I was so happy, but that came with a grain of salt. I had doubts that Peter could present us this children's book in the same style, tone andI am a huge LotR fan, just putting it out there, and when I heard there would be a Hobbit movie I was so happy, but that came with a grain of salt. I had doubts that Peter could present us this children's book in the same style, tone and mood that he did with LotR, and he didn't. This movie was trying so hard to be a fun kid's adventure movie but every time a scene from the Silmarillion and Tolkien's reimagined Hobbit occurred it was so distant from the merry old adventures of the dwarves. Anyhow onto the good, this film is a visual treat, the acting is superb and I really felt like I was back in middle-earth only it was much happier and more colourful! Gollum/Smeagol was incredible to watch and I loved seeing all the nods to Fellowship and the rest of the trilogy. Totally worth a watch!… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
SirMauzApr 30, 2013
I really have enjoyed the LOTR movies; having read the books first though, I can't offer more than a 7. It's a good adaptation, but some add-ons are kinda meh while some things left out are making me go The Heck??? All in all, a decent movie,I really have enjoyed the LOTR movies; having read the books first though, I can't offer more than a 7. It's a good adaptation, but some add-ons are kinda meh while some things left out are making me go The Heck??? All in all, a decent movie, but if you have to have it right, be ready for some weird crap.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
westbrook21Jun 29, 2013
Exciting film with good action and acting, however, parts of the storyline seem pointless and I think the film drags more than it needs too. As a Lord of the Rings fan I was let down a bit by this film, but definitely worth a watch.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
callumjsouthDec 13, 2014
Comparisons to The Lord of the Rings are inevitable, but these comparisons certainly won't make The Hobbit look weak. It can at times feel stretched too thin, because adapting one book into a trilogy of 2+ hour films was always going to beComparisons to The Lord of the Rings are inevitable, but these comparisons certainly won't make The Hobbit look weak. It can at times feel stretched too thin, because adapting one book into a trilogy of 2+ hour films was always going to be ambitious. The lack of a decent quantity of source material can make the film feel needlessly dragged out at times to, but, we are back in Middle-Earth! The Hobbit tells the story of Bilbo Baggins, a cautious yet caring hobbit, who I like more than Frodo. Perhaps due to Martin Freeman's on-screen brilliance. I found the characters in the story much more admirable and realistic than those in the first LOTR outing, Fellowship. This meant I truly cared more about the fate of the characters and as a result, felt more involved during their dangerous encounters. This is a very introductory film in terms of the plot, but, we do learn things. How Smaug claimed Erebor. How Bilbo acquired the ring from Gollum which is one of the film's best scenes. The conflicts and history between the secondary antagonist Azog and the dwarves. The Hobbit also sees the return of many classic LOTR locations, which brought a smile to my face. The music is gripping which only enhances true feelings. An Unexpected Journey is a steady yet strong film that sets the trilogy on the right path through great characters, great history and most of all, great anticipation.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
DiskMagazineJun 18, 2013
Welcome back to middle earth my friends.
The Hobbit is the long anticipated film that takes place 60 years before Lord of the Rings, the acclaimed trilogy directed by Peter Jackson.
In The Hobbit we follow Bilbo Baggins, a Hobbit who livesWelcome back to middle earth my friends.
The Hobbit is the long anticipated film that takes place 60 years before Lord of the Rings, the acclaimed trilogy directed by Peter Jackson.
In The Hobbit we follow Bilbo Baggins, a Hobbit who lives in the Shire, a mystic place where people sit around smoking pipes and eating food. Bilbo is visited by Gandalf the Grey, a wizard who invites him to go on an adventure with 13 dwarves to kill a dragon that has destroyed their homeland.
Now Bilbo, like many Hobbits, does not like to partake in these kind of things. The dangerous world of middle earth is no place for them. But, in a fortunate 30 minutes of screen time, they convince him and we have our journey.
Right off the bat I just want to say that the Hobbit AUJ is a long film. Just about as long as Fellowship of the Ring. However, in fellowship, a lot more happens. I wont knock The Hobbit down any points for dragging on because, while it does do so, there is plenty of more material to see during these moments. You get to meet the dwarves, who are fun and eccentric. You also get to see Sir Ian McKellen as Gandalf again.
Martin Freeman and Ian McKellen do great, especially Freeman. He makes Bilbo more three dimensional than before.
And Thorin? He’s a wonderful character with a great back story who really shows leadership over the dwarves.
Sure there are a few forgettable dwarves in the movie, but for the most part they are interesting characters with colourful personalities.
If I were to nitpick anything (minus the argument over 40fps) is that this film has a lot more CGI. So much so that it really just takes you out of the experience. There were many scenes where I was like
“They got over a thousand extras for Helms Deep but had to CGI those 8 guys?”
It is kinda upsetting and really seems unnecessary at points.
But other than that, the film is great. It was cool to see the battle at Moria, I love how it’s told, I love the build up, I REALLY love the attention to detail, and I surprisingly love Radagast the Brown.
and the ‘Riddles in the Dark’ sequence? Yeah, talk about chilling.
There’s really not much else to say here, if you love LotR you’ll absolutely love The Hobbit AUJ. If you love film in general you will, for the most part, enjoy The Hobbit. Although, you may be annoyed by the FPS and many of the drawn out scenes.
If you hated LotR and everything it stood for then dude, stay as far away as possible, this will not change your mind. In fact it will most likely strengthen your hatred.
But for me, I enjoyed it. While I believe it was not perfect, it left me in great anticipation for the sequel.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
smaug87Jul 10, 2013
Despite being a visual masterpiece the Hobbit suffers from side plots which draw us away from the main objective.

The casting was spot on. I couldn't find fault with any of the choices but there was very little depth in many of theDespite being a visual masterpiece the Hobbit suffers from side plots which draw us away from the main objective.

The casting was spot on. I couldn't find fault with any of the choices but there was very little depth in many of the characters because so much else was going on. I do like the way we see Bilbo's character grow from start to finish and his relationship with Gandalf.

Not a failure by any means but there's a lesson to be learnt here that less is more.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
DibbHansenJul 15, 2013
While it may have some great performances in there, along with some visually dazzling sequences, this film still feels overly long and stretched out. It does not come close to matching with Lord of the Rings, it still is a enjoyable film.While it may have some great performances in there, along with some visually dazzling sequences, this film still feels overly long and stretched out. It does not come close to matching with Lord of the Rings, it still is a enjoyable film. The action is fun, the story (once it gets going) is fun and the scenes with Radagast the Brown were my favorite. The music is done well along with the cinematography. This film is enjoyable, but lacks in originality and the timing should have been trimmed down a bit.… Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
7
TheApplegnomeDec 9, 2014
Everything is about money, including this new and unnecessary trilogy.

This new trilogy is far away when it comes to Middle-earth magic, as we know it. The main issue is that there are three movies on one book that’s only one-third of TheEverything is about money, including this new and unnecessary trilogy.

This new trilogy is far away when it comes to Middle-earth magic, as we know it. The main issue is that there are three movies on one book that’s only one-third of The Lord of The Rings; this can only result in a worse trilogy than Lord of the Rings. It’s all about money. One result of this is that it took like 25 minutes for the movie to really start; there are so much slow scenes in the beginning. There’s also much slow and silly scenes in the film, there’s no LotR-magic. But at the same time are there some highly entertaining and funny things that I totally enjoyed to see, and the action is great, but not as unique as in The Lord of the Rings. The biggest problem with the action is that there’s too much CGI, and by that I mean bad CGI. It doesn’t look real. Some of the villains that are only CGI are superb, but when it comes to other living objects like trees and fires am I not impressed. The movie is overall very entertaining because it gives us a greater backstory of Bilbo’s life, which hasn’t been fully explained before. There are lots of connections between the two trilogies, which I truly love! The extended edition is even greater, so much more material. The last aspect of the film that I really enjoyed is the soundtrack. It’s so touching. But not as epic as The Lord of the Rings.

This movie gives the audience a greater backstory of Bilbo’s life, before everything in one of the greatest trilogies ever made. Even though Peter Jackson directed this film, it got some flaws. The silliness and a big lack of innovation and dramatic scenes don’t make this film even close to matching The Fellowship of the Ring.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey gets a 7.5/10.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
FreedomFightersDec 31, 2016
I'm going to get this out of the way right now, and I'm probably going to receive a huge storm of hate for this, but here it is: I have not seen any of the original Lord of the Rings films in their entirety. I know, strike me down. I'm notI'm going to get this out of the way right now, and I'm probably going to receive a huge storm of hate for this, but here it is: I have not seen any of the original Lord of the Rings films in their entirety. I know, strike me down. I'm not sure what it is, but something about those films just never really interested me. Most of the reason I saw "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" was because the trailers for the film looked fantastic and sold the movie for me. And I still remember how hyped this movie was, and how everyone was looking forward to it and all this, and then when it came out..."meh" seemed to be what I heard from most people. That didn't stop me from checking out the film, and all in all, even from the perspective of an outsider, it was a pretty good film. It was visually breathtaking and wonderfully-acted, especially by Martin Freeman and Andy Serkis, and it had some pretty solid action scenes. It DID kind of chug along a little bit, probably because it's the first of a trilogy and it's supposed to set things up, but all in all, "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" is a good, entertaining, visually stunning film. Considering that you are hearing this from an outsider to the series, I'm sure the fans of the series will enjoy it even more than I did.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
joao1198pedroOct 27, 2013
altought it isn´t in the level of the lord of the rings trilogy,it is still a good film,for an prequel this movie have a great story,the special effects are great and it can be a revolution just like the lord of the rings were.
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
7
GrabacrJan 7, 2014
It's definitely not at the level of Lord of the Rings, and I"ll admit, there are some lines that I laughed at that I probably wasn't supposed to, but it was still entertaining. It was well-written, and the fact that it's more "childish" thanIt's definitely not at the level of Lord of the Rings, and I"ll admit, there are some lines that I laughed at that I probably wasn't supposed to, but it was still entertaining. It was well-written, and the fact that it's more "childish" than LOTR is just because that's how the books went as well.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
DiskJul 15, 2014
Welcome back to middle earth my friends.
The Hobbit is the long anticipated film that takes place 60 years before Lord of the Rings, the acclaimed trilogy directed by Peter Jackson.
In The Hobbit we follow Bilbo Baggins, a Hobbit who livesWelcome back to middle earth my friends.
The Hobbit is the long anticipated film that takes place 60 years before Lord of the Rings, the acclaimed trilogy directed by Peter Jackson.
In The Hobbit we follow Bilbo Baggins, a Hobbit who lives in the Shire, a mystic place where people sit around smoking pipes and eating food. Bilbo is visited by Gandalf the Grey, a wizard who invites him to go on an adventure with 13 dwarves to kill a dragon that has destroyed their homeland.
Now Bilbo, like many Hobbits, does not like to partake in these kind of things. The dangerous world of middle earth is no place for them. But, in a fortunate 30 minutes of screen time, they convince him and we have our journey.
Right off the bat I just want to say that the Hobbit AUJ is a long film. Just about as long as Fellowship of the Ring. However, in fellowship, a lot more happens. I wont knock The Hobbit down any points for dragging on because, while it does do so, there is plenty of more material to see during these moments. You get to meet the dwarves, who are fun and eccentric. You also get to see Sir Ian McKellen as Gandalf again.
Martin Freeman and Ian McKellen do great, especially Freeman. He makes Bilbo more three dimensional than before.
And Thorin? He’s a wonderful character with a great back story who really shows leadership over the dwarves.
Sure there are a few forgettable dwarves in the movie, but for the most part they are interesting characters with colourful personalities.
If I were to nitpick anything (minus the argument over 40fps) is that this film has a lot more CGI. So much so that it really just takes you out of the experience. There were many scenes where I was like
“They got over a thousand extras for Helms Deep but had to CGI those 8 guys?”
It is kinda upsetting and really seems unnecessary at points.
But other than that, the film is great. It was cool to see the battle at Moria, I love how it’s told, I love the build up, I REALLY love the attention to detail, and I surprisingly love Radagast the Brown.
and the ‘Riddles in the Dark’ sequence? Yeah, talk about chilling.
There’s really not much else to say here, if you love LotR you’ll absolutely love The Hobbit AUJ. If you love film in general you will, for the most part, enjoy The Hobbit. Although, you may be annoyed by the FPS and many of the drawn out scenes.
If you hated LotR and everything it stood for then dude, stay as far away as possible, this will not change your mind. In fact it will most likely strengthen your hatred.
But for me, I enjoyed it. While I believe it was not perfect, it left me in great anticipation for the sequel.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
adpirtleAug 14, 2014
The opening chapter of Peter Jackson's second Middle-earth trilogy is a bit of a mixed bag, but the bag itself is gorgeous. The scenery, the set design and the special effects (mostly) dazzle, and the 48fps theatrical release was, for me, aThe opening chapter of Peter Jackson's second Middle-earth trilogy is a bit of a mixed bag, but the bag itself is gorgeous. The scenery, the set design and the special effects (mostly) dazzle, and the 48fps theatrical release was, for me, a game-changer of a visual experience (YMMV). The ensemble cast (both old and new) is uniformly good, and Martin Freeman is absolutely perfect in the title role of a thoroughly domesticated hobbit pushing middle-age, who finds himself uncharacteristically swept away on an adventure. The film doesn't precisely follow the beloved children's tale it's adapting (though the first 45 minutes or so is just shy of reverential), but many of the changes are understandable, and work to make the movie more accessible. I have no idea why Jackson decided to change this from a "quest" into a "chase," but Azog makes a pretty decent bad guy.

There are really only two issues that keep this film from getting a higher score from me, and they're both hard to ignore. First, of course, is the length. When I heard that Jackson was turning this slim novel into a trilogy, I still never imagined that each film would be pushing 3 hours long. The LOTR movies could get away with this, because they had so much story to tell, but this one feels a bit padded.

The second problem, which runs throughout the film, at least after it leaves Bag End, is the overwhelming about of computer graphics. One reason the first trilogy was so well accepted, even by non-fantasy fans, is how grounded it felt, with lots of real locations and practical effects. This film moves away from that trend, perhaps because Jackson has a substantially larger war chest to play with. Goblin-town is particularly egregious. The Great Goblin looks fantastic, and so does Gollum, (who continues to steal all his scenes), but the rest of it just feels fake, more like a video game than a movie, especially the escape.

Overall, this is an enjoyable adventure film, and a fun, if flawed, beginning of moviegoers new foray into Middle-earth.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
SkyrimGuy935Feb 20, 2015
Let's get this out of the way first. The Hobbit is not in any way, shape, or form as good as Lord of the Rings. However, when compared to such incredible films, very few movies are great. When looking at it from an unbiased standpoint, ILet's get this out of the way first. The Hobbit is not in any way, shape, or form as good as Lord of the Rings. However, when compared to such incredible films, very few movies are great. When looking at it from an unbiased standpoint, I found there was much enjoyment to be had in this fun fantasy romp, even if its clumsy pace and overabundance of CGI bring it down a few notches.

7.2/10… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
johnbobs1Jan 16, 2015
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. After the brilliant Lord of the Rings films, I was expecting big things from this film. Unfortunately, I was found myself a little let down by it. It seems that Peter Jackson may have lost his touch a little.
The rings films were huge, epic and rivetting pieces of film making. This is still in evidence in ''an unexpected journey''; superbly filmed backdrops and scenery throughout and a real sense of adventure are both still there. However, it has to be remember that Tolkien's original book was a reasonably simplistic and straightforward children's story, with a few darker undertones thrown in for us older readers. Peter Jackson has chosen to expand upon these darker undertones, and indeed the film feels much more like a prequel to the Fellowship of the Ring than an actual adaptation of the Hobbit.
That said, it generally succeeds in what in trying to achieve this status, though in doing so sacrifices much of the original matter of Tolkien's book.
New and often seemingly unnecessary scenes have been added, including Gandalf's co-wizard Radagast escaping from a pack of Wargs on a sled pulled by giant bunnies (I'm not making that up...), and a cringeworthy scene involving the Hobbit and Dwarves attempting to evade the battling ''storm giants'' of the mountains. The script is also not perfect and often questionable, and characters who had little or no place in the book appear prominently in certain scenes. However, unlike many reviewers (!) I often found their additions quite interesting. However, in choosing to focus on characters such as Azog the Defiler and Sauron, Peter Jackson has perhaps unwittingly placed lesser importance on the real baddie of the book; Smaug. This is a shame.
In terms of effects, I found this film difficult to stomach at times. Though the animation is fantastic in places, in other scenes the camera angle jerks around constantly and is extremely irritating.
Character acting is also variable. I wasn't actually particularly keen on Martin Freeman as Bilbo (though I know he was poplular with others), and some of the Dwarves could have had bigger parts in the film.
Generally, a good film; entertaining and dark. But not quite what I was expecting; an unexpected journey, no less.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
anichelsJan 1, 2016
The Hobbit gets a passing grade, but just that.
Same director and world setting as LOTR, but their insistence on the use of CGI made many parts of the movie look cartoonish.
I thought the original story stood up on its own without theThe Hobbit gets a passing grade, but just that.
Same director and world setting as LOTR, but their insistence on the use of CGI made many parts of the movie look cartoonish.
I thought the original story stood up on its own without the liberties taken from the writers to introduce orcs and evil wizards and stuff.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
horcrux2007Sep 26, 2014
I think "An Unexpected Journey" was a reasonably good start to the soon-to-be Hobbit trilogy. It's exciting, adventurous, and engaging, but it might strain your patience at a running time of nearly three hours because some scenes dragged onI think "An Unexpected Journey" was a reasonably good start to the soon-to-be Hobbit trilogy. It's exciting, adventurous, and engaging, but it might strain your patience at a running time of nearly three hours because some scenes dragged on for a very long time. Another problem I had was that it tried to connect to The Lord of the Rings way too much such as the addition of a few characters and an overly long intro scene. It's still a nice first chapter in what I think will be a great series despite those faults.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
Le__XenomorphDec 28, 2014
This movie did not wow or disappoint me. It was a good enough movie to establish the Hobbit trilogy and introduce the characters, for sure. However, the worst problems of this movie were boring scenes and an unnecessarily long running time.This movie did not wow or disappoint me. It was a good enough movie to establish the Hobbit trilogy and introduce the characters, for sure. However, the worst problems of this movie were boring scenes and an unnecessarily long running time. But the Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is definitely a solid movie and is a great setup for the trilogy. 7/10 (good)… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
emlugo123Feb 22, 2015
The first hour of this movie or so is really long and tedious. I watched this with my brother and he fell asleep. But after the first hour the pace did pick up somewhat. There is a lot of CGI in this film, something that I was ratherThe first hour of this movie or so is really long and tedious. I watched this with my brother and he fell asleep. But after the first hour the pace did pick up somewhat. There is a lot of CGI in this film, something that I was rather disappointed with, I wish they had used real life actors instead. Do NOT watch this film in 3D, my eyes could not adjust to the 3D so I had the watch the movie with my 3D glasses off.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
homer4presidentMar 11, 2015
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. First off, I do like the movie. Martin Freeman is excellent as Bilbo. He truly embodies the character. The dwarves are very well cast too. Unfortunately, the script makes arbitrary changes to several key scenes. I was very upset that they almost completely changed the scene with the trolls. Tolkien did it best in the book and why Mr. Jackson and troop of writers changed the scene only seems like they were arrogant enough to believe that they could do better. They didn't. The scene in the movie is crude and not funny at all. it also tries to turn the focus on Bilbo when it was originally meant to show Gandalf as a tricky and wise wizard.

Otherwise, the visuals, the action scenes, and musical score are excellent. It's not a bad movie, just don't expect book, or you will be sorely disappointed.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
Termin8terApr 19, 2016
The Hobbit: Unexpected Journey is a good movie, but a serious step back from LOTR in terms of scope and storytelling. Here are my reasons that this is not as good as LOTR: Firstly, their is an over-reliance on CGI. The LOTR movies barely usedThe Hobbit: Unexpected Journey is a good movie, but a serious step back from LOTR in terms of scope and storytelling. Here are my reasons that this is not as good as LOTR: Firstly, their is an over-reliance on CGI. The LOTR movies barely used any CGI, but this uses far too many green-screen sets, and It gets very annoying. Second, there are far too many jokes and dry humor that it ruins the flow and intensity of the story.
These two glaring problems seriously hold back this movie from being awesome. Overall, Unexpected Journey is a good movie, but not nearly as good as FOTR, and the LOTR trilogy.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
MovieManiac83Apr 23, 2015
In 2001, only a few months after the fall of the World Trade Center, Peter Jackson swept us away to Middle Earth with The Fellowship of the Ring. It was a wondrous three-hour achievement: the first major attempt at serious, big budget epicIn 2001, only a few months after the fall of the World Trade Center, Peter Jackson swept us away to Middle Earth with The Fellowship of the Ring. It was a wondrous three-hour achievement: the first major attempt at serious, big budget epic fantasy. It succeeded beyond anyone's wildest imagination ("imagination" being the key term), and Fellowship, along with its follow-ups, The Two Towers and The Return of the King, convinced Hollywood that there was unexplored ore in the fantasy mine. Now, nine years after closing the book on The Lord of the Rings, Jackson has returned to the scene of his greatest success. The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, the first installment of a three-part adaptation of Tolkien's first Middle Earth adventure, is both more and less of the same. There are numerous concrete reasons why An Unexpected Journey fails to live up to the standard set by The Lord of the Rings, but the most critical is also the most intangible: the magic is gone (or at least muted). An Unexpected Journey is a competent, entertaining effort but it neither enthralls nor amazes in the way its predecessors did. There's no question that Jackson is attempting to recapture something elusive and, although there are stretches when he comes close, he never quite attains that goal. It would be monumentally unfair to label The Hobbit as a "failure," but calling it a "disappointment" would be reasonable. Jackson established expectations with The Lord of the Rings; his inability to fulfill them is perhaps a trap of his own making.

The Fellowship of the Ring is 400 pages; Jackson adapted it into a three-hour theatrical release. The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey covers the first 100 pages of a 270-page book; the movie version runs only 10 minutes shorter than The Fellowship of the Ring. And therein lies this production's Achilles Heel: its long-windedness. An Unexpected Journey does not earn its 168-minute running time. From the beginning, there's a sense of bloating and self-indulgence. Roughly the first half requires a dose of caffeine to stay awake and focused. Things improve considerably during the second half. In fact, the final 45 minutes are tightly paced and riveting. But the strong ending cannot fully compensate for the way the movie meanders and stumbles during its first two hours. I think there's a very good, perhaps even a great, movie contained within An Unexpected Journey, but a ruthless editor was needed to unearth it. Perhaps the DVD Special Edition for this picture should feature less footage rather than more.

In a sense, it's unfair to assign a final "grade" to The Hobbit until all three parts are available. Perhaps, when viewed as a whole, the movies will provide a smoother, more richly textured experience than what is hinted at by An Unexpected Journey. Maybe some of the secondary characters will come to life. In this first chapter, only Bilbo, Gandalf, and Thorin show sufficient personality to distinguish themselves.

Unfortunately, there are also some unforgivably cartoonish moments. The shots of Radagast (Sylvester McCoy) being chased by goblins while riding a rabbit-pulled sleigh look like a video game excerpt. There are other isolated scenes that have a similar problem with the CGI being too apparent. The stone giant battle is impressive but it looks more like an outtake from a Transformers film than something that belongs in The Hobbit. On the other hand, there are some wonderful scenes: a council with Gandalf, Elrond, Saruman, and Galadriel; riddles in dark with the most vivid, detailed Gollum to date; and the climactic stand-off with the White Orc. Jackson does a great job crafting the goblin's underground kingdom. The troll encounter does justice to the book. Rivendell mimics what we saw in The Lord of the Rings. And the glimpses of Smaug make us want to see more.

Visually, The Hobbit is being released in four different flavors: digital 2-D, 3-D at 24 frames-per-second (fps), 3-D at 48 fps, and 3-D IMAX. Having seen it in the 48 fps version, I have a few comments. First, neither the doubled frame rate nor the 3-D adds much to the overall experience. Both are superfluous. The 3-D does not create a richer environment, although neither does it corrupt the experience. The 48 fps is less noticeable than I expected. There are scenes when it causes the images to be crisper and brighter but, especially in instances of high CGI content, it creates a non-cinematic picture. That may be the primary reason why isolated moments feel like video game outtakes. My advice: avoid all the visual flourishes and see this in good, old-fashioned 2-D. The Lord of the Rings didn't need 48 fps or 3-D and there's no conceivable reason why The Hobbit should. It's certainly not better because of it.

Still, for all of its faults, which are more numerous than those in any of The Lord of the Rings' chapters, Jackson successfully navigates the return to Middle Earth.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
PeterAlexanderJun 10, 2015
The first instalment of the Hobbit series succeeds, by the most part, to take its viewers back to Middle Earth. Whilst the film is visually stunning at times and demonstrates a magical proportion of promise, it does not provide the movieThe first instalment of the Hobbit series succeeds, by the most part, to take its viewers back to Middle Earth. Whilst the film is visually stunning at times and demonstrates a magical proportion of promise, it does not provide the movie going experience of the Lord of the Rings. Peter Jackson swerves from the winning formula that brought him so much love from fans. An over reliance on CGI effects and comedic and at times kiddish humour is prevalent throughout the film. Although I urge Lord of the Rings fans to steady their expectations, the return to Middle Earth provides some spectacular moments and presents clear promise for the next two films.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
DanBurritoSep 15, 2015
Coming from someone who hasn't seen LOTR it was decent enough. Martin Freeman does a very good Bilbo Baggins and my favourite scene is the scene with Gollum. Andy Serkis is perfect for that role. Again, I don't know how it compares to Lord OfComing from someone who hasn't seen LOTR it was decent enough. Martin Freeman does a very good Bilbo Baggins and my favourite scene is the scene with Gollum. Andy Serkis is perfect for that role. Again, I don't know how it compares to Lord Of The Rings but I thought it was watchable. A couple of scenes that weren't in the book were a little unnecessary though. Some of them work and some don't. For example the "Stone giants" scene is kind of random and leaves you thinking "why did they put THAT scene in? Isn't the movie extended enough by now?". Ah well. I can't think of a good sentence to finish this review so bye.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
JP32Nov 16, 2022
Peter Jackson has defined his career as the fantasy-epic guy, but what makes him special is his robust cinematic ingenuity. He has a range of directorial skills, not just as a visionary or a special effects pioneer, but as a storyteller,Peter Jackson has defined his career as the fantasy-epic guy, but what makes him special is his robust cinematic ingenuity. He has a range of directorial skills, not just as a visionary or a special effects pioneer, but as a storyteller, actor’s coach, showman. His Hobbit is fittingly family-friendly, wonderfully full of charm and humor.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
Jaredc324Dec 11, 2019
What a heartwarming return that's only flaw in being too long is somewhat contradicted as being back in this world isn't something any fan and moviegoer of the 21st century would wish to cut short on. But it's characters and backstory seem toWhat a heartwarming return that's only flaw in being too long is somewhat contradicted as being back in this world isn't something any fan and moviegoer of the 21st century would wish to cut short on. But it's characters and backstory seem to have a beat too many in terms of exposition (making it less mysterious, and therefore less surprising). It's just such a wonder to be back in the visionary interpretation of Peter Jackson's Middle Earth again, even if it's length does make "An Unexpected Journey" seem more than it needs to be.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
ErikTheCriticSep 25, 2018
This first "Hobbit" movie does have certain pacing issues, however as a whole it is still a very enjoyable movie with breathtaking visuals and an outstanding portrayal of Bilbo Baggins played by Martin Freeman.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
DiptanshuJul 3, 2020
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Visually stunning and beautiful movie!Each and every fight scenes were epic and awesome but as a prequel its a decent movie!the music was phenomenal same as LOTR trilogy,the acting was amazing,the CGI and Visuals were Improved and it was literally a Piece Of Art,the story was decent and screenplay was quite okay,the 1st half was literally utter slow and boring.the LOTR's 1st movie "the fellowship" was slow at start but the world building and intro to all it was Riveting to watch where-as in this the intro was good but the conversation and all felt stretched although the starting Frodo's intro and Gandalf's entry was amazing then the whole dwarfs thing and till they left the Bilbo's house it was annoying as hell,after that the adventure at start was slow the momentum was gained from the Trolls and the King's old enemy fight it was awesome scene then the whole journey according to Gandalf and the Rivendell scene was literally the piece of art the scenery and Epic music it was worth experiencing,the Wizards talk was awesome,and great to see Elf's king and Galadriel back again the Conversation between them was brilliant the "small daily life happiness thing in life" scene from Gandalf about Hobbit worthy in team it was satisfyingly beautiful scene,then the whole Journey ahead with obstacles and the ups and downs it was amazing.the mountain destruction scene was amazing.the whole movie the spaces and plot-points left for sequel and the build-up for Dragon's story-line as well as the Brown wizards fear of waking dead person thing was amazing as per build-up to sequel,the further journey the Goblins fight and escape was awesome as hell,the other side the Gollum's and Bilbo's backstory was amazingly showcased there Riddle's game was literally amazingly fun and awesome,after the escape From Goblin's the Ending fight between old enemy of Dwarf king and himself was literally awesome and Nail-biting.the tree's hideout for Dwarfs fearing the Wolf kind-of thing then the ending rescue by beloved Eagles before falling it was satisfying and amazing,before that the Bilbo's brave fight against the Enemy of king and after that the appreciation scene from king for saving his life it was amazing and sweet end!The whole movie except for slow and stretched plot at 1st half it was a good prequel!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
Cementer200Sep 27, 2020
The Hobbit An Unexpected Journey is a good movie. .
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
smijatovJan 16, 2013
Hmm. The Hobbit. I find it somewhat ironic that the little Hobbits and Dwarfs got their film dwarfed by the Lord of the Rings. There we go - enough of silly jokes. But indeed, The Hobbit is just not as good as the Lord of the Rings. WhetherHmm. The Hobbit. I find it somewhat ironic that the little Hobbits and Dwarfs got their film dwarfed by the Lord of the Rings. There we go - enough of silly jokes. But indeed, The Hobbit is just not as good as the Lord of the Rings. Whether we should be making those comparisons or not is irrelevant, they happen either way. And how could they not? There is so much overlap with characters and places, but also costumes, musical score, cinematography, art direction, you just name it. And while the film holds "universal acclaim" with the general audience of metacritic, I'd highly disagree with this. Yes, the acting is rather solid. Technically the film is good too. However, it gives us nothing new. It does not provide any new, deeper connection with these characters, especially not Gandalf, who is surprisingly weakly portrayed by McKellen after his excellent turn in the Lord of the Rings. Honestly, the story of The Hobbit is not as interesting as the one of the Lord of the Rings, for one. That would do the trick on its own, let alone having high expectations and a million comparisons with one of the best trilogies of all time. Overall, The Hobbit is not a bad film at all. But it is just yet another big-budget blockbuster with great technical aspects, but not quite as much substance as its predecessor had. Maybe the second one will be better? 6/10… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
6
Forrestgump1Jun 4, 2013
"While not offering much to the beloved fans. The Hobbit is quite the journey indeed. I enjoyed my endevours with our lovable gang. It has some intense moments but the true fact is a 200 page book does not quite add up to a 2hr and 46min"While not offering much to the beloved fans. The Hobbit is quite the journey indeed. I enjoyed my endevours with our lovable gang. It has some intense moments but the true fact is a 200 page book does not quite add up to a 2hr and 46min running time." B… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
JamesLDec 29, 2012
I admit this was not as good as any of the three Lord of the Rings films. However, it was not the disaster that many of the critics labeled it. I actually enjoyed revisiting that world and was entertained and never bored. I get what theI admit this was not as good as any of the three Lord of the Rings films. However, it was not the disaster that many of the critics labeled it. I actually enjoyed revisiting that world and was entertained and never bored. I get what the critics are saying about it being redundant and uninspired. I do not see the need for the 3 D but it was a good time at the theater. I will bet money I will enjoy this more than"Django Unchained" from QT which the critics loved. I will review that after I see it.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
TVJerryDec 17, 2012
Peter Jackson presents the first installment in this popular book with a full tilt vision. After the setup and a lengthy introduction of the characters; Bilbo Baggins and Gandalf set out to help 12 dwarves reclaim their kingdom from aPeter Jackson presents the first installment in this popular book with a full tilt vision. After the setup and a lengthy introduction of the characters; Bilbo Baggins and Gandalf set out to help 12 dwarves reclaim their kingdom from a sleeping dragon. Two hours of this three-hour film feels like a massive, frantic video game: lots of action and mayhem on a grand scale. The fantasy world is visually dazzling and the pacing seldom lags. Fans will surely be thrilled, but there's something hollow and weirdly modern about the spirit that makes it more a spectacle than an expressive adventure. BTW, this is the first movie in HRF (High Frame Rate), shot in 48fps and showing in selected local theatres. Basically, it looks like really clean HD video. I review THE HOBBIT and the new HFR format.… Expand
0 of 5 users found this helpful05
All this user's reviews
6
ChuckDee33Dec 31, 2012
Here's my main issue w/ the film. Jackson tried to make it too much like LOTR when The Hobbit as a book has quite a different tone and story. It didn't need to be so long, it didn't need to have winking references to LOTR and it didn't needHere's my main issue w/ the film. Jackson tried to make it too much like LOTR when The Hobbit as a book has quite a different tone and story. It didn't need to be so long, it didn't need to have winking references to LOTR and it didn't need to recycle LOTR's musical themes. It should have been kept at two films max. The production design and camera work are tops of course but that doesn't make it a good movie. There are other positives and negatives of course. If The Hobbit had been the first Tolkien book that Jackson adapted we'd probably all be amazed and astounded, but it's not. To follow his own LOTR adaptation I'm afraid The Hobbit is trapped in that grey area between mediocrity and greatness. Let me sum it up this way - I watch LOTR once a year or so and love revisiting those worlds. I don't have a strong desire to revisit this one.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
6
JovDec 14, 2012
Let me preface this by saying that I'm a moderate fan of the LOTR books and movies, but more-so a big Peter Jackson fan, with my favorites being his early work. Somehow, with The Hobbit, Peter Jackson has fumbled. Thinking back to hisLet me preface this by saying that I'm a moderate fan of the LOTR books and movies, but more-so a big Peter Jackson fan, with my favorites being his early work. Somehow, with The Hobbit, Peter Jackson has fumbled. Thinking back to his fantastic Production Diaries: it's an odd thing when the behind the scenes shorts are better than the film itself. I watched the film exactly as PJ intended it - at 48 FPS, 3D, with Dolby ATMOS surround sound on 4K resolution projectors, but was repeatedly disappointed by the visuals. Peter Jackson seems to have gone the route of George Lucas in replacing actors, puppets, and good old fashioned screen magic with pure CGI. I'm not sure if it was the 48 FPS or what, but the film looked very, very fake. I felt like I was watching an animated film, or a video game at times. A lot of people are complaining about the over-long run time - I'm not one of them. I love a long film, and appreciated it here as well, but I think that it's significant to mention that despite a nearly 3-hour length, there was very little character development. No pauses for pacing. No - this was non-stop action. I felt like I was on "The Hobbit: THE RIDE". But what was I expecting? It was a children's book, and the film is a children's movie. The battles are toned down and pointedly blood-free. If LOTR is a classically painted master-work, then The Hobbit is a caricature. This isn't to say The Hobbit was all bad. It wasn't. I thoroughly enjoyed it at points. But the comparison to Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace is apt. The film is woefully over-full of CGI, lacks spirit. This doesn't feel like a labor of love - it feels like a blockbuster made for a younger generation with short-attention spans. Skip the 3D and skip the 48 fps. I look forward to a fan-edit when all three movies are released. It needs one.… Expand
3 of 10 users found this helpful37
All this user's reviews
6
TomHugDec 16, 2012
Great characterizations. The dovetailing with the events from the Lord of the Rings movies is artfully done as well. Mr. Freeman's Bilbo is great. We get a chance to see a different aspect of Smeagol/Gollum as well.

However, there are aGreat characterizations. The dovetailing with the events from the Lord of the Rings movies is artfully done as well. Mr. Freeman's Bilbo is great. We get a chance to see a different aspect of Smeagol/Gollum as well.

However, there are a lot of non-canon scenes and sub-plots that have been injected to a) stretch the plot material to last for three movies and b) show off the 3D technology. There are many action scenes that are frenetic and pointless.

It's all well -done and I can't think of anyone who could have done a better job with the story than Mr. Jackson.

In hindsight though, I think making only 2 movies and sticking more closely to the book would have been best.… Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
6
matroycemApr 26, 2013
The Hobbit has a difficult act to follow. Having already seen the Lord of the Rings Trilogy which is a lot darker and heavier (Like the books), the Hobbit does not feel as gripping. The book of the Hobbit was written before the LOTR and wasThe Hobbit has a difficult act to follow. Having already seen the Lord of the Rings Trilogy which is a lot darker and heavier (Like the books), the Hobbit does not feel as gripping. The book of the Hobbit was written before the LOTR and was written for a young audience and I think it shows. The film is trying to be accurate to the text and seems to have a lot of padding to make it more friendly. The opening sequences to me seemed pointless and if they were cut would not have affected the film other than to reduce the run time to something more reasonable. the same can be said for other parts of the film which seem to ramble on rather than actually go anywhere. This not to say the film is poor because it isn't. Overall the casting was good and the acting likewise. Martin Freeman as Bilbo was surprisingly well cast as he got the balance right for the character. One of the issues with the film was a bit like the Star Wars Prequels. You know certain people are going to be okay and also some of the plot if you have seen the later films. This does cross off a few questions raised in the LOTR trilogy but does again make the film have another problem to solve.
Having Peter Jackson back on board to direct has at least made the universe feel consistent and the camera work is very familiar. The film is not a bad one and I am sure the new Trilogy will be overall good but I can't help feeling that I was not blown away and also that they could have made Two films rather than Three to tell the story.
I did not see the 3D showing due to not being able to watch 3D so cannot comment on whether this added to the experience. But the world still looks vivid in 2D and maybe even more alive than in the LOTR films.… Expand
3 of 6 users found this helpful33
All this user's reviews
6
Grim13Jan 4, 2013
Overall, I enjoyed the film... BUT, why on Earth does Peter Jackson make some of the changes he does to the story is beyond me! Obviously, some alteration was going to be neccesary... however, some of the changes make little to no sense atOverall, I enjoyed the film... BUT, why on Earth does Peter Jackson make some of the changes he does to the story is beyond me! Obviously, some alteration was going to be neccesary... however, some of the changes make little to no sense at all... and are entirely unneccesary.

Then there is the fact that this was SUPPOSED to be a 2 movie deal until the Studio decided it wanted to make more money and stretch it into 3 !@#$% movies! This is why the film is overlong with bloat, bloat, and more bloat! The LOTR was three 3 hour movies from about 1100 pages of source material... The Hobbit films are going to be three 3 hour movies from a little over 300 pages of source material (!?) expanded with additions from the LOTR Appendices.… Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
6
blackwolf07Dec 20, 2012
Not close to as well made as the LOTR's trilogy but entertaining. I have to knock it for adding in places that really did not need it. Also, there was no content and there's no reason for this to be a trilogy.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
6
RenzomaloJan 10, 2013
I saw The Hobbit after having reread the book and found the movie visually spectacular but otherwise somewhat disappointing. Tolkien
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
6
LivingonairDec 14, 2012
I was greatly anticipating this movie since I first heard that it was going to be made. What did I think of it now that I've seen it? I'll put it this way... it wasn't bad, but having been a big fan of the books and previous LOTR movies, II was greatly anticipating this movie since I first heard that it was going to be made. What did I think of it now that I've seen it? I'll put it this way... it wasn't bad, but having been a big fan of the books and previous LOTR movies, I was expecting more. I can't exactly put a finger on it just yet.. but something about this film compared to the previous 3 seemed slightly off, as though to remind you it is indeed a movie. Even the makeup, costumes, and animation seemed more "play" like as though you were watching it on a stage rather than it really happening. It was ok.. but I would say it didn't quite stay in the same league as the first three movies.… Expand
3 of 7 users found this helpful34
All this user's reviews
6
TyranianApr 11, 2019
The first Hobbit film is mildly enjoyable but suffers from poor writing and an inflated story.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
Sevvy88Jun 7, 2013
It's alright. Just alright. It's a spectacle for sure, complete with the great music and atmosphere. It's a big adventure that would be great to watch with a date or your family... it's kind of a movie for everyone in that sense. I foundIt's alright. Just alright. It's a spectacle for sure, complete with the great music and atmosphere. It's a big adventure that would be great to watch with a date or your family... it's kind of a movie for everyone in that sense. I found myself entertained, but once it ended, I realized it was lacking what I cherished about Jackson's LOTR movies: a lasting impression. There are so many scenes and themes explored in his vision of the trilogy that I will never forget, sadly, The Hobbit failed to make that kind of impression on me. It's not a bad movie, it's just not very substantial past it being a suitable adventure film for the entire family. Read the book instead.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
6
thedude74Dec 17, 2012
Definitely lower your expectations if you are a huge fan of Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy before going to see the first installment of The Hobbit. If you loved the theater versions, but felt that the extended editions on dvd were aDefinitely lower your expectations if you are a huge fan of Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy before going to see the first installment of The Hobbit. If you loved the theater versions, but felt that the extended editions on dvd were a little tedious, then you will have that familiar feeling here. I was worried when they first decided to stretch it out into two movies, rather than one spectacular one, so I was even more worried when I heard they stretched it all the way out to a new trilogy. The Hobbit is such a great story. They really really are stretching it out, though, here. They added a lot that I didn't remember, and seemed to take a lot of liberties, though to be honest it's so long since I read the book I can't be sure what was or wasn't in it. I may be comparing it too much to the cartoon movie version I loved so much as a kid. But, all in all, I just felt that the story is stretched out a bit too long here. It's true that it probably wouldn't have all fit into one movie, but I think two would have been plenty, and then leave a lot of what they put in out for the blu-ray release. Instead, you get an uneven affair here, some of which reaches the familiar heights of greatness Peter Jackson established with the Lord of the Rings, but a lot of which falls short.… Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
6
SayCHeese256Jan 24, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. I went into it thinking, "is this going to live to the anticipation"? I was sadly disappointed. I guess its still a good a movie. The cast was great, especially the three leads, and the music by Howard Shore was amazing. But the rest of the movie? Meh. The only really good bits were the misty mountains song by the dwarfs, the troll sequence, and the Gollum sequence. I thought the critics were being harsh comparing it to the lord of the rings as the books were very different, so the movies will be too. But now, I can see why. I had so many feelings of deja vu when I was watching this, that it felt like I was watching a recycled version of the fellowship of the ring, and it shouldn't be like that. And the script just dragged everrrryyythhhinnggg oooouuuuttttt soooooo lllloooonnngg. I was almost falling asleep during the white council scene. Which never happened in the book, it was just so they could have Galadriel and Saruman in the movie. Also, the last 10-15 minutes was incredibly melodramatic. Unnecessarily so. I guess it was an OK movie, to be honest I would watch it again, but only if I had nothing better to do.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
mrniceOct 14, 2013
All the parts that were supposed to be adventurous were rushed. All the parts that were supposed to be thrilling were bombastic, exposed action. The dark and intimate parts were made grand and epic. Who's to blame? Probably the financial tiesAll the parts that were supposed to be adventurous were rushed. All the parts that were supposed to be thrilling were bombastic, exposed action. The dark and intimate parts were made grand and epic. Who's to blame? Probably the financial ties behind the production. I fear Hollywood has a manipulative motivation for making another huge "good guys go out and fight bad guys in another country", because watching the movie it just felt like a propagandistic lesson in patriotism and violence. All the grace of Tolkien's writing is gone.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
6
lasttimeisawJan 16, 2013
A plain 2D version at the local multiplex, culminating my not-so-frenetic film-viewing activity of 2012. The first chapter of this contentiously extended THE HOBBIT trilogy from Peter Jackson revisits the familiar ground in New Zealand, withA plain 2D version at the local multiplex, culminating my not-so-frenetic film-viewing activity of 2012. The first chapter of this contentiously extended THE HOBBIT trilogy from Peter Jackson revisits the familiar ground in New Zealand, with Bilbo recounts his tall-tale with Gandolf and thirteen dwarfs (strangely their purpose of their journey seems to be deliberately dodged, for viewers who have not read the novel, the journey itself is conspicuously … Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
jack977Mar 9, 2013
The Hobbit is a dazzling film, with almost every other frame gleaming with extravagant special effects. But its deliberately tedious pacing makes it little more than a curtain raiser for the future films in the franchise to follow.
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
6
beingryanjudeSep 1, 2014
It is clear that Peter Jackson should not stretch the children's book into three Lord of the Rings-length feature films. Nevertheless, Jackson brings an insightful look into Middle Earth once again. An Unexpected Journey is by no means aIt is clear that Peter Jackson should not stretch the children's book into three Lord of the Rings-length feature films. Nevertheless, Jackson brings an insightful look into Middle Earth once again. An Unexpected Journey is by no means a repeat of the previous trilogy--it's fresh and exciting.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
csw12Dec 18, 2012
The Hobbit is clearly a step down from The Lord of the Rings. Jackson didn't seem to remember how to direct. Editing, pace, acting and even action sequences were off. The movie simply didn't gel. The visuals were stunning, music remember fullThe Hobbit is clearly a step down from The Lord of the Rings. Jackson didn't seem to remember how to direct. Editing, pace, acting and even action sequences were off. The movie simply didn't gel. The visuals were stunning, music remember full and some scenes brought back good memories. The Hobbit isn't a bad movie by any means but the length is simply ridiculous.… Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
6
Trev29Nov 30, 2013
The Hobbit is extremely disappointing coming from a director who has accomplished so much, and knows the material so well. It is still has great moments, and for the most part is easy going adventure to watch, but come on.
29 of 72 users found this helpful2943
All this user's reviews
6
GodotIsW8ing4UJan 30, 2013
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is a movie best described as "unexpected". A decade ago, nobody expected that Peter Jackson would come around and even make The Hobbit. A year ago, nobody expected that Peter Jackson would split it acrossThe Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is a movie best described as "unexpected". A decade ago, nobody expected that Peter Jackson would come around and even make The Hobbit. A year ago, nobody expected that Peter Jackson would split it across three movies. A month or two ago, nobody expected that HFR would bring with it a huge dinner party of new problems for visual effects staff. And going into the theater, despite all of the warnings I'd received, I still didn't really expect what I got.

It's not that I didn't LIKE The Hobbit -- I very much did, though many of my friends didn't -- the problem is that strictly speaking, it's not a good movie. It would, however, make a very good TV mini-series.

A movie brings with it certain demands of pacing and condensation; you've got your audience for a set length of time with no intermissions or breaks, and you've got to hold their attention and entertain them for that entire time, which means that the longer your movie runs, the less added fluff you can afford to have in your movie (conversely, shorter movies can afford a lot more fluff, simply because the audience won't get tired of a 90 minute movie unless the whole thing is just unspeakably dull). With a mini-series, on the other hand, you can break the story up into 1-hour chunks, show one a week, move the story along at whatever pace you damn well like and as long as you don't turn into The Walking Dead Season Two you can flesh out the world as much as you want.

Peter Jackson's heart is in the right place with this movie: he wants to show Middle-Earth in all its glory. He wants to show not only what you read in the book The Hobbit, but also everything important that was happening at the same time anywhere in the world, as well as give some of the otherwise-flat dwarves arcs. All of this would be completely forgiven on TV, and it would be hailed as one of the best shows on the airwaves for its dedication to bringing its setting to full, vibrant life. However, doing this in cinema just means that people are going to get cramps in their asses from sitting in the theater seats for three hours straight once a year three years in a row.

The problem with the movie isn't with the dialogue, the acting, the visual effects (though I will be discussing the unexpected technical issues later; I just consider them petty quibbles rather than major problems), the cinematography, the sound, or any of that; the problem is pretty much just the decision to make the movie as incredibly long as it is. All the scenes themselves are individually very nice, and are at the very least atmospheric if not essential to the plot, but at a running time like this, anything unessential to the plot feels like it's wasting the viewers' time and padding the movie rather than actually giving you anything good, which is a real pity because this movie clearly put a great deal of love and work into everything in it. The good news is that the movie's pace ramps up constantly, until it's moving at full steam by the end, and it never slows down once it's gained speed.

If I had to change one thing about the movie to make it better, there's one thing I would do: cut the entire chase scene that leads into Rivendell. Have Gandalf simply browbeat Thorin into going to Rivendell in a three or four minute conversation, cut to Rivendell, and have Gandalf meet Radagast there before the whole wizard council, moving Radagast's conversation with Gandalf to that meeting. It cuts out a huge padded chase scene that isn't nice to watch (it breaks the "only provide the illusion of depth; never pop out of the screen" rule that all 3D movies should follow), adds nothing to the story, dilutes Radagast's character, and introduces the Azog subplot much too early. In fact, Azog and his orcs shouldn't have come into the movie at all until Thorin gets a chance to finally see them at the end; this way, the audience feels his same surprise and the scene has that much more emotional impact. It also shortens the movie, which is one of the things that needs to be done with this movie. Moving Radagast to the Council also allows him to play off the other wizards, giving Sylvester McCoy much-deserved screentime to be entertaining while also giving him a chance to show that his character isn't just an insane stoner in the woods. It's shorter and has a better overall effect.

On the technical side of the movie, HFR is a technology that shows promise, but still has a few kinks to work out. It makes the entire movie look too smoothly animated, like a Final Fantasy XIII cinematic, until you adjust to it, which takes about the first half hour. Once you acclimate, it looks gorgeous, but another problem arises: the greater detail means that costumes (and most noticeably, beards) look less realistic, which means that HFR won't develop further until costuming gets MUCH better. A lower framerate, something like 30, might be easier to work with.

Hoping the sequel will be better.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
ConnKonFeb 13, 2013
Oh dear. This is the biggest disappointment in a movie I've ever had. I'm a HUGE Lord of the Rings fan (like a lot of people claim they are), the Lord of the Rings truly changed my childhood. Now more than 10 years later The Hobbit isOh dear. This is the biggest disappointment in a movie I've ever had. I'm a HUGE Lord of the Rings fan (like a lot of people claim they are), the Lord of the Rings truly changed my childhood. Now more than 10 years later The Hobbit is released. This has been my most anticipated movie since heard it was going to be made in 2008. I couldn't believe I was going on another Middle Earth adventure! And after finally watching The Hobbit I was really let down. So what was wrong with The Hobbit: an Unexpected Journey? It's hard to place, but it wasn't intriguing at all. The story felt really flat, the characters didn't develop well, it was too childish and it was trying too hard to be something it's not. At least don't make the goblins damn CGI! The Goblin King was a joke, the viewer can't connect to the dwarfs all, there wasn't a sense of real danger. Even the script was pretty bad! The movie started off pretty good, you felt like you were back in Middle Earth after 10 years but then it turns into a silly Narnia adventure. 6/10… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
TubeyDec 22, 2015
In parts it nails Middle Earth, and when the score starts to soar in the background and the pacing kicks up a gear then it feels a worthy successor (or predecessor, I dunno...) to the LOTR movies.

But then it'll drop back into a movieIn parts it nails Middle Earth, and when the score starts to soar in the background and the pacing kicks up a gear then it feels a worthy successor (or predecessor, I dunno...) to the LOTR movies.

But then it'll drop back into a movie version of painting by numbers, moving from one dreary scene to the next with little continuity, which is a result of what it is - unnecessary padding of the source material to stretch the project into three movies.

This lack of coherent pacing, haphazard character development, combined with a massive over-usage of CGI, all combine to make a movie far longer than it has any right to be and is difficult to watch to the conclusion.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
hugethornDec 19, 2012
So my way of rating a movie: Is it worth the ticket price? In this case, yes, but barely. Sure it's an entertaining movie, but it is NOT "The Hobbit" so if you're a fan of the book, don't show up expecting it.

The book is pastoral,So my way of rating a movie: Is it worth the ticket price? In this case, yes, but barely. Sure it's an entertaining movie, but it is NOT "The Hobbit" so if you're a fan of the book, don't show up expecting it.

The book is pastoral, insightful, thoughtful with shots of excitement and suspense. The movie is none of these things. It has gratuitous violence and formulaic action sequences. I was shocked by how much yelling, screaming and sword fighting and biting there was, since the book has so little of it. Now, I like a violent movie as much as the next guy, and I really enjoyed LOTR, but the Hobbit is different. Unfortunately, Peter Jackson made an LOTR version of the Hobbit. Mostly, I'm disappointed by him and his dumbing-down of the subtleties of the novel.
The 3d IMAX experience was awesome, but sometimes the characters were CLEARLY plastic (CG). The action sequences also felt very "harry potter-ish" - Incredible, over the top, unsurvivable scenes and characters walk with nary a scratch. I can practically see the roller coaster name branding spilling out of a couple scenes.… Expand
5 of 8 users found this helpful53
All this user's reviews
6
MonsieurEamesJan 21, 2013
Not horrible, but rather disappointing. Jackson captures the visual appeal of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy but the story feels much too bloated. The ending was satisfying, though.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
moonman1994Jan 28, 2013
All the major critics of this film relate this film to Lord of the Rings and say how it was not near as epic as Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy. Let me first say that no it isn't but The Hobbit is no epic and so you shouldn't expect it toAll the major critics of this film relate this film to Lord of the Rings and say how it was not near as epic as Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy. Let me first say that no it isn't but The Hobbit is no epic and so you shouldn't expect it to be. The Hobbit is a short, goofy heart-warming prequel to an epic. Sure, it has it's epic moments but out rightly comparing this movie to Lord of the Rings is unfair. So, if that's not my complaint why did I give this movie a 6? The problem is that the Hobbit is a short book and it's ending up being stretched into 3 LONG movies. Since the Hobbit book is even shorter than a single Lord of the Rings book this is a problem and this lead to Jackson looking to the appendices to put more content into the film. This leads to a drawn out film that doesn't seem to want to end. There are definitely scenes that should have been saved for the extended addition and other parts that should have plainly been cut. Anther problem is that the film seems to want to spend more times making ties to Lord of the Rings than developing it's own characters (all of which did great jobs in there respective roles.) This leads to cameos by characters not previously in the Hobbit which while cool is something that makes the movie even more long. If Jackson trims the fat of the movie down just a bit more in the next two films the could be great but he has to learn that he must do that first. If you're a big LOTR fan you will love this movie but if you're indifferent to the series you'll find it to be mediocre. Yeah I enjoyed it and yeah I'm extremely excited for the next two movies. I just hope it's an improvement to this film.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
SpangleMar 6, 2016
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is a visually striking film from director Peter Jackson that rises to the cinematic levels of the Lord of the Rings trilogy in that area. The dialogue and direction are very good, but it just felt like theThe Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is a visually striking film from director Peter Jackson that rises to the cinematic levels of the Lord of the Rings trilogy in that area. The dialogue and direction are very good, but it just felt like the narrative elements of this film were lacking. The story is not overly complex, but it just feels like it had no need to be this long, as they keep running into characters from the Lord of the Rings that feel as though they are there solely for nostalgia purposes. I have never read The Hobbit, so I have no idea what is added, but there are just so many tiebacks to the original trilogy that this one feels as though it is trying to ride on the coattails of that series rather than on its own strengths, which bothered me. That said, Martin Freeman, Ian McKellen, Hugo Weaving, Richard Armitage, and Cate Blanchett, are all very good here and this is a film that does a great job setting up its succeeding sequels. Cannot wait to check those out.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
tropicAcesDec 17, 2012
There are moments that make you remember the first three films, and that unfortunately makes you realize how much better those are than this. Perhaps in the next two (God help us) we will see more development but this is a film that is atThere are moments that make you remember the first three films, and that unfortunately makes you realize how much better those are than this. Perhaps in the next two (God help us) we will see more development but this is a film that is at least 30 minutes too long and too family friendly for its own good.… Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
6
axelkochDec 31, 2012
The two things that make "An Unexpected Journey" not that good as we all have hoped are its length and the inappropriate funny stuff Jackson mixes into it. The dwarfs and their burping and quaffing destroy the mystic feeling of Middle-earthThe two things that make "An Unexpected Journey" not that good as we all have hoped are its length and the inappropriate funny stuff Jackson mixes into it. The dwarfs and their burping and quaffing destroy the mystic feeling of Middle-earth and turn the movie into a unfunny comedy. Luckily, only the first third of the film is ruled by the dwarfs, the rest is focused on the great battles and the wonderful views of Tolkien's world. But Peter Jackson's habit to turn every little story, as tiny as it may be, into a three-hour-picture is really pesky. Less dwarfs, less battles, less pseudo-humorous talk and we would've got a much better film. But after all, the first part of The Hobbit is dominated by the Oscar-deserving visuals and acoustics, a mostly felicitous cast and fantasy stuff, that is simply amazing to see. Just because of the 3D, the cinema ticket is worth its price. Eventually, you have to keep in mind that this is only the initiation to a hopefully marvelous journey.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
NecromusJan 2, 2013
I saw this in 2D last night, I have mixed feelings about it. While I didn't hate it, I didn't love it either. I saw it for half price on cheap movie night, I think if I paid full price I might feel like I wasted my money. I can't really sayI saw this in 2D last night, I have mixed feelings about it. While I didn't hate it, I didn't love it either. I saw it for half price on cheap movie night, I think if I paid full price I might feel like I wasted my money. I can't really say that it was a bad movie though, it just seemed to lack that Je ne c'est quoi that makes you go WOW! when you see an epic, ground-breaking movie. The acting was great, the cinematography was great, the CGI was (mostly) great. The movie is slow-paced at times. Other times it is too fast-paced. Some scenes are longer than they need to be, but I guess that's what happens when you take a single book story and stretch it out to a 3 part movie trilogy. I get the impression that this movie might possibly be targeted at children more than adults, I think a young child would definitely enjoy it more. For an adult, it is alright but just alright. But after some online investigation, I found a reference to letters stating that The Hobbit book was written for children, while the LOTR book trilogy was written for an older audience, so I'll assume the movie is being true to the book in targeting a younger audience. A plot hole I noticed is why don't they just fly on the eagles from the Shire to the Dwarf city/mountain they are trying to get to? Well, this plot hole apparently exists in the book too so I can't hold it against the movie. And what the heck is a dragon going to do with a pile of gold? Well, according to some online blogs male dragons are like bowerbirds that make nests out of shiny objects to attract a mate, so that resolves that question I had that wasn't explained by this movie. This movie mostly reminds me of Pirates of the Caribbean although it is nowhere good as the first POC movie, nor is it horrible like some of the later POC sequels. All of the focus seems to be on the special effects and (mostly) failed attempts at humour rather than focusing on decent story telling or character development. I rate it as average since it lacks the Je ne c'est quoi to make it an epic movie (pacing? plot-deviations from book? not sure what went wrong exactly...) and I can't honestly say that I even liked the film. It does not live up to the quality of the LOTR trilogy at all (except for the CGI of Gollum which is still great in this movie as it was in the LOTR trilogy). It's been 25 years since I read the book, but I think I might go pick it up and read it again rather than wait for the next two movies...… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
6
ImOnFireDec 16, 2012
Too many time-filling gimmicks. The Dwarves are uninteresting in the movie. Some CGI effects actually look pretty terrible. Very far from the artistic looks of LOTR (for the most part, environments seem generic). Maybe the budget for the filmToo many time-filling gimmicks. The Dwarves are uninteresting in the movie. Some CGI effects actually look pretty terrible. Very far from the artistic looks of LOTR (for the most part, environments seem generic). Maybe the budget for the film was too small, maybe Peter Jackson went nuts, but I truly feel there is not a single aspect of the movie that is outstanding. Directing and editing were bad. Acting was really good. There were some great action scenes after the first 1h30min. Sound effects and original score were good (very nice theme song, though still far from LOTR themes...). I watched it in 2D.… Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
6
JawsLaxerDramaDec 23, 2012
The movie has its share of flaws. Number one being that the first 20 minutes of the movie are painfully drawn out much too long. While it was true to the book (any maybe the book was really at fault) it did get better. The movie isn'tThe movie has its share of flaws. Number one being that the first 20 minutes of the movie are painfully drawn out much too long. While it was true to the book (any maybe the book was really at fault) it did get better. The movie isn't oustanding. I, personally, sat next to a good friend who LOVES, LOVES, LOVES LOTR. She, of course, was so happy about seeing it. Don't get me wrong. I like the series, but I feel the next two will be much better. Eh, it was okay in the end.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
Page:
More From This Movie

58 Critic Reviews

8.0 User Reviews

Details & Credits|Trailers

Current Movie Releases
By MetascoreBy User Score
1 77 Project Hail Mary
2 75 Send Help
3 73 Hoppers
4 72 The Sheep Detectives
5 63 Normal
SEE ALL
Essential Links
New on Amazon Prime Video
New on Netflix
Coming Soon to DVD/Blu-ray
SEE ALL