The Hobbit, or There and Back Again The Hobbit, or There and Back Again question

Book or movie
Dana Dana Jan 30, 2015 05:46PM
I am personally in favor of the movie(s). I mean it's a good book, but I defiantly LOVE with a capital L these movies


All the things Jackson did right with the The Lord of the Rings he failed to do with the Hobbit.

The trilogy is a waste of time and money.

Kuromaru (last edited Feb 04, 2015 11:40AM ) Feb 04, 2015 10:44AM   3 votes
Definitely the book.
Even though I liked the first film, I didn't enjoy the other two quite as much.

The Hobbit was the book through which I have discovered Tolkien and his work, it's a special book for me and I must say Jackson did a good job with LOTR trilogy, I don't think this is how Tolkien imagined it to be.

I see what Jackson tried to do with the trilogy, unfortunately he failed massively. He tried to make it as an adventure for children with comedic features (Freeman did a splendid work!), but at the same time he was trying to make it an epic LOTR-like thing. This is not the way to go, I think. Hobbit is not Lord of the Rings and people should realise that. Hobbit was written for children and it should stay like that. Apart from failing greatly at making it epic with ridiculous scenes and features such as Legolas mistaking the trilogy with The Matrix (Legolas running on the falling stairs), unplanned ships... undeveloped planned ships... a rad scene for epileptics (the scene with Galadriel), etc.

No, in my opinion the book was better.

I always loved the book and found myself disappointed with the movies. I thought the first movie was horrible, the second was decent and the third was dragged out.

I personally like both, but I have a really good reason. The whole reason I am a Tolkien fan at all is because of "The Desolation of Smaug". About a year ago I was forced to watch it at a friends birthday party (I wasn't very happy about it!) but I ended up LOVING it! After that I read the book and loved it too and everything else is history. So even though I do see the flaws in the movies (of which there are many)I will always love them for converting me even when I didn't want to!

Not being a big fan of the LOTR trilogy the Hobbit has been my benchmark for why the Tolkien universe is great.

A standalone movie would have been great, as a trilogy i only could watch the first.

I love the book and I love the movies. Did the movies fall the book? No but the reality of it is that the book will always be better than the movie/movies

I am a huge Tolkien fan and love all of his books. I also loved Peter Jackson's adaptation of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy. In my mind though, The Hobbit movies fell kind of flat. It seemed as though they tried very hard to be epic, but missed the mark. I believe that Peter Jackson took way too many liberties with this trilogy. I do not believe that the book needed all of the changes that Mr. Jackson obviously did. Did not much care for the Hobbit all. I did like Lee Pace's portrayal of King Thandruil though.


The book is one of the best children's stories ever written, although getting a bit old now.

The films are lush to look at and fun, but the ridiculous ninja CGI elves annoy me intensely.

You know, I haven't even bothered with third film, and yet I enjoyed the book immensely. I guess that says enough. I'd have probably loved the adaptations about five years ago (I'm 19 years old), but they just feel, to quote the eponymous character, "like butter scraped over too much bread".

Book all the way.

The first movie was good and I really liked it, but the second was bad and the third wasn't even worth seeing. They couldn't even get "Battle of Five Armies" right.

Movies. I always like a great visual representation that's based on a good book.

Nothing wrong with the movies, they are decent adaptations of the source material. Certainly visually stunning. But there is a subtlety of story that only the book gets across.

Definitely book, there is so much not included in the movies that I watched the first movie and will not watch the rest.

BOTH. The feeling I felt when I was reading the trilogy was the same when I watched the movies (many many times actually!! :D). My all time favorite!! :))

Book is one of my all time favorites. Movie just ok

The movies felt like fanfiction to me. The book is where it's at!

Book by far

I would have to go book, but the movies were okay. The first two were way better than the third. The Lord of the Rings were a thousand times better, in my opinion.

Definitely the book. I find the story is just well written, sometimes a bit slow paced. I enjoyed the movie parts which originated in the book. All the additional stuff really annoyed me, specially the love story and that Legolas shows up. And when you take the freedom of adding stuff then I would definitely add more story to Smaug. Not just the waking up and being shot in the heart.

I prefer the book because the movie was different,and I hate reading a reallygood book and then watch the movie and find out that it's different.

Book without a doubt.

Though I nitpicked the movies like any fan would, watching PJ's production blogs really impressed upon me the level of effort gone into making the book to come to life onscreen. While I didn't agree with every creative decision (elf girl love triangle...WHY? Three movies for one book? Really?) they were still pretty enjoyable. But no amount of effort could top the magic of a perfect book.

The book was meant for children and could have been made in one movie but to reach a larger audience(not just the followers) they had to add more action and drama. The series is definitely a Peter Jackson film where the lord of the rings is all JRR Tolkin. My analysis of the hobbit movie is : They added some good stuff, some bad stuff and some stuff that was unnecessary but in the end it was a good watch.

I read the book when I was little because I wanted to read the LOTR but I had to read the Hobbit first. I don't remember to much of it but I know I enjoyed it and had fun reading it. Now the movies I will remember for all time. They are amazing.

The first movie was good. The second was trash, and the third was only a bit better.

The book, on the other hand, gets better every time I read it. I don't understand why Peter Jackson had to circumvent *so much* of the story that it just... felt off. They seemed more like war movies, which is a poor tone for an adaptation of the book-- and I don't care how much of the Simarillion is in it.

Movies were fun, but didn't really fit the book.

Tom (last edited Jan 31, 2015 12:33PM ) Jan 31, 2015 12:33PM   0 votes
The book, no contest. Jackson did a pretty bad job on the adaptation. It's as if he couldn't decide whether to make an epic like Lord of the Rings, or a light-hearted adventure story, and ended up failing at both. There's also far too much unnecessary filler (see Tauriel and Kili). There are some nice special effects, but very little substance. The book, on the other hand, is a charming, and well written children's story, which can also be enjoyed by adults.

E Nicole I couldn't agree with you more. The book no contest! ...more
Feb 01, 2015 09:54PM

OK, let me preface this by saying that The Hobbit was the first 'adult' book that I ever read and as such, it's one of my favorite books of all time.
Putting that aside as best I can, IMO the movie was a fantasy action film that was loosely based on The Hobbit with a whole bunch of sub-plots and characters added in order to flesh it out enough to fill a trilogy.
I enjoyed the movies taken by themselves, but they are most definitely NOT The Hobbit.

Ryan The Hobbit was a children's book :P ...more
Mar 24, 2015 03:15PM

Definitely the book, was quite disappointed by the movies although I really enjoyed the battle of the five armies.

BOOK!!!!!!!! Trilogy was too much for such a short book!

deleted member Mar 25, 2015 03:17AM   -1 votes
The movies. I love the book but I mean the movies has more characters like Tauriel(She's the best) and Legolas is inculded in the movies but not the book and I LOVED Legolas.

back to top