The Hobbit Films: A Success Or Failure?

I’ve wanted to write this article for a while since there’s been plenty of dispute over The Hobbit Trilogy films. Some people are avid lovers of them—others are avid haters. Some would just label them as “meh”.

While I understand both sides, in this article I’m hoping to lay out the faults and the highlights of The Hobbit films and whether they are worth the watch. This is only my personal opinion, but I hope that you find this article interesting and enlightening.

Lows

For people who were expecting films as good as The Lord of the Rings films were,The Hobbit Trilogy was probably a disappointment. No, it was not close to as good. Here are some of the reasons why I think this is:

It Added a Ton of Content

I think one of the reasons why The Hobbit films weren’t quite as good as The Lord of the Rings was because they tried to do too much. I am of the personal opinion that there could have been one Hobbit movie and it would have been great.

Since they did decide to make three movies, I understand why they added all the new content. While most Hobbit fans and Tolkienites probably hated this, and though it wasn’t my personal favorite either, I understand why they did it; and I can’t say I especially hate any of the things they added. There’s also the fact that The Lord of the Rings are some of the best movies of all time, and it would be really hard to create something as good. Yet I am of the personal opinion that adding the new content wasn’t especially amazing.

It Changed Some of the Classic Characters

One of the main complaints I have against the Hobbit films has to be how they portrayed Legolas’ father, the King of Mirkwood. They made him look like a horrible and evil person who was out for his own personal gain and who disrespected Gandalf, which I don’t think was accurate.

Changing classic characters like that isn’t really a good idea. I didn’t like it at all.

It Was More Like the Stereotypical Fantasy Film

This is probably my biggest issue with the Hobbit films. They went for the twist and thrill.

In the Hobbit movies you definitely see a shift towards more of the intense and exciting scenes and twists that you get from more average fantasy films. You didn’t get much of this in The Lord of the Rings, but with things happening like Kili getting hit by a poisonous arrow that only Tauriel can heal…well, you get my meaning. It’s more of a modern and thrilling type of side plot. It probably isn’t something Tolkien would have written, and I honestly believe that in this way they were trying too hard to appeal to modern audiences.

The fight scenes were more CGI and unrealistic than the fight scenes in the Lord of the Rings films were. You can’t tell me those “Legolas fighting orcs in Lake Town” scenes were real. Although some of these fight scenes are cool to watch, they don’t seem as real or convincing as the fight scenes in the Lord of the Rings, and that’s because they aren’t. When you see fight scenes that are more realistic and down-to-earth, it’s more relatable.

Too Much "Epicness"

The Hobbit is known and loved for being simpler than the Lord of the Rings. The book itself is actually pretty clever and amusing, while the Lord of the Rings are the books that take a more solemn note. Fans wanted to see this lighter side portrayed, while I feel like in the movies they tried to remake the story of the Hobbit into an epic like the Lord of the Rings when it’s not meant to be one.

Highs

For me, there were a lot of highs in the Hobbit films. There were tons of things to love and enjoy.

It Had Excellent Casting

Let me just say that I think the casting in the Hobbit films is absolutely spot-on. Martin Freeman is the perfect Bilbo, and I don’t think anybody could have played Bilbo better. Not to mention Ian McKellen (Gandalf) returning for the Hobbit movies. I liked Richard Armetage as Thorin and thought he portrayed the character well. Orlando Bloom coming back to be Legolas in the last two films was a fun development, and I found it interesting how he depicted a younger Legolas as more emotional and headstrong compared to the calm and composed Legolas we know later in the Lord of the Rings films. Luke Evans was a wonderful Bard.

Overall, I think the casting was great.

The Music

Howard Shore. Need I say more?

The music for The Hobbit films was, of course, excellent. Howard Shore is an ingenious composer. The Dwarf Cast led by Richard Armetage singing The Misty Mountains is awesome. Not to mention Billy Boyd (Pippin in the Lord of the Rings) returning to sing The Last Goodbye, the closing song for The Battle of the Five Armies. Seriously guys, that song is musical perfection. So. Good.

The Portrayal of Middle-earth

The Hobbit movies painted Middle-earth in a way that, frankly, other renditions of Tolkien’s world like The Rings of Power can’t compete with. Mirkwood was really cool to see come to life, as was Lake Town. I had a lot of fun watching the dwarves and Bilbo journey together.

Most of the Changes Made Sense

Although the purists may have hated the changes made in The Hobbit films, I understand why they were made. Because they made three movies, they had to add some things; and most of the decisions they made weren’t terrible. Although I’ve heard many people complain about the Tauriel, Legolas, and Kili love triangle, I personally don’t think Tolkien would have necessarily disliked it. From what I know, Tolkien seemed to enjoy seeing his races come together through differences. We see that through Legolas’ friendship with Gimli in the Lord of the Rings. Not to mention it sets up Legolas’ character development and friendship with Gimli for The Lord of the Rings films in an interesting way. Although this love triangle may not be a lot of people’s favorite, it added a level of emotional interest to the films that added to the story.

There's also the whole side-addition of Gandalf, Galadriel, and Elrond fighting Sauron. Even though people may not like this either, it was what Gandalf was doing when he left Bilbo and the dwarves in Mirkwood. Although Peter Jackson may have taken liberties with the details, the general story stayed the same; Sauron attempted to return and Gandalf stopped him with the help of others.

Not to mention that they kept in most of the things from the book The Hobbit in the films. The main difference was how much they added, not left out.

The Writing Wasn’t Bad

While the writing in The Hobbit isn’t as good as the writing in the Lord of the Rings movies, it’s still okay and it still holds the “Tolkienish” flavor that I personally think failed to come through in, for example, The Rings of Power. While watching the movies, I really feel like I’m in Middle-earth. I think that’s one of the most important things to look for and expect in a Tolkien film.

It Held Depth

The Hobbit movies may not have been as deep or meaningful as The Lord of the Rings, but they still held the messages that Tolkien so often talked about and portrayed in his stories, which, for me, is the most important part of any Tolkien rendition.

Overall…

Were The Hobbit movies a success or failure? Overall, I enjoyed them. No, they’re not as good as The Lord of the Rings, but they set up the story for The Lord of the Rings, and there are many great aspects about them that I love. Though they have their faults, I think they still hold depth and meaning, and I think they’re worth a watch. In fact, they hold a place in my list of top-favorite movies ever. But that’s just my opinion. If you haven’t already, I encourage you to watch them for yourselves.

What about you? What do you think about The Hobbit Trilogy? Comment below and let me know! I always love to hear different opinions.