I was actually kind of ok with the adding on in the first movie. The second I was like, "ehhh." The third movie I was pretty much done. They bloated it so much and there was no resolution (who's king under the mountain? What happened to lake town? etc.) and they kept following that Alfrid guy who had no effect on the plot. If you're gonna bloat a story that much at least explain the f'ing eagles.
4
deleted
· 9 years ago
Exactly! Entire battle of five armies from the book:
Damn three armies
Damn four armies
Damn five armies
Bilbo hides like the adorable coward he is. Gets knocked out. Wakes up hours later. Battle's over....
Everyone is complaining about there being more to the movie than the book, but they are using Tolkien's original manuscript for the movies, not just the book. There was a lot to Tolkien's story of The Hobbit that was never actually published. True, the necromancer in the south side story ft. Gandalf was merely mentioned in the book, but Tolkien had all that worked out in his unpublished notes and had plans to insert that story in a separate book, which never ended up happening. They may have accentuated certain aspects, giving characters more of a distinct personality, but nothing was added story-wise that Tolkien didn't himself write.
Jackson's production company couldn't get the rights to the Silmarilion... but the rights to The Lord of the Rings included the appendices at the end of the Return of the King. In them, is a time line in the expanded universe. A fair bit of material was mined from there.
Damn three armies
Damn four armies
Damn five armies
Bilbo hides like the adorable coward he is. Gets knocked out. Wakes up hours later. Battle's over....
- I wouldn't mind the third movie if it weren't for Alfrid. Fucking Alfrid, man.
- Bard looks ripped on that cover.