LogFAQs > #973576792

rexcrk posted...

Jacksons Hobbit movies work fine the way they are. But you have to watch them with an open mind instead of the I dont want to like these because its supposed to be one movie mindset.

That's not even remotely the reason I don't like them, though.

I went in with an open mind, and they were bad in multiple ways. Talking about how the problem is too many movies is the answer that came afterward to explain why they were bad, not the expectation beforehand that poisoned the well. I didn't go into them expecting to hate them or wanting to hate them.

Jackson's movies might work fine the way they are if you know nothing about The Hobbit. But they're a terrible adaptation.



rexcrk posted...

Besides, if youre going to act like the liberties from the book for that are a heinous crime, I dont want to hear about how amazing the LotR movies are, which took even more (and in some cases, even worse, liberties from the source material looking at you, Return of the King).

Not even close.

Unless you're counting dropping Tom Bombadil and the Scouring of the Shire. But arguably both of those changes were improvements. The only real problem I have is that dropping the Scouring screwed up Saruman's conclusion in the films (especially in the theatrical version versus the extended edition)..

It's like when people talked about the original Spider-Man movie changing Peter's web-shooters from something he invented himself to an organic part of him. Yes, it was a change from the comics (and purists were going to complain no matter what), but it made sense in the context of the film. Having him invent web-shooters as a poor teenage kid would overcomplicate the story - making them a natural part of him simplified it Like it or not, some things work better in comics than they would on film (like putting all the X-Men in black leather instead of yellow spandex). Same with Spider-Man being bit by a genetically engineered spider versus a radioactive one - radiation was the catch-all source of power in the 60s, but by the 2000s it feels much more ridiculous. Genetic engineering is a much more modern fear, though - and thus works better in the modern context.

You CAN change elements from the original source in an adaptation. But those changes need to be things that make the story better, or at least make it work better on film than it otherwise would. Most of the LotR change are positive. Most of the Hobbit ones aren't. The problem isn't that the Hobbit films added or changed things. It's that the changes were bad.