The problem with the 'Hobbit' Movies

[TruckOSaurus]

irstupid said:
anyone who says they liked the books better in LOTR versus the movie has not read the books. Now i'm not saying the movie is better than the books, just saying its more enjoyable.

The books are for like the super fans of the series that want to learn every aspect of the world and know each characters geneoligy and howto speak elvin and ect. The books are like reading an actualy real life history book. They were not read for entertainment purposes. It's a chore reading them.

The Hobbit is the opposite. It is a delight reading the Hobbit.

Maybe that is why people love the LOTR movies and hate the Hobbit. Like most all book/movie adaptations, the books are always better. BUT in the case of the LOTR, while it may be better, it is such a huge chore that its a relief to be able to watch it and cut out the history lesson. Thus we look past its flaws or omisions from the books and can just enjoy the story.

meanwhile we already could enjoy the Hobbit and thus we start nitpicking every little thing about the movie.

That has not been my experience at all. I've read all three LOTR books and was throughly entertained. I tried to read The Hobbit but stopped half-way through. I never felt the LOTR books were akin to a history book, yes there's a lot of details but the story progresses at a smooth pace and never gets boring. From what I've heard from my husband, it's the Silmarillion and The Unfinished Tales that read more like a history book (I haven't read them so I gotta take his word for it).