Lotr then watch Hobbit with lowered expectations if you want to see some of the same actors and world building but they're more boring.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Should I watch LOTR and then Hobbit or the reverse?
- Thread starter Deleted member 279
- Start date
Other: Read the Hobbit and then watch the LotR movies.
The Hobbit is a short book compared to the LoTR series. The Hobbit movies aren't awful, but they aren't as faithful to the source material as they should be. So I would read the book first. The LotR movies on the otherhand are some of the best novel adaptations ever made. I, of course, recommend reading the books as well; but the movies are so good they shouldn't be missed.
The Hobbit is a short book compared to the LoTR series. The Hobbit movies aren't awful, but they aren't as faithful to the source material as they should be. So I would read the book first. The LotR movies on the otherhand are some of the best novel adaptations ever made. I, of course, recommend reading the books as well; but the movies are so good they shouldn't be missed.
It makes no difference. Both trilogies work on their own.
For my money The Hobbit is a more enjoyable experience, and this is largely due to the omission of some of my favourite scenes from the novel in the Lord of the Rings films. It's the other way round in The Hobbit, in that much briefer source material (a children's story) is augmented with new material that I find quite entertaining.
Most people, to be fair, think Lord of the Rings is the better trilogy.
If you're going to include The Hobbit (I only made it partway through the second movie and I love the book) than release order.
Terrible idea. If you think films can be awful, don't even bother sitting through a long talk about how this or that film got it all wrong. Watch How it Should Have Ended and Honest Trailers instead, they'll brighten your day.
Yeah yeah, you right. I just really like telling people to watch Lindsay Ellis
"How can we top the shield-boarding scene"
I love the LOTR trilogy and have seen both versions at least twice and I never watched the hobbit movies despite reading the book and watching the animated version ages ago
LOTR extended is a good watch.
Didn't realize they made some Hobbit movies too. That's an interesting piece of trivia.
Didn't realize they made some Hobbit movies too. That's an interesting piece of trivia.
Well, the hobbit is already in the LOTR movies, so you don't need to watch these separate movies :V
Watch The Lord of the Rings Extended Editions. The entire production of all three films was an enormous labour of love from all involved. From Jackson and Walsh painstakingly translating the literature to film while doing their utmost best to carefully retain themes, narrative arcs, characterisations, and emotional beats from the source material while conveying them to a visual medium. To Howard Shore's remarkable score matched to every scene. And every concept artist, costume designer, prop worker, tech wizard at WETA, set architect, and more. All working collaboratively with genuine passion and fulfilment to bring Tolkien's iconic work to life and capture his magic and adventure in motion picture.
The Hobbit trilogy on the other hand was a disastrously rushed production of mangled vision and broken stability, incoherently unfocused, at the behest of a production company less interested in faithfully adapting the books and more in replicating the cinematic success of Lord of the Rings. It is painfully bloated and stretched with unwarranted, shallow additions to the narrative. Grotesquely haphazard in its over indulgence of CGI and cinematic spectacle. Clearly agenda driven by corporate directive. Rushed and underfunded. And left many who begrudgingly worked on it, including Peter Jackson, exhausted and defeated.
There are good moments in the Hobbit trilogy, but as a whole its a soulless, miserable adaptation made all the more obviously so when compared to the incredible creative endeavor that is The Lord of the Rings.
Read the Hobbit instead. It's short and wondeful.
The Hobbit trilogy on the other hand was a disastrously rushed production of mangled vision and broken stability, incoherently unfocused, at the behest of a production company less interested in faithfully adapting the books and more in replicating the cinematic success of Lord of the Rings. It is painfully bloated and stretched with unwarranted, shallow additions to the narrative. Grotesquely haphazard in its over indulgence of CGI and cinematic spectacle. Clearly agenda driven by corporate directive. Rushed and underfunded. And left many who begrudgingly worked on it, including Peter Jackson, exhausted and defeated.
There are good moments in the Hobbit trilogy, but as a whole its a soulless, miserable adaptation made all the more obviously so when compared to the incredible creative endeavor that is The Lord of the Rings.
Read the Hobbit instead. It's short and wondeful.
LOTR trilogy, then the Hobbit trilogy, then the Lindsay Ellis video trilogy about the making of the Hobbit trilogy
It's the hottest of takes.
Last edited:
First time? Order of release, always. Doesn't matter what it is.
But subsequent times? Coincidentally, the last week or two, we've re-watched both (extended) trilogies, and we did it so in order of release. But I have to admit, in hindsight I think I should have started with The Hobbit trilogy this time. I'd never seen The Battle of the Five Armies up until a few days ago, and I think it would have been better to fire Fellowship right after it. There's a scene in Fellowship, which I won't spoiler for you, in an area called Moria that will have much more meaning if you've seen (or read) The Hobbit.
But subsequent times? Coincidentally, the last week or two, we've re-watched both (extended) trilogies, and we did it so in order of release. But I have to admit, in hindsight I think I should have started with The Hobbit trilogy this time. I'd never seen The Battle of the Five Armies up until a few days ago, and I think it would have been better to fire Fellowship right after it. There's a scene in Fellowship, which I won't spoiler for you, in an area called Moria that will have much more meaning if you've seen (or read) The Hobbit.
I decided to binge watch the Hobbit trilogy today due to this thread and I gotta say. It's pretty good. The first movie is ok, the second one is the best, but the third was is pretty weak lol. Also, all the gifs in this thread are from the third film. Gives you an idea of the downward turn it takes.
Just watch The Hobbit until he leaves the Shire 30 minutes into the movie. That's the best part of the whole trilogy.
I watched the fan edit of the three Hobbit movies into one movie. It felt pretty complete to me, and I didn't feel like I was missing out on anything. There was no way I was sitting through 3 of those stupid long movies.
Theatrical versions of the Lord of the Rings first. The extended editions can be watched later if you enjoyed the movies and want more of the universe. They suffer as far as film watching experiences go. There's a reason Peter Jackson considers the theatrical versions his director's cuts. The extended are for fans first and foremost, not newcomers.
Watch the first Hobbit after and see what you think, you may like it. If not then don't bother with the rest.
Watch the first Hobbit after and see what you think, you may like it. If not then don't bother with the rest.
Desolation of Smaug extended is actually better than theatrical.
The Hobbit was NOT a terrible movie
The Hobbit was NOT a terrible movie
I wish there was a good Blu-ray rerelease of this. The DVD unfortunately has missing sound effects. I loved this movie as a kid. It's a really nice take on Tolken's songs, making it almost into a musical. I always think of this version of Bilbo when I reread the books.
Geeze. I didn't think The Hobbit was THAT bad...Granted, I haven't seen them since I saw them in theaters, but still. May as well give them a shot OP. I think the first film was pretty good. CGI was sketchy, but I enjoyed it.
An Unexpected Journey is a good movie. The Desolation of Smaug is where it starts to get dumb and the third movie is just unnecessary.
I really enjoyed seeing the first Hobbit movie in the theater because of the 48fps. That was cool.
First Hobbit movie is ok. The rest are horrifying.
First Hobbit movie is ok. The rest are horrifying.
AGREED! John Huston's Gandalf is my Gandalf of choice and I love Ian McKellan's Gandalf
If you only care about the films, start with LotR. If you are planning to read the books, go with The Hobbit.
I'mma do a little different and suggest Hobbit '77 followed by LOTR (Theatrical cuts).
EDIT: Beaten to it by Fat4all you BITCH.
EDIT: Beaten to it by Fat4all you BITCH.
Watch LOTR Extended, and then Lindsay Ellis's videos about why The Hobbit is a horrible production. Don't bother with the actual Hobbit movies.
Also, Release order anything is how you should watch things
Also, Release order anything is how you should watch things