Jump to content

The Hobbit Trilogy vs. Star Wars Prequel Trilogy


John

The Hobbit Trilogy vs. Star Wars Prequel Trilogy  

50 members have voted

  1. 1. Which trilogy is better?

    • The Hobbit trilogy (directed by Peter Jackson)
    • The Star Wars prequel trilogy (directed by George Lucas)
    • I have no taste in movies; I love both!
    • Are you kidding me? Both suck.


Recommended Posts

Both trilogies serve as prequels to a far greater trilogy. Both have had more of a mixed reaction to their respective fanbases. And now it is up to you to decide; which trilogy is better, the Hobbit trilogy or the Star Wars prequel trilogy?

 

Personally, my vote goes to the Hobbit trilogy. Despite the excessive CGI and visual effects, as well as the additional storylines and subplots, at least it feels as though it is from the same vein of movies as the LOTR trilogy. On the other hand, the Star Wars prequel trilogy completely sidelined the visual style and charm of the OT, resulting in a set of movies that have neither the humor, nostalgia, or feel of the original classic films. The Hobbit trilogy also has far superior acting.

 

Ultimately, the decision is up to you. Please vote in the poll above!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Hobbit, while disappointing after LOTR, holds together for 2/3 of it, only crapping out completely in BOFA.  Most of the performances are good, and many are great.

 

I prefer Star Wars generally, but outside of a handful of cool "moments" in each prequel (and the outstanding scores), I don't have a lot of good to say about them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many people don't get that the first Hobbit film is supposed to be a fairy tale, whereas its sequels (only the movies, not the novel) become more and more sinister and develop into a kind of war drama set in a fantasy world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What many people do get is how shoddily executed much of the 2nd and 3rd film are.  I voted Star Wars only because The Hobbit was more disappointing in its mediocrity.  They could've been so great as two films.  Damn your excessive self-indulgence, Peter Jackson!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, mstrox said:

The Hobbit, while disappointing after LOTR, holds together for 2/3 of it, only crapping out completely in BOFA. 

 

True. That is one major difference I have noticed between the two trilogies. While the Star Wars prequel trilogy ends on its highest note with ROTS, which is widely considered to be the best of the prequels, the Hobbit trilogy ends with a somewhat lackluster and disappointing conclusion, though I will always love the last few scenes of BOFTA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

Any three of the Hobbit films is vastly superior to ROTS, which, while probably being the best of the Prequels, is a boring and ineptly made piece of shit.

 

Although ROTS is a stoopid movie, it's advantage over TPM and AOTC is that it's not boring!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love ROTS because of how shitty it is.  It has the most hilariously bad line-readings of any major Hollywood film I've ever seen.

 

My personal favorite:

 

"A Sith. Lord?"

"Yes.  The one we've been looking for."

 

 

Jackson and Christensen sound so deeply, profoundly bored.  I love it.

 

One of my favorite movies to put on while drinking heavily with a friend or two to just point and laugh at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It actually isnt intense at all. It's another endless lightsaber battle that's just a sequence of stunts and acrobatics without any kind of narrative. The effects are dreadful, I never believed the characters were really in that environment.(i believe they dont even sweat)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of the duels in the OT were largely story driven.  The PT duels were largely spectacle - especially the TPM and ROTS ones.  They very, very elaborately get the characters from point A to point B, where the story happens.  The brief duels with Dooku in AOTC and the beginning ROTS weren't too bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as we must be thankful to Jackson for giving us three truly great films, The Hobbit films are ultimately uninteresting bastardizations.  That said, Star Wars is never better than anything, it's just ok.  But who would have the courage to propose such a radical idea?  If only... Senator Amidala were here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AotC has less flaws than RotS and PM, the course of the love story is relatively cool. The best part of the prequel trilogy.

 

Peter Jackson has made 6 great films. The rest is a pile of crap or B-movies!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Almost all of the major criticisms in the Hobbit (too much CGI, rushed screenplay, too much Alfrid) can be excused by the lack of preparation time and excessive studio meddling. On the Prequels, however, every man and his dog blindly nodded to everything the crazy old bastard barfed up two minutes before shooting a scene.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Brundlefly said:

Peter Jackson has made 6 great films

 

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King

Heavenly Creatures

Dead Alive/Braindead

Bad Taste

 

2 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

 

Yes! The LOTR trilogy, King Kong, The Frighteners, Heavenly Creatures and Forgotten Silver.

 

Damn! Seconds before me!

 

King Kong is another movie I love for how crappy the line readings are.  Jack Black and Jamie Bell give career worst performances!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

 

LOTR was originally supposed to be two films. They only added extra material because New Line offered them more money than the other studios. But it still counts as two!

 

It's kinda funny how what was a huge artistic and commercial gamble in 1998/1999 was a mercenary, greedy cash-grab in 2012.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, as they were brought up as being prequel trilogies, they must be compared as just that: the Hobbit trilogy flows pretty well into LotR (minus obvious and unevitable stuff like Martin Freeman turning into Ian Holm and a supposedly immortal, never-changing elf-prince looking significantly younger 60+ years later), while the PT goes out of its way to contradict the OT in as many things as physically possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

 

But isn't that simply because The Hobbit was written first?

 

Plus, apart from the actual story, the Hobbit trilogy doesn't flow particularly well into LOTR in terms of look, tone, music... BOFA is very, VERY different from FOTR.

 

Because BotFA is about the biggest battle in centuries, and FotR begins 60 years later in the Shire, in peacetime. The tone doesn't have to be consistent. Technically, the Prequels were also already written, we knew the basic story from the OT, but George decided to actively ignore it. The Prequels barely have anything to do with the OT in terms of look, tone, music AND story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. Is that all extended footage? I don't remember that stuff at all.

 

How could there be so much lunacy in one battle?

 

2 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

It's pretty fucking awful. I used to think its few highlights (the acorn scene, the silent scene between Gandalf and Bilbo, the epilogue...) were enough to make it the best of the trilogy (or "the least awful" ;)), but I quickly realized it wasn't enough. And the added EE material made matters worse.

 

AUJ is still the best film of the lot, which is kind of sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right. That's why I asked, because I never bothered with the BoFA EE.

 

And everyone knows I've been anti-Tauriel from the moment I first saw her on screen! Don't try and plant your foul seeds of doubt here, Wormtongue!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched the BOTFA EE once.  I swear PJ had actually lost his mind by that point.  He couldn't manage one compelling scene in all the fighting in Dale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.