I saw the trailer for the 2nd one just before, that's what irritated me
Lets see, first, I still do not understand WHY there are 3 movies, well ok, I do, money. But I read the hobbit, the whole book, on the drive back from holiday to the new forest (I bought it from the shop on site just before we went home), and I am a slow reader. My copy is shorter than Fellowship which had 1 movie!.
I've been reading about all the extra 'padding' that they have added.
Legolas - OK, he's Thranduil's son, but why does he need to be in these movies? It's not a cameo either apparently.
Tauriel - I don't even know where to start with her.
She's an original character who's there because the decision was made that the film needed a strong female part (???). There is apparently a love story involved with her.
I just don't understand.
What is wrong with just telling the story!
I do understand that it might have needed 2 movies, but having to put in extra story to stretch it out just doesn't seen right to me.
I'm a big The Lord of the Rings/Tolkien fan, tLotR is one of my favourite book(s), I have three copies, my main paper back, a set of three instalments/book with the movie still on the front and a huge hardback illustrated version that my mum got me for my birthday a few years back that is illustrated by one of the gentlemen whose paintings inspired the sets for the movies (I forget his name).
The movies were pretty good too, but I'm starting to worry that the Hobbit films aren't going to be as good, I wasn't that keen on part one, which I've been looking forward to for YEARS. And the trailer for the 2nd part doesn't make me feel better.
BUT I want to be proved wrong on all accounts!! hopefully it will all make sense when it's released and I'll really like it. Even the pointless new character.
OK rant over
