The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)

Good concept, poorly executed.

A story that's too fascinating to pass by...

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

Seven stars for part one of The Hobbit series, which is mainly because of the filming, attributes and acting.As for the story itself, I haven't read the books yet - so bear with me, but I found it very dry and not so interesting. Many moments I wanted to scream out that >random cliché moment< was so naive. The great wizard who is not so great after all. A simple hobbit like Bilbo Baggins getting dragged into a war like that, which to me, is completely the opposite of his attitude. Perhaps the second and third movie will surprise me, but thus far I haven't enjoyed The Hobbit as much as I thought it would.The story of An Unexpected Journey has disappointed me. Hopefully the next movies will become better.As for the filming, attributes and acting - VERY good. Amazing CGI, details, filming/drone shots and OST! The acting was very good too.

I enjoyed the Lord of the Rings movies and was looking forward to the next set of Middle-earth films. I never gave up hope that there'd be more Tolkien films after Return of the King, though King Kong was the next project after that very aforementioned film and this was the end result. I don't claim An Unexpected Journey is as good or even better than the original trilogy but it's still better than The Phantom Menace of the Star Wars prequel trilogy. More plot, more fun characters, and more action. And some familiar faces. More dwarves too. I'd read the Hobbit years ago and I remembered some parts but that didn't hinder my enjoyment of this very film. More good visuals like its predecessors.

I love the book, and the part of its adaptation is far to be uninspired. but, in strange manner, it is not more than...nice. a nice film , a decent try to use the succes of the first Peter Jackson trilogy. nothing unjustifid. except the difference between the two books and the sin of director to desire use the same tools and recipe. sure, it is a film who seduce. but the force of Lord of Ring is absent, the links between characters is fragile and the heroism has didactic aspect. result, a good choice for the young public. and that is all.

peter Jackson directed this even though gullimore del toro was meant so peter gave his magic to this big budget masterpiece from the books of the same name this was set before the lord of the rings I saw this in the cinema in 3d it was breath taking with a budget of 250 million I can see why this follows Bilbo bag-gins who along with Gandalf and 13 dwarfs led by thorin oaken shield is wept into an epic quest to reclaim the lost dwarf kingdom of erbor from the fearsome dragon smaug their journey will take them into the wild through treacherous lands inhabited by goblins orcs deadly war-gs the highlight here is under the mountain were there being chased by goblins in 3d with wooden bridges falling down hobbits fighting surfing wood down a rock side and Bilbo having a answer and question game with Gollum one of the highlights of the movie. there is another creature here necromancer along the way the dwarfs re led to riven dale a beautiful place were Elrond gives advice to Gandalf stunning place in 3d with waterfalls the Bilbo bag-gins not only discovers depths of ingenuity and courage that surprise even himself he also gains possession of a precious ring tied to all middle earth in ways he cannot imagine. we see they have to go the lonely mountain on their journey with a dragon in their way I gave this 9/10 brilliant film to start the new trilogy.