Who wasn't excited when Peter Jackson announced he would be following up his Lord Of The Rings Trilogy with an adaptation of Tolkien's classic prequel The Hobbit. "A Hobbit movie!?" you all exclaimed hysterically. "Brilliant!" everyone thought. Alarm bells started ringing when Jackson went on to explain that it wouldn't be a Hobbit movie, but a Hobbit trilogy. Admittedly, all three of the films make astonishing use of the same wonderful visuals that made the Rings trilogy such a spectacle, but the praise (save for Martin Freeman's spot-on portrayal of Bilbo) pretty much stops there. Unfortunately, spreading just 300 pages out across nearly eight hours makes for a rather slow-moving experience. It doesn't help that Jackson watered down the Tolkien magic by taking bits out, adding bits in, and forgetting that what sets the novel apart from any other adventure story is its consistent four-foot-tall perspective. The whole trilogy seems confused about what it actually is. Is it about a Hobbit? Or is it about his dwarf friends? Is it about Middle-Earth? Is it about Gandalf or Saruman? Worse. It's just a thinly-spread cash grab adaptation. What's your least favourite book-to-movie adaptation? Let us know in the comments below.
