Fans of the Hobbit movie / book De todo y un poco más

Are there fans of the Hobbit movie / book?)

Me! Percy jackson for the book and volley (ball) for a hobbie!

i love the hobbit movies. i haven't read the book, but i plan to do so. i like the lord of the rings too, but i think that the hobbit triology is much better.

I don't think so. There were indeed interesting added sequences like Gandalf in Dol Guldur, which is evocated in the book and more explained in The lord of the rings.
I think Legolas is too present. He doesn't appear in the book, but appearing in movies is not so bad, but I think a cameo would be enough.
I think the love story is not impressive. I don't criticize the fact of a love story in the movies which is not in the book. There are lots of tragic love stories in Tolkien's universe, like Beren and Lutien's poeme. But I think the love story in The Hobbit its not told well.
But even if I criticize those movies, I have to be fair. Peter Jackson planned to do only two parts. But he had not started the final batle yet, when his time was running out. So, he had to produce a movie fast and decided finally to make a triptic. So, even though I don't like very much Peter Jackson's adaptation, I think he did what he could with all his problems.
But there also are the animated TV film of 1977 which is nearer to the book than the trilogy and a Russian version in live action. I didn't see the Russian adaptation, because I don't speak Russian and am not able to read subtitles because of my handicap. There are also three comic books.
But there are also adaptations which are not very famous in younger populations out out of English-speaking countries. Those adaptations suit me, because I have no need to be with someone else for explainations of what happens on the screen (even if there is more and more audiodescriptions nowadays). I'm talking about radio serials. The first, realized by the BBC in the 50s was lost. They adapted The LOTR with the same cast too but here again, it's lost. But the 1968 and 1979 radio serials are both entirely available. I prefer the 68 version.
You can also listen the theatrical audiobook realized by an American youtuber.

i guess, that in this case it is an advantage that i haven't read the book because it seems to happen often that after you read the book you don't like the movie amymore. i do like the love story in the hobbit. but the main reason why i like hobbit better is that it is more exciting. the second movie of lord of the rings, for example, is by far too long while almost nothing happens. at the same time, the hobbit movies are shorter and i simply find the plot better. also, i really like the characters of the hobbit.

Hi

The thing is, The Hobbit was written for children, and kids love adventure and excitement. And in the book, it's even faster than in movies. However, characters are not very developped. So, that are Peter Jackson's characters you like, not Tolkien's. In LOTR, characters are nearer to the book, even if they are a little modernized.
The Hobbit is a tale, but LOTR is an epic. So, I'm at the opposite of you, because I think The Hobbit movies are too long, and LOTR's are too short. I would like to have the final battle in The Return of the King. I'll not spoile you about this battle if you want to read the book.
I'll finish this post by telling you that: you shall watch again LOTR but not as an adventure movie or a basic blockbuster.

i've already watched both triologies twice lately, but i'm gonna watch them again either way. i didn't mean to say that i don't like LOTR or the characters. i do like them, especially after wathcing the movies for the second time. the main reason for my preference, however, is that over three hours are extremely long. the first movie is awesome, and they did a great job with the plot. only with the second part, it seems to me that we only see them walk for the majority of the movie. - apart from the battle, of course.

I read all the books in my language, but they change a lot of names... When I was 9 years old I read all the Lord of Rings. It taked me a month!

yess, the names can be confusing, especially when watching/reading lotr for the first time.

The second tome of LOTR is effectively a walking tome.
I told you about The Hobbit's radio serials, but I think you might also like the BBC's radio serials of LOTR broadcasted in 1981. Ian Holme, who played Bilbo in Jackson's LOTR, used his voice for Frodo. It's as long as the three movies in long version, but battles are shorter (because of the audio). So, lots of scenaristic points which are not in movies are in this serials. The OST by Stephen Oliver is incredible too. But I think you should read the book before, because the serials is nearer to it.

Yeeeyyy

Contrary to popular belief, Hobbit was not written for children. Tolkien's himself denied that it was written for children : “That’s all sob stuff. No, of course, I didn’t… The Hobbit was written in what I should now regard as bad style, as if one were talking to children." I agree with him. In Hobbit, there was a brilliant creativity but a poor narrative style.

I read it because my father had it, but he told me that was not a book writed for kids. But I always liked challenges and when someone say that I can't read something, I read it. Always.

So I won't talk to you about a certain fantastic and horrific author of the begining of the last century before one year or two.

i read the book and i watched the film. They are awesome!

Yeah i am. Im not only fan of Hobbit, but generally of Tolkien's books. And, lately im trying to learn Elvish language.