Fan Cuts The Hobbit Trilogy Into a Single, Four-Hour Movie

[Gxas]

This is probably terrible.

The movies can't be cut into anything close to the book because the tone and pacing of both are COMPLETELY different.

People still complaining that the movies aren't close enough to the book need to just let it go, honestly. It's been 3 years now. Stop dwelling and move on.

 

[IOwnTheSpire]

I think some of the cuts are a bad idea, such as the prologue. Knowing the importance of the Arkenstone from the get-go is better than being told about it for the first time right before Bilbo has to steal it. I think the prologue provides valuable information and shouldn't be cut. Trimmed, but not cut entirely.

Also, having Gandalf just disappear for a while without explanation is bad for the narrative, since 'I have to do wizard stuff' would be a stupid explanation. Keeping some of the Sauron stuff (not all) would help a person watching this who hasn't read the book understand things better.

 

[waj9876]

we won't be linking to them here, as it is still piracy

Doesn't this count as a parody? I'm pretty sure this counts as a parody.

If this doesn't count as a parody for some stupid technical reason that's bullshit.

 

[Spider RedNight]

I'm with that other guy that mentioned that the music is probably gonna be all screwed up.

I liked all three movies though I get why some cuts would be preferred... I liked Tauriel. I DIDN'T like Tauriel falling in love with Kili and having Legolas be there and all like "Mmmeh, I liked her first" and blah blah, which is sad for me because they could've made certain parts of Battle of Five Armies so much more powerful without that stupid love triangle; brothers love each other, too.

Also polite pass on something having pirated content. A cut edition isn't nearly worth it enough.

 

[ekrolo2]

Cutting out the Dul-Guldur stuff seems like a mistake, especially since that stuff canonically happened and was used to explain where the hell Gandalf was off to and what he was doing during his disappearances throughout Hobbit. Plus it was easily among the most compelling stories for me in all the films. I mean c'mon, Sauron, Galadriel and Elrond showing up like Middle-Earths Expendables was pretty bad ass.

 

[Evonisia]

This is probably terrible.

The movies can't be cut into anything close to the book because the tone and pacing of both are COMPLETELY different.

People still complaining that the movies aren't close enough to the book need to just let it go, honestly. It's been 3 years now. Stop dwelling and move on.

Especially because the third film doesn't even bother. It's The Hobbit in name alone, and gets on with being awesome regardless of what the original text said. And it was the strongest of the trilogy for it.

 

[babinro]

I tried to watch the first Hobbit film twice back in the day and I couldn't get through it either time. Needless to say I didn't bother checking out the rest of the trilogy.

If I ever do decide to check out the movie I'd go for this 4 hour cut.

Edit: My issues were with the pacing of the film and the fact that I didn't care about the characters and thus couldn't care about the action scenes either. It was simply too boring to bother.

Edit 2: This comes from someone who felt the book was pretty good up until the smaug story is complete. The book lost me with the battle of five armies stuff but that wasn't enough to ruin the story.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Should have cut out some of the dwarves as they are forgettable. ;-)

 

[delroland]

Should have cut out some of the dwarves as they are forgettable. ;-)

They did, just not until the end.

 

[kael013]

Wait, the riddle-off, the fight that gave Sting its name, and the conversation where Bilbo shows what a guile hero he is weren't in the book!? What edition did Tolkieneditor use, because I just looked through mine (revised edition) and those scenes are in there. In fact, they were pretty decently adapted; not perfectly, but very close (except for the spider battle, that was stretched out a tad too long).

If you actually read what Tolkieneditor said (https://tolkieneditor.wordpress.com/) he says:

"...it should be noted that Bilbo's key scenes-the encounter with Gollum, the battle against the Mirkwood spiders, and the conversation with Smaug-have not been tampered with, since they proved to be excellent adaptions (in no small part due to Freeman's performance), and serve to refocus the film on Bilbo's arc"

So yeah, Steven Bogos dun goofed.

Oh, well that makes more sense. Tiredness (I posted that @ 4 am here) and a habit of not double-checking articles is no excuse for my ignorance. Thank you for clarifying (and cute Avatar btw).

...Yeah, I should probably start reading the links more.

 

[darkbshadow]

Wow that was fast. I knew someone was going to do it. just didn't think it was going to be taht soon.

 

[ExileNZ]

Can't you get one of those in-player files to just skip to all the right places at the right times?
Oh right, you'd still need to rip all three films to run that...

 

[CoffeeOfDoom]

Oh, well that makes more sense. Tiredness (I posted that @ 4 am here) and a habit of not double-checking articles is no excuse for my ignorance. Thank you for clarifying (and cute Avatar btw).

...Yeah, I should probably start reading the links more.

Don't worry about it, I realised my post sounded quite hostile when I read it again now, didn't mean for it to!

(Thank you :3 its some random Tumblr fan art of Korra XD)

 

[Fdzzaigl]

I enjoyed the first two films but found the last one a generally bad movie and a huge borefest.

Honestly, I didn't even give a damn when key characters died because of all the pointless fillers and cheesy dialogue in between.

Two films, which was the original plan, would have been perfect. Then they could also have cut all the pointless content in the first two films, like the stupid rabid sled scenes.

 

[Olrod]

Since when is a single movie four hours long?

What they really did was cut them into two two-hour-long movies and play them back to back.

 

[castlewise]

The best thing I can say about the third one is that it made me care about the Azog and Kili-Taurel subplots.

 

[elvor0]

The complaining about Legolas being in it is what really gets me though, if you have read the Silmarillion, it is obvious that Legolas was in mirkwood at the time of the Hobbit, he was there, with his father. He may not have been quite as accomplished as he was portrayed in Jackson's adaption, but at the time he was still somewhere in the region of 3000 years old and past the age of Elf maturity.

Having Legolas just be there would've been fine. It's pretty likely that he would've been in Mirkwood with the Elven King, however, him being the main character for a good chunk of the second movie doing his crazy shit in a plot that never happened and bulked the movie out for no reason, while also cutting bits that were actually in the book was just Jackon giving Legolas an onscreen tongue bath for the sake of it. Which basically describes the whole trilogy, tolkeins work cut or squashed to the sidelines while Jackon makes 3 massive movies mostly consisting of his own fanfiction.

 

[Spushkin]

You're telling me this version lacks the "OMG love hurts so much, rite?" exchange between Tauriel and Thranduil in the end?

I'd pay for this if I could.

 

[RedDeadFred]

It certainly seems like the appropriate length.

Sure, Jackson included some seeds that were mentioned, or could be inferred to have happened, but there was so much extra crap that ultimately took away from the overall story. Two movies would probably have been the best length.

Battle of Five Armies did not need to be nearly as long as it was. IMO, it was easily the worst of the trilogy.

I'm curious to see how this fan cut will affect the overall tone of the films. One of my biggest issues was how disjointed it all felt. The Sauron subplot took away from the main stuff and was much darker in general. This just didn't fit with the rest of the movie.