6:55 pm - 01/01/2013
CNN Is Like ONTD: They Hate Things Without Valid Reasons
'The Hobbit' One of the Top 10 Worst Movies in 2012 According to CNN
CNN.com writer Tom Charity has posted his 'The 10 worst movies of 2012' and decided to controversially include 'The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey' on the list. It should be noted, he specifically calls out the 48fps experience as being the 'worst' - not the actual film itself. Though he does take a dig at the length of the latest Middle-earth tome. The facts about 'The Hobbit' seem to paint a different picture: RottenTomatoes Critic index of 65%; RottenTomatoes audience rating of 81%; CinemaScore rating of 'A;' Ringer Review average of 4.5/5; Three week lead at the international box office; and breaking multiple December box office records. Looking at Mr. Charity's other films on the list, most have a RottenTomatoes.com rating of < 30% and only one breaks the 50% mark.
What Tom Charity Wrote:
Whatever you think of the film itself (and with at least one-third of the running time given over to padding, it's pretty indefensible), hands-down the worst experience at the movies this year was suffering the plastic high-definition 48 frames-per-second 3-D version of Peter Jackson's box-office smash. The technology made one of the most expensive movies ever made look like a PS3 game.
So what made Mr. Charity put 'The Hobbit' on his list? The easiest explanation is he really didn't like the 48fps experience as he states in the article.
His true intention is even more transparent. He simply wants more eyeballs and a bit of controversy. After all, he only continues to get paid if he remains interesting. (The quote from Zoolander comes to mind...'Dance Monkey, Dance!') So including a popular film on his 'worst of' list on a major outlet like CNN.com is sure to do just that. It will definitely cause some discussion.
Would you put 'The Hobbit' on your own worst list of 2012? Is Mr. Charity totally off base? Tell us what you think!
Source
I cannot deal with the stupidity of this writer. He basically hated The Hobbit because of the 48fps 3D version. What a FUCKING idiot. He just pulled the hate out of his ass cuz there was nothing else he could hate on. And there are 3 movies cuz PJ included EVERYTHING from the book and whatever else was mentioned of the Hobbit in the LOTR books.
CNN.com writer Tom Charity has posted his 'The 10 worst movies of 2012' and decided to controversially include 'The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey' on the list. It should be noted, he specifically calls out the 48fps experience as being the 'worst' - not the actual film itself. Though he does take a dig at the length of the latest Middle-earth tome. The facts about 'The Hobbit' seem to paint a different picture: RottenTomatoes Critic index of 65%; RottenTomatoes audience rating of 81%; CinemaScore rating of 'A;' Ringer Review average of 4.5/5; Three week lead at the international box office; and breaking multiple December box office records. Looking at Mr. Charity's other films on the list, most have a RottenTomatoes.com rating of < 30% and only one breaks the 50% mark.
What Tom Charity Wrote:
Whatever you think of the film itself (and with at least one-third of the running time given over to padding, it's pretty indefensible), hands-down the worst experience at the movies this year was suffering the plastic high-definition 48 frames-per-second 3-D version of Peter Jackson's box-office smash. The technology made one of the most expensive movies ever made look like a PS3 game.
So what made Mr. Charity put 'The Hobbit' on his list? The easiest explanation is he really didn't like the 48fps experience as he states in the article.
His true intention is even more transparent. He simply wants more eyeballs and a bit of controversy. After all, he only continues to get paid if he remains interesting. (The quote from Zoolander comes to mind...'Dance Monkey, Dance!') So including a popular film on his 'worst of' list on a major outlet like CNN.com is sure to do just that. It will definitely cause some discussion.
Would you put 'The Hobbit' on your own worst list of 2012? Is Mr. Charity totally off base? Tell us what you think!
Source
I cannot deal with the stupidity of this writer. He basically hated The Hobbit because of the 48fps 3D version. What a FUCKING idiot. He just pulled the hate out of his ass cuz there was nothing else he could hate on. And there are 3 movies cuz PJ included EVERYTHING from the book and whatever else was mentioned of the Hobbit in the LOTR books.
lbr if it were 1 movie everyone would be bitching of all the things that were left out from it.
I honestly think the book would have fit nicely into one 3-hour long film. I think it's ridiculous that they did LOTR in three movies, which is over 1000 pages long with so much more detail and they did it perfectly, and now they're taking a 200 page book and trying to do the same thing.
Edited at 2013-01-02 03:09 am (UTC)
I could understand even a 2-parter since that is the thing to do now. But a trilogy is taking the gratuitous cash grab to a new level and its nagl
and I still disagree. One movie would be terrible. It would be like the book: the dwarves would have no development. You wouldn't give a shit that Kili or Fili died because you'd barely get to see them. You'd probably barely care that Thorin died.
I'm not a fan of 3 movies, I would have been fine with 2. 2 movies would have been ample time to flesh out the characters, give them the chance to shine, but not drag it on. I don't know if 3 movies will work. I liked An Unexpected Journey, but I don't know how the next two movies are going to go because they put so much in the first one.
If Game of Thrones doesn't get every single tiny storyline in, why does this? It is way overkill, he obviously can't edit for shit if he thinks he needs 3 films for this. I'm so bitter.