THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY (2012) MOVIE REACTION – FIRST TIME WATCHING – REVIEW



Welcome to our first-time watching as we react to The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012). It’s only been a couple of weeks since we saw The Lord of the Rings and we already missed Middle-earth. So glad we still had yet to witness the thrilling adventures of Bilbo Baggins.

Directed by Peter Jackson, “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey” follows the humble hobbit Bilbo Baggins as he joins a group of dwarves on a quest to reclaim their homeland from the fearsome dragon Smaug.

There is a lot of elements we enjoyed in this film. Getting to see a lot of the stories mentioned throughout “The Lord of the Rings” and how it all went down was exciting and we were thrilled to see how incredible Martin Freeman was as Bilbo.

We loved that the themes of friendship and courage are present here and how they take this opportunity to expand a bit more on the history and lore of Middle-earth. There were other elements that were missed, quite frankly some of the aesthetic choices especially with the things that used to be practical and are now CGI.

We hope that you enjoy our reactions, commentary and discussions as we delve into the film’s themes and how it impacted the fantasy genre. How it’s connection to the incredible “Lord of the Rings” trilogy made this such an enjoyable experience and how they continue to show the pure genius and innovation of J.R.R Tolkien who singlehandedly changed the landscape of what fantasy was as a genre and what could be achieved.

The Lord of the Rings Trilogy Movie Reactions: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL3SJLuUxsbvOFsw7ljGojEx-JijBoLrjl

If you’d like to support the channel and gain access to the full length reaction become a member of our patreon https://bit.ly/3ICVrJ6
Watch our reactions early! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCiCUz1bHid4H9mu6g2IOjXg/join
#TheHobbitAnUnexpectedJourney #Reaction #TheMediaKnights

source

44 thoughts on “THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY (2012) MOVIE REACTION – FIRST TIME WATCHING – REVIEW”

  1. Hey guys! Thank you so much for watching this with us and for the immense support these past weeks with "The Lord of the Rings". If you enjoyed this reaction leave a like and subscribe and if you'd like to support the channel and gain access to the full length reaction become a member of our patreon https://bit.ly/3ICVrJ6

    Watch our reactions early! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCiCUz1bHid4H9mu6g2IOjXg/join
    The Lord of the Rings Reactions: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL3SJLuUxsbvOFsw7ljGojEx-JijBoLrjl

    Reply
  2. In the boo9k The Hobbit, the chapter with Bilbo & Gollum in the cave, which is one of the most sigifgant events in the entire lore of Middle Earth is titled "Riddles in the Dark", which is the phrase that Gandalf mutters under his breath in LOTR when Frodo rushes into Bag End after Bilbo leaves for Rivendell as he is sitting in Bag End smoking his pipe. SO that was actually a callback to The Hobbit (which of course was written prior LOTR).

    Reply
  3. The Hobbit trilogy would of been so much better had peter Jackson and his crew not been under so much pressure, time constraints and NZ government having to haggle with production companies and tax rebates for filming in NZ ect. if he had the sort of freedoms he had with the Ring trilogy the quality would of been a notch better. In saying this this is still a great trilogy as it only adds to the over all story.

    Reply
  4. Can you guys please do a reaction to Jamie Fox movie Day Shift. Its a fun movie to watch and I would love to see yall react to it.If you guys already watched it,its fine.

    Reply
  5. This was actually my first LOTR related film I ever watched. My friends were superfans and this came out when we were in 6th grade and asked me to come watch it, been a huge fan ever since. I actually really like this film as well as the next one. I hope you enjoy this trilogy

    Reply
  6. Nothing can beat LOTR… and this trilogy has it's flaws… but you can only satisfy the middle earth desires via LOTR… and this trilogy makes a nice fix for that urge.

    Reply
  7. Just an FYI if you two even read these. Smegal aka Gholum, was never a Hobbit. He was one of the river folk. If you notice Frodo in the Lord of the rings says to Gholum, " You were much like a Hobbit once. " That's because Frodo knew that Smegal was one of the river folk and not a Hobbit.
    My only personal problem with the Unexpected journey is that once on the eagles why didn't Gandolf simply have the eagles fly them all the way to the Misty Mountains where their kingdom was. Instead of dropping them several miles away. Leaving them miles and miles of dangerous lands to go through all the while having the Orks on their heels.

    I understand that it would have eliminated a lot of the adventures that they encounter along the way there. But I just wanted a good reason given as to why that seemingly obvious idea didn't occur to anyone.

    Reply
  8. I love the LOTR trilogy and also love the Hobbit trilogy for what they are by themself. I never compaired them. I'm grateful Peter Jackson tooke the time and passion to bring this wonderful world to life, since I am not a reader, and would never read any of those books, I can visually be amazed and enjoy this wonderful world.

    Reply
  9. Remember, for people who read the books, this was the original story (and was initially going to be stand-alone children's fairy tale, until Tolkien's readers, and publisher, wanted him him expand on the plot -which became the Lord of The Rings trilogy a couple years later). The call-backs you see here are actually the plot of the OH-"Original Hobbit" 🙂
    And I'm sure it's already been addressed, but whereas the Lord Of The Rings was essentially 1 movie per book (with a lot of stuff taken out)- this was one (smaller) book stretched across a trilogy. and as a result, it did add a lot of things to pad it – with varying degrees of success (which, as you've pointed out, a lot of padding was done with CGI)).
    The main antagonist in the book is Smaug, but a few other characters were added to the movie to have a few other bad guys to follow- Azog's name is just mentioned once during a conversation between Thorin and Gandalf (as is Radagast- he's obviously not an antagonist, though), while the Necromancer is mentioned in passing by Gandalf as an issue he was taking care of on his own. "The Hobbit" book doesn't even have Orcs in it (or even mention any)- besides Smaug, the only other bad guys you see (at this point- no spoilers) are Goblins- Azog was actually described as a Goblin in the original text, and it's the Goblins that trap everyone in the trees.
    It's still an amazing fantasy journey, though- and Jackson's reverence for Tolkien remains obvious.

    Reply
  10. For me, the CGI problem doesn't botter me anymore, it only felt strange the first 2 times I watched the Hobbit trilogy. With time, the brain got used to it, and now, I even admire the CGI work, it's really top notch. My dream was to P. Jackson to adapt The Silmarilion in a series.

    Oh, and the real, real dud in the adaptions of Tolkien work in cinema, it's Rings of Power, that is really a travesti, a terrible mistake.

    Reply
  11. Glad you're back with more Middle Earth. Great reaction as always and thoroughly enjoyed it.
    Maybe others have had a thought I have. When the movie title card comes up with "An Unexpected Journey" there is also Bilbo's smoke ring. A subtle way of showing where this story is going to go, be focused on and the central "character". A Ring.

    Awaiting the next two movies.
    Namarie'

    Reply
  12. I think peolle hate on these movies too much. They're really enjoyable and if it had stayed exactly like the book I'm not sure it would have been a good decision because it's only written from Bilbos pov. So many things that are important (like battles and death) would have not been shown, only the aftermath. After all, it was a children's book

    Reply
  13. A lot of the issues (many of which you both talked about) that come with these series of films comes from the fact that it's trying to make the story of The Hobbit in a prequel to The Lord of the Rings, when that wasn't the way it was written. The Hobbit doesn't feel like it has a concrete villain in the first film because Smaug IS the villain by virtue of just being a dragon in a typical bedside fairytale story. The stuff with the trolls, goblins, orcs, etc was intended to be much less of a factor, and more of a hurdle than full blown villains.

    Tldr; they tried to make the story of the Hobbit have significantly more stakes and content than the original material, and it just doesn't all mesh together, particularly because a lot of the newly added content is more so fanservice to the film trilogy of The Lord of the Rings and visual aesthetic as opposed to adding to the material at large.

    That said, there's some cool stuff that was put in as well. Peter Jackson added in a ton of niche references to the appendices of The Lord of the Rings, and that's always appreciated to see from a lore perspective.

    Reply
  14. This is the good Hobbit movie, and it's so good because it's (mostly) straight from the source material of either the Hobbit book or the appendices of LOTR (for the Radagast the Brown and Dol Guldur stuff). The problem with the trilogy is, the Hobbit isn't a very long book, and while there's enough in it to make two very solid movies, the studio was dead-set on making another trilogy. Sadly, that meant Peter Jackson had to just make some stuff up to try and extend things long enough to justify two more movies…some stuff that he pulled from the appendices is pretty awesome, but the stuff he came up with on his own is…lackluster, shall we say, compared to Tolkien's ideas, and the transition between the two is fairly jarring at times. That said, the trilogy is still worth watching, as the awesome parts are extremely awesome (I'm trying not to say too much or spoil anything).
    I'd also be curious to see how y'all react to the Rings of Power show, given that you're not deep into the Tolkien lore…the show definitely has its flaws, as well as its strengths, but it'd be interesting to see the perspective of folks who haven't read the books but enjoyed the movies with that show. If nothing else, it gives you another "hit" of Middle-Earth lol.

    Reply
  15. After watching all 3 , several times and dozens of reactions- I the movies are taken as their own artwork, it's decent.
    The first movie is probably the best, closest to the book.

    After seeing how the whole project came together, I don't blame Jackson for the major issues.

    Reply
  16. Some fun/sad Trivia; Balin, the Elder Dwarf with the long white beard, was Gimlis cousin in Moria in the Fellowship where they found his tomb, and the youngest dwarf here, he was the skeleton with the book the Gandalf read from before the goblin attack

    Reply
  17. Thorin's grandfather was the dwarven King Thror not his father. It goes Thror (who died at Moria) who was the father of Thrain (who is currently just missing, explained more later) who was the father of Thorin. And a little side fact is that the brothers Fili and Kili are Thorin's nephews.

    Reply
  18. These are some of my favorite movies, I absolutely LOVE The Hobbit trilogy, easy to watch, nostalgic in many ways, the new characters we get to meet are amazing and their stories… amazing as well, and maybe some people dislike them, but I like to think I’m one of the few that really enjoys them, I hope you like them as well!

    Reply
  19. 32:15 yes this was the same story that Bilbo was telling in The Fellowship of the Ring. Also later in the movie after Frodo is stabbed by the Nazgul right before they meet Arwen they stop to try to find some herbs to help Frodo and Sam points out that they found the trolls from the story and they are in the exact same pose as in this movie.

    Reply
  20. The thing about the Hobbit movies is they are full of references to the lord of the rings movies, all the callbacks, fanservicey moments, easter eggs whatnot, and a lot of it is great, but at the same time there's also a lot of unnecessary stuff that they added, like they are constantly emphasizing the connection between the two trilogies and so i think it's completely fair to compare them.

    Reply
  21. There is a two headed beast at play with the Hobbit trilogy. Tolkien wrote Hobbit for his kids, and the book is a fifth the size of LOTR and it's much closer to a fairy tale. Jackson had to make it more like LOTR or it would have self destructed faster than a Marvel movie. It could have been done with a duology. But the studio wanted a trilogy with the same kind of profit but for much less investment. Jackson had to pull parts out of other Middle Earth books, and invent stuff for the studio. The Hobbit, as the kids stuff, is always the lesser next to LOTR, so this could not have been made first. But if it had been, as a duology, it would have been better received.

    Reply

Leave a Comment