A problem also seems to have been that, after the success of the LOTR trilogy, the mandate became "Let Peter Jackson make his movies as long as he wants and DON'T TOUCH THEM!!! They're GOLD, Baby!!!"

Take "King Kong" for example... that was a movie in dire need of an editor. I remember mentally editing it as I was watching it in the theater. Great... but bloated.

Much as I want to see "The Hobbit" (and am sure I'll like it a lot), I can't help but think that Rob's review might be right on the money. Because I just can't see this story comfortably being stretched to 3 movies. And 3 VERY LONG movies at that.

"quickly stay far longer than they should"

What does that even mean?

I love how people nowadays are saying movies are too long. I don't get it. If a movie is great or even good there's no such thing as too long. I've never left a good or better movie saying "Damn, I wish I could get less of that."

I've read the Silmarillion 9 times.  Nothing can bore me, ha.  I've been saying only the die hards are going to love this.  I think the next ones will run more smoothly.

 Tomorrow already have my imax tickets. 

 Just to put this out there - one of my best friends whose opinions on movies, both technical and critical, I trust implicitly, urges everybody to save your money and skip the HFR 3D on this one, unless you like the look of soap operas and 80's sitcoms.  Apparently tradition will make your viewing more pleasurable in this instance.

this was funny: "Just like the ones that complained about the length of the LOTR trilogy films which made me just want to slap them"

i found the LOTR films a bit long myself but i'm not a fan of the books ... same for harry P

I love the honest trailers ... all the shortcomings laid out bare for you ... and no movie spared (TDKR, avengers, avatar) ...

NO SPOILERS! NO SPOILERS! NO SPOILERS! NO SPOILERS! NO SPOILERS!

Rest easy guys!.. These three films are not only the story of "The Hobbit". It's also the additional appendices, written by Tolkien after "The Hobbit" was released, to explain in detail what Gandalf did when leaving the group on several occations throughout the quest. It's about the parts of "Silmarillion" that details what other main events take place in Middle Earth during the time of "The Hobbit". Last but not least; there are also historically significant deeds connected to the characters and their ancestors to be woven into this new trilogy. Remember that while "The Hobbit" is undoubtedly the main storyline, there will be lots and lots of additional material incorporated into these three movies. I haven't read the original books/texts myself (Not even the Hobbit) but there's no way we can judge if there's enough interesting material for three films without knowing what parts of Tolkiens extensive Middle Earth material Peter has chosen to elaborate upon. I'll say this for sure - "An unexpected Journey" is in my opinion also an unexpectedly good and entertaining movie.

While the story of "The Hobbit" may not be truly as epic as "The Lord Of The Rings", Jackson has still easily made one of the most captivating fantasy movies of the year (Avengers and Prometheus being two other favorites of mine). If you prefer the Extended versions of the LOTR trilogy you'll have absolutely no problem sitting through the length of "An Unexpected Journey". People who complain about this are the same ones who thought the previous movies were unnecessarily streched out. Also, I never thought I'd say this about a movie, but If anything I would've actually wanted a little more over-the-top acting in this one. I guess this means the performances must have been absolutely totally bad-ass!?..

As for the cinematography of this first chapter in the Hobbit saga; It's looks absolutely STUNNING!!! And after seeing it a second time in Enhanced 3D I say - This is what 3D was meant to look like from the beginning! I'll never watch a standard 3D movie again unless absolutely nothing else is available (Including "2D"). I've never been a fan of 3D before and I've honestly never seen a regular 3D movie that actually looks good all the way through (floating in and out of focus and with those irritable ghosting edges ever present), but with the 48fps format all of those previous problems are finally gone and the experience is almost FLAWLESS!!! All I'm looking forward to now is that Cameron will take this experience to the 60fps he's previously hinted at. Avatar 2 & 3 will look abslutely magical.

Wiseguy.... I'm glad to say that I agree with you 100% about Lord of the Rings. We can disagree on all things Batman, but LOTR is the greatest cinematic achievement in my book. Since this is the last time we'll see middle earth on the big screen (unless the Tolkien estate relinquishes rights to the Silmarillian,) I'm more than happy to sit through what would normally be considered "extended" story details. 2 more movies after this and that's all she (he) wrote. We're not going to see a cinema remake of Lord of the Rings in our life time, we'll just keep revisiting it, along with the Hobbit, with our kids and grandkids. So by all means, pour it on. I don't like the idea of saying the studio pushed Jackson to make a third just for money. That may be true, but I don't think that was his personal motivation. But that's just my humble opinion.

Rob is smoking crack once again...This movie was a easy A maybe even A LOTS of action the dwarfs rocked great pace cant wait for part 2!!!