The Hobbit trilogy by director Peter Jackson was a low-key prequel to the hugely successful LOTR franchise from the early 2000s. The franchise received a lukewarm reception from Tolkien fans who thought the movies could have adapted the available lore better than they did.
While the majority of folks seem to take the movies with a pinch of salt, a few unpopular opinions that go against the grain of the popular viewpoint are expressed from time to time on Reddit.
An Enjoyable Experience Casting Purism Aside
The Hobbit trilogy might not qualify as great but they are still quite good movies and an enjoyable experience, on the whole, irrespective of whether or not they played around with the source material, feels this fan.
One of the main complaints that Tolkien fans have regarding the movies is that they are terrible adaptations of Tolkien's original work. But if one can cast aside the purism, then this fan feels that the movies themselves aren't necessarily bad at all.
Freeman Was A Fantastic Bilbo Baggins
Actor Martin Freeman broke into the world of popular cinema with his role as the hobbit Bilbo Baggins. Freeman is a well-known actor although his portrayal of Bilbo was criticized for his characteristic mannerisms, which he brings into every role, whether as John Watson or as Bilbo Baggins.
But this Redditor disagrees with the popular opinion that Freeman didn't do justice to his role. The fan feels that he made a fine Bilbo and that despite the flaws in the movies, the lead actor's performance was a joy to watch.
Enough Lore For The Three Movies
Another common grievance about the trilogy is that there didn't need to be three 3-hour long movies because there simply wasn't enough subject matter to justify all three.
But one fan strongly disagrees with this popular opinion, specifically pointing out that there was sufficient lore woven into Tolkien's universe that could be adapted into the movies. Moreover, adapting a grand epic universe such as Tolkien's was never a simple task and various considerations would have been made with the film medium in mind. For instance, including Legolas in the Hobbit movies, since the fans were already familiar with him from the LOTR trilogy, and Gandalf's pursuit of the Necromancer.
The Tauriel-Hate Club
Actress Evangeline Lilly played the she-elf Tauriel in the second and the third installments of the Hobbit franchise. Tauriel was a brave warrior and a captain of the elven forces of the Woodland realms. One of the major plotlines involving her was the love triangle between her, the dwarf Kili, and Legolas, that ended in tragedy.
The addition of the she-elf was yet another thing a majority of viewers had a bone to pick with, not least because she wasn't there in the books. However, not everybody hated her and some thought adding her to the story was in fact quite clever.
The CGI Didn't Take Away From The Movies
The Hobbit movies have been criticized heavily for their nigh comical use of CGI, especially when compared to the LOTR franchise.
Now, some fans do agree that the CGI wasn't great, that it was overbearing even. But according to this Redditor, the CGI doesn't exactly take away from the films as such and doesn't deserve to be held accountable for discrediting the entire franchise.
The Dwarves Were Thoroughly Entertaining
One popular opinion about the movies has been that the characters were bland and lackluster, and the dwarves even appeared cartoonish with no character development.
However, the fans who actually love the movies opine that the characters, especially the dwarves, aren't terrible at all and that they are fun and entertaining to watch, implying that the popular opinions leveled against the characterization in the movies aren't justified.
More Upbeat Than the LOTR Trilogy
There are those that hate the Hobbit trilogy when comparing it with the LOTR movies, and then there is a minority of fans who think that the story of Bilbo Baggins was told better by Peter Jackson than that of Frodo.
This Redditor found the Hobbit movies lighter-hearted and better paced than the LOTR franchise. Both the trilogies were beloved but the fan thought the Hobbit was somehow more fun and upbeat in general.
Bilbo Was More Interesting Than Frodo
In a uniquely unpopular opinion, some feel that Martin Freeman's Bilbo was way more interesting and enterprising as a character than Frodo Baggins played by Elijah Wood.
This fan even states that Wood was somewhat cringeworthy and even appeared worthless at times in his iconic portrayal of Frodo, as opposed to Freeman who had more spunk, and brought something more to his role.
Better Fight Sequences & More Entertaining Than The LOTR
Another highly unpopular opinion is that Peter Jackson's second, not so successful attempt at revisiting Middle-Earth, was actually quite as great as his first, in terms of both story and music.
The CGI was better in the Hobbit trilogy than in the LOTR, according to this Redditor, as were the fight sequences, and even the jokes were better in what was overall a fun mix of darkness, fun, and excitement.
A Great Prequel
To conclude, here's a fan who gave the movies a big thumbs up and stated that at the end of the day, it was a great prequel to the LOTR movies.
Contrary to popular opinion that the prequel was no match for the original epic movies that became phenomenal hits close to two decades ago, and have gained cult status all over the world, only growing in fandom over the years.