User Score

Universal acclaim- based on 2390 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jan 28, 2013
    of course it's good. it's primarily good because it makes all the right choices at the right places. the book is much lighter than the lord of the rings in terms of content, so the movie must be too. where the lord of the rings fills up the holes between it's moments of epicness with more epicness, the hobbit fills it up mostly with humour. also, the modern technology helps the world come even more alive. Expand
  2. Jan 27, 2013
    The movie is a masterpiece. The "new additions" makes the classic story even better! People complaining 'cause its 3 parts? Really? Who wouldnt like to have more running time from 'Lord of The Rings' saga? I'm starting to think people just don't like prequels at all, even if it as good as the originals.
  3. Jan 27, 2013
    A great looking movie, but more importantly it keeps the feel of the Lord of the Rings trilogy while putting in some of the musical elements which reminds me of the animated film. It has some added plot elements on top of the original story, probably to help them milk a rather short story into multiple films, but since I enjoyed it so much I'm not complaining.

    If you enjoyed the LOTR
    trilogy you will most likely enjoy this as well, unless you're a purist about the original plot from the books or don't really want to watch long, drawn out action sequences. Expand
  4. Jan 25, 2013
    One of the best movies i've watched in my life as I am a huge LOTR fan. Peter Jackson made this movie in New Zealand which brings out the lovely nature and hills in the movie. It is a fun movie to watch and is an absolute masterpiece.
  5. Jan 24, 2013
    A great way to spend an evening! There was a nostalgic feel to the movie since we get to revisit some old locations from LOTR. And see some old friends. If you haven't seen it yet go!

    I did see it in 3d and thought it didn't add much to the experience.
  6. Jan 23, 2013
    It was a great movie. Not as dark and not as serious as LotR, and Martin Freeman is a brilliant and humorous Bilbo. I liked this first part, Peter Jackson's take on Thorin was good and as for Bilbo, we can see the transition from respectable country esquire to adventuring burglar. Top notch, clearly, and looking forward to the next instalment.
  7. Jan 23, 2013
    Peter Jackson is a master of direction. His cinematography is colorful and artistic, the effects by Weta Digital are great as always and the score has that same wonder and excitement as the LOTR films did. It was a refreshing movie to watch after seeing Red Dawn last and wanting something actually above average and if I'm to believe the movies are to be like the books then Hobbits 2 is going to be even better then the first. Expand
  8. Jan 22, 2013
    The Hobbit was a fantastic movie that hit all the right notes, while perhaps hitting a couple of bum ones. First things first, the majority of critics did not know what they were on about: the only reason it got as bad reviews as it did was because of the reason that it's a prequel (although the book actually came a long while before) that is split into three parts. I must admit, I was very dubious of this film, I was when I heard it was going to be two parts all those moons ago, even more so when I heard it would be three; the film exceeded my expectations by quite a margin. Let's get this out of the way straight away, the acting is great from all involved, with Martin Freeman making quite the splash as Bilbo. At times I felt the film strayed a little too much from the source material, but not enough to not love every second of the (around) three hours of run time, but this was necessary (and interesting enough) to spread the relatively small book over three long films. If you are expecting a very dark tone like the Lord of the Rings trilogy, be warned, this is a lot more light-hearted, Peter Jackson has done a great job at making the Hobbit feel unique at the same time as definitely a part of the Lord of the Rings series. The film is very special effects heavy, perhaps too special effects heavy for some (it was at times), but not to the point of being overly distracting or unnecessary. The film felt nostalgic, new, and magical all at the same time, helped overwhelmingly by the soundtrack, cinematography and acting. It was fantastic to see Middle-Earh again on the big screen, putting a smile on my face for pretty much the whole film. The negatives though, characters returning from the Lord of the Rings trilogy did feel a little forced and unnecessary, as all of their respective scenes lasted too long, old Bilbo and Frodo were there for too long! But, no way near long enough to ruin the film on any level, overall, I'm very pleased the film turned out as well as it did and am very much looking forward to parts two and three. Wonderful: 94/100. Expand
  9. Jan 16, 2013
    I saw this in 2D and intend to see it again in HFR 3D
    It was beautifully shot - naturally - and while 3 movies were probably not necessary I don't think it has detracted from the film. Adding the content from the appendices in LTR has allowed Jacko to make another trilogy and IMHO it just extends the Middle Earth Universe further.
    Very good, and looking forward to Smaug in part 2
  10. Jan 16, 2013
    I loved the Hobbit. Great casting and well written. A lot of laughs and still quite a bit of action in there for the Adults. While I've never been a 3D fan before at all, the effects in this film were EPIC. Go and See this film. See it in a cinema, and pay the extra for the 3D version. You won't be let down unless you want the film to be word perfect to the book... and that might be asking just a little too much. Expand
  11. Jan 16, 2013
    A book is a book, a movie is a movie. I read the book and saw the movie and i think that Peter Jackson did a great job taking the story to the screenplay, by adding a coherence with the LOTR trilogy.
  12. Jan 15, 2013
    The best movie ever,people will never ever find any other movie like this or the lotr trilogy.
    I recommend this for everyone. i rate this 10/10 because it has the best story.
    The tech and defintion lets us enter a new world as if you were seeing it from your eyes.everyone should know about this,it everything you expect but it goes far over the top amazing very one.people should really
    stop comparing this with lotr,it wasnt even written like it.if u find a better movie i will compare it to this btw all people giving this a low rating are twilight fans Expand
  13. Jan 13, 2013
    The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey was able to give me what I expected from it, even more at times. People should give it a thought that the Hobbit was not written like the Lord of the Rings series, the latter had greater incorporation of darkness, the entire concept of the darkness ruling the world. Therefore it shouldn't be compared to the Hobbit, which is written in a totally different way. Its premise doesn't revolve around the Ring, so that's why it doesn't have that dark soul or something like that. It's actually written in humorous way to keep the entire plot light and make it different from the LoTR series.
    Anyway, I still think that if we judge the Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey in its entirety, we would love this film. I did it and I love it. Peter Jackson always surprises me with his outstanding direction and his brilliant vision, the way he has visualized the book in the film is phenomenal. The best things about this film are of course its entire 3D experience and the cinematography, the beautiful sceneries and its characters, they are lovable, they make you believe in their mission, and especially the performance of Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggins. I enjoyed it, he makes a good Baggins, his expressions and his dialogues are more funnier than I thought.
    Other things the majority of critics talked about were shooting the film in higher frame rates than the usual 24 FPS and the running time of the movie. Both of these arguments are invalid. Shooting a film in 48 fps is not a problem, the technology is advancing gradually and sooner or later, the filmmakers are gonna have to start doing it. Why blame Peter Jackson? He just utilized a latest technology to give us a new experience and we are doing everything but appreciating his efforts and the challenge he would have face while shooting the film. The second argument is a bit reasonable, the running time is long but why do you want a film like this to be shorter? I am really glad that it is that long so I was getting to experience every frame of the movie and loving it completely. I don't mind films with long running time as long as they don't get boring, and to me, the Hobbit never got boring at all. Everyone has their own opinions, a lot of people found the ending of the film ridiculous and dumb, but that's exactly how the LoTR films were ended especially the Fellowship of the Ring. You can't complain about a film that still has two parts to complete it and maybe your opinion would change after watching the remaining installments.
    Long story short, don't expect this film to be anything like LoTR trilogy, it may have some similarities (i.e. its characters, the locations, and a few sceneries) but it surely doesn't have that dark plot the LoTR films had. The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is the beginning of a funny, daring, terrifying and a beautiful adventure which might really turn into an epicness in the future when the remaining films come out. It is enjoyable, great to watch and finally gives you the satisfactory feeling of how the middle earth would have looked in 3D and better visual effects.
  14. Jan 13, 2013
    This movie was amazing. The storyline was great and if you are a lover of the LOTR then you will definitely love it. the Scenery and the costumes and make up should definitely receive awards as they were incredible. I particularly liked how Peter Jackson did not allow one particular character to completely take over the movie but bought all the characters together and showed the importance of each one. I do however think that there was about 20 mins cut out of the movie at the cinema that I saw it as there were 2 areas where the scene abruptly stopped and then went to an entirely different scene and i am sure that Peter Jackson would not allow such bad editing. The movie was running behind so i believe that the cinema cut it out, but i am going to see it again on weekend (good excuse to see again) and will see if it does it again.
    The music appears to be less in this movie then in LOTR but it also has some of the music especially Concerning Hobbits which is an absolute favourite and parents ringtone. The music is fantastic to listen to and if there was not so much going on on the screen you would be very content to just sit back and close your eyes and listen.
    Although this movies goes for 184 minutes you wouldn't know it as I was enthralled throughout it and could have gone on with more. Absolutely wonderful movie and cannot wait for number 2. GO AND SEE IT!!!!!
  15. Jan 12, 2013
    I really don't know why this movie gets such bad reviews. A 58? There's the obvious and overused complaint "it's too long" but for anyone who has a half decent attention span it wasn't that bad. It was about the same length of Django Unchained or The Avengers but I never heard anyone complaining about those. The special effects were great, the acting was great, and the story, while still great, was something to be expected because the book had been out for a while. Some people were complaining about the abrupt ending but anyone who knew anything about the movie probably found out that they were making it into multiple movies. And don't complain about "It's the shortest book! Why is IT in three movies?" because Harry Potter did it and no one complained about that. My only complaints about this movie were that it was a bit slow to start (not too long, just slow, it's entirely different) and I wish they showed a bit more of Martin Freeman. They still showed a lot of Martin Freeman as he was still the main character but I really liked him so the scenes that he wasn't in I felt weren't as good. Expand
  16. Jan 11, 2013
    Far over the misty mountains cold... 4 points just for this and the end-titles song. Another 5 points for the Tolkien experience. I save the last point to give it to the next two parts of the trilogy. For all those who gave bad reviews, I wish they are eaten alive by Smaug !!
  17. Jan 10, 2013
    I saw this movie and i was very pleased with what peter did. I didn't go to see Lord of the Rings, i went to see the hobbit. People who expected a new lord of the rings were obviously disappointed. Looking forward for the next 2.
  18. Jan 9, 2013
    The movie is visually beautiful. It's a new opportunity to revisit Middle-Earth through the mastery of Peter Jackson - but it is not The Lord of the Rings, it's another story, so don't expect the same experience. If only the climax had been Goblin town, the movie would've been better. The HFR version is almost perfect.
  19. Jan 9, 2013
    I'm not sure how The Hobbit has a metacritic rating of 58, my friends and I all loved it. I have not read the Lord of the Rings books or seen the past movies, so the first few minutes of the movie I was a bit lost. After I understood more of what was going on, I quickly warmed up to this movie and loved it.
  20. Jan 8, 2013
    An absolutely wonderful film (though too short for me!), which I've seen three times already, and will see again tomorrow, again in the 3D 48 HFR format. The casting and acting of Bilbo, Gandalf and Thorin was absolutely right, and all the Dwarves were also well cast, though of necessity their roles were not huge (similarly to in the book). Balin, played so well by Ken Stott, is my next favourite Dwarf after Thorin. I loved the way the music made references to LOTR, and Thorin's song was just lovely. The visuals, also, were absolutely brilliant: the sweeping shots of the mountain scenery; Erebor; waterfalls in moonlight at Rivendell; the eagles at the end; the Stone Giants fighting while ignoring the little beings below them. I think I like this film more, even, than FOTR (my favourite of the LOTR films), mainly because the casting and acting is generally better, and because of the incredible visuals. My thanks and warmest congratulations to PJ, and I cannot wait for the next two films.

    As for the critics who left poor reviews for this film, I really don't know what their problem was. Don't like fantasy? Don't like films creatively not made by Americans perhaps? Well done, though, to Total Film and Empire, who always give fair and insightful reviews of films. I registered here specifically to comment on this film because I was so disgusted with the negative reviews of something that plainly does not deserve it. Thank goodness I generally do not read the opinions of critics before seeing a film, since I prefer to make up my own mind.
  21. Jan 8, 2013
    Many people forget that this is going to part of a much longer film franchise, expecting around about at least another few films coming out from it, the humor aspect which some people tend to claim poor or childish need to be reminded that in the book, it was to be known to be childish, due to the Dwarves happy go lucky nature, as well as a serious side for their people and the task they have at hand. Again perhaps the critics should take into account that this is part of one, many people we're disappointed with the ending of the first LOTR film, then found the following 2 films to be an exceptional ending to the film franchise. The only thing i can fault this film for is possibly not covering all of the detail, this is unavoidable however, before the film becomes to dragged out to those that may not know the full story Expand
  22. Jan 8, 2013
    To be honest i have a suspicion that a lot of folk might just be jumping on the bandwagon to criticise "The Hobbit, An unexpected journey". I've seen it a couple of times now. Yes in the controversial HFR 3D. Yes it does take a few minutes to get used too but the rewards are huge. So it doesn't follow the book page by page. If that's what you want then read the book. Peter Jackson is a film maker... and one of the best too. I found the Hobbit both spectacular and charming for all the right reasons. The casting was perfect, the special effects were incredible and the film flew by for me. Yes some of it does feel familiar but Im not complaining. I really have no idea why the score is so low. Especially seeing as it seems to be mostly professional critics with a negative review. Everybody i know who's seen it loved it. I can't wait for the next one. Expand
  23. Jan 8, 2013
    Superb imagining of a well-loved book. Visual excellence along with a cracking good tale.
    Although Jackson has certainly taken some liberties, most work very well and aid or
    enhance the whole experience. I was concerned it might be a touch too twee for my tastes, but this was not the case. Worth noting that I did not watch the high frame rate or 3D version of this film - just the
    standard 2D showing. I'm also giving this a 9 rather than a 10 because I was niggled
    at 2 mediocre effects amongst over 2.5 hours of an otherwise permanently impressive viewing treat, and I struggle at the best of times to be kind. And if Gollum was fantastic before, he's gone up a notch now! Watching that face trying to work out riddles was a highlight. Almost as funny as seeing the majority of user reviews being at complete odds with 'critics'. Do they actually get paid for being pointless and confused?
  24. Jan 8, 2013
    I honestly don't see why so many of you goobers think this movie sucks. Critics seem to be going psycho about it such as crap like the 48-fps camera setup they went with. I'm gonna get to that first. When I watched The Hobbit @ 48fps, it was a little choppy initially, but it became smooth later on. It feels thousands of times more pure than traditional 24fps footage we're used to. All of you gooblings **** about that format need to lay off tha **** cus this new format is totally kicks ass. As for the movie, it's got a different feeling than that of the LOTR trilogy released a decade ago. It's less geeky and more entertaining, so us normal people will be able to get into it a lot easier. Expand
  25. Jan 8, 2013
    ESPECTACULAR!! recomendable 100% si no la as visto vete al cine a verla merece la pena verla en 3D muchos criticos la criticaron mal, y que el 3d a 48 fotogramas por segundo no valia la pena y que no se notaba, y toda la gente que a ido le a encantado, me daria verguenza ser critico de cine ahora mismo, la criticaron tan mal solo por quedar mas profesionales o algo pero no tienen ni idea
  26. Jan 7, 2013
    Review based on 48fps non-3d edition as 3d gives me headaches.
    I was very impressed with the LOTR trilogy by Peter Jackson, after being worried after seeing his earlier works...but then as now faith has been rewarded. The Hobbit is pretty much as I would have expected it, it matches most of the previous 3 movies high standards without too many shortcummings to stretch a short kids book
    into another 3 part epic. Lets not forget there is more story and background stuff in "The Hobbit" than all the Harry Potter series put together, so lets look at the main things Jackson got right. 1. 48fps is fantastic and whingers should shut up crying about out of date 24fps formats, though I agree 3d sucks and needs to die quickly.
    2. The story is pretty faithful to the book, and actually improves on some duller bits with some awesome special fx action sequences to pad it out in such a way it feels right at home with the lore.
    3. The acting is fantastic, Martin freeman was the perfect choice, and to have a lot of the original cast show up is also and linking it seemlessly to the LOTR movies is very welcome...
    4. The dwarves... okay they are there to carry the humour, they were written with next to no personality and stereotypical, but it's a kids book remember.

    So why did I only give it 9/10, well some places didn't really need to be in there (Mountain Giants) but they were nice additions for nothing I guess... nobody would really miss having it when the movie is over 2:30hrs long... but I bought the extended LOTR so I want the lot...warts n all lol. So in essence it's a little long for kids to sit through but ideal for the nippers once it's out on Bluray.
  27. Jan 7, 2013
    The Hobbit: an Unexpected Journey is yet another Peter Jackson work of art. I am also a massive fan of the LOTR trilogy, although this film has a different air to it, anyone who like LOTRs should also like this.
    The film is shot in HFR (High frame rate) 3D, meaning that it is shot in 48 fps rather than 24. This initially takes a bit of getting used to but overall makes the movement on
    screen seem more fluid.
    I think the 3D wasn't great, but I think that of nearly every 3D film I have seen, It certainly wasn't detrimental to the film so is still deserving its 10/10.
  28. Jan 7, 2013
    Gollum looked better than ever, and after my third viewing the Pale Orc Azog finally grew on me. It's always disappointing when main characters are CG-- these were the best I've ever seen, but it still leaves one wanting. Overall, a wonderful adventure film that I absolutely loved.
  29. Jan 7, 2013
    The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is a prequel to Peter Jackson's The Lord of The Rings Trilogy, probably my favourite film series of all time. This film starred Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggins. Gandalf enlists Bilbo to go on an adventure with a company of Dwarves to reclaim their gold and treasure from the Dragon Smaug. This movie had some great stars, with Martin Freeman, Richard Armitage (Thorin Oakenshield) and Sylvester McCoy (Radagast the Brown). The plot of the film drew you in with twist and turns along the way, with Gollum and the ring both showing up in this installment. Overall I do not think this film was as good as any of The Lord of the Rings trilogy but it was still a great return to Middle Earth and recommended. The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug will be released 13th December 2013, with the final installment The Hobbit: There and Back Again coming 8th July 2014. Expand
  30. Jan 6, 2013
    Such a great movie, I went in with a skeptical mind and came out pleasantly surprised. I think Jackson has a fantastic start to The Hobbit and I look forward to the sequels!

Mixed or average reviews - based on 40 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 20 out of 40
  2. Negative: 2 out of 40
  1. Reviewed by: Peter Rainer
    Dec 14, 2012
    My first thought in watching The Hobbit was: Do we really need this movie? It was my last thought, too.
  2. Reviewed by: Liam Lacey
    Dec 14, 2012
    In this fitfully engaging, but often patience-straining preamble to Hobbit adventures to come, there is one transporting 10 minutes of screen time. It happens when Bilbo meets the freakish, ring-obsessed creature Gollum.
  3. Reviewed by: Ann Hornaday
    Dec 13, 2012
    It's a bloated, shockingly tedious trudge that manages to look both overproduced and unforgivably cheesy.