alt Hacker NewsI don't think it does? Nor is it trying to. LotR was something that happens once every 50 years - a movie series that's as good as the source material and holds quality over 3 movies (wonder why they didn't do the Hobbit as well). The Oddyssey is a summer blockbuster. A good one, I definitely recommend it, but far from memorable.
Replies
> wonder why they didn't do the Hobbit as well
I have a theory. When Jackson made LotR, he was not a celebrity. I expect people on his staff would say "that's not going to work."
After LotR, Jackson was a god. Nobody on the Hobbit staff dared to say "no". For example, the Hobbit had numerous cliffhangers. Only one was necessary.
You can see the same thing in his King Kong remake. Nobody dared tell him to cut some of the redundant things.
The music on the Hobbit was pretty forgettable, too. I wonder what went wrong with that.
> wonder why they didn't do the Hobbit as well
Because it should've been done as just one movie. Someone got greedy and decided to split it up into three movies, and it was such a drag watching all of them - and I say this as a huge LotR fan who enjoyed all the extended LotR cuts.
The other big issue was the frame rate of the movie, 48FPS was a risky move and didn't really translate well to the big screen, it felt like everything was sped up and was hyper realistic.
The CGI was also bad and hasn't aged well, like if you watch LotR now it still looks pretty good, whereas the the monsters in the Hobbit look like some 3D printed figurines covered in oil, or have an uncanny valley effect.
In fact there was so much wrong with the movie that it's easier to just list the good things (which, for me, was the music).