The Hobbit Extended Edition 3D Blu Ray is cheaper on Amazon UK than any of the retail outlets here. It is time to take advantage of the Brexit. Price is converted from GBP 41.07. JBHiFi is AUD 92
The Hobbit Extended Edition 3D Blu Ray £41.07 (~AU $77) Delivered @ Amazon UK
70
dorian_gray on 25/06/2016 - 11:56 amazon.co.uk (131 clicks)
Last edited 25/06/2016 - 12:29 by 1 other user
Last edited 25/06/2016 - 12:29 by 1 other user
Price History at 
CamelCamelCamel 
Keepa.
CamelCamelCamel Keepa.Related Stores
closed Comments
It has been that price for months.
I don't think a 7% exchange rate movement is justification for this post. Are you going to start posting everything in the UK that is cheaper than here?http://uk.camelcamelcamel.com/Hobbit-Trilogy-Extended-Blu-ra…
Now is not the perfect time to take advantage of Brexit.
The UK has only fallen to 1.37 US, meanwhile our dollar has fallen to US 0.73. Our dollar is predicted to rise to 0.76 as it was and the GBP is predicted to continue to fall to below 1.20 US. When our dollar is 0.76 and greater and their GBP is 1.20 or lower, then will be the perfect time to purchase.
Be careful about taking forex advice from anyone, let alone anonymous strangers with crystal balls on ozbargain.
The AUD has not really been affected. GBP has had a small fall against the Euro, which is a good thing. It provides compensation for uncertainty. Its about the same as a couple of years ago, and was lower before that.
You need to understand why the USD has risen against other currencies. If everyone agreed with your prediction, it would already be there.
And yes, the Hobbit should have been one movie, not three. It needs the opposite of an extended edition.
These movies do not need any more extending.
Of all the actors they could of chose they chose Martin bloody Freeman, ruined the whole trilogy for me.
Seems Jackson gave him enough rope to hang himself with. In most cases he just tried to pass off some kind of retarded, paused stutter as Bilbo's reaction to every situation. I thought he was the least likable character in the whole trilogy, which is weird cause he's meant to be the hero.
Could have been worse, if Jackson hadn't limited Benedict Cumberbatch's appearance to an over produced voice-over ;-)
The problem with the trilogy was that it didn't really have any lead character and the action felt cartoony, antiseptic and safe as houses the entire time.
The only half decent movie was the first because it was a movie mostly about a hobbit, Bilbo. The other two weren't about him really. They were just a roller coaster ride. Well, more like a teacup ride or bumper cars because they didn't feel dangerous at any point.
Freeman was fine. Not great but we can't magic Ian Holm back to being 50ish, unfortunately. Freeman did well enough with what he was given.
For me the problem with the trilogy was that it was a trilogy…IMO.
That's a big part of it and one of the reasons there isn't a lead character.
I actually think there was enough book to make two movies though. A lot happens to Bilbo. If you actually focused on Bilbo as the main character there's a lot of stories to tell.
There's the call to adventure at the beginning. The trolls. Rivendell. The goblins. Gollum. The wargs. The eagles. Meeting Beorn. Getting lost in Mirkwood. Chasing elf-sounds/lights. Spider fight. Captured by elves. A month (months?) sneaking around an elven city/castle. Escape to the barrels. Getting the support of Lake Town and equipping up. Secret door. Talks with Smaug. Fortifying the mountain. Arkenstone bargain. And then finally the death of Thorin.
Bilbo is directly involved with all of that, usually as the lead and it's too much for a single movie. The problem becomes how to split the movie. There's no natural break point in the middle, no point where you get two sets of good beats to make a movie. The ending in particular is rough and you can see that with the movies. The confrontation with Smaug feels like the big ending but it really isn't. Smaug just flies off and Bilbo doesn't see him again.
You'd probably drop Rivendell 'cause it's not all that useful or relevant to the story. You might get rid of the eagles too because they feel too much like a cheat. While I love the Beorn scene on the page it's hard to make work in a movie, as seen in the movies. Although in the movies they made the bigger mistake of having bear him attack them and making him go on about his race's history instead of keeping him mysterious and powerful. It could definitely be done better than that but I think it'd have pacing issues in a movie regardless, especially since we never see him again (Bilbo doesn't, he just hears about him showing up at the final battle).
The more I write about it the more I see the problems with making any movie/movies version of The Hobbit. It just doesn't have good movie pacing. You'd have to rearrange a bunch of stuff and skip a few bits. Probably add a lot more character building dialogue (but not stupid love triangles, ffs). You'd have to make it a season of TV, really.
No. Not even if it was 1/10 of the price…
There's a thought. Thanks, imma go hunting.