Hopefully WB doesn’t decide to cut the budget of the sequel, if and when it happens, based on the box office this film gets.
I do remember the initial reviews and, while they were mostly positive and referred to it as an achievement, many of those initial reviews did complain that too much of the focus was shifted off of the hobbits (this was one of Ebert’s biggest issues with the series from the jump), which was a complaint that only progressed as the series wore on. It makes sense that would be one of the larger criticisms because fans of the books would likely tell you the same. I love both. I’ll admit the films do have less of the hobbits than the books, but I still adore them.
Yeah but if you compare The Fellowship of the Ring’s 92 to Dune’s 76 on metacritic you can tell that the film was more well received, at least by critics. You don’t get a 92 on that site with lukewarm initial reviews.
There were people at the time who wouldn’t stop crying that Fellowship didn’t make time to put in goddamn Tom Bombadil. They were never going to satisfy people that hardcore into the books. I love the books but the movies do a great job of what any movie adaptation should do, which is ADAPT the books into a movie. Jackson pulled that off perfectly, but in order to do it cuts had to be made. Dune has a very similar adaptation problem as LOTR tbh. The material is just so dense.
I personally feel it's a 75% chance we'll get the sequel, but I can see why you might feel the complete opposite