Stop comparing to Lord of the Rings!!

Rating: 9/10 (18 December 2012)

When the Hobbit first came out, I was disappointed with the mixed reviews, mostly negative coming from movies.com and other sources. I read the books as a child so of course I was going to see it regardless, and I must say the movie met my expectations.
It is a big mistake to compare The Hobbit with LOTR! Many critics are doing this; I assume the people who haven't read the book as a child. LOTR is a very very dark storyline, in which if their quest fails, they are all doomed resulting in Sauron controlling Middle Earth. The Hobbit is more of an adventurous tale in which if the group were to turn back, nothing would have changed. You can argue that part of the tale is dark, but nothing as close to the Lord of the Rings. Also, not sure why people are stating that The Hobbit is the prelude to the LOTR... THIS IS NOT THE CASE.
Many people thought the movie was rather boring and slow, but since this is the first movie, this had to be expected as Peter Jackson dragged this 300 pg book into a trilogy. People had similar thoughts for the Fellowship of the Ring, and look how much action was in the 2nd / 3rd movies (Battle of Helms Deep / Battle of the Pelennor Fields). I think this was an amazing setup (possibly better than the Fellowship) for the rest of the movies. And from reading the books, I can assure you that the next two movies will have a great deal of action.
I think people who are disappointed in the movie are the ones who are comparing it to the intensity of the LOTR and thus, living to an unrealistic hype, having expected the movie would surpass the Lord of the Rings, which is a daunting task.
The only drawback from the book (which I guess in the movie as well) is that I wish JRR Tolkein provided more character development on the dwarfs. I had some trouble remembering each one by face.