Who else thought this was more faithful to the book?

Gotta admit though Jackson's Hobbit was more faithful to the source material than Jackson's Lord of the Rings was.

It's definitely more faithful to the book. If Jackson had followed its example and made one solid film, without any of the awful fan-fiction he concocted to pad out & cheapen the original, he would have produced a classic. Instead, he pandered to 21st Century demographics too much. The cartoon is always true to the spirit of Tolkien, with its essentially good-hearted humor emerging naturally from the character of Bilbo. But the humor never clashes with the more serious tone that develops as the journey continues & Bilbo grows as a refreshingly humble & modest hero.

Most importantly, the cartoon remembers that The Hobbit is a children's story, albeit one that grows more complex & grown-up toward the end. I do miss Beorn and the Arkenstone; if it had been half an hour longer to weave those strands into the narrative, it would have been nigh perfect. That said, what we got is still very good indeed. I especially like the inclusion of so many of Tolkien's songs to move the story forward! And the voice work is uniformly excellent.

I wish more filmmakers didn't feel the need to "improve" what was already a classic story ...

I have a soft spot in my heart for this movie

The Hobbit's short magical tale - not big dark saga. the idea to divide the book to 3 parts is unforgivable. Real Tolkien fan will never do that.

I proud that I boycotted all Jackson's Hobbit trilogy. I already recognized in the third LOTR film that success made him arrogant as he admitted that he didn't watched the film before it was released.

The Hobbit (1977) is much more faithful to the spirit of the book. It's fun, adventurous, beautiful drawings with great songs. It's feel like Tolkien.

This was not only more faithful, but a better adaptation than Jackson's trilogy. Only the first part I would even consider a good movie.