The Hobbit: Desolation of Smaug

[Snaked]

I saw the 11:30am showing today and really enjoyed it!

[Rushman14]

took me 3 nights to get through the first one. painful.

[x1yyz]

I saw The Hobbit last night. A friend said it best: The movie should be called "Inspired by The Hobbit." I think after the third movie is released someone needs to edit them all down into one good ~2 hour Hobbit movie.

 

There is way too much made-up filler material. The CGI isn't that good in parts (some things look "fake", some creatures don't move realistically). And the big end scene is not believable, even when attempting to suspend disbelief. I really wish Peter Jackson had been as true to the story as he was to LotR.

[theredtamasrule]

Indeed these movies could be called "Rhapsody on a Theme by Tolkien".

 

Just saw it in HD 3d. Better storytelling than the first, more momentum forward even for such a long film but definitely NOT the story as told by Tolkien. Interesting mix of the book, appendices from LOTR & fan fiction...especially the Gandalf in Dol Guldor scenes, didn't quite expect what we got but I liked it. I'm most interested to see the resolution to this plot line in the finale.

 

I'll say this for Jackson, he has no subtlety in him. Besides over the top action he demands character reactions that are rash & nonsensical and often antithetical to the characters themselves. Frodo's dismissal of Sam for example. That happens a couple of times here but obviously on a much less dramatic stage. He, Boyens, et. al. should leave characterization to Tolkien and not pervert them for sudden & forced dramatic effect.

 

What subtlety there is I'm willing to bet was directed by Andy Serkis with the second unit.

 

Overall thumbs up, very entertaining. Just embrace it for what it is.

[goose]

Good reviews, gents. Thanks for posting!

[theredtamasrule]

Good reviews, Ents. Thanks for posting!

 

Fixed!

[EagleMoon]

I really wish Peter Jackson had been as true to the story as he was to LotR.

 

Then all we would have would be a half hour TV movie.

[Tombstone Mountain]

First off, I'm somewhat of a Tolkien junkie. And I'm a CS Lewis junkie. Their relationship fascinates me in terms of how they went about the process of sharing ideas and writing their books. They had a writing club...imagine being a fly on the wall at those gatherings.

 

I just saw the Smaug-rageous film. My 8 year old loved it as I did. I found myself in awe of how Smaug was brought to life. To me this film is the best of all the Tolkien installments.

 

it's impossible to bring those lovingly crafted works of genius completely to life...this work left me wanting more. My son was in his room drawing Smaug after this movie. He asked me why a sequel is necessary. When he reads the books he'll understand why.

Edited December 16, 2013 by Tombstone Mountain

[Powderfinger]

Saw it earlier this evening in IMAX 3-D. It was quite good. I wouldn't say it's exponentially better than the first installment, but I really like the first film. (I know I'm virtually alone in that sentiment.) Some of the new installment's fight scenes grew a bit tedious at times (in general the film felt a little too long), but it was indeed more exciting and enthralling than the first film. A very good film, to be sure.

[Snaked]

I know there are varying opinions on this point.. but personally I *LOVED* the cliffhanger!!!!

I don't think it could have been done any better.. left me wanting more.. not just wanting more but salivating for more!

[Tombstone Mountain]

I know there are varying opinions on this point.. but personally I *LOVED* the cliffhanger!!!!

I don't think it could have been done any better.. left me wanting more.. not just wanting more but salivating for more!

 

I agree. Peter Jackson just set the bar really frigging high

[Presto-digitation]

Saw it earlier this evening in IMAX 3-D. It was quite good. I wouldn't say it's exponentially better than the first installment, but I really like the first film. (I know I'm virtually alone in that sentiment.) Some of the new installment's fight scenes grew a bit tedious at times (in general the film felt a little too long), but it was indeed more exciting and enthralling than the first film. A very good film, to be sure.

 

Pretty much my exact thoughts.

[Oracle]

MUCH better than the first Hobbit, but Jackson easily could have done better. I saw the movie Saturday night in a packed theater, and I have to say that, while I'm not disappointed, I'm not fully impressed either. I'm no professional movie critic, but this movie suffers from what the first Hobbit suffered from: NO CHARACTER PROGRESSION! I mean, when you read the book, you see obvious character progression in the dwarves and Bilbo; but in the movie? Holy crap, I could see more character in the dead fish in the barrels! That's not to fully discredit the acting, though. I feel that all the actors were perfect choices for the roles, especially Martin Freeman for Bilbo and Benedict Cumberpatch doing the voice over work for Smaug.

 

Did anyone else get these absolute feeling of dread when Smaug came onto the screen? I mean, I was in row THREE of the cinema and I have never felt smaller in my entire life! If this movie got one thing right, it was the final scenes with Smaug, because those were obviously some of the best cinematic moments of the year for me. Very few movies can actually have something that large on the screen and make a 6-1 guy feel small in comparison. On another note, the cliffhanger at the end was very tasteful. That's what I did not really come in expecting, as Peter has never really ended any of his movies on a cliffhanger. I'm starting to wish he did that with his Lord of the Ring series when he made The Two Towers, because that would have made that an even immensely better movie if it were done correctly.

 

The only thing I won't change my opinion on is the fact that they shoehorned Legolas into the film. Legolas was never in the novel, nor was this character Tauriel (to what I remember; I read The Hobbit four years ago, so I don't remember ALL of it). The scenes in forests of Mirkwood could have been much more detailed, as that section of the novel was very long according to my memory. Elrond was also absent from this film when he shouldn't have been.

 

Overall, I'd say go see it, but on the precautions:

 

1. You're obviously a fan of long running movies; I believe this one clocks it at just about two hours and fifty minutes

 

2. You're a fan of the Lord of the Rings trilogy of novels/films and have seen the first Hobbit film or at least remember reading The Hobbit in school

 

On a final note, I wouldn't pay full ticket price to see this. But don't wait for the DVD either. Wait until it comes to the dollar saver theater, because if you're paying 12 dollars like I am to see a movie, you damn well better be getting your money's worth.

Edited December 16, 2013 by Oracle

[x1yyz]

Warning: Contains spoilers

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I thought Smaug was done very well. He looked great, was impressive, and moved very well. But the scenes at the end of the movie just didn't make sense. First of all, Smaug is immersed in molten gold. (We'll just disregard how that huge mass of metal was melted in about three minutes.) Gold melts at 1945F/1063C. There is no biological material that can withstand this sort of temperature as proteins denature at 212F/100C or less. Yet Smaug emerged unscathed from the molten gold.

 

Maybe his scales protected him? Well, even if his scales were made of something with a higher melting point that gold, either a) heat conducting through the scales would kill the living tissue underneath, or b) molten gold would have entered the body through the missing scale, which we know is Smaug's vulnerable spot.

 

Even if we dismiss all this and attribute it to "magic" it still doesn't seem plausible. To me, that's where they jumped the shark.

[goose]

Well..I saw it. I really liked the Beorn part, and Bard was interpreted nicely. The movie is just too bloated for my taste, too obviously stretching things out to milk the story for 3 films. The Smaug scenes impressed me at first, but as it dragged on, I actually fell alseep during the final chase/battle scenes.

[theredtamasrule]

More spoilery talk below....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gandalf v. Sauron? To me that was the most "holy shit!" moment in the whole film. Totally did not expect Sauron to give Gandalf the smack down like that...hell...I didn't even expect them to meet at all. Gandalf must be stuck there until the White Council saves his ass because there's no question, none, about who the Necromancer really is and he's not supposed to reveal himself until being driven out by the White Council according to the book. This what I want to see resolved more than Laketown getting torched.

 

[alphseeker]

Well..I saw it. I really liked the Beorn part, and Bard was interpreted nicely. The movie is just too bloated for my taste, too obviously stretching things out to milk the story for 3 films. The Smaug scenes impressed me at first, but as it dragged on, I actually fell alseep during the final chase/battle scenes.

Damn that sucks -

I'll have to sneak a monster in and drink it at the 2 hour mark cause i dozed off in the first movie.

[goose]

Well..I saw it. I really liked the Beorn part, and Bard was interpreted nicely. The movie is just too bloated for my taste, too obviously stretching things out to milk the story for 3 films. The Smaug scenes impressed me at first, but as it dragged on, I actually fell alseep during the final chase/battle scenes.

Damn that sucks -

I'll have to sneak a monster in and drink it at the 2 hour mark cause i dozed off in the first movie.

It's a bummer because there are some great ideas...Jackson just seems compelled to beat the dead horse to a bloody pulp.

[Dread Pirate Robert]

Just saw it today, in 3d.

 

I found myself rolling my eyes at times during the more absurd action sequences, and murmuring things to myself like "really? seriously? oh please . . stop, just stop" That includes the ridiculous barrel escape scene and the dwarf acrobatics in the confrontation with Smaug.

 

Without those way over the top to the point of absurd silliness scenes, the movie would be pretty good, imo.

Edited December 21, 2013 by Dread Pirate Robert

[goose]

Just saw it today, in 3d.

 

I found myself rolling my eyes at times during the more absurd action sequences, and murmuring things to myself like "really? seriously? oh please . . stop, just stop" That includes the ridiculous barrel escape scene and the dwarf acrobatics in the confrontation with Smaug.

 

Without those way over the top to the point of absurd silliness scenes, the movie would be pretty good, imo.

Jackson insists on reducing every action scene to a version of Super Mario World. I find it distracting.

[EagleMoon]

Just saw it today, in 3d.

 

I found myself rolling my eyes at times during the more absurd action sequences, and murmuring things to myself like "really? seriously? oh please . . stop, just stop" That includes the ridiculous barrel escape scene and the dwarf acrobatics in the confrontation with Smaug.

 

Without those way over the top to the point of absurd silliness scenes, the movie would be pretty good, imo.

Jackson insists on reducing every action scene to a version of Super Mario World. I find it distracting.

 

That's seems to be the popular thing right now. Pacific Rim was full of those kinds of scenes. Reminds me of a lot of martial arts movies.

[Sark]

As a stand alone piece of entertainment, It filled the role. Some fairly large detours or occlusions from the book. Some to enhance a scene, and some just to make it "friendly" to those not familiar with the story/ stories. All in all it seems Peter Jackson was trying to inspire future gamers, not readers.

[OGr8imL84AD8inF8sBlackSedan]

Just got back from seeing it and I'd have to say I agree with all the criticism of too much action, too much CGI, too much disjointed story telling too much too much too much. Jackson tends to just overdo everything to the point of ridiculously preposterous absurdity, although with that said, I didn't think it was th​at bad. It had a some good parts, a couple boring parts, some dragging on parts, some too quick parts. It was certainly better than the first installment of the story. When it's all said and done it's a somewhat decent interpretation of the story, but ultimately it's clearly just another Hollywood studio money grab.

 

The LoTR nerd that has been brewing in me for over 35 years was satisfied...with a grain of salt.

[Alsgalpal]

I went to see it on Christmas Eve. Date day with the boyfriend was my present.

 

 

 

I'm crazy in love with Lee Pace anyway, and him as an elf king totally made the giant spiders worth it. :drool: He's my ultimate fantasy.

[Principled Man]

Just saw it tonight. Entertaining, but alas, I left the cinema feeling unfulfilled. Like others have said, Peter Jackson just stretched it out and made it boring. The battle with Smaug in the mountain was very entertaining, but overall, the film was just a lot of "same old, same old" Middle Earth battles.......