The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

[Khev]

Long post ahead, get your "Didn't Read" memes ready.

Hobbit trilogy will never surpass LOTR trilogy in quality, like never. Did I say never

But does it have to for it to still be entertaining?

Apparently for many the answer is yes. If PJ makes a Middle-Earth film it either needs to match FOTR in every way or it's as bad as a SW Prequel. Pass/Fail. The end. If TTT came out today it'd be a "Lucas movie" with a fully CG antagonist (Gollum) not to mention animated tree people and armies. That's not allowed today. Everything needs to be people in make-up or a stop-motion puppet apparently. I'm sure claymation would still get a pass too. Whatever. No sense dialoguing against those with such a mindset.

Anyway, I did have the pleasure of watching BOTFA again yesterday after finishing Tolkien's novel earlier that same day. It was fun to be refreshed on the book right before closing out the trilogy in the cinema again.

I'm even more impressed with how PJ translated the book to the screen after reading it again.

Some interesting things that stuck out at me:

1. Man, the dwarves were basically incompetent background characters in the book. They really had no descriptions save for Thorin, Bombur ("the fat one"), and Kili and Fili ("the young ones") and most of them never said one word. They also do NOTHING cool and are literally rescued by Gandalf or Bilbo in EVERY single encounter. Then at the end Thorin becomes a total **** and only gets somewhat cool on his deathbed. PJ really had his work cut out for him to give them engaging and likable personas and abilities. That's not to say that they were done poorly in the book, Tolkien just deliberately didn't have them as the focus. They just sort of existed as a means to let Gandalf and Bilbo go on a cool adventure and do cool stuff. That just wouldn't work in a movie though and PJ did a great job with them.

2. Azog and Radagast. Wow, they each get mentioned in one single sentence. "Azog the Goblin" is mentioned as having killed Thror (before being killed by Dain) and Gandalf mentions Radagast to Beorn. BUT the book also says that Gandalf goes and meets with a council of Wizards and drives the Necromancer out of the South. So I don't see any problem in showing Gandalf do those things and having Radagast involved. I love the greater role that PJ gave Azog, an ancient feud of bloodlines, and it's almost Shakespearean how the line of Durin and Azog's line come to an end in the same battle. I really was expecting Azog to fall in some crowd pleasing manner like Lurtz but no, we see Thorin allowing the orc to skewer him so he can release his own sword and run his foe through, then get on top of him and stab him again, lowering his face to just stare into Azog's eyes, soaking in every last second of the orc's dwindling life, that's some epic Ledger Joker **** right there. Hardcore!

3. Smaug and Bard. Okay I'm just going to say it. It was perfect in the book, so cinematic and even more exciting than it was in the movie. Every time I've ever read the passages detailing the dragon laying waste to the town, Bard and his men launching all of their arrows at it, then the one magic thrush comes down and whispers Smaug's weakness into Bard's ear right as he gets down to his last arrow, the black arrow, then he lets it loose as Smaug blazes past him and sinks the entire arrow into his belly, the dragon crashes through the whole city...beyond epic. Just storyboard that **** right there and call it a day. But alas, it was not to be, and the final showdown between man and beast was still awesome (and even I'd say the most awesome opening of all six films) but I can't help but feel that an opportunity was missed. In the book the Master runs out into the desert with his share of the Erebor treasure and dies, I did like the death PJ gave him much better at least.

4. jye4ever you mentioned that you didn't like Bilbo taking out orcs with rocks and thought that those scenes were inspired by ewoks in ROTJ. They weren't. In the book Bilbo kills a good number of the giant spiders in Mirkwood with throwing rocks so this would have been an evolution of that.

5. Alfrid stuck out even more the second time after realizing that he wasn't even in the book at all. He made sense in DOS because his existence gave the Master someone to talk to so we could learn about the Master. But after the Master's death? Why? I get that he was a greedy counterpoint to Bard in that he was just after gold and his own skin but wasn't the Master also? And even Thorin to a point? He seemed really unnecessary and I would have liked to have seen Bard cast him off the way Aragorn did to Wormtongue as soon as his influence was gone. Hopefully he has a really satisfying demise in the EE. His one saving grace was that he actually was a pretty entertaining character even if he was out of place. And all things considered his part was still pretty small overall.

6. Legolas. Loved him. Loved his superheroics but loved witnessing him evolve into his FOTR self even more. I got warm fuzzies seeing him stand next to Bard and giving advice to the human in much the same manner that he would later do for Aragorn. LOVED that one brief moment of "Fellowship" music when Thranduil mentioned Strider.

7. The deaths in this movie and the incredibly powerful reactions to them (especially Freeman's performance at Thorin's passing) really elevate this movie to emotional levels not even present in much of the LOTR trilogy. GREAT stuff, and as I mentioned last week gives an extra element of danger to the whole LOTR as well.

8. The freaking witch king battle in this movie, one of my favorites of all six films. Somehow, in some utterly freaking magical way, PJ captured both the essence of the LOTR films AND the 1978 animated Bakshi movie with the way the wraiths weren't really cartoons, weren't really men, UNBELIEVABLE. Perfectly done.

9. This is another great trilogy IMO. Maybe LOTR is the "Raiders of the Lost Ark" trilogy and this is the "Temple of Doom" trilogy. One's "perfect" and will always be in AFI's top whatever of all time but the other still has it's own valid identity with just as many iconic moments of it's own. I'll go ahead and say that LOTR are "better made" films, but I like both trilogies equally. I won't even say that LOTR is 10/10 and Hobbit is 6/10, 7/10 or whatever. LOTR is 10/10, Hobbit is not quite there but somehow just as good IMO, if that makes any sense.

 

[The Ween]

Gingerbread anyone?

 

[Darth Waller]

I showed AUJ to my 10-year-old daughter on the 20th and she started reading the book as soon as it was over. On the 21st, we watched DOS with my wife so we could all see BotFA this week. We all enjoyed it. My daughter has become a big fan and has been playing the LEGO Hobbit game on Wii U since yesterday. She's also been asking about when we're watching the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

 

[Khev]

Did Jackson say why he went CGI for the Orcs in this one?

Yes, in the AUJ commentary he mentions that even for LOTR he was never quite happy with the orcs being people wearing prosthetics. He stated that when reading the books he always pictured them as being differently proportioned than men from head to toe in ways that go beyond makeup and masks. After advancements in CGI since LOTR that allowed for the likes of Davy Jones, Kong, and Avatar he decided to give the orcs the inhuman look he originally wanted for them.

Nevertheless he said that all of Azog's AUJ scenes were originally filmed with an actor wearing prosthetics but he was unhappy with the look and replaced the actor with CG mo-cap. The original "Azog" became Yazneg:

Not nearly as cool or intimidating as final Azog. I would have hated for "Yazneg" to have been the one facing Thorin on the frozen waterfall.

 

[The Josh]

Damn Khev that's an impressive post (your breakdown). I agree with you. Nice job.

 

[jye4ever]

Thorin's spell being lifted still seemed anti climatic for me.

 

[Morgul Matt]

Damn Khev that's an impressive post (your breakdown). I agree with you. Nice job.

Yeah, totally agree with Josh. That post of yours, Khev, made for a very interesting read that I agree wholeheartedly with except that I do give The Hobbit films 10/10 even though I do prefer TLOTR trilogy.

I'm seeing TBOFA in early January & I'll be surprised if it isn't yet another perfect film, for me.

 

[jye4ever]

Azog swinging that concrete brick over and over was meant to subconsciously convey that Azog had weight and mass while his exhaustion represented a human condition, it definately worked on me.

I saw a real person swinging that.

I just hope PJ doesn't give Lurtz a kiwi accent.

 

[DiFabio]

Azog swinging that concrete brick over and over was meant to subconsciously convey that Azog had weight and mass while his exhaustion represented a human condition, it definately worked on me.


I saw a real person swinging that.

I just hope PJ doesn't give Lurtz a kiwi accent.

I felt they were just aping the Witch King/Eowyn fight, which actually had weight to it with that mace (because, you know, most of it was real. Miranda Otto broke down in tears over how exhausting that scene was. Can't really find a comparison to that with the sterile Hobbit scenes). Azog just looked like a cartoon swinging around to me.

Oddly enough, the same actor that portrayed Lurtz was the Witch King and Gothmog. You wouldn't know it because all three of them were done well. That's a testament to the performances, prosthetics, and effects for the orcs. Much better than the yogurt, glitzy looking Azog.

Wouldn't surprise me if Jackson went back and edited the creatures in LOTR, I wouldn't put it past him, especially when he's gone on to say how he wasn't happy with how they turned out. Go full Lucas, why not.

 

[Jokes & Bats]

The curse of George Lucas.

I'm currently watching all of the extended edition extras for LOTR - on Two Towers extras at the mo - the love and care and attention that went into making all the prosthetics and weapons and armour is truly stunning. Two guys sat in a room for a year linking plastic chain mail rings together for the costumes. The miniatures are superb and there is rarely a green screen in sight. The Peter Jackson of LOTR is not the Peter Jackson of The Hobbit. I honestly detest the CGI in The Hobbit; it is truly disgusting.

The story of The Hobbit is superb because it's Tolkien but the execution of the film has been terrible. Such a shame. Such a waste

 

[The Ween]

I have to wonder just how much cost played into the decision of using more CGI as well. It has to certainly be cheaper and the costs since LotR would've went sky high like everything else has. I see more and more movies using it, for explosions, etc.

Add to that the difference in scales of the characters. I'm guessing it was just easier all around.

 

[Khev]

Damn Khev that's an impressive post (your breakdown). I agree with you. Nice job.

Yeah, totally agree with Josh. That post of yours, Khev, made for a very interesting read that I agree wholeheartedly with except that I do give The Hobbit films 10/10 even though I do prefer TLOTR trilogy.

I'm seeing TBOFA in early January & I'll be surprised if it isn't yet another perfect film, for me.

Thanks guys. And to Morgul Matt, I'm not saying that I wouldn't give the Hobbit films a 10/10, all I know is that LOTR are slightly better crafted. Heck I might even say Hobbit is 10/10 and LOTR is 11/10. I consider them pretty much equal even if I recognize why LOTR would get all the Academy Awards and the Hobbit doesn't.

Thorin's spell being lifted still seemed anti climatic for me.

How do you think PJ should have portrayed it? In the book it isn't even clear that Thorin "breaks" the dragon-sickness at all (until his deathbed speech anyway), he just is a **** and then comes charging out the main gate like in the movie. As far as the book details it you could even take it that his sickness is what drives him to defend his precious treasure with reckless abandon. I think PJ just wanted people to root for him again before he made his final charge and had him basically just shake it off. I actually kind of like that. He's no Theoden or Thrain who needs Gandalf to come and "lift the spell." He's a stout-hearted hero who simply came to his senses.

I felt they were just aping the Witch King/Eowyn fight,

I think the Thorin/Azog fight did a nice job of one-upping the Eowen/Witch King duel. I never really cared for Otto's performance in that one. She was good throughout TTT and ROTK but I didn't think she did that great in her final battle. Her line delivery of "I am no MAN" was a bit eye-rolling and her final "Yeaaaah" was cheesy IMO. Azog's animated performance was actually better than hers. The Witch King fight was still cool but from the moment I saw it I thought it was a little anti-climactic.

A couple of my favorite scenes in TTT and ROTK were fully CG (Orcs scaling the walls of Helm's Deep while ladders drop left and right, Rohirim charging down the slope and the Rohirim charging through the orc ranks at Minas Tirith.) I'm guessing that all Hobbit naysayers think those scenes "suck" now? And Gollum, the Balrog, Shelob, trolls, and fellbeasts all suck too? Even when the LOTR was released they had a number of scenes that were dodgy as hell. The wargs of TTT? Yikes.

 

[jye4ever]

I felt they were just aping the Witch King/Eowyn fight, which actually had weight to it with that mace (because, you know, most of it was real. Miranda Otto broke down in tears over how exhausting that scene was. Can't really find a comparison to that with the sterile Hobbit scenes). Azog just looked like a cartoon swinging around to me.

Oddly enough, the same actor that portrayed Lurtz was the Witch King and Gothmog. You wouldn't know it because all three of them were done well. That's a testament to the performances, prosthetics, and effects for the orcs. Much better than the yogurt, glitzy looking Azog.

Wouldn't surprise me if Jackson went back and edited the creatures in LOTR, I wouldn't put it past him, especially when he's gone on to say how he wasn't happy with how they turned out. Go full Lucas, why not.

I'm guessing that Azog being milky yogurt white was meant to be a contrast to the dark greasy painted earth tone Lurtz.

No denying that Lurtz being on set with all that makeup and war clothes made for an imposing creature.

But I would be lying if I said Azog wasn't a decent villain.

How do you think PJ should have portrayed it? In the book it isn't even clear that Thorin "breaks" the dragon-sickness, he just is a **** and then comes charging out the main gate like in the movie. As far as the book details it you could even take it that his sickness is what drives him to defend his precious treasure with reckless abandon. I think PJ just wanted people to root for him again before he made his final charge and had him basically just shake it off. I actually kind of like that. He's no Theoden or Thrain who needs Gandalf to come and "lift the spell." He's a stout-hearted hero who simply came to his senses.

Idk, I was hoping he snapped out of it while almost killing someone with a knife to their throat instead of hallucinating in an empty room.

 

[Irvy]

It's because everything on the screen in some hobbit scenes is competely cgi. They didn't even try to film on location or build epic sets like Edoras or Helm's deep.
There's no earthiness or lived-in feel to the world. May as well have filmed the whole thing in a studio shed.

 

[Kibagami]

7. The deaths in this movie and the incredibly powerful reactions to them (especially Freeman's performance at Thorin's passing) really elevate this movie to emotional levels not even present in much of the LOTR trilogy. GREAT stuff, and as I mentioned last week gives an extra element of danger to the whole LOTR as well.

8. The freaking witch king battle in this movie, one of my favorites of all six films. Somehow, in some utterly freaking magical way, PJ captured both the essence of the LOTR films AND the 1978 animated Bakshi movie with the way the wraiths weren't really cartoons, weren't really men, UNBELIEVABLE. Perfectly done.

Best parts of the movie.

 

[Khev]

Idk, I was hoping he snapped out of it while almost killing someone with a knife to their throat instead of hallucinating in an empty room.

You wouldn't have been bothered by PJ basically recycling the scene at the end of TTT where Frodo comes to his senses after holding Sting to Sam's throat?

It's because everything on the screen in some hobbit scenes is competely cgi.

Yes and everything on the screen in some LOTR scenes was completely CGI.

They didn't even try to film on location or build epic sets like Edoras or Helm's deep.

I believe on the AUJ commentary PJ mentioned that the Dale set was bigger than anything they built in LOTR.

 

[Kibagami]

It's because everything on the screen in some hobbit scenes is competely cgi. They didn't even try to film on location or build epic sets like Edoras or Helm's deep.
There's no earthiness or lived-in feel to the world. May as well have filmed the whole thing in a studio shed.

Feels like the hobbit is comparable to the star wars prequel, doesn't it?

I'm not ashamed, I loved the hobbit though.

 

[jye4ever]

You wouldn't have been bothered by PJ basically recycling the scene at the end of TTT where Frodo comes to his senses after holding Sting to Sam's throat?

Ok, maybe not that.

 

[Khev]

Ok, maybe not that.

I wasn't going to say that your idea was "bad" I was just curious if you wanted there to be an obvious parallel or not.

And it's so silly to claim that the Hobbit didn't have epic sets. Freaking Lake-town was huge and built above real water. The Master's mansion, most of Dale, obviously the Shire, Mirkwood dungeons and cellar, Mirkwood itself, all real sets. And then there's all the great real locations of various parts of New Zealand that they traveled through. Comparing the movies to the SW prequels is so off base. But meh, people clearly want to do it whether there are valid reasons or not and I'm already breaking my own advice by responding to the silliness.

 

[DiFabio]

A couple of my favorite scenes in TTT and ROTK were fully CG (Orcs scaling the walls of Helm's Deep while ladders drop left and right, Rohirim charging down the slope and the Rohirim charging through the orc ranks at Minas Tirith.) I'm guessing that all Hobbit naysayers think those scenes "suck" now? And Gollum, the Balrog, Shelob, trolls, and fellbeasts all suck too? Even when the LOTR was released they had a number of scenes that were dodgy as hell. The wargs of TTT? Yikes.

No way.

I don't know about others, but I ****ing loved Smaug in the Hobbit movies even though I don't like the Hobbit movies at all! I'm not against CGI, I thought Gollum looked 10x better in the Hobbit than LOTR. The Riddles in the dark sequence almost brought a tear to my eye, especially when Bilbo spares him or when Gollum was thinking of a riddle before shouting "teef!". Smaug was perfection in DoS and in the lake town battle. New Wargs looked great too.

My mentality isn't "if it's CGI, it sux". LOTR had it from Balrogs to "stunt Fellowship members" crossing the Bridge of khazad dum. I'd be a hypocrite if I said otherwise. And yes, the Wargs in Two Towers look like ass, so does Legolas' Oliphant stunt. That's not what I'm arguing with against the Hobbit. My resentment against the Hobbit movies is that they went too overboard with it. Everything looks fake, even when there are no creatures present. Every shot after Hobbiton seems like it's slathered with a color glow timing effect in post production. The CGI I hate and can't stand are the goblins and orcs, the sled animals, the environments, CGI structures like Rivendell and that damn golden Dwarf jello mold. Fat Bombur in his barrel and Super Mario Legolas. They look awful. Reminds me of the CGI in Spider-Man 3 when Spider-Man is fighting Venom. Peter's face looked fake as he was falling and Venom looked like a video game.

Smaug though? Gollum? The spiders? All well done.