The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

[The Josh]

You really need to read the book to find out why the places and things that happen are important.

 

[grphyx1]

Saw this yesterday and LOVED it! story moved at such a great clip.

 

[jye4ever]

My wife just asked me why the eagles didn't just drop them off at the Lonely Mountain at the end of AUJ.

 

[The Josh]

My wife just asked me why the eagles didn't just drop them off at the Lonely Mountain at the end of AUJ.

They don't want to fly over lands controlled my men. They're afraid of being shot at and killed basically.

 

[JAWS]

You really need to read the book to find out why the places and things that happen are important.

Well that is my point.. I am coming at this like the books don't exist at all. The films should stand on their own. And while I know that the third film will help bridge the gaps, the Second film suffers from the fact that PJ took the shortest book and made it three films.. Thus scenes in DOS have much less impact and feel less important and more like filler. I have no doubt that had PJ made two three hour films those scenes would not feel so much like filler. You would see their purpose.
I am praying that part 3 increases my enjoyment of part 2.

PS - I am reading the Hobbit now .

 

[JAWS]

My wife just asked me why the eagles didn't just drop them off at the Lonely Mountain at the end of AUJ.

They don't want to fly over lands controlled my men. They're afraid of being shot at and killed basically.

I just figured it would make for a very short and crappy adventure

 

[The Josh]

Even without reading the book those places and events are important. Reading the book might help you understand this. This film does stand on its own.

 

[The Chev]

I actually prefer the EX cut of TTT to the regular cut... In fact I find it to be the one of the three that benefited most from the EX cut. Many new characters were given more personality and more story. Faramir being the best example of this. I could care less about him in the regular version but the EX cut helped out his character immensely. I could have done without the Extra Tree beard stuff. My problems with TTT are that I think it is by far the most bring of the Rings films. I mean they had to add a Warg action scene to help the film move along. Helms Deep was OK but it kept getting interrupted by tree Beard speeches and there was no sense of loss or Danger... The Good Guys win again... I always thought FOTR ended more like the middle part of the story... The Fellowship is Broken, Gandalf is Dead, Marry and Pippin have been taken... Things are bleak. Some of this is the fault of the source material... But I think Shelob is in the TTT story right?? that is almost how it should have ended with Frodo being taken by the Orks after Shelob got him.

Yeah, I know PJ kicked Shelob to ROTK, and said it also helps with timeline, but I still wonder what could have been if they kept it as is. It would have been gone done as one of the Great cliffhangers I feel.

I remember an interview after FOTR came out where PJ broke the news that "She" wouldn't be in TT. I remember his other reasoning was that Frodo and Sam wouldn't have much to do in ROTK. IT ended up being that they didn't have much to do in TT. Faramir taking the hobbits to Osgiliaith(spl?) Just wasn't a satisfying climax for the hobbit's story in my opinion. The reason it didn't bring the film done was because of how epic Helm's deep and The Last march of the Ents was.

I still get goosebumps thinking about the ending of the Book and the final line "Frodo was taken by the enemy"

 

[The Chev]

Well that is my point.. I am coming at this like the books don't exist at all. The films should stand on their own. And while I know that the third film will help bridge the gaps, the Second film suffers from the fact that PJ took the shortest book and made it three films.. Thus scenes in DOS have much less impact and feel less important and more like filler. I have no doubt that had PJ made two three hour films those scenes would not feel so much like filler. You would see their purpose.
I am praying that part 3 increases my enjoyment of part 2.

PS - I am reading the Hobbit now .

I think it will. I can't wait myself to see it.

 

[Jokes & Bats]

Three hours of...nothing. If any film never had a plot - it is this.
It should have been called 'The Legolas: A CGI Mess of Rubbish'

I love The Lord of the Rings with all my heart; I love the books and the films but I think Peter Jackson has lost his way a bit with these. It's all CGI - it's so polished and computer rendered it looks constantly fake.

Not one plot was finished in this film: Legolas ran off after the orc; Gandalf is still stuck with his back to that rock; and nothing happened with the Dwarves or Bilbo (who apparently did appear in the film at some points).

Everytime Legolas and Kate from Lost appeared, I cringed. Smaug was underwhelming - I half expected to see a 'Gingotts' sign behind him.

I'll stick to the book because this was just awful.

 

[The Chev]

Things didn't get resolved much in FOTR and TT.

 

[jye4ever]

They don't want to fly over lands controlled my men. They're afraid of being shot at and killed basically.

Josh to the rescue.



*runs to inform wife

 

[Adolfo]

They don't want to fly over lands controlled my men. They're afraid of being shot at and killed basically.

If PJ had let the eagles talk for a minute they could have mentioned that and the Lord of the Eagles never forgetting Gandalf saving a past arrow...just like it was in the book

 

[hoodonit00]

Three hours of...nothing. If any film never had a plot - it is this.
It should have been called 'The Legolas: A CGI Mess of Rubbish'

I love The Lord of the Rings with all my heart; I love the books and the films but I think Peter Jackson has lost his way a bit with these. It's all CGI - it's so polished and computer rendered it looks constantly fake.

Not one plot was finished in this film: Legolas ran off after the orc; Gandalf is still stuck with his back to that rock; and nothing happened with the Dwarves or Bilbo (who apparently did appear in the film at some points).

Everytime Legolas and Kate from Lost appeared, I cringed. Smaug was underwhelming - I half expected to see a 'Gingotts' sign behind him.

I'll stick to the book because this was just awful.

Although I agree that there was too much CGI I disagree with everything else you wrote. Why would they finish any of the plots if there is another movie coming out?

 

[TURINS~BANE]

Three hours of...nothing. If any film never had a plot - it is this.
It should have been called 'The Legolas: A CGI Mess of Rubbish'

I love The Lord of the Rings with all my heart; I love the books and the films but I think Peter Jackson has lost his way a bit with these. It's all CGI - it's so polished and computer rendered it looks constantly fake.

Not one plot was finished in this film: Legolas ran off after the orc; Gandalf is still stuck with his back to that rock; and nothing happened with the Dwarves or Bilbo (who apparently did appear in the film at some points).

Everytime Legolas and Kate from Lost appeared, I cringed. Smaug was underwhelming - I half expected to see a 'Gingotts' sign behind him.

I'll stick to the book because this was just awful.

Mixed feelings then hey..? shame.

 

[JAWS]

Even without reading the book those places and events are important. Reading the book might help you understand this. This film does stand on its own.

Not in this ONE film their not... At least I don't feel they were. Bear guy... Nothing, Captured by elves.. Eh.. So what.. We see that he still don't like the Elf king.. I got that form the first film. Spiders.. Cool scene but it was turned into nothing more then an action sequence...

Where were the great moments of Character interaction? Where were the great Panoramic shots of unseen Middle Earth Enviroments?? Like I said before... I don't think any of the main characters had very much dialogue.

Take Balin for example... Such a great character in the first film... Given only like three lines to speak.


I missed these things in the new film... I hope the EX cut can bring some of that back.


Here are some quotes from a review that sum it up perfectly for me and basically say the same thing.. Only better.

"The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug is not a movie.

Well, technically it is. But only technically. It’s the second act of a movie. There’s no beginning or ending of a story, only a middle.

It could be argued at this point that The Desolation of Smaug is supposed to be a middle, but that’s not fair to all the other wonderful trilogies that have successfully managed to do more than just get us to the next movie. To cite a recent example, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire did this admirably. The Hobbit is proving the naysayers right: there is little reason for this to be a nine-hour trilogy.........There really isn’t a story. The dwarves are just running from one obstacle to the next, and what time is spent not running or fighting is really just set up for the next time running and fighting....... Where An Unexpected Journey succeeded in a way that The Desolation of Smaug was unable was in the character development department. The previous film was about the dwarves coming to trust Bilbo. This time, none of the characters really seem to develop in any way.

The characters do a lot of nothing. There’s a point when Bilbo does something that you realize you haven’t really seen him much. So much for it being The Hobbit. Gandalf continues to do a lot of realizing of the impending doom that will be coming. None of it is much different than in the previous installment."

That is why I keep stressing that as a stand alone film it sort of fails.

I was originally not one of the naysayers... I said the More middle earth the better... For this film I feel I was wrong.

Yeah, I know PJ kicked Shelob to ROTK, and said it also helps with timeline, but I still wonder what could have been if they kept it as is. It would have been gone done as one of the Great cliffhangers I feel.

I remember an interview after FOTR came out where PJ broke the news that "She" wouldn't be in TT. I remember his other reasoning was that Frodo and Sam wouldn't have much to do in ROTK. IT ended up being that they didn't have much to do in TT. Faramir taking the hobbits to Osgiliaith(spl?) Just wasn't a satisfying climax for the hobbit's story in my opinion. The reason it didn't bring the film done was because of how epic Helm's deep and The Last march of the Ents was.

I still get goosebumps thinking about the ending of the Book and the final line "Frodo was taken by the enemy"

That is an awsome way to end it..... That is what TTT was lacking IMO... That big "what going to happen to our heros next" moment.

 

[The Josh]

If PJ had let the eagles talk for a minute they could have mentioned that and the Lord of the Eagles never forgetting Gandalf saving a past arrow...just like it was in the book

I'd have gone with Gandalf just mentioning this stuff but I agree the info would have helped.

Josh to the rescue.



*runs to inform wife

 

[The Chev]

\Well, technically it is. But only technically. It’s the second act of a movie. There’s no beginning or ending of a story, only a middle.

It could be argued at this point that The Desolation of Smaug is supposed to be a middle, but that’s not fair to all the other wonderful trilogies that have successfully managed to do more than just get us to the next movie. To cite a recent example, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire did this admirably. The Hobbit is proving the naysayers right: there is little reason for this to be a nine-hour trilogy.........There really isn’t a story. The dwarves are just running from one obstacle to the next, and what time is spent not running or fighting is really just set up for the next time running and fighting....... Where An Unexpected Journey succeeded in a way that The Desolation of Smaug was unable was in the character development department. The previous film was about the dwarves coming to trust Bilbo. This time, none of the characters really seem to develop in any way.

The characters do a lot of nothing. There’s a point when Bilbo does something that you realize you haven’t really seen him much. So much for it being The Hobbit. Gandalf continues to do a lot of realizing of the impending doom that will be coming. None of it is much different than in the previous installment."[/B]

That is why I keep stressing that as a stand alone film it sort of fails.

I was originally not one of the naysayers... I said the More middle earth the better... For this film I feel I was wrong.

.

For the review To knock DOS while commending Catching Fire for showing how to do a "real " Middle film is pretty silly. The Hobbit, and to a lesser extent , the LOTR films are more episodic in nature. To me it's like starting Game of Thrones with episode 5 of a season 1 and not liking it because things didn't get resolved in the episode.

I'm also amazed that some of the criticisms being heaped on These two hobbit films can also be applied to LOTR. AUJ and FOTR even followed a similar Pattern

Shire to Rivendell, Rivendell to Misty Mountains and then under them, then ends with an Ambush.

Also, saying nothing happened is a lot different than saying their was no character growth.

 

[Spartan Rex]

Haven't seen the movie yet but will soon.
However an acquaintance of mine who's a big Tolkien fan had seen it and had mixed feelings. He said one thing that really bugged him is that Smaug had sway or some power over the ring. He said it didn't make sense since no connection between the two in the movie or the books is established.
So what's the scoop?

 

[Njits]

Why are you even in here before having seen the film? GET OUT!