The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

[DPrime]

Well, I liked this movie a lot, but I couldn't help but be disappointed that some of my favourite scenes from the book were glossed over (mainly Beorn and the Spiders; I was REALLY looking forward to seeing Peter Jackson's interpretation of these scenes).

Legolas was alright, but a bit overused. I didn't think we needed a dwarf/elf love story, ffs, either.

I never got the impression the dwarves were imprisoned for very long, which I thought was important.

That said, I did thoroughly enjoy it. I LOVED Smaug... I was VERY happy to see a lot of him - I had feared most of him would be saved for the third film. Bard was also very well done, as was Beorn, though I think he was played a bit dark for my tastes. The Elf King was pretty cool, too. And the Necromancer/Sauron was pretty neat as well.

All in all, I still would have prefered a Hobbit film series that didn't try to be Lord of the Rings, but whatever. I ain't REALLY complaining.

 

[The Ween]

Of course I don't know a lot about film making, but there was over a decade since the beginning of filming of LotR and The Hobbit. Could've been a difference in budget, in unions, in a lot of things that we aren't privy to. Look how much grief we heard about when it came to just starting these movies with accusations of animal abuse and union problems. The studio may've had a lot to do with how many real actors vs CGI was used as well. I'm sure in this day it cost more to hire an actor and make him up rather than just use CGI. Everything is so expensive these days.

And I can understand Jackson wanting to do the HFR and 3D, so certain things had to be different for these reasons.

 

[DiFabio]

Thing is, they did hire actors AND then replaced them with CGI animation.

Budget? The LOTR trilogy cost $281 million to make. The Hobbit? $600 million and counting . . .

So that can't be it.

 

[spider]

Of course I don't know a lot about film making, but there was over a decade since the beginning of filming of LotR and The Hobbit. Could've been a difference in budget, in unions, in a lot of things that we aren't privy to. Look how much grief we heard about when it came to just starting these movies with accusations of animal abuse and union problems. The studio may've had a lot to do with how many real actors vs CGI was used as well. I'm sure in this day it cost more to hire an actor and make him up rather than just use CGI. Everything is so expensive these days.

And I can understand Jackson wanting to do the HFR and 3D, so certain things had to be different for these reasons.

Had to check the animal abuse claim, I had no idea 27 animals died while they were making the first hobbit film...

 

[EnShinNoi]

Had to check the animal abuse claim, I had no idea 27 animals died while they were making the first hobbit film...

That claim was proven to take things completely out of context. They didn't die as a result of neglect. Billions of animals die every day. 27 over a 2 year span from natural causes is expected.

 

[spider]

"Twenty seven animals including goats and sheep were said to have perished from dehydration, exhaustion or drowning on a New Zealand farm during filming."
The farm they had these animals housed in was apparently a death trap." According to a report by the Associated Press, animal wranglers hired to oversee some 150 animals used in the films say 27 of them died because they were housed on a treacherous farm full of “death traps,” including bluffs, sinkholes and jagged fencing. The dead include a miniature pony called Rainbow, hired as a hobbit horse, who crashed off a bank on the farm and broke his back. When the wrangler found him in the morning, he was still alive, and later had to be euthanized." It doesn't sound like any of these animals died from natural causes...but since billions of them die every day, it's all good...

 

[Irvy]

Lotr to me will always be an untouchable 'historical' epic, the hobbit films are a nice addition but the reliance on Lucas levels of cgi will make them very inconsistent when the 6 films are eventually bundled together.

Sure The Hobbit is more of a fairytale story but to me it doesn't feel like it plays out in the same tangible Middle Earth that we've visited previously.

 

[EnShinNoi]

"Twenty seven animals including goats and sheep were said to have perished from dehydration, exhaustion or drowning on a New Zealand farm during filming."
The farm they had these animals housed in was apparently a death trap." According to a report by the Associated Press, animal wranglers hired to oversee some 150 animals used in the films say 27 of them died because they were housed on a treacherous farm full of “death traps,” including bluffs, sinkholes and jagged fencing. The dead include a miniature pony called Rainbow, hired as a hobbit horse, who crashed off a bank on the farm and broke his back. When the wrangler found him in the morning, he was still alive, and later had to be euthanized." It doesn't sound like any of these animals died from natural causes...but since billions of them die every day, it's all good...

For a farm animal, those are natural causes. It may sound cruel but it's reality.

 

[heon123]

Anyone think Smaug is the greatest piece of CGI magic in film history?

 

[Irvy]

Anyone think Smaug is the greatest piece of CGI magic in film history?

Na Gollum's got him beat.

 

[The Josh]

Anyone think Smaug is the greatest piece of CGI magic in film history?

He's right up there.

 

[EnShinNoi]

Anyone think Smaug is the greatest piece of CGI magic in film history?

Gollum is to me.

 

[TURINS~BANE]

Anyone think Smaug is the greatest piece of CGI magic in film history?

yeah hes right up there.

 

[jye4ever]

Just finished the LOTR EE with the wife for new years.

They just keep getting better and better with age.

Nothing on film can touch these.

 

[hoodonit00]

Lotr to me will always be an untouchable 'historical' epic, the hobbit films are a nice addition but the reliance on Lucas levels of cgi will make them very inconsistent when the 6 films are eventually bundled together.

Sure The Hobbit is more of a fairytale story but to me it doesn't feel like it plays out in the same tangible Middle Earth that we've visited previously.

Agreed 100%. I was looking at box office takes of the individual films the other day. Starting with The Fellowship the trilogy increased with each film released with ROTK making the most. The Hobbit An Unexpected Journey made a little less than ROTK and the way it looks now The Desolation Of Smaug is going to make less yet. Although there is no doubt in my mind The Hobbit movies are successes, there is just something that is not resonating with the audience as much as the LOTR.

 

[The Ween]

Thing is, they did hire actors AND then replaced them with CGI animation.

Budget? The LOTR trilogy cost $281 million to make. The Hobbit? $600 million and counting . . .

So that can't be it.

I can actually see the budget doubling in 15 years time. Everything I think has doubled in that period of time.

And a lot of the people in LotR were military personnel and were on the military payroll and had to work for cheap. It's my understanding that they couldn't do that this time. And the union labor they worked with were paid a lot less than what their counterparts in the US were paid, and I'm sure this time around that was all changed. Wasn't there a strike or something before filming started? I can't remember now.

Who knows what the budget would've been if it was filmed exactly like LotR. The price of making movies these days is mind boggling!

 

[Khev]

Just finished the LOTR EE with the wife for new years.

They just keep getting better and better with age.

Nothing on film can touch these.

Wow I always pegged you for more of a superhero fanboy. Never realized you had such great taste.

Lotr to me will always be an untouchable 'historical' epic,

You know I'd say I agree. And in a way their epic quality limits the level to which I can "dive in" to the phenomenon. As films, they are pretty much untouchable. But they're kind of like Braveheart. Emotional and grueling (in addition to being wonderfully shot, paced, scored, directed, etc.)

But the "Hobbit" films are more like Star Wars to me. Not something that I'm going to tear up watching or say are the "best films ever made" but so damn fun and magical. They remind of watching the SW OT, playing D&D, reading episodic "Choose Your Own Adventure" books and so on. And to me the Hobbit films ARE the "best" types of those movies ever made. Not Braveheart epics, but something different and in some ways more fun and enjoyable.

I don't ever see myself getting William Wallace 12 inch figures or legos, or Braveheart Art Books or dioramas. And I've kind of always been that way with LOTR. I don't even watch them that often out of reverence. And even if the clouds don't part and Holy light doesn't shine down from Heaven on the Hobbit films I'm LOVING them. LOVING them. And I think when all is said and done they'll be my favorite film trilogy of all time. Movies I can just pour into and enjoy over and over more than all others.

 

[The Ween]

Agreed 100%. I was looking at box office takes of the individual films the other day. Starting with The Fellowship the trilogy increased with each film released with ROTK making the most. The Hobbit An Unexpected Journey made a little less than ROTK and the way it looks now The Desolation Of Smaug is going to make less yet. Although there is no doubt in my mind The Hobbit movies are successes, there is just something that is not resonating with the audience as much as the LOTR.

Is there a way to find out exactly how many tickets were sold, rather than how much money was taken in for movies? I'd be curious about that.

Timing is a big issue with movies. When the timing is just right and everything falls into place, the movie does better. I swear this year had the most releases for Christmas I've ever seen. Smaller theaters had a hard time fitting them all in. Add in 3D and that takes up screens as well.

 

[The Ween]

Wow I always pegged you for more of a superhero fanboy. Never realized you had such great taste.



You know I'd say I agree. And in a way their epic quality limits the level to which I can "dive in" to the phenomenon. As films, they are pretty much untouchable. But they're kind of like Braveheart. Emotional and grueling (in addition to being wonderfully shot, paced, scored, directed, etc.)

But the "Hobbit" films are more like Star Wars to me. Not something that I'm going to tear up watching or say are the "best films ever made" but so damn fun and magical. They remind of watching the SW OT, playing D&D, reading episodic "Choose Your Own Adventure" books and so on. And to me the Hobbit films ARE the "best" types of those movies ever made. Not Braveheart epics, but something different and in some ways more fun and enjoyable.

I don't ever see myself getting William Wallace 12 inch figures or legos, or Braveheart Art Books or dioramas. And I've kind of always been that way with LOTR. I don't even watch them that often out of reverence. And even if the clouds don't part and Holy light doesn't shine down from Heaven on the Hobbit films I'm LOVING them. LOVING them. And I think when all is said and done they'll be my favorite film trilogy of all time. Movies I can just pour into and enjoy over and over more than all others.

Totally agree.

 

[Khev]

Agreed 100%. I was looking at box office takes of the individual films the other day. Starting with The Fellowship the trilogy increased with each film released with ROTK making the most. The Hobbit An Unexpected Journey made a little less than ROTK and the way it looks now The Desolation Of Smaug is going to make less yet. Although there is no doubt in my mind The Hobbit movies are successes, there is just something that is not resonating with the audience as much as the LOTR.

Something I can't help but wonder is how the series would be perceived had PJ just started filming the books in order and released AUJ in 2001 instead of FOTR (for discussion sake let's pretend that the films would have still turned out exactly the same.)

We'd have no LOTR to look back on when watching AUJ. Just Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone and The Hobbit. And THEN 10 years later the LOTR. I wonder if people would just still be "over" Middle-Earth 10 years later, regardless of quality. I do think that is playing a part with the Hobbit films now.

Who knows. The Harry Potter films kept their box office consistent or growing over 10 years but there was never a long enough period for the hype to die down.