The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I thought that the way they handled the talking spiders was a brilliant solution and a great way to adapt the book.

The more I think about it, the more great little bits I remember. I am looking forward to a second viewing.
 
I got to see a preview screening of this the other night, had to sit through a sales pitch, but there were drinks and food at least lol

I thought it was a really fun flick, and moved along nice and fast paced. Really awesome addition to the franchise. I agree Legolass seemed kinda forced, but I think we're see a much different mind set Legolas here than we did in LOTR.. and Tauriel was just hot, damn fine lookin elf lol

Also agree with eveyrone on how they handled the talking spiders and really liked how they included a lot of the spiders and Smaug dialog from the old cartoon (can't remember if it was in the book or not as I read that like 35 years ago)

Can't wait to own this one on blu!
 
Thought it was much better than the 1st one. Smaug looked great. I thought it was Tim Curry doing the voice so that's a good thing. I find myself pulling for Smaug. I'd love to see him vs Sauron with his army. I didn't care for the Bard guy...looked to much like Legolas. What's the deal with Legolas Dads face? Who's the giant bear guy? Some dwarves need to die. I can't tell them apart.
 
Last edited:
I've seen some complaints about Legolas in this compared to LOTR. He's supposed to be different. The guy you see during The Council of Elrond more matches this guy. He was raised to hate Dwarves and may hold a grudge because of Tauriel. Though, I think the reason he joins The Fellowship is because of what she tells him in this movie.

:lol .. nice .
Gotta love Josh. He rolls with the punches better than any LOTR/Sideshow apologist on the board :yess:

:1-1::hi5:
 
What's the explanation for Legolas, a 2000 year old Elf, looking older than his Fellowship self that looks younger? There's 60 years in between that, and somehow, old Legolas looks like a young 20 something as opposed to the late 30 looking lad in the Hobbit.


Or even better, how the heck did Bilbo go from this,

LOTR_Fell009_IanHolm.jpg

bfotrprologue9.jpg


To this?


hobbit.jpg








The reason Hobbit Legolas is different from the LOTR Legolas is simple, it's not the same Legolas. The Hobbit is new. The characters that first appeared 13 years ago are about as close as Episode III Anakin to the 1977 or Empire Vader (save for maybe Elrond and Saruman). :lol

That's the nature of all prequel trilogies, they don't match up.
 
I would really like for them to remove the footage of Holm in the opening of FOTR and replace it with Freeman's scene in AUJ.
 
Also replace all the orcs, goblins, and Uruk-hai with CGI.

Lurtz looks sooooo outdated.
 
Back
Top