The Hobbit: The Desolation Of Smaug (film)

[Neil]

Looks just like what I imagined in the book!

http://media.aintitcool.com/media/uploads/2013/harry/desolation_of_smaug_poster_large.jpg

[shootemindehead]

Can't wait.

I know a few people had issues with the first one, but I thought it was fine.

[Neil]

Can't wait.

I know a few people had issues with the first one, but I thought it was fine.

Yeh, I found it a little clunky, but as long as the second improves and gets a touch more serious, I'll be very happy!

[MinionZombie]

I enjoyed The Hobbit ... it wasn't up to Lord of the Rings snuff, but wasn't too far off either ... looking forward to seeing this one. :)

[Morto Vivente]

Yeh, I found it a little clunky, but as long as the second improves and gets a touch more serious, I'll be very happy!

Let's hope they keep to the spirit of the book, it should get more serious once Gandalf departs for Dol Guldur, and Bilbo and co enter Mirkwood..

[Neil]

^^ Yes, but for example the spiders could portrayed as truly horrible, or a touch campy, tripping over each other, with silly accents etc etc so kids don't have nightmares etc....

[Morto Vivente]

Nooooo.......Please don't say that you'll give me nightmares ! :lol: I hadn't thought of that, I really hope they don't balls up the spiders.

[Neil]

Nooooo.......Please don't say that you'll give me nightmares ! :lol:

It could easily go either way though... I can imagine them playing such choices safely and it all turning out a bit too nicey nicey comic book!

[Morto Vivente]

It could easily go either way though... I can imagine them playing such choices safely and it all turning out a bit too nicey nicey comic book!

With the original material being lighter in tone to LotR I can see what you mean. I really hope they go for the "Shelob" approach from the LotR movie. Spiders with voices has a big possibility for disaster. It could all get a bit ANIME ("Dungeons & Dragons"), which is fine for ANIME. Obviously the goblins of An Unexpected Journey were not as threatening as the orcs, but I found them acceptable relative to the source material. But spiders with overly pronounced SSSSSSSSes. No thanks.

[Morto Vivente]

OsKRzJkDiyg

[wayzim]

Let's hope they keep to the spirit of the book, it should get more serious once Gandalf departs for Dol Guldur, and Bilbo and co enter Mirkwood..

I did initially have issues with the first Hobbit film, but I also really liked the dwarves rendition of Under The Misty Mountains ( just a bit less as action music, but I didn't have problems with the original LOTR theme so maybe I'm just being a grumpy old man here ... "Hey you kids! Get off my lawn! ) so there was plenty of good to go with the meh.
And with the second film, there's opportunities for still more LOTR cameos - hurrah! I still have faith that Jackson and crew will pull this new trilogy off.

Wayne Z

"Day 35: " killed by orcs. Stupid orcs. " Boromir from the very secret LOTR diaries by cassieclaire.
Very funny and very pervy series by the above mentioned cassandra claire( from way back when ). Read only if you have a twisted sense of humor - then you'll understand the term ' Pervy Hobbit Fancier. '

[Neil]

I do sort of get a "going through the motions" sort of feel with the first film and this trailer... It just sort of feels a touch soulless compared to LOTR!?

Hopefully the second will improve on the first and I'll be proved wrong!

[Morto Vivente]

I realize humour isn't integral to the LotR movies, and I don't recall any, or at least practically none in the books. But the line during An Unexpected Journey by Fili or Kili when they're feasting in Rivendell, "I don't like green stuff....Got any chips?" (waving a leaf of lettuce) was hilarious. Obviously a joke doesn't make a movie but it was better than any attempt at humour in the LotR movies, IMO. Then again The Hobbit (novel) has many more humorous elements than LotR, which purely on the basis of depth could almost be a real chronicle. The intended audience age group of the two original stories were different.

[Neil]

mbOEknbi4gQ

[dracenstein]

Never having read The Hobbit, I always assumed Legolas wasn't in it. The female elf, I hope she isn't his love interest and gets killed, because in The Fellowship of the Ring, was it commentary or special feature, the actor says it was the first time Legolas had known somebody to die, thus for her to die, it would negate his reaction in TFotR.

[shootemindehead]

Legoland was definitely not in the book, although the dwarfs did meet a big band of elves, IIRC. There was no female elf either.

I think it's a bad move by Jackson. The story doesn't need it.

[Neil]

Never having read The Hobbit, I always assumed Legolas wasn't in it. The female elf, I hope she isn't his love interest and gets killed, because in The Fellowship of the Ring, was it commentary or special feature, the actor says it was the first time Legolas had known somebody to die, thus for her to die, it would negate his reaction in TFotR.

Yes, you're right. I don't know if they've completely invented stuff to add in, or they've borrowed from other Tolkien fiction like The Silmarillion.

[AcesandEights]

Yes, you're right. I don't know if they've completely invented stuff to add in, or they've borrowed from other Tolkien fiction like The Silmarillion.

From what I can tell (and my Tolkien knowledge is somewhat lacking), they have borrowed, added, edited and deleted. I don't mind it so much, especially when leaving certain aspects out in the LOTRO trilogy, but adding strictly unnecessary elements when it smacks of reasoning insincere to the advancement of the plot is a bit annoying.

[Neil]

I'm interested in seeing their adaptation of Beorn!

[Neil]

lfflhfn1W-o

[rongravy]

Just saw it tonight. This one is definitely the Empire Strikes Back of the trilogy.
Awesomeness. Go see it.

[krisvds]

On Legolas. True he wasn't in 'The Hobbit' but let's not forget he is described in Lord of the Rings as the son of Thranduil, king of the wood-elves in Mirkwood. Since the dwarves and Bilbo pass through that forest in the Hobbit and encounter the King etcaetera it would be rather strange if they had not encountered Legolas at that time.

There are other departures of the original books that bother me more in Peter Jackson's work; mainly his reliance on completely bonkers and over the top action setpieces where he tries to out-Spielberg Spielberg?

Still very much looking forward to the new film. Love me

[blind2d]

So I've been poking around the 'net a bit and Tauriel (the female elf, played by some woman from 'Lost') is a completely new character apparently, not from anything Tolkein ever wrote. Which, y'know, I'm not happy about really, but it's nice to have more female characters at the same time. I'll see it around Christmas, most likely. But yeah, not that enthused.

[MinionZombie]

I've been consistently hearing it's better than the first (and I liked the first, although not as much as the Rings trilogy), so that sounds good to me.

Tauriel - indeed, a character they created to put a dose of lady into the sausage fest that is the source material. :D Evangeline Lilly is the actress, best known as "Kate" from Lost.

[Neil]

I mostly enjoyed the film, BUT I must admit leaving utterly annoyed that Jackson has yet again gone even further away from the source material seemingly again for the worse!

Once again we have Hanna Barbara action - Characters bouncing and swinging around seemingly as if in a Tom & Jerry cartoon - After a while you lose all concern for them...

And then we get to Smaug and the mountain - In the book, the Dwarves hide from the dragon - no surprise there - and in the end the dragon gets frustrated and takes his fury out on the town. But now, in this film, we have the Dwarves happily running head long into the dragon and using Hanna Barbara physics to come out completely unscathed! Really?

And don't get me onto huge golden dwarf statues - WTF? Was this mold just sitting there unused just in case they fancied making a huge gold statue?

[MinionZombie]

I saw it the other day and rather enjoyed it.

Well, the Dwarves do have a veritable mountain of gold, so they can easily afford to create a giant statue out of the stuff - if you're hoarding a load of gold, why not make a giant statue? Plus their plan does essentially make sense in what it's supposed to do - distract Smaug and try to kill him ... although that didn't work out so well. :p

In terms of physicality ... perhaps, but then this is also a universe where people can live for hundreds and hundreds of years without aging a day ... or where there are sod-off massive spiders that talk ... etc etc etc. ;)

I thought the pace was better than the first, it had a bit more oomph to it ... although there are too many sweeping shots where the camera flies around in vast moves that tilt and pan and arc and go all over - it diminishes the scale (almost makes the events look like miniatures). I dug it though.

The Rings trilogy is still the best, but it's nice to go back to this world and some of these characters.

I think you could easily cut a bunch of stuff out, but I imagine the reason why it's kept in there is because this is one chance to make these films, and the filmmakers being fans of this book, want to see all this stuff on-screen ... however, if you were writing this specifically as a film today (as opposed to a loving adapation of a famous book) there are numerous scenes in both films so far that you'd trim or cut out entirely ... but then it is nice to see all these different sights and characters and explore this richly textured world.

[Neil]

I saw it the other day and rather enjoyed it.

Well, the Dwarves do have a veritable mountain of gold, so they can easily afford to create a giant statue out of the stuff - if you're hoarding a load of gold, why not make a giant statue? Plus their plan does essentially make sense in what it's supposed to do - distract Smaug and try to kill him ... although that didn't work out so well. :p

In terms of physicality ... perhaps, but then this is also a universe where people can live for hundreds and hundreds of years without aging a day ... or where there are sod-off massive spiders that talk ... etc etc etc. ;)

I thought the pace was better than the first, it had a bit more oomph to it ... although there are too many sweeping shots where the camera flies around in vast moves that tilt and pan and arc and go all over - it diminishes the scale (almost makes the events look like miniatures). I dug it though.

The Rings trilogy is still the best, but it's nice to go back to this world and some of these characters.

I think you could easily cut a bunch of stuff out, but I imagine the reason why it's kept in there is because this is one chance to make these films, and the filmmakers being fans of this book, want to see all this stuff on-screen ... however, if you were writing this specifically as a film today (as opposed to a loving adapation of a famous book) there are numerous scenes in both films so far that you'd trim or cut out entirely ... but then it is nice to see all these different sights and characters and explore this richly textured world.

Yes, the pace was a lot quicker and more enjoyable.

But the last 30 mins was a bit of a mess to me. Needlessly departing from the (better) source material for no other reason than to contrive a lot of CGI hokum... The dragon couldn't kill a single one of these Hanna Barabera dwarves! And then to end it off, decided to fly off elsewhere when they were all still just feet away from him...? Why? They could scoop up loads of his treasure while he needlessly wonders off!

Also, if Gandalf has now discovered Sauron is "alive" again... then what does that mean to the same revelation in the LOTR films set 50-60yrs later on?

[AcesandEights]

I enjoyed the film overall, and didn't mind the last half hour, really...except that it's all so needlessly drawn out and felt perfunctory.

My quibble with cheesy action dramatics primarily comes more from the middle of the film:

The barrel chase sequence was both overly long, and overly cartoony in its execution. They could have done with about a quarter of the runtime for that scene and 1/10 of the barrel-bouncing, probability defying action and it would have been cleaner and more fun for the audience, I'd think.

Still this is probably a great movie for little kids, which is a fine thing. So I'll start my kid on this some day and then graduate him to LOTR.

[Neil]

The barrel chase sequence was both overly long, and overly cartoony in its execution. They could have done with about a quarter of the runtime for that scene and 1/10 of the barrel-bouncing, probability defying action and it would have been cleaner and more fun for the audience, I'd think.
This is the Hanna Barbera physics I was on about!