- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Official Hobbit The Desolation of Smaug Review Thread (spoilers)
Posted on 12/14/13 at 8:06 am to DumpsterFire
Posted on 12/14/13 at 8:06 am to DumpsterFire
The Gimli reference was great!
Overall the movie was fun, entertaining and action packed, but it did feel like there was a bunch of unnecessary shite going on at one time. I get that the men of Laketown were not exactly the brightest, but all those Orcs made it in the town unnoticed? Even after the elves showed up and a long battle erupted, not a one human poped their head out and said "holy hell a bunch of Orcs are throwing down with elves and dwarves"? Seemed too much out of place.
Another small complaint I have with these movies is that I don't understand why a lot of the appearances of the characters are changed from the book. Some of their appearances are described in detail such as Beorn with his long thick beard and giant house, and especially Thorin and company. These particular dwarves from the line of Durin were also know as the Longbeards, and should all be sporting real beards. I will say Smaug was portrayed about as good as I could have ever imagined.
I'm still not over all the damn Orcs being CGI. What happened to Conan Stevens playing Bolg? Wiki shows Bolg being played by someone completely different. I was hoping to see another Azog like character out of him. Speaking of Azog, he is pretty much a badass and doesn't seem to be scared of shite.
Anyway, I definitely can't wait to see how Smaug's death is portrayed along with the Battle of the Five armies!
Overall the movie was fun, entertaining and action packed, but it did feel like there was a bunch of unnecessary shite going on at one time. I get that the men of Laketown were not exactly the brightest, but all those Orcs made it in the town unnoticed? Even after the elves showed up and a long battle erupted, not a one human poped their head out and said "holy hell a bunch of Orcs are throwing down with elves and dwarves"? Seemed too much out of place.
Another small complaint I have with these movies is that I don't understand why a lot of the appearances of the characters are changed from the book. Some of their appearances are described in detail such as Beorn with his long thick beard and giant house, and especially Thorin and company. These particular dwarves from the line of Durin were also know as the Longbeards, and should all be sporting real beards. I will say Smaug was portrayed about as good as I could have ever imagined.
I'm still not over all the damn Orcs being CGI. What happened to Conan Stevens playing Bolg? Wiki shows Bolg being played by someone completely different. I was hoping to see another Azog like character out of him. Speaking of Azog, he is pretty much a badass and doesn't seem to be scared of shite.
Anyway, I definitely can't wait to see how Smaug's death is portrayed along with the Battle of the Five armies!
0
Posted on 12/14/13 at 8:06 am to Lacour
Beorn was my only disappointment, but he is going to wreck shite in the 3rd movie so I'm good. Erebor was great as were all of the other locations. Seeing Sauron take form was awesome IMO.
This post was edited on 12/14/13 at 8:08 am
Posted on 12/14/13 at 8:13 am to Mr. Wayne
It had great parts, but to me it was the weakest of all five films in the series.
Smaug was fantastic.
What was the point of covering him in gold? Did they think it would kill him?
It seemed strange.
Smaug was fantastic.
What was the point of covering him in gold? Did they think it would kill him?
It seemed strange.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 8:19 am to Lacour
Am I the only one who actually enjoyed the barrel scene. It was cheesy but also a lot if fun. All the Orc kills were entertaining to me.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 8:21 am to arktiger28
There was nothing wrong with it at all.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 8:38 am to Lacour
I think Thorin knew they were likely to die. He was just trying everything he could to go out with a fight. What else could they have done to fight him?
Posted on 12/14/13 at 8:54 am to Mr. Wayne
Was Smaug saying "it burns" when he was fleeing? I mean before he burst into the night.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 8:56 am to Lacour
And why all of a sudden Bard being chased and arrested?
He was cooking dinner, goes out and is arrested. Did I miss a part? I know the master wanted him gone but he was walking freely and then later he was arrested.
He was cooking dinner, goes out and is arrested. Did I miss a part? I know the master wanted him gone but he was walking freely and then later he was arrested.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 9:20 am to Lacour
How was Smaug in on current events? In the movie, Gandalf was insistent on taking out Smaug based on his knowledge of what was happening with the Necromancer.
He seemed to imply that the Necromancer was going to use Smaug as an ally. This is backed up by Smaug himself saying that a new darkness is coming.
It's not out of the realm of possibility the Smaug is in direct contact with Sauron. Smaug also goes so far as to be curiously unsurprised by Thorin's arrival when he tells Bilbo he's sniffed out Thorin's plot. This after Bilbo gives him no information at all about Thorin.
How does Sauron communicate with Smaug? Good question. Here are a couple of thoughts. Maybe there is a dwarven ring of power in the treasure horde somewhere? A palanquin maybe? Or how about this? Maybe the arkenstone had some sort of sinister origin? After all, it drives kings mad.
Overall, I liked the movie. I don't see what some people have their panties in a bunch over. We knew going into it that it was going to be different from the book and both expanded and bloated from the original material. If you are going to hold it true to the book and the vision in your head, the book is still there for you to read. You can read it anytime you like. This is just one filmmaker's take on it. It's not even the "official" version of the story. You have that version in your hands. Don't you realize that?
He seemed to imply that the Necromancer was going to use Smaug as an ally. This is backed up by Smaug himself saying that a new darkness is coming.
It's not out of the realm of possibility the Smaug is in direct contact with Sauron. Smaug also goes so far as to be curiously unsurprised by Thorin's arrival when he tells Bilbo he's sniffed out Thorin's plot. This after Bilbo gives him no information at all about Thorin.
How does Sauron communicate with Smaug? Good question. Here are a couple of thoughts. Maybe there is a dwarven ring of power in the treasure horde somewhere? A palanquin maybe? Or how about this? Maybe the arkenstone had some sort of sinister origin? After all, it drives kings mad.
Overall, I liked the movie. I don't see what some people have their panties in a bunch over. We knew going into it that it was going to be different from the book and both expanded and bloated from the original material. If you are going to hold it true to the book and the vision in your head, the book is still there for you to read. You can read it anytime you like. This is just one filmmaker's take on it. It's not even the "official" version of the story. You have that version in your hands. Don't you realize that?
Posted on 12/14/13 at 9:35 am to bamafan1001
quote:
I honestly didnt care for the addition of Sauron to the Hobbit movies.
It's in the original back story, you should read "The Hunt for the Ring" it's some of my Favorite Tolkien stuff.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 10:15 am to Strannix
What format did everyone see it in? 3D, Regular? The high frame rate version?
If 3D, is it great/worth the extra $ for 3D?
After the poor opinions of the High Frame rate from the first installment I am weary of viewing it in this format this time around.
If 3D, is it great/worth the extra $ for 3D?
After the poor opinions of the High Frame rate from the first installment I am weary of viewing it in this format this time around.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 10:19 am to ATLienTiger
I liked the addition of Tauriel and Legolas, and I enjoyed pretty much all of the action scenes.
I thought Bard was pretty cool but like others mentioned why did he get arrested? I felt like his role could have been bigger
Also, anyone else notice Peter Jackson taking a bit out of a carrot in Bree again?
I thought Bard was pretty cool but like others mentioned why did he get arrested? I felt like his role could have been bigger
Also, anyone else notice Peter Jackson taking a bit out of a carrot in Bree again?
Posted on 12/14/13 at 10:39 am to DumpsterFire
quote:
frick that elf chick. She completely screwed over Legolas, who she has known for 600 years and who she knows is in in love with her. She does it for a dwarf that she had one conversation with. That's fricked up. If I didn't know that legolas was in the LOTR movies, then I would have thought he was going to die there.
In her defense, Legolas' father and her king did tell her they could never be together and to not lead him on. She's just looking for a breakup fling.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 11:57 am to PsychTiger
Surprised there's not more posting here. Less folks seeing it?
Posted on 12/14/13 at 5:19 pm to Lacour
Just saw it. I thought it was ok. The barrel scene had me thinking about the gungan battle in Star Wars which is not good. I feel like Peter Jackson tries to make every scene impactful and it just doesn't take. I did enjoy it but there were times that I was just bored.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 5:49 pm to Mr Gardoki
Just watched it, and I do have some mixed feelings about it.
First off, whatever you do, do not see it in 48FPS. It took me until getting to the Lonely Mountain for me to get remotely used to it, and even then it looked like a cartoon. I can not fathom what Peter Jackson is thinking with this format. With a nature documentary, it's great, but really anything else, especially when your movie has a lot of special effects in it, it's just awful and frustrating.
And with that ridiculously abrupt conclusion, this almost certainly should have been 2 and not 3 films. There's no way when Del Toro and Jackson were originally writing it that they had any intention of ending it there. The Hobbit is a tricky one to stop in the middle, but I guess I would have stopped the second one at the Spider Pit, with the Dwarves being captured and Bilbo escaping, then kick off the next one with them escaping from the elves, briefly stop in Lake-Town, and then head straight to the Lonely Mountain to where we meet Smaug about an hour or less into the film.
I'm hesitant to judge it without seeing the truly finished product, but they have been taking their sweet time with the filler. Beorn wasn't great, the escape scene was a bit over the top (though thankfully no where near as bad as the mine sequence in the last film), and they spent way too much time in Lake-Town. When they intermingled it with Smaug's appearances, I actually got a bit frustrated watching Legolas kill some Orcs that aren't going to really matter in the long run.
I would like to say these were minor nitpicks, but they're pretty major for me. That said I'll wait until next year to fully judge it, and I do think this is a better installment than the previous one, but it's still not near the greatness of Lord of the Rings due to the sheer amount of tediousness going into it. For all I know, they may grow on me once I see the finished product as well as their Extended Editions (if that were possible), but not for the time being.
That being said, I did quite enjoy myself. The spider attack scene was great, and really loved how they showed the Ring already taking slight control over Bilbo.
I did enjoy the addition of Legolas and the original character of Tauriel. It makes sense that Legolas was likely present for many of the events of "The Hobbit", so why not add him? And Tauriel was great too to break-up the sausagefest, and actually really liked the love story between her and Kili (even if it did get corny at the end). Those were both good additions to the story, even if I wanted them to stay more focused on the dragon at the end.
And speaking of the dragon, holy shite did Jackson just blow Smaug out of the water. Absolutely perfect, and my biggest concern going into the Hobbit. It's curious to me that the scenes Jackson knows he can't afford to frick up, he succeeds gloriously, but has tended to mess up or stay too long in the non-iconic scenes. Jackson got his personality down to a T, and Cumberbatch was perfectly cast. He has the narcissistic, cocky, sly, and sociopathic vibe of the character that actually makes you squirm. Maybe the best non-human villain since HAL 9000.
3 stars out of 4
Ranking:
1) Fellowship of the Ring
2) Return of the King
3) The Two Towers
4) The Desolation of Smaug
5) An Unexpected Journey
First off, whatever you do, do not see it in 48FPS. It took me until getting to the Lonely Mountain for me to get remotely used to it, and even then it looked like a cartoon. I can not fathom what Peter Jackson is thinking with this format. With a nature documentary, it's great, but really anything else, especially when your movie has a lot of special effects in it, it's just awful and frustrating.
And with that ridiculously abrupt conclusion, this almost certainly should have been 2 and not 3 films. There's no way when Del Toro and Jackson were originally writing it that they had any intention of ending it there. The Hobbit is a tricky one to stop in the middle, but I guess I would have stopped the second one at the Spider Pit, with the Dwarves being captured and Bilbo escaping, then kick off the next one with them escaping from the elves, briefly stop in Lake-Town, and then head straight to the Lonely Mountain to where we meet Smaug about an hour or less into the film.
I'm hesitant to judge it without seeing the truly finished product, but they have been taking their sweet time with the filler. Beorn wasn't great, the escape scene was a bit over the top (though thankfully no where near as bad as the mine sequence in the last film), and they spent way too much time in Lake-Town. When they intermingled it with Smaug's appearances, I actually got a bit frustrated watching Legolas kill some Orcs that aren't going to really matter in the long run.
I would like to say these were minor nitpicks, but they're pretty major for me. That said I'll wait until next year to fully judge it, and I do think this is a better installment than the previous one, but it's still not near the greatness of Lord of the Rings due to the sheer amount of tediousness going into it. For all I know, they may grow on me once I see the finished product as well as their Extended Editions (if that were possible), but not for the time being.
That being said, I did quite enjoy myself. The spider attack scene was great, and really loved how they showed the Ring already taking slight control over Bilbo.
I did enjoy the addition of Legolas and the original character of Tauriel. It makes sense that Legolas was likely present for many of the events of "The Hobbit", so why not add him? And Tauriel was great too to break-up the sausagefest, and actually really liked the love story between her and Kili (even if it did get corny at the end). Those were both good additions to the story, even if I wanted them to stay more focused on the dragon at the end.
And speaking of the dragon, holy shite did Jackson just blow Smaug out of the water. Absolutely perfect, and my biggest concern going into the Hobbit. It's curious to me that the scenes Jackson knows he can't afford to frick up, he succeeds gloriously, but has tended to mess up or stay too long in the non-iconic scenes. Jackson got his personality down to a T, and Cumberbatch was perfectly cast. He has the narcissistic, cocky, sly, and sociopathic vibe of the character that actually makes you squirm. Maybe the best non-human villain since HAL 9000.
3 stars out of 4
Ranking:
1) Fellowship of the Ring
2) Return of the King
3) The Two Towers
4) The Desolation of Smaug
5) An Unexpected Journey
Posted on 12/14/13 at 5:56 pm to Lacour
quote:
What was the point of covering him in gold? Did they think it would kill him?
I don't see any other method to really kill them as far as they knew. Drowning him in molten gold was their best chance, since gold hardens pretty quickly.
This post was edited on 12/14/13 at 5:57 pm
Posted on 12/14/13 at 6:12 pm to OMLandshark
Isn't the 48 FPS version the 3d version?
Posted on 12/14/13 at 6:55 pm to Mr Gardoki
Yeah I realize this is Peter Jackson's take on the story and that it isnt the official story. I just think if the Hobbit was made in a way that more closely resembled the book, it would be awesome.
I wasnt expecting the movie to be perfectly aligned with the book but a more lighthearted movie would have been better IMO.
I wasnt expecting the movie to be perfectly aligned with the book but a more lighthearted movie would have been better IMO.
Posted on 12/14/13 at 8:00 pm to bamafan1001
Jackson revealed where they were originally going to split it:
Really wish they did that instead, because the second film would have been nothing but balls to the walls awesome.
quote:
Jackson revealed in a recent interview with EW that before they split the movie into three films, Part 1 and Part 2 were going to be split right after Bilbo and the Dwarves see Bard the Bowman’s silhouette in the distance. The second movie would’ve picked up with their journey into Laketown.
Really wish they did that instead, because the second film would have been nothing but balls to the walls awesome.
Page 2 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News