The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

[baumer]

Discuss

[Goffe]

I'm so excited, my first movie in 48 fps

[Dementeleus]

It's basically the last 30 minutes of AUJ ramped up to 11. Mostly in a good (albeit absurd) way, sometimes in a stupid way. It's not the book at all, really -- I mean, it follows the basic plot, and characters go to the same locations in (roughly) the same order, more or less, but the plot basically exists just to string action scenes together. There's not any emotional journey, really, and it's a far cry from the drama of LOTR.

 

That being said, it has some of the more absurdly awesome action scenes you'll see in theaters. The Barrel Chase and the Smaug section along make it worth seeing on the big screen. If you expect realism or harsh grittiness, you'll be disappointed.... this is more like DEAD ALIVE-era PJ armed with a billion dollar budget trying to one-up himself with each kill and close escape.

 

My initial reaction is about a B; we'll see if that changes with repeat viewing.

[friendofnarnia]

Estimated the Box Office Forum Rotten Tomato score for An Unexpected Journey and came up with 69%. Interested to see what this one will be.

Edited December 11, 2013 by friendofnarnia

[Deep Wang]

I was pretty ho-hum about the majority of it. It just doesn't have that spark that LOTR did. But yeah, the barrel bit and Smaug were the closest it comes to recapturing the magic. Seeing Legolas kicking ass again was pretty fun. There's something about archery that I just love, it's so rare that when someone does it and has fun with it. Is it just me, or was it disappointing to see they added a kick-ass female character....only to see her story is a romance?

[Dementeleus]

I was pretty ho-hum about the majority of it. It just doesn't have that spark that LOTR did.But yeah, the barrel bit and Smaug were the closest it comes to recapturing the magic.Seeing Legolas kicking ass again was pretty fun. There's something about archery that I just love, it's so rare that when someone does it and has fun with it.Is it just me, or was it disappointing to see they added a kick-ass female character....only to see her story is a romance?

 

Yeah, that was a waste. She kicks enough ass that they didn't even need Legolas around (though I understand why they brought him back). Saving grace for her character is that she basically ends up being the conscience of the elves.

[forg]

As the middle part of a trilogy, The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug as expected ended on a cliffhanger but the last act's spectacular moments did a good job in setting up the anticipation for the finale next year. The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug is still nowhere near the power of The Lord of the Rings trilogy but its significant improvements from the first movie makes this ride worth the time.

 

Full review here: http://www.pinoyexchange.com/forums/content.php?r=1025-Review-The-Hobbit-The-Desolation-of-Smaug

[CJohn]

How is the HFR? Better than in the first movie?

[Crusader]

Hmm I saw it and while some stuff improved on the first one some of it was really ... off I guess 

 

The narrative is tighter ... they go from point A to B to C in a much more confident way ... I'm not talking about the characters confidence in the movie but of the director's. It seems he managed to pick himself up from the first movie a bit ... it feels as if the first half of AUJ was him trying to get back in the zone and I'm glad he found the zone in this one from beginning to the end ... what end you ask ? I'll get to that later 

 

Pacing has been much debated and I won't be the one to beat a dead horse but the scene with the keyhole in a 'normal' director's hands would've been a one minute scene not the five minute one ... even PJ in LOTR days wouldn't go on about it so much 

 

There's also a lack of actual action in the movie ... there are 2 longer sequences prior to the finale and while the barell scene was nicely done it was also way over the top and when you are taking it slow and then suddenly you go BAM IN YOUR FACE action you can't go back to the same old afterwards ... he juggled this stuff way better in LOTR ... there were always tense scenes to bridge the gap between two major action setpieces 

 

The main problem is ... its not a real movie ... I mean no its not even a real cliffhanger middle movie ... it feels like an episode of a TV series it feels as if it exists merely to fill the void 

 

I really thought the cut off point would be Smaug's defeat ... instead Jackson decided to do 2 movies WITHOUT killing off Smaug ??? Gimme a break its just too much and even my die hard Tolkien fan friend said 'Enough dude give us something ' . So Smaug is going to bite it in the first 15 minutes of the next movie and for what purpose was this cliffhanger ending created for ? I don't think anyone can say that this experience didn't feel like a tv episode 

 

Effects were thoroughly unspectacular except for Smaug and once again the decision to have the Orcs totally CGI wasn't the best one since I see them as caricatures of the formidable ones from LOTR.

 

In a perfect alternate universe where Del Toro would've done 2 movies he would probably cut the first one around the time they are about to enter the mountain correct ? 

 

Anyways I won't grade since its not a real movie that can stand on its own in any kind of way ... which again Two Towers was ... and I don't think Tolkien would like for his fun and breezy children's book to be this overlong and sometimes even tedious trilogy of movies where the first two are in no way to be considered actual films 

 

Acting was solid except for Bloom ofc who's in it quite a lot which is not a good thing in any way ... his acting skills deteriorated from the LOTR ... Ian Mckellen otoh is a dead on Gandalf and even when I read the book that's how I envisioned him to be 

 

So to conclude some stuff gets better some stuff stays the same but its all just there ... there's no spark about it like there was during the good old days of middle earth adventures 

 

That's all 

 

I'm a fan of the LOTR trilogy don't bring that troll shit to me btw 

[Crusader]

Tele I don't get how this is amped up so much from the AUJ ? From the first half yeah sure but a movie about a guy a reading a phone book would've been much more exciting than that 

 

Aside from those two action sequences you just mentioned there's just the one with the spiders and when the elves come in ... Laketown stuff from the end I count in one big finale action ( which is not me trying to start a technical argument or anything just my observation ) Its not like in Two Towers when you had the Helm's Deep battle and back and forth with Ent battle and the one at Osgialiath ... but see that climax lasted for like an hour or so ... here there's maybe 40-45 minutes of total action in the movie ( and I'm being generous I think ) 

 

Action is not my biggest complaint I'm not some teen who's only entertained with fights and chases I'm just saying there isn't as much action in it as people make it out be 

[Dementeleus]

Tele I don't get how this is amped up so much from the AUJ ? From the first half yeah sure but a movie about a guy a reading a phone book would've been much more exciting than that 

 

Aside from those two action sequences you just mentioned there's just the one with the spiders and when the elves come in ... Laketown stuff from the end I count in one big finale action ( which is not me trying to start a technical argument or anything just my observation ) Its not like in Two Towers when you had the Helm's Deep battle and back and forth with Ent battle and the one at Osgialiath ... but see that climax lasted for like an hour or so ... here there's maybe 40-45 minutes of total action in the movie ( and I'm being generous I think ) 

 

Action is not my biggest complaint I'm not some teen who's only entertained with fights and chases I'm just saying there isn't as much action in it as people make it out be 

 

I'm not talking action so much as pacing. Most of AUJ moves in fits and starts (especially in the first half). This whole movie is paced more like the last 45 minutes of AUJ (which, IMO, is a good thing).

 

btw, I think the original two-movie plan was to break the story around when they're captured by the Elves.

[tilko]

A+ ! Fantastic movie, but 30min too short for me !

[Crusader]

I'm not talking action so much as pacing. Most of AUJ moves in fits and starts (especially in the first half). This whole movie is paced more like the last 45 minutes of AUJ (which, IMO, is a good thing).

 

btw, I think the original two-movie plan was to break the story around when they're captured by the Elves.

 

Hmm I think while the pacing is in the style of AUJ's second half its still not quite right but the narrative or storytelling whatever you want to call it IS better there's a sense of the distance they are covering and the time that has passed. In AUJ when it ended I felt like they went on the road yesterday morning you know ? 

 

I'm just differentiating the two ( pacing and narrative ) in order for you to understand what I mean ... do you ? 

 

as for the originally planned cut off ... what ??? 

 

So the first movie would've been like 2 hours and the second 3 or something like that ? I mean they do have a journey back bit to cover too 

 

Either PJ is going to get a grip on himself in the final movie and tell it how its supposed to be told or we'll have a 4 hour final movie with his storytelling habbits 

 

As for this being a better thing ... yeah its all fine and well and then whaaaa ??? 'what have we done' ? seriously ??? that ending was a slap in the face of all filmmakers that have a hard time as it is to get a movie made let alone something on this scale which 99.9 % of directors out there dream off and then end it in a way that sorta insults your profession 

[Dementeleus]

Hmm I think while the pacing is in the style of AUJ's second half its still not quite right but the narrative or storytelling whatever you want to call it IS better there's a sense of the distance they are covering and the time that has passed. In AUJ when it ended I felt like they went on the road yesterday morning you know ? 

 

I'm just differentiating the two ( pacing and narrative ) in order for you to understand what I mean ... do you ? 

 

as for the originally planned cut off ... what ??? 

 

So the first movie would've been like 2 hours and the second 3 or something like that ? I mean they do have a journey back bit to cover too 

 

Either PJ is going to get a grip on himself in the final movie and tell it how its supposed to be told or we'll have a 4 hour final movie with his storytelling habbits 

 

As for this being a better thing ... yeah its all fine and well and then whaaaa ??? 'what have we done' ? seriously ??? that ending was a slap in the face of all filmmakers that have a hard time as it is to get a movie made let alone something on this scale which 99.9 % of directors out there dream off and then end it in a way that sorta insults your profession 

 

I'm curious (because usually I'm the one bothered by cliffhangers, and I wasn't here), how do you feel about other cliffhanger movies? Because DOS is certainly not the first, and won't be the last. This one didn't phase me as much because {a} it's fun and {b} the whole movie is a series of roller-coaster rides, so why not stop at the top? It felt appropriate within the context of the film, and so I wasn't bothered as much as I was for MATRIX RELOADED, DEATHLY HALLOWS 1, or CATCHING FIRE (to name but three). BACK TO THE FUTURE 2 is another, very much in the same lines as SMAUG -- it's a classic serial cliffhanger.

 

It's sort of pointless to predict what exactly will happen (and won't) in part three, since PJ has already shown a willingness to completely change things up as he warrants, but I'll bet the trip back won't take long at all. The bulk of THERE AND BACK AGAIN will deal with Dol Guldor, Smaug, Thorin's rise and fall, and the Battle of Five Armies. That doesn't seem like too much.

[Crusader]

I'm curious (because usually I'm the one bothered by cliffhangers, and I wasn't here), how do you feel about other cliffhanger movies? Because DOS is certainly not the first, and won't be the last. This one didn't phase me as much because {a} it's fun and {b} the whole movie is a series of roller-coaster rides, so why not stop at the top? It felt appropriate within the context of the film, and so I wasn't bothered as much as I was for MATRIX RELOADED, DEATHLY HALLOWS 1, or CATCHING FIRE (to name but three). BACK TO THE FUTURE 2 is another, very much in the same lines as SMAUG -- it's a classic serial cliffhanger.

 

It's sort of pointless to predict what exactly will happen (and won't) in part three, since PJ has already shown a willingness to completely change things up as he warrants, but I'll bet the trip back won't take long at all. The bulk of THERE AND BACK AGAIN will deal with Dol Guldor, Smaug, Thorin's rise and fall, and the Battle of Five Armies. That doesn't seem like too much.

 

Like I said I don't know where you got the rollercoaster from ... I mean sure I concede that when the action happens its sorta exciting but it wasn't happening enough for me to classify this as a thrillride to and fro ... for a movie to just be considered a theme park ride or whatever you want to call it is a film where I don't think about stuff like how Jackson totally gave himself too much freedom in adapting or to question anything other than how high the scale of fun-o-meter is. An example of a movie like this ( that I think we can ALL agree on ) is MI4 ... even though I didn't like it as much as the rest of the folks did ( and it did offend me with comments about my country a few times ) I took it as nothing more than a series of action pieces string together with insanely thin plot. As such it worked. This tries to be more and despite you observation that Jackson abandoned the ambition of LOTR-style filmmaking here I thought it was quite present 

 

As for your question about other cliffhanger endings I haven't seen CF but for Potter despite the 'final battle is upon us' sense of dredd that final battle wasn't gonna begin in the next 5 minutes wasn't it ? Same for Reloaded ... and even though Reloaded ended with a HEAVY cliffhanger it also answered some VERY important questions about the Matrix and the scene with the acrhitect gave the sequels little purpose where otherwise they would have none whatsoever 

 

This was a cheap television cliffhanger ... more suited for an episode of 24 than this 

Edited December 13, 2013 by Crusader

[4815162342]

I'm not talking action so much as pacing. Most of AUJ moves in fits and starts (especially in the first half). This whole movie is paced more like the last 45 minutes of AUJ (which, IMO, is a good thing).

 

btw, I think the original two-movie plan was to break the story around when they're captured by the Elves.

 

It was either when they were captured by the Elves or when Bilbo breaks them out, with Barrels out of Bond being the roaring opener for Film 2.

[Dementeleus]

Like I said I don't know where you got the rollercoaster from ... I mean sure I concede that when the action happens its sorta exciting but it wasn't happening enough for me to classify this as a thrillride to and fro ... for a movie to just be considered a theme park ride or whatever you want to call it is a film where I don't think about stuff like how Jackson totally gave himself too much freedom in adapting or to question anything other than how high the scale of fun-o-meter is.

 

Personally, I compare this (in terms of pacing and being "a ride of a movie") to something like TEMPLE OF DOOM (though it isn't as good as TOD). The plot is designed to string sequences together, and those sequences are designed to have arcs and mini-sequences within them. It's not like TEMPLE moves at a breakneck pace throughout, it's that the story is essentially an excuse for some grandly-conceived set-pieces. I think the SMAUG set-pieces -- in terms of inventiveness and maximizing danger in every dimension -- are wildly inventive, completely absurd (in a good way), and show real style.... in the same way that TEMPLE OF DOOM did.

 

This was a cheap television cliffhanger ... more suited for an episode of 24 than this 

 

So I take it you wanted to see Smaug finished off here? Sure, that could've worked too (had other sections of the story been re-worked), but I think PJ wanted to give non-book readers a solid reason to return for the third movie... after all, if Smaug's dead, what's left?

 

RELOADED left us with the Architect's questions, yes, but remember, that's not where it ended. It went on for another 10 minutes or so, and left us in a rather sudden and abrupt way that (IMO) was less satisfying than ending on, say, Neo walking out of the door of the Architect's room.

 

I thought this ending was cheeky. I laughed. It's fun when a filmmaker plays with audience expectations.

[Crusader]

Hmm I think we are gonna have to do the usual agree to disagree here because while the river chase was nice and with a lot of detail it was 1) way OTT 2 ) been there done that stuff ... the romance stuff felt very forced also 

 

Unless Jackson does another opening with a scene from the past like he did here Smaug is dead around the 10-12 minute mark ( that is if I remember correctly ... feel free to tell me otherwise its been a while since I've read the book ) and then five armies stuff will take the center stage 

 

Look, you see it as a means to get non-readers to come back for the third movie but I see it as a cheap way of depriving people from any sort of payoff prior to the final movie 

 

Sure then you can market the shit out of the final movie and show the dragon again and a big ass battle and all sorts of things but at what cost ? damaging the entire project with a purposeless 2 films ( mind you I'm not saying that only one film was supposed to be made out of the book ... but 2 would've been just fine ) 

 

TTT and ROTK both had big battles and the centre of them and Jackson pulled both off without a sense of repetition and people came back ... surely he could have marketed the third movie with the battle of five armies ... but he didn't and I believe its because he knows that people ain't quite satisfied with Hobbit and its more of a financial than a creative decision 

[4815162342]

I imagine we'll get an very exhilarating Dragon attack on Laketown from multiple perspectives since (based on what I have read about the deviations) there are now 4 quality archers in the town, not just Bard.

 

I imagine there will be three big set pieces. First, Smaug attacking Laketown. Then, around the middle of the film or just before, the White Council assaults Dol Guldur and all become aware of Sauron's return. This gives Gandalf time to get to Erebor for the final act as the three-way tensions between Thorin/Dain, Thranduil, and Bard get to the breaking point and for some key prep for the Battle of the Five Armies.

 

The only problem is that between the Smaug attack and the events surrounding Gandalf arriving at Erebor Jackson will have to invent a fair amount of filler to deal with all the politics and tensions to keep audiences from missing Bilbo, Thorin, etc.

[Dementeleus]

Unless Jackson does another opening with a scene from the past like he did here Smaug is dead around the 10-12 minute mark ( that is if I remember correctly ... feel free to tell me otherwise its been a while since I've read the book ) and then five armies stuff will take the center stage

 

I very very much doubt PJ is gonna throw us immediately into Smaug's attack on Water Town. He might start with Dain, for all I know. Or

pick up Gandalf's rescue from Dol Guldor

. Or something entirely different.

 

If there's anything I take away from this movie, it's that all bets are off.