The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug. New trailer.

[alkemyst]

I saw this on Saturday. It was ok, it was cartooney, not sure how much I like it. I'll still watch the third because I like the books and stories by Tolkien.

One complaint was how outrageous the fight scenes were. Legolas and Tauriel are killing machines that don't break a sweat, and don't have a spec of Orc blood on them. In fact, I don't remember seeing anything realistic in the fight scenes with the Wood Elves.

The only blood was when Kili got hit with a "morgul arrow", which again...isn't part of the book.

So magic and Dragons get a pass on realism for you?

 

[ch33zw1z]

So magic and Dragons get a pass on realism for you?

Nothing of value to add? the usual, as expected from the forum jester.

 

[dainthomas]

Orcs don't bleed? Elves don't sweat? I know what you're saying, but the fight scene felt like the creators spent more time on how cool they make the elf cartoons move, instead of adding the aspect of realism that some may look for.

The Hobbit is supposed to be more of a kids' story. I don't think you're going to see a Helms Deep level level of blood even when we get to the battle of the five armies.

Of course the whole movie doesn't get a pass from me. I thought the final scene in Erebor was pretty much superfluous nonsense with no discernable purpose that I could fathom.

 

[ch33zw1z]

The Hobbit is supposed to be more of a kids' story. I don't think you're going to see a Helms Deep level level of blood even when we get to the battle of the five armies.

Of course the whole movie doesn't get a pass from me. I thought the final scene in Erebor was pretty much superfluous nonsense with no discernable purpose that I could fathom.

Yea, but when the people running this movie start to take creative liberties and adding story plots, then I start to nit-pick. They changed it from a kids book into a movie that was geared towards older kids and adults.

When the movie got over, we looked at each other and said: "How did you like the movie about a hobbit", "there was a hobbit in the movie?"

They're not sticking to the story line from the book, changing parts to fit their....I don't even know.

At least with LOTR, there was just some parts left out. I didn't recall any additions to the story line.

 

[bearxor]

It's my understanding that most of the "extra story" comes from the appendices of RotK.

 

[smackababy]

The Hobbit is supposed to be more of a kids' story. I don't think you're going to see a Helms Deep level level of blood even when we get to the battle of the five armies.

Of course the whole movie doesn't get a pass from me. I thought the final scene in Erebor was pretty much superfluous nonsense with no discernable purpose that I could fathom.

I always thought the charm of the Hobbit was that it was being "retold" from the perspective of Bilbo. Granted, I have a very fond spot in my heart for this book, as it was the first book I remember, as my father read it with me as a child.

I thought this second movie was okay. I wasn't fond of pretty much anything they added, but it didn't detract much from the actual story, so I was okay with it. I feel like a lot of parts were kind of glossed over (especially the humorous Beorn part from the book) and I remember the dwarves doing a lot more singing!

 

[HumblePie]

You know, I watched the movie and really like it. Yes they are adding more into the movie than was in the original book. Something that is pretty much unheard of. But you know what, they are doing that to actually fill in plot holes to some degree from the book. There was only a few liberties they took I thought was a bit strange. Like redoing Bard almost completely from the book. Time for spoilers

Spoiler

So bard in the books was the captain of the guard in laketown. He is a decendant of human ings of the north. Not some smuggler like in the movie. I don't know why they changed this for the movie as it seems very strange and seems like it might actually cause a potential problem in the future. Because in the book, Bard actually kills Smaug when the thrush that Bilbo sends to him to tell him of the missing scale on Smaug's belly. Bard is in a position of power in the town to negotiate with Thorin for money for the town when Thorin goes all greed master in the book after Smaug dies. Which is why Thorin basically tries to start a war over keeping the treasure they just got back from the Dragon without sharing it despite promises earlier in the book to do so.

I do like the extra bits they threw in with Gandalf to fill in the return of Sauron. That whole bit of scenery at Dul Guldor (sp?). This was not in the book at all as all the references to Sauron was not even really in the Hobbit. Mainly because Tolkien hadn't even realy thought about writing the Lord of the Rings trilogy and was actually cajoled into writing the sequels later. Still, I really liked that bit as it was a nice tie in with the later movies and explains part of the hole of Gandalf leaving the party in the book a bit more. Of course in the later revisions of the Hobbit a bit more of the approaching greater evil was added, but still not a direct reference to Sauron nor the ring Wights.

The interaction between Bilbo and Smaug in the movie was quite a bit different than that of the book. However, I LIKED the difference. This is because the book goes into a bit more detailed explanation of the powers of the one ring, of basically being able to dampen ALL forms of detection for the wearer. So Bilbo while wearing the ring can't be seen, smelled, or heard unless he wants to be. Of course the ring doesn't stop the emanation of evil that it exudes. So beings like Smaug can detect that. In the book, Smaug doesn't even really notice that Bilbo was there until Bilbo takes a gold cup. Smaug notices the missing gold cup despite the vast treasure, which shows how great his mind is at cataloguing the treaure. Anyhow, the by play between Bilbo and Smaug was done entirely with Bilbo being invisible. Since the movie doesn't want to do a hard narration of why Smaug can't detect Bilbo but still vaguely senses him nearby, they just have Smaug not really attack due to his own sense of Ego and not worried about something so small as Bilbo. It plays into the character of Smaug very nicely from the book. So I liked that adaptation. Of course the fight between the dwarves and Smaug doesn't happen in the book. Oh well a little action for a bit of a dull moment I suppose that didn't actually change the basics of the story.

As I said previously, I do like the inclusion of Azog the White Orc into the story in the movie. He was not in the book, but he adds a bit of face for the audience to dislike. He becomes something for the audience to identify with instead of a bunch of nameless orcs that were after the band for no real reason in the original book. Again a plot hole from the book that I feel the movie made up for nicely. It also gives a slightly better reason why the Orcs with the Wargs show up to fight at the end of the book in the Battle of the Five armies (humans, elves, dwarves, orcs, and wargs). The orcs follow Azog, and Azog follows Sauron. Sauron doesn't want to see the dwarven kingdom rebuilt to help fight against him later when he gets enough power to enter the material realm again.

Again overall, most of the points of the movie stayed very true to the book. There were obvious differences. Most of which I liked. Some of which I didn't, such as changing who Bard is fundamentally.

 

[smackababy]

ow what, they are doing that to actually fill in plot holes to some degree from the book. There was only a few liberties they took I thought was a bit strange. Like redoing Bard almost completely from the book.

Spoiler

This is my take on why they had to change Bard. The character in the book just wasn't major. He wasn't heroic and just kind of came out of nowhere and slayed the dragon. There was no, from what I recall, foreshadowing he was going to be a hero and even then, it just kind of happened. In the movie, they built up a character that is for the people. There is a tyrant lord over Laketown and Bard has a troubled ancestry he will fix after he kills Smaug. He can then lead the people, as they will rally behind this new hero and try and trade with Thorin.

I did like the interactions with Smaug and Bilbo, because in the book Smaug doesn't really do much. He just sits and talks and then leaves and dies. Pretty lame for a dragon, especially in a epic tale. I also agree the Azog addition was good for a movie. I disagree with Beorn and them cutting what could have been a funny moment (the retelling of their journey, each time adding an extra two dwarfs to the party). It would have been a bit long, but I feel it would have added to the movie.

 

[meltdown75]

Pumped to see this bad boy.

 

[Via]

Going to catch it on HBO in a few months.

 

[kranky]

After much gentle nagging I took my wife to see this movie the other day. I have never read the books. This movie was just too l-o-n-g and it dragged. I don't mind a long movie if it is moving the plot along, but the fight scenes needed to be trimmed drastically.