Personally, I didn't enjoy Tauriel at all.
! Her love triangle betwen Kili and Legolas wasn't interesting and I found myself groaning a lot.
But what I found weird is that the movie removed stuff as well as added things. I missed the Gandalf moment in Beon's house, where he slowly introduced the dwarves two-by-two. It might have been difficult to pull off in a movie, but it showed Gandalf's wise thinking rather than emphasizing his strength in the castle scenes.
Not sure how anyone could find it weird that there would be stuff both added and removed, been happening since FOTR.
I'm willing to be there will be lots of Beorn material in the extended edition.
After waiting for this movie to come out, we just went and saw it and honestly…was a let down.
! The master of the lake part was a let down. Rest was okay.
! The movie wasn't bad but if there was film in this trilogy that drives home the lack of need for it to be a trilogy at all…It's this one.
! Not even in a purist way, because you've got to accept things are going to be missed/added in a big screen adaptation. But man. The stuff with Tauriel (Even though it was nice to see Evangeline Lily again post-Lost) was just so...unnecessary.
! I can understand the addition and major expansion of Legolas' role but that love triangle story line just had me cringing.
! I also missed the introducing the dwarves 2 by 2 part. I was sure they'd get pretty much their whole quota of comedy for the movie from that.
! The one expansion I really didn't have a problem with was Smaug's extended dialogue, I could listen to Cumberbatch's soothing aristocratic tones till the end of time.
! Overall though, this could have been 2 really packed, fairly faithful movies that still got in adapted ideas like Smaug's dialogue and Gandalf's invasion of Dol Guldur. Instead large portions of each movie so far have felt flat, and unless they manage to seriously expand Smaug's attack on Dale and The Battle of Five Armies, the third with most likely suffer in a similar manner.
! That being said, I'll go and see the third movie simply for those two incidents lol.
just watched it and no complain. a great fanfiction from Peter Jackson which make watching the movie and reading its book has different value.
imho, it won't be interesting for the reader if the movie nakedly translated from the book's content. the element of surprise and dramatization wins me.
much better than the first installment, which made me disappointed to chose An Unexpected Journey over One Piece Z. it cost 1500 Yen more expensive too than OP Z :(
This movie's ending also a guarantee for the third installment's success. good strategy, Peter Jackson-san! XD
I don't know who's in charge of marketing, but I hate them for those Legolas posters on every 3rd bus stop I walk past.
Advertising an extra actor just just because his face will bring more people to the cinemas. No dignity at all.
I don't know who's in charge of marketing, but I hate them for those Legolas posters on every 3rd bus stop I walk past.
Advertising an extra actor just just because his face will bring more people to the cinemas. No dignity at all.
Since dignity and Hollywood goes so well together^^
Just saw it, really enjoyed it. Especially that the dwarves got to do things instead of being totally useless lumps that Bilbo kept saving…. and that Bard isn't just the random guy that shows up at the last minute.
But ugh, that cliffhanger. I thought they'd resolve a little more than that before the end. My worry is that they won't be able to build that momentum back up after a whole year.
Eh. The films are going to spend 99.9% of their history all released, so after the final film is out it won't ever be an issue on your dvd sets… same for the previous trilogy. Most of the times you see it, it will be one after the other, on dvd or tnt.
As for the complaints about the cliffhanger... well, I knew it was going to be there going in, but it didn't bother me. Everyone is assuming that, going by the book, the resolution to the main plot would only take another 5 minutes.... but if the next film emphasizes lake town some more and give Smaug some more moments and whatnot, (Plus the necessary several minutes wind-down from defeating him) I could easily see it taking another half hour or so. Plus, it'll give a big action beat for the start of the film.
Personally, I didn't enjoy Tauriel at all.
I missed the Gandalf moment in Beon's house, where he slowly introduced the dwarves two-by-two. It might have been difficult to pull off in a movie, but it showed Gandalf's wise thinking rather than emphasizing his strength in the castle scenes.
I imagine that might be in the extended edition. Its a cute little bit, but introducing all 13 of them again would slow the start of the film down by like 10 minutes… to repeat what the first film already explicitly did at length. I mean, it really would be exactly the same gag.
This one there were quite a few spots where I can see the cuts made and imagine will be extended... in a year.
Probably going to get more Gandalf and Radagast as well, I'd assume. (Unless this is the part where McCoy ran off to film the Five(ish) Doctors...)
I don't know who's in charge of marketing, but I hate them for those Legolas posters on every 3rd bus stop I walk past..
Yes, how dare they try to make the movies be successful.
Watched it. Liked it. Didn't love it.
Smaug was amazing. The animation, the voice acting. The character is pretty simple on paper but the dialogue elevated him into a very interesting and engaging character. It kinda lost me near the end. The final action sequence was way too dragged out and made Smaug look like an idiot that kept fumbling around. I liked the face-off at the end though and I actually liked the cliffhanger and thought it was a pretty perfect ending. The love triangle was total bullshit. Forced, cheesy, badly written (there was a scene where the dwarf guy saw elf chick with a halo like she was an angel, ugh). It's something where I completely don't care about two characters. The actress who played Elf chick apparently only took the role because shew as promised she wouldn't be put into a love triangle…and then the studio went behind her back and put her in one anyway. Fucking Hollywood and their love triangles.
Other than that, decent to good movie.
@Thousand:
The actress who played Elf chick apparently only took the role because shew as promised she wouldn't be put into a love triangle…and then the studio went behind her back and put her in one anyway. Fucking Hollywood and their love triangles.
Guys never take a Hollywood job
because they will lie to you and turn you into one of their robot slaves.
Was I the only person who didn't see that as a love triangle? Tauriel doesn't really seem all that into Legolas.
Her role as a character was defined by the affections of her male peers (plus Thranduil pretty much said Tauriel had a thing for Legolas and there was no reason he would lie or be mistaken in that scene). It was a love triangle.
They set her up as a badass orc massacrer and all she boiled down to was as a healer and a love interest. It's nice to see how far Hollywood has progressed in 2013!
To say a good thing, I really loved Thranduil. His over the top performance made for some cheesy fun.
^ Pretty sure it was the other way around and Thranduil stating that Legolas had a thing for her while she was dodging around to not offend him.
She looked pretty relieved when that line about her not being of high enough status worked.
Liked the movie it was hugely entertaining.
Minor issues for me were Gandalf showing us more apparent magic. I liked how low key magic was in LotR.
I wonder how they'll tie it up that Gandalf recognized Sauron.
Wasn't there are scene in LotR where he was researching if Sauron really came back(when he went to Gondor).
Also that huge barrel scene…
@Thousand:
Her role as a character was defined by the affections of her male peers (plus Thranduil pretty much said Tauriel had a thing for Legolas and there was no reason he would lie or be mistaken in that scene). It was a love triangle.
They set her up as a badass orc massacrer and all she boiled down to was as a healer and a love interest. It's nice to see how far Hollywood has progressed in 2013!
Aside from the parts where she badassedly slaughtered orcs better than anyone else in the film?
And it wasn't much of a love triangle. She was trying to turn Legolas down even when we first met her. Hopefully the expanded edition, and the third film, gives some more actual meat to all of that. Regardless, i appreciate them distinguishing the dwarves a bit, trying to give soem of them something to do, making them competent, since they're basically completely indistinguishable shmucks that just keep getting hopelessly caught in the book and cartoon version.
Minor issues for me were Gandalf showing us more apparent magic. I liked how low key magic was in LotR.
He only did that when he wasn't seen by anyone else and when he was plainly right in front of some serious badness.
I wonder how they'll tie it up that Gandalf recognized Sauron.
Wasn't there are scene in LotR where he was researching if Sauron really came back(when he went to Gondor).
There was. In the books he spent 17 years doing that research and hunting Gollum down. In the film version it was… a little more vauge about the time.
The explanation in both cases is
! they defeat the Necromancer in this outing, and assume him beaten. Though Gandalf has his suspicions, he doesn't know THE one ring is still around, and thus has no idea Sauron will come back into power a THIRD time… 70 years later.
! If Bilbo hold told him up front about the ring they might have saved some headaches in that 70 year stretch.
@RobbyBevard:
I imagine that might be in the extended edition. Its a cute little bit, but introducing all 13 of them again would slow the start of the film down by like 10 minutes… to repeat what the first film already explicitly did at length. I mean, it really would be exactly the same gag.
This one there were quite a few spots where I can see the cuts made and imagine will be extended... in a year.
Probably going to get more Gandalf and Radagast as well, I'd assume. (Unless this is the part where McCoy ran off to film the Five(ish) Doctors...)
A gag? Well, I didn't really see it as a gag to me. It was more of a Gandalf moment for me. As a wizard of many years, he was very wise, and could handle situations like these. The other castles scenes did give him a lot of focus, but made him more of a "badass" type of character, rather than wise.
But it is nitpicking.
@RobbyBevard:
He only did that when he wasn't seen by anyone else and when he was plainly right in front of some serious badness.
There was. In the books he spent 17 years doing that research and hunting Gollum down. In the film version it was… a little more vauge about the time.
The explanation in both cases is
! they defeat the Necromancer in this outing, and assume him beaten. Though Gandalf has his suspicions, he doesn't know THE one ring is still around, and thus has no idea Sauron will come back into power a THIRD time… 70 years later.
! If Bilbo hold told him up front about the ring they might have saved some headaches in that 70 year stretch.
It's not so much that it was shown to us but I didn't quite like how visually imposing they were compared to what we got in LotR.
But then when we count in some of the special extended scene like Saruman's fireball or Gandalf vs the Witchking it probably wasn't that much more.
I still kind of remember that one interview Jackson gave about how he didn't want magic to be shooting lightning and where he talked about his vision for it, I did like that.
As for Gandalf just thinking they defeated the necromancer I guess that works.
This question just popped into my mind.
! Why does the ring provide enormous power to Sauron but only invisibility to the Hobbits?
IIRC that was sort of explained in LOTR in the book. Putting on the ring causes mortals to shift into the spirit world. But Sauron was a fallen spirit that originated from that world. Gandalf, also being Maiar would probably not have become invisible, Tom Bombadil in FOTR wore the ring without becoming invisible.
The more you know.
Did the movie cover anything about the Hobbits on the eagle's place? I think Movie 2 started when they already left the place.
The only thing I did not like about the first movie was that scene when Mountaing giants came to life, But I really liked the movie, and even rewatched it several times. After 2nd part I left cinema in such a crappy mood. I am a huge Tolkien fan and I try to watch movie adaptations with an open mind. but the 2nd part felt totally unnecessary. Just want to know - does anybody feels the same way? : ( I mean it definatly felt like a bad movie overall. A lot of cheesy moments like love story stuff,
! gnomes getting caught several times.(two exact same scenes one after another, really?) 2d dimensional filler villians in that human town. There were so many little things that irritated me while I was watching it… But Smaug was worth watching it after all, dragon was amazing all the way throught.
Think happy thoughts
]nomes getting caught several times.(two exact same scenes one after another, really?
The DWARVES getting caught two times in a row was in the book. In fact, in the book they were completely helpless and caught and trapped in basically every single encounter and Bilbo kept dragging them out. The trolls, the goblins, the spiders, the wood-elves, a river of amnesia…. (and they never even saw Gollum or Smaug really) in every single situation all 13 of them were incapacitated and useless like complete bunglers leaving it up to Bilbo to save them. (except the times Gandalf saved them.)
The movies actually fixed that a little by making them more active party members capable of saving themselves at least a little... or helping Bilbo at the very least. That's one area that was a definite improvement over the source.
2d dimensional filler villians in that human town.
Lake town was expanded on quite a bit, but was also definitely in the book. Its for the better now, Bard is an actual character, instead of random guy who shows up to kill Smaug.
that scene when Mountaing giants came to life
Also in the book, though glossed over and short, only a sentence or two, not an action set piece.
I mean it definatly felt like a bad movie overall. A lot of cheesy moments like love story stuff,
It's all fine. A little cheesy, sure, but fine. Three movies instead of two is without question pushing it, (huge chunks of material could have just been on the extended edition dvds) but it'll be cool when you have the 9 hour epic on your shelf in years to come. Its hard to judge until we see what exactly they do to fill out the third film, since thi is very, very much the middle film, without a real beginning or ed of its own..
Calling dwarves gnomes.. my bad : D And I totally forgot about the giants being in the book -_-. The movie felt very awkward and slow paced to me. It had great moments like that barrel-ride fight,in the middle of the movie I started to look at the clock on my phone in anticipation of the ending. thank god, it had Smaug at the end.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed for the 3rd part of the trilogy. The end of the Smaug, the battle of five armies… Also the way they keep tying hobbit with LOTR in this movie makes me think that 3rd film will end with the capturing of Gollum, and him being dragged in the sauron's tower
I didn't enjoy it, but I didn't enjoy the first film either.
Why go see part 2 if you didn't enjoy part 1? It's all made by the same people and filmed at the same time, not like anything is going to change.
Because … dragon! Big cinema theater surround sound cumberbatch experience dragon!
This question just popped into my mind.
! Why does the ring provide enormous power to Sauron but only invisibility to the Hobbits?
The Ring amplifies characteristics/abilities that you already have for one thing; Hobbits are naturally stealthy (there's a reference early on about how they can hide so quickly and well that they seem to vanish if a human comes along) and become invisible. Sam had a vision of using The Ring to create a massive garden; part of that was probably The Ring playing with him but he probably could have used it that way.
Plus a lot of the power was Sauron's anyway so it's no surprise that he could get more out of it than others; the Wizards probably would have come the closest to getting the most out of it since they were Maiar like Sauron.
That was kind of fun. Felt like it was dragging a lot less than the first film, though some parts still felt as though we were watching the extended edition already. It's less of a wacky dwarven travelogue and more of an actual story. Also, much as I dislike Cumberbatch immensely, Smaug is so compelling. You can believe he's the threat he's been built up to be.
Reaver The Master of Lake Town made the audience in my cinema laugh, but that's probably because of the effect Stephen Fry seems to have on your average Brit.
Tauriel feels superfluous, which is sad given she's just about the only female character of any significance in sight. At least she seems to share Legolas' outrageously good fighting skills. Now she just needs some personality traits not based on her relationship with one of the men.
Spoony Bard, on the other hand, is expanded well enough that you'd not even realise he's barely even in there in the books except to fill Important Plot Point. I presume there are already plenty of references to how Bard got barred?
Mirkwood felt a lot smaller than I remember it feeling, but I suppose watching thirty minutes of dwarves in the woods would have been quite tedious. I presume most people aren't thinking of the maps as much as I do in any case.
The reveal of The Necromancer was superb in its execution. All the settings are lush and inspiring like concept art, and the groundwork for the climax(es) has been properly laid.
All in all, I agree with my friend's review when she said she broadly enjoyed Peter Jackson's cinematic Hobbit-based fanfiction.
moooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooon
The maps were the best part of the books.
All fiction is fanfiction now that the "fans" (read: nerds) have grown up to become creators.
I liked the part where Printerir appeared at the last moment and saved everyone and everyone loved her.
And by "grown up" I meant that they've aged physically, not that they've actually grown up.
I enjoyed the movie more than the first. I kept falling alseep during part 1 lol. But part 2 had some great stuff. And the only part that I really disliked was Tauriel.
! What's with women in these books having motivation revolving around dudes they could potentially bone? The triangle was so weird…She knew that dwarf for 10 minutes...Cause he's taller? Ugh. lol. But her fighting was pretty boss. And berzerker Legolas was amusing and actiony. He seemed to have calmed down over the years between the Hobbit and LOTR.. I feel a little bad for Orlando…He's clearly getting older and playing an immortal-ish race is risky, his face was much more square. I sort thought at first he got double roles as Legolas and the Bard. That guy really looked like Will Turner to me lol.
Smaug was amazing.
I enjoyed the movie more than the first. I kept falling alseep during part 1 lol. But part 2 had some great stuff. And the only part that I really disliked was Tauriel.
! What's with women in these books having motivation revolving around dudes they could potentially bone? The triangle was so weird…She knew that dwarf for 10 minutes...Cause he's taller? Ugh. lol.
You mean in "these movies". Tauriel was not in the book, she was invented by Peter Jackson for the movie.
! But to answer your question, it's more complex than "he's taller". She saw something special in him when she had a conversation with him in the prison cell. Because of their centuries of feuding, elves and dwarves have unfair prejudice against each other, much like people in our real world do. Tauriel and Kili are two younger individuals that were not so jaded by their people's stubborn hate for each other. It's a bit of a Romeo and Juliette motif, I guess.
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible. - Frank Zappa
You mean in "these movies". Tauriel was not in the book, she was invented by Peter Jackson for the movie.
! But to answer your question, it's more complex than "he's taller". She saw something special in him when she had a conversation with him in the prison cell. Because of their centuries of feuding, elves and dwarves have unfair prejudice against each other, much like people in our real world do. Tauriel and Kili are two younger individuals that were not so jaded by their people's stubborn hate for each other. It's a bit of a Romeo and Juliette motif, I guess.
My bad. Yes these movies.
! I know that there was supposedly a bit more. But it was too quick and for me felt really forced just to have that side plot going on. It's not something they had time to really develop in what would feel natural. And I'm someone that always found the Romeo and Juliette scenario to be overly silly. They just met! Anyways that was my only real gripe with the movie.
! Romance mucking up my action adventure epical movies…:getlost:
Most of the Arwen/Aragorn stuff was fanfiction, too.
The Tauriel/Kili stuff may have been forced, but I like the message of dwarfs and elves getting over their prejudices. Especially since Kili is Thorin's son it just adds more dynamic to both Kili and Thorin. Maybe that might play a role in the 3rd film and I hope it does.
Well, maybe it's because I'm a lady, but I don't mind the romance stuff sprinkled in. ;)
I'm a lady too….:ninja:
Romance seems ridiculous to me when there's more important things going on.
Romance is often intertwined in many of the most important works of fiction, you may have to have a sit down with the human race about that.
I'm a guy and I love romance interspersed with action but the problem with this is that it felt awkward and didn't make much sense.
I can't help but chuckle when I think about their "future" together, what with her looking the same and him growing into a more traditional dwarf look.
There's a difference between romance and something vaguely romantic added on top of everything else. It's hardly a starcrossed lovers thing, sweet as it is. Also, what a surprise they picked the fanservice dwarf to involve in it XD
Though I suppose it does add to the relatively undeveloped dynamics from the books, where the dwarfs were basically just basically cut and pastes. And they wouldn't have that much time to spend on it with everything else that Jackson has added.
The true romance is between Bilbo and Thorin anyway >_>
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
And I'm someone that always found the Romeo and Juliette scenario to be overly silly. They just met!
That's kind of the point. It wasn't meant to be 'epic, eternal love'. It was meant to be one of those teenage experiences of first love where you believe all the stories because you're not yet jaded. Had Romeo & Juliet been given time and space, they'd have probably got over it in a couple of weeks and either settled down into a more realistic relationship or gone their separate ways. But because their families were so blinded by prejudice, they over-reacted and pushed the couple into going further and acting on those wild juvenile impulses.
moooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooon
@Print:
There's a difference between romance and something vaguely romantic added on top of everything else. It's hardly a starcrossed lovers thing, sweet as it is. Also, what a surprise they picked the fanservice dwarf to involve in it XD
Though I suppose it does add to the relatively undeveloped dynamics from the books, where the dwarfs were basically just basically cut and pastes. And they wouldn't have that much time to spend on it with everything else that Jackson has added.
Yeah, pretty much. If you have read the book, you know what is going to happen… I think he was just trying to get the audience to care as much about the dwarves as individuals in a short period of time that they have to do it.
The true romance is between Bilbo and Thorin anyway >_>
lol, first time that thought ever even occurred to me, great, now I'm going to start looking for romantic overtones.
! That spy hates Beorn by the way.
Complicating things since 2009.
I can't help but chuckle when I think about their "future" together, what with her looking the same and him growing into a more traditional dwarf look.
@Print:
Also, what a surprise they picked the fanservice dwarf to involve in it XD
At first, when I heard about this, I thought that it was going to be funny, considering that Legolas would have to compete with a… An actual dwarf-looking dwarf, like Gimli. But then I saw what Kili looked like in the film... Hollywood couldn't even allow a non-conventional romance to happen in a fantasy movie... It's like they made him look that way just for this plotline...
@Print:
That was kind of fun. Felt like it was dragging a lot less than the first film, though some parts still felt as though we were watching the extended edition already. It's less of a wacky dwarven travelogue and more of an actual story. Also, much as I dislike Cumberbatch immensely, Smaug is so compelling. You can believe he's the threat he's been built up to be.
Why don't you like him?
