{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by Twitchyloner:
1/8/2014 8:02:46 AM
29
Thoughts on the 'Desolation of Smaug'
[quote]I was slightly disappointed at the movie. It's more the start of the movie, I dislike the use of font, e.g '12 months later' or 'Just outside of bree' these small details i don't like, we can work it out for ourselves. It didn't like when the 'desolation of the smaug' logo showed, and that music played.. it made it fell like a king kong movie. That orc/bear scene needed to go for longer and needed to flesh out more, The movie gets good for me when they reach the little town. After that It's great. So in short, the start of the movie was to jumpy.[/quote]
Everyone else's thoughts?
The Pale Orc has been improved. The only error I had in the first part, was the Pale Orc, he looked horrible. However they have Improved him greatly.
English
#Offtopic
-
Edited by banj0: 1/8/2014 8:17:21 AMI didn't really get the point of spending 50 minutes on exposition for a completely different series - it pretty much confirmed that three long movies cannot be made out of a meagre 300 pages without adding in some serious padding; that's disappointing, considering the first Hobbit had the best of both Lord of the Rings and the original book.
-
The scene in the forge should have been scrapped completely, and the river scene was really just awful. Bilbo was the only thing that kept me awake during the movie, since his actor is just incredibly fun to watch. I thought Smaug was boring, and we needed more Beorn. I understand the Necromancer was useful to show where Gandalf disappeared to, but seeing as it has no bearing on the ultimate story of The Hobbit, it seems like obvious filler. All of the CGI budget seemed to be spent on Smaug, and even then there where moments where he looked really ugly. Don't even get me started on the molten gold though...it looked like the fill effect from old Powerpoint versions. Overall it was just a lot of stupid content with a few interesting characters (Bilbo, Thorin, and Gandalf).
-
1 ReplyI'm in the minority of people who absolutely loved the first Hobbit film, but I'm not entirely sure about how The Desolation of Smaug made me feel. I really need to see it again before I make my mind up completely. I loved the political and racial themes, particularly in regards to Tauriel's position as "a lowly Silvan elf" when juxtaposed with Thranduil's position of power as Sindar. This isn't something overtly obvious to people who aren't familiar with Tolkien's lore, but I for one really enjoyed this part of the film. From what I've seen, the people who don't like the whole Tauriel part of the story are those who didn't particularly understand the whole Sindar/Silvan hierarchy/racism thing. The Mirkwood Spiders and Smaug scenes were awesome, and Gandalf's encounter with Sauron was the absolute highlight of the film for me. That effect where Sauron emerges out of the flame as the Eye itself was [i]brilliant[/i]. My issues with the film primarily revolve around the pacing and how some story threads are left out to dry for too long before we go back to them - the Gandalf scenes at Dol Guldur are [i]way[/i] too spaced out, for instance. I enjoyed it, but I'm not sure it managed to stand up to the first one.
-
1 ReplyEdited by Xmark120: 1/9/2014 2:08:44 PMI hated the first half, up until they arrived at that port village. It was ¨okay¨ after that, IMO, but nowhere near the standard of the The Lord of the Rings trilogy. I would give it an 8/10.
-
Edited by Indominus: 1/9/2014 5:14:11 AMI liked it. I was a bit nervous about the spiders in Mirkwood but it ended up not that bad IMO
-
1 ReplyEdited by GKR: 1/8/2014 8:22:24 PM[i]Is that a Tolkien thread I see?[/i] I agree that the opening was rushed. It didn't bother me too much. A longer opening sequence and a shorter ending sequence would have helped the movie out a lot. It dragged on a bit too long at the end, which had a ridiculous scheme in my opinion. The addition of Legolas was a plus, but I would have preferred if he had less to do. Tauriel's edition didn't bother me much. I was skeptical about her romance with Kili, but the [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=iOkhdHDLwA8#t=85]gorgeous theme[/url] Howard Shore composed for their relationship saved it for me. But it might just be due to the fact that the song played over Tauriel's dialogue concerning how the stars are sacred to the Eldar, causing my inner lore-whore to squee with Silmarillion giddiness.[spoiler]The [url=http://static2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20131229043231/lotr/images/1/16/Sauron_in_DOS.gif]reveal of Sauron[/url] was magnificent. Having read the books I knew it was coming, and my heart was still pounding afterwards. However rumor has it that Sauron will appear in the Battle of Five Armies, but this might have been a mistake on Benedict Cumberbatch's part who called it the "Five Legions War" in an interview.[/spoiler]
-
Edited by DarkestSeptagon: 1/9/2014 4:18:53 AMThe pacing and cuts felt odd at times but overall it was a good movie.
-
1 ReplyMy favourite part was when the seasoned military commander who has lived for hundreds of years drops everything to follow a guy she has known for all of less than a day. Clearly the best way to write an empowered woman is to have her fall in love with a guy after a 5 minute conversation. Also Legolas is suddenly a bit of a douche for no discernible reason. The finale with Smaug made it worth watching, though. Just a shame we had to sit through an hours worth of filler before we actually got there.
-
1 ReplyWasn't entirely impressed. The pacing was awful, even worse than the first movie. The Legolas and Tauriel scenes were not necessary at all, and should have been cut down to flesh out Beorn more, since you know, he's actually in the book. The quality of the CGI seems to have degraded a bit when compared to An Unexpected Journey. I'm not sure if this was due to all the focus been put on Smaug, but either way, it looked really tacky, especially considering it was WETA. Everything just felt like one big video game. The river and forge scene spring to mind. The crazy physics and CGI don't help in the slightest. Overall it wasn't godawful, but there were definitely decisions that should have been made differently.
-
I think it was a great movie for anyone that hasn't read the book.
-
I thought it was great.
-
Loved it.
-
9/10 movie.
-
4 RepliesA) It's spelt "Orc" B) He's called Azod
-
Edited by Hallinskioi: 1/8/2014 4:42:18 PMI couldn't make up my mind on it. Needed more Beorn. The battle between the Dwarves and Smaug was to long winded in my opinion and was way to fantasy physics. The love triangle thing was pushing it a bit far as well but I can see why it was added. Nobody likes a cock fest. Oh and I expected the dragon to die in this one to set up for the BoFA in the next one. The rest was good though, better than the 1st I think.
-
Smaug had the sexiest voice. It Almost made me cream.
-
I enjoyed it for the most part but I don't know how I felt about some parts. Like the black arrow going on the dwarven ballista and not being an actual bow and arrow. Also the battle between Gandalf and Sauron was cool but it made Sauron seem like a punk because he couldn't take down Gandalf's shield whereas the Balrog just took it down in one hit in Fellowship. Also I felt there's too much cgi in the Hobbit and as a result it won't hold up as well as LOTR. Actually, in my own opinion, the cgi in the Hobbit seems a bit poorer.
-
Better than the first. Considering the book was so fast paced and covered a lot very fast (and Gandalf would up and disappear for no reason I recall) it's well done enough. And seeing as the movies have the privilege of knowingly setting up Lord of the Rings, which the book didn't, they can afford some deviance a for the sake of consistency. Also: Smaug was amazing.
-
Didn't like the gold CGI. It appeared to be lazily done, low resolution maps. Molten gold in real life looks like bad CGI, so when you have bad CGI of something that already looks like bad CGI, well then, you have a special kind of bad CGI. I also didn't like the GoPro footage used. It was quite jarring, going from cameras worth over fifty thousand dollars to awful fisheye overly sharp cheap consumer grade cameras. Apart from those two complaints, and the film's length, I quite enjoyed it. Even the added stuff, people seem to be forgetting that it's not just leading up to the LOTR films, but also the Battle of the Five Armies, giving a better reason for the goblin's presence at the battle.
-
10/10 in my opinion.
-
It just doesn't feel like an authentic LOTR film. I think it combined too much fantasy elements from other sources. But, taking it for what it is, it was still a solid film.
-
I enjoyed it. Day Smaug voice
-
Was too long. Three movies from such a small book is a bit of a stretch I think.
-
The scene where whatshisdick the orc was talking to whatshisdick the big black spooky cloud looked absolutely terrible between the cgi and the stupid camera work. Also, the cliffhanger pissed me off.
-
1 ReplyNeeded more Beorn.
-
I quite enjoyed it. 8/10.
