OT: The Hobbit Desolation of Smaug

Submitted by Jaqen H'ghar on December 13th, 2013 at 3:51 PM

I know there's a fair share of LOTR/Hobbit fans on the board. I'm sure a lot of you went and saw the movie last night or are going to see it tonight.

I saw it last night at midnight and it was great. Thoroughly entertaining throughout the entire movie, although it doesn't feel nearly as serious as Lord of the Rings (which is probably their intention). The action was non-stop and Smaug is definitely the best CGI Dragon we will see for a while (unless Thrones really steps up their game). 

Compared to the first one, it was much faster paced, even though it was longer. It never felt liek there was a lull in the action or there was just enough to give proper back story. I definitely think it is better than the first one, which I also really enjoyed. However, I'm a fan of anything that transports me back to a world that I love so I'm not exactly the harshest critic of these kinds of movies.

How many of have seen it? Thoughts? Still mad I have to wait another year for the end.



December 13th, 2013 at 4:21 PM ^

I may be going this weekend to see it. I'm waiting on my friend because I can't stand to go to the movies alone.

IMO, the Hobbit took a bit too much heat for what it was. Yeah, the White Orc guy didnt need to be CGI and could've been done with some makeup. Same for the Goblins. And yeah, it took an hour to get things going, which was probably not totally necessary.

But still, when all is said and done, we will look back at the Hobbit in the same way we look at Fellowship: a solid introduction to a fantastic sequel in a series that wins some awards in the end.

Although I did like The Fellowship more than The Hobbit 1.


December 13th, 2013 at 4:21 PM ^

unfortunately I don't have time to see it before then, but I am looking forward to seeing this one. I've loved the LOTR series and have enjoyed what they've done with The Hobbit so far. I'm glad to hear that you liked it OP.

Magnum P.I.

December 13th, 2013 at 4:26 PM ^

I'm a huge LOTR fan, but I made the decision to boycott the Hobbit films when they were broken up into a three-part series. Just shameless greed, but part of the new Hollywood model.


December 13th, 2013 at 4:41 PM ^

Not to question your stance, but have you also chosen to boycott Michigan athletic events?  Don't think this 'shameless greed' is solely found Hollywood.

I do agree with your agnst at the makers turning it into a trilogy, I just don't have your fortitude to not bend over and take it... three times!


December 13th, 2013 at 5:04 PM ^

You still need a quality product.  Star Wars fans would tell you that theyd love to have movies made every year until they died.  That being said ask them how they feel about the 3 most recent movies made. 


The 2nd Hobbit movie should have lasted about 30 minutes and been added to the end of the first one.  They turned 30 minutes of waking up a dragon and what happened with Gandalf into a 3 hour movie that was COMPLETELY unnecessary.

Jaqen H'ghar

December 13th, 2013 at 6:47 PM ^

Star Wars is my favorite by far. I've read more books than I can even count and while I agree with your point in principle as long as the product looks polished and it has all the requisite pieces (awesome planets, jedi, sith, not jar jar) I will usually enjoy myself regardless of the acting.


December 13th, 2013 at 5:58 PM ^

Where do you live? I have 5 as well. I use the AMC stubs card, go early ($6.50 ea), get med popcorn/drink upgraded to large, take snacks in bags for kids and get free refills(large popcorn and drink gets refills)and use extra cups on drink for kids. $43 and every $100(2.5 movies) I get $10 off.

typed on Iphone so punctuation meh...


December 13th, 2013 at 6:17 PM ^

But I actually look at it a bit differently . . . I wish they had stretched LOTR out to four movies, and included more with the flight out of Hobbiton, and the Old Forest, and Tom Bombadil, and on, and on, and on. But I get that they did what they had to do. I am an addict:  I've probably read the LOTR 5 or 6 times over the last 30 years.

Here's a LOTR trivia question:  there's a 3 letter word used twice in the trilogy which almost no one knows the meaning of. The most common usage today is completely, totally wrong (as well as being politically incorrect. The word? Fey. It is used when Frodo sets his face out of Shelob's lair resolutely for Mordor. See if you know the word.


December 13th, 2013 at 11:51 PM ^

Yes, I would have loved Bombadil et al. But you have to cut somewhere.

And yes, the word is closer to fate. The word would have been used of a soldier or warrior going into battle, knowing he probably was going to do, but going courageously and boldly anyway. Just the attitude Frodo had going into Mordor:  I'm going to die, but that's ok, I'm doing the right thing.


December 14th, 2013 at 9:47 AM ^

Getting rid of Tom Bombadil was the best creative decision ever and the flight out of Hobbiton was(much like The Hobbit) a long description of people being hungry. The original movies were fine and had insanely long directors cuts. Jackson is prone to excess here and frankly the first movie suffered from the long chase scenes.


December 13th, 2013 at 6:56 PM ^

I don't consider myself a purist; I understand that in order to make a novel into a film a lot of things get cut and that minor changes here or there may be necessary in order to eliminate an unneeded subplot, etc.

However I cry foul when the changes consist of adding long sequences that in the book were only a sentence or two, or when things are added as major plot points that aren't even in the book.  Then it smells like they are just trying to extend the story as much as possible in order to make more money.

The Hobbit was a shorter, simpler story than LOTR.  I think the film version should have been shorter and simpler as well.


December 14th, 2013 at 12:32 AM ^

If you love Middle Earth and Tolkien's work as much as I and others, you want as many hours of it as possible.  I was thrilled they extended it to 3 movies so they could provide more details and dialogue, and in truth, the first two haven't done enough to build characters if you ask me.  Saw it today and it was awesome.  The only downer was the way Smaug battled the dwarves started to get a little cartoony and reminded me of the Godzilla movie where Matthew Broderick and the taxi cab could bob and weave under Godzilla's feet and never get stomped.  Regardless, it was still an awesome movie and some of the special effects, especially the flight path shots of Legolas's arrows, were incredible.


December 13th, 2013 at 4:39 PM ^

I hold just about the exact opposite opinion of the OP.  I liked the first move.  I liked the original 3.  This movie was long, boring, and uneventful.


Nothing happened.  You know how they make fun of LOTR in Clerks 2?  This was it.  A movie about walking.  There is zero plot.  I feel like you could watch the first and third movie and understand everything almost perfectly.  No one dies, good or bad.  Nothing changes.  They just got a little farther along the road.  You get a 5 minute river fight scene in exchange for 3 hours of your time. 

While I am generally excited to see the ending of this story, this movie was probably the 2nd greatest waste of my time.  Winning by an unbeatable margin is Buried with Ryan Reynolds.


December 14th, 2013 at 12:42 AM ^

I honestly must say I feel sorry for you man.  If you don't appreciate the ability to gain immersion into Middle Earth - the mother of all fantasy worlds - with these incredible graphics and story lines, for an extra few hours, then that is your loss.  And these comments about nothing happening are absurd.  We learn that Sauron has returned and he takes Gandalf captive.  How is that not something happening?  We learn the wood elves want the treasure of Erebor as well.  We learn there is a town of humans in harm's way in the event the dwarves disturb the dragon, we see incredible fight scenes with the river fight, the spider fight and what about the dragon?  How sad is it that we take such insanely good special effects for granted now?  I remember 20 years ago when the first Jurassic Park came out and no one could fathom how incredible those graphics were.  And this dragon?  It will be the best and most realistic dragon we'll ever see in our lifetimes.  How you don't appreciate this, if you're even remotely a Tolkien fan, is beyond me.


December 13th, 2013 at 4:39 PM ^

Well I just got out of the theater about 20 minutes ago. I'm left feeling that i'm still deathly afraid of spiders, and Benedich Cumberbatch voices a brilliant Smaug.


December 13th, 2013 at 4:39 PM ^

I'm not much of a moviegoer.  I actually think the last movie I saw in theaters was An Unexpected Journey.  I am definitely planning on going to see this, though.  Everyone I have heard talk about it has said it was really well done.  Can't wait!


December 13th, 2013 at 5:17 PM ^

I went to see it today. Bought my ticket and got to the ticket taker dude. I was then told that the projector broke. I was given a refund AND two free readmission tickets to use for any regular 2D movie. The readmission tickets do not expire. I shall either go tomorrow or next Friday. Looking forward to it.


December 13th, 2013 at 7:35 PM ^

Going tomorrow and taking my 9 year old son.  That is the beauty of having children....they are your excuse to watch Sci-Fi and cartoons well into your 40's.  Looking forward to seeing Lakewood and Beorn as well as Mirkwood.


December 13th, 2013 at 9:34 PM ^

That is exactly my situation. My 9 yr "drags" me to Avengers, IM3, Thor etc. Those I like. This... its like Installment No 5 of LOTR. Pretty much same thing over and over with less interesting characters. The ONlY saving graces are the hot badass Elf chick, and Khan the Dragon (if you know the reference). But if you arent really intothese movies... you still wont be after this one.

I for one am far more looking forward to seeing Ultron.