The Hobbit (film series)

[HORNS]



I had to go. And I would have gone in any case. But still.

2) The changes to the story don’t seem to have made it any better. So why make them? I mean, if you want crazy action sequences, fine, put them in (though I could do without) but why change the story otherwise? Why, e.g., do the elves have to save them from the spiders? Why did they take out Thorin shooting the stag, or Bombur falling in the stream and then falling asleep? Could have played that for laughs.

I hope Jackson played Ramble On during the barrel scene.

 

[hendrix]

The barrel scene just totally epitomises what's been wrong with Jackson's action scenes. How the **** can you reconcile Ian McKellan's excellent realism in his acting when you have freaking ten pin bowling in the next scene?

If you want to make a freaking Disney movie, make a Disney movie.

 

[HORNS]

Do you guys think that these movies can be edited to be good or great?

 

[lefty]

Edited down? I think there's probably a pretty solid 3 hour movie in all this.

lefty

 

[HORNS]

Yes, that is what I was asking.

 

[Lionheart Biker]

Aside from all the differences from the book, I enjoyed it quite a lot, much better than the first. It didn´t feel as childish, though yes, the barrel part was a bit overkill (but still fun).
Cumberbatch´s voice surprised me. I knew he´d do a great job but jeez, he really gave an amazing depth to Smaug. And Smau himself looked like nothing I´ve ever seen; he must be one of the greatest characters ever created.

 

[El Argentino]

Broke down and saw it with the rest of the extended family. Was more entertaining than the first one, but still a bit long and drawn out. Gandalf v. Sauron was cool. Legolas also looks like he's put on 20lbs - which I frankly think looks better than the thin waif he was in LOTR.

Saving grace of the whole movie though is the closing credits song, "I See Fire" by Ed Sheeran.

[VIDEO][/VIDEO]

 

[deadly7]

Contrary to many here, I loved the film. I enjoyed Smaug, but if anything was drawn out it was the Smaug scene. The fight scene was insanely boring. But, Bilbo's conversation with Smaug was almost as enjoyable as Gandalf in Dol Guldur. The barrel scene was pure fun.

 

[Neo_Version 7]

My god, this movie nearly put me to sleep on a level of Peter Jackson's King Kong. I mean honestly, there were a couple of fun sequences but it just wasn't all that engaging. Ironically, the character I liked most was Kate who isn't even in the novel. Just like the first film, the best scene was Bilbo simply exchanging dialogue with a compelling character (Smaug, in this case) but even that became sleep inducing after a while.

 

[Harold falcon]

There's a good 45 minute movie (Smaug) buried somewhere in this mess.

 

[Gradstudent78]



There's a good 45 minute movie (Smaug) buried somewhere in this mess.

Maybe they'll be a good 2 hour fan cut of all three movies when everything is done.

 

[Harold falcon]



Maybe they'll be a good 2 hour fan cut of all three movies when everything is done.

I hope so for future generations, but I won't be rewatching.

 

[Manton]



Maybe they'll be a good 2 hour fan cut of all three movies when everything is done.

That works out about right, roughly five minutes per page, about the same ratio as LotR.

 

[Kaplan]

I agree with most of your critiques Manton (and am trying to pen some of my own), but I can't wrap my head around that math. 5 minutes per page of the Hobbit = a 2 hours film? (Or was that supposed to be ½ a minute per page?)

 

[Manton]

I was thinking, roughly 100 pages per hour. LotR is around 1,000 pages and made a fine 9 hour film, or even 11 if you count the extended editions. So, yes, math is wrong.