EC11 he/him Posted December 19, 2013 Report Share Posted December 19, 2013 Has anyone here been watching these films? I just purchased the extended edition of the first film and saw the second recently and was mildly annoyed the delayed the final film until December of 2014 However, that being said I loved the film, it will probably make Tolkien fanatics weep in more than one way but it was a top notch film overall! Beautifully put together and beautifully coordinated with a wonderful use of CGI. I've got to say I haven't seen a better film in ages! This is one thing I have to give producers credit for. (sigh) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartbug he/him Posted December 19, 2013 Report Share Posted December 19, 2013 Yay!!! Whenever I talk to most people about them, especially Unexpected Journey, they complain about it being, "slow" and with too much singing. I think, however, that the style of the first one matches Tolkiens prose much better, which is fantastic anyhow. I actually liked the first one better, just because it had the more storybook pacing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamma Fiend he/him Posted December 19, 2013 Report Share Posted December 19, 2013 I liked the Book.I (kind of) watched the first movie, and yeah I'll agree it looks cool and everything. But I just figured if I want to spend 9 hours on the Hobbit, I'll just read it. I don't think they're really trying to tell the Hobbit story, they're just using it as a vehicle to make cool special effects and draw in tons of holiday shoppers into watching it. And I'm sorry, Legolas is not in The Hobbit (yeah, sure, after LotR when his character was created he technically had to of existed and been living during the Hobbit story, but the fact is he wasn't in the book, shouldn't be in the movie).It should have just stayed as a book and a fun cartoon movie. But that's my cynical, anti-almost everything in media nowdays attitude. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windrunner he/him Posted December 19, 2013 Report Share Posted December 19, 2013 I've seen the first two at this point, kind of. I watched the first one and enjoyed it, as they stuck fairly closely to the book. There were a few moments that felt a little cameo-ish. I didn't remember Galadriel or Sauron being in the Hobbit, but it's been a few years, so perhaps I've forgotten. I loved the flashback scenes to the fall of Erebor, I thought they were excellent. As for the second one, I have a confession to make. I totally fell asleep during it. I don't think it was the fault of the movie. I'd been waiting in the snow for six hours, and was on about four hours of sleep and coming down with a cold. But I do remember a few parts. I agree that Legolas shouldn't have been in it. It was just kind of a distraction, but forgivable. However, his love interest and the whole elf/dwarf love triangle thing came out of left field. I feel like that deviated way too far from the source material. On the other hand, a few changes, like the visit to the tomb of the Nazgul were pretty excellent. It did stress the bounds of plausibility at times. There was one point in the escape from the Elvenking, where one of the dwarves bounced off of like 12 goblins, which got a little ridiculous. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamma Fiend he/him Posted December 19, 2013 Report Share Posted December 19, 2013 Expanding on what Windy said: I just read I Legolas' whole 'love-connection' female character was completely invented. She doesn't exist in the books, nor none of their interactions, obviously. I don't know any other detaiils about it since I haven't watched it, but that just seems like trying to waste too much screen time for me. Nobody cares about Legolas' love interests (that never get mentioned or happened in ANY of the books. Even LotR) they just want to see him shoot some wicked fast arrows and dominate everybody else in the 'kill count game'. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claincy he/him Posted December 19, 2013 Report Share Posted December 19, 2013 I've only seen the first. (The second isn't out till boxing day in AU) but I did really enjoy it.I think tthey are dragging it out a bit with three films but the first was enough fun that I can forgive that. @bartbug, well, I may be unusual in that I wanted more of the singing Not the one about what Volvo Baggin's hates, but I personally would have liked to have the rest of misty mountains. I am a singer though so may be coloring my opinion 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argent he/him Posted December 19, 2013 Report Share Posted December 19, 2013 Dwarves. In barrels. That's all I need to say. For now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartbug he/him Posted December 19, 2013 Report Share Posted December 19, 2013 @Windy, most of the stuff with Sauron and Galadriel happened, just behind the scenes. (KInd of) Same with Legolas. He was there, but not mentioned explicitly in the book. The only truly invented sequence was the one with Kate, I'm sorry, Tauriel, and her love triangle thing with the Fili? and Legolas. But any downsides in that movie were erased by the one Gimli joke. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiver he/him Posted December 19, 2013 Report Share Posted December 19, 2013 I saw Desolation at the weekend, and I thought it was an improvement over the first one. Sure, the things often didn't match my headcanon, or the actual book canon, but I still found it enjoyable. The film was quicker paced, but I think that's because, unlike Lord of the Rings or Star Wars, this felt like a direct continuation of the first one. I suspect these films are built more as a single nine+ hour film than three, three length ones.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argent he/him Posted December 19, 2013 Report Share Posted December 19, 2013 I too liked it better than the first one. Though the whole love triangle thing didn't quite work for me - I am willing to close my eyes to it, however, because of how few female characters Tolkien has, and even a shallow one is better than none. One thing I liked very very very much - the Necromancer's appearance. One of the things the Tolkien fandom likes to poke fun of is how Sauron, the great demi-god villain hellbent on conquering the Middle Earth, takes the shape of a burning eye. Not very intimidating, and kind of weird. I mean, an eye? A ball of fire, identical to the eye but without the "iris" would've looked much better. The Desolation of Smaug addresses this quite nicely I thought. The idea that the eyeball is really just a ball of fire/energy/power, and what looks like an iris is actually the vague and distant outline of Sauron as we see him in the opening scene of The Fellowship of the Ring. I thought this was an extremely nice touch. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scriptorian he/him Posted December 19, 2013 Report Share Posted December 19, 2013 (edited) The funny part with Tauriel is that, although she's not in any books or lore, I think she shows up in the 2003 video game. I liked the first movie better, honestly. The adds were more-lore friendly, and the second just had too many sub-plots. The love-triangle made me weep inwardly. One thing that did surprise/impress me in the second was a really obscure lore reference (actually its so obscure I'm not sure if it was intentional), where Thandril won't let Legolas be with Tauriel because she's Silvan. For those who aren't Tolkien-buffs, there are actually three main categories of elves: Noldor, Sindar, and Silvan (in order of decreasing fruity-ness), and they don't always get along very well. Although Thandril is king over the Silvan elves, he is actually a Sindar, and so to him unthinkable for his son to marry a "lesser" elf. Yeah, I'm also a Tolkien-lore fan. What of if? Edited December 19, 2013 by Serendipity 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiver he/him Posted December 19, 2013 Report Share Posted December 19, 2013 One thing I liked very very very much - the Necromancer's appearance. One of the things the Tolkien fandom likes to poke fun of is how Sauron, the great demi-god villain hellbent on conquering the Middle Earth, takes the shape of a burning eye. Not very intimidating, and kind of weird. I mean, an eye? A ball of fire, identical to the eye but without the "iris" would've looked much better. The Desolation of Smaug addresses this quite nicely I thought. The idea that the eyeball is really just a ball of fire/energy/power, and what looks like an iris is actually the vague and distant outline of Sauron as we see him in the opening scene of The Fellowship of the Ring. I thought this was an extremely nice touch. That was my single favourite moment of the movie, maybe the best moment of the series, period. Trippy, mind bending, and sort of terrifying. I'm waiting for a friend of mine to see the movie, just so I can see his reaction to that moment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claincy he/him Posted January 16, 2014 Report Share Posted January 16, 2014 I was watching it again yesterday because some of my family hadn't seen it and with the current streak of 40+ degrees Celsius days the theater was nice and cool. Of course with so much heat most people in Melbourne has their air conditioners going which taxes the powergrid a bit. (minor spoiler) It had just got to the part when most of the dwarves leave Laketown for Erebor. The remaining dwarves knock on Bard's door. "NO. I've had enough of dwarves!" *Screen goes black* Best blackout timing ever. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.