So true! I noticed that while visiting Las Cruces, NM (which is practically west Texas) in July, even captioned one of the pictures Mordor. http://www.bigweathergames.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/130730_NM_18_LasCrucesMordor_small.jpg
I’m kinda bummed, my wife gets treated to a free showing of Desolation on Friday. Yeah she has to sit through the vendor presentation (its a work event) etc beforehand, but she gets the movie and any and all treats she wants for free. Hopefully she’ll really like it and not mind going again.
Well, I got preview screening tickets to the new Hobbit movie (through work) after asking my wife if she wanted to go - to which she halfheartedly shrugged and answered “sure”. The word I would most aptly use to refer to the first film would be “incompetent”, but I’m willing to admit I walked out of the new installment entertained this time, much to my surprise. And no way would I admit enjoying the film without this addendum: the b-story is hilarious. So, yeah - they’ve wrangled the schizophrenic tone a bit and paced it like an actual movie this time. Mostly.
Murph
1586
Yeah, I sure wish they’d stuck to the book more. There were large sequences that were pure fabrication, and while I enjoyed some of them, I couldn’t not be a little bit bothered by them. I felt like this movie did everything the first one did, but more. The good stuff was better, but the departures from the book were more vast.
I thought it was a thoroughly enjoyable movie despite some issues, especially if you can remember that you’re watching Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit, not Tolkien’s.
Smaug was perfect, and that’s really what I bought the ticket to see.
I won’t be seeing this until next weekend due to scheduling issues, so I’m going to miss most of the heated discussion that’s sure to flood this thread over the next few days. Comments like this don’t give me much hope, though:
I could have saved you a ticket. Here’s (my) Smaug, being perfect…
Any impressions on the 48 fps this time? I saw the first one like that (and 3d) and thought it was horrible.
I read something that said Jackson had made some adjustments to it this time.
I heard the same thing, that Jackson worked on fixing the “soap opera/80’s home video” effect that plagued the first HFR version of The Hobbit. I’d like to hear some impressions as well.
For me, the “fix” was to see the standard frame rate version instead.
Telefrog
1591
Still didn’t care for HFR. A few scenes looked like a BBC production of Hamlet due to the HFR effect.
On the other hand, I liked this movie a lot more than AUJ.
mono
1592
Smaug was fantastic despite everyone saying his name wrong.
It wasn’t new but I do love to watch elves kick butt.
That’s all I got. No sense of place for any of the locations, no interesting characters and too much action for a trilogy that should have more than enough time to take it slow.
Bleh. This movie probably wasn’t any worse than AUJ, but I think my disappointment with the Hobbit movies is cumulative, so even a pretty cool Smaug left me liking this one even less than the first.
I never saw AUJ in 3D or HFR, so I can’t say if it was any better or worse, but watching this one in 3D HFR was okay. It feels like a soap opera for the first half hour or so, then it all just fades away like subtitles or 3D itself and I didn’t notice it for the rest of the movie.
I did keep noticing the terrible decisions to do so much digitally though. Again, same problem as the first movie when compared to the LotR trilogy. Such a let down. Smaug was great looking, I’m not totally against extensive digital effects. The barrel ride was a pretty good excuse for a lot of digital stuff too, that was fun. But big sweeping outdoor shots and backgrounds still feel unreal and stupid.
This was pretty good. Much better than the first installment. One thing I noticed, was I thought the 3D was very well done and often used for the first half of the film. But for the second half, it seems like they hardly used it at all. Anyone else notice this?
What was up with Legolas? He looked fatter / bulkier and was wearing different colored contacts this time.
And yeah, they pronounced Smaug incorrectly.
Nesrie
1595
I enjoyed the movie. The pacing was better. The little Jacksony extras not too distracting. 3D is cheap here so I enjoyed that bit. I wouldn’t say it’s a must see in 3D though because I can’t remember anything big. It’s not just you. I don’t even remember the 3D parts at the end, but then again, this movie was never about shoving it in your face like the other ones were.
As for the other one, yeah he’s older and bigger… still nice to look at though.
Is that the incorrect way to say Smaug? They sure emphasized it a lot.
I’ll look forward to reading your review.
I look forward to writing it! And on the “how to say Smaug?” question, the answer is with an “OW” sound like “loud”. It’s been mentioned before in this thread, but Tolkien’s pronunciation guide is very clear. The same applies to Sauron.
Then most of the characters pronounced it correctly. I think the only mispronunciations may have been due to native accents.
I always said “smog” in my head, because I never read things like pronunciation guides. It’s a book, I don’t care if I’m pronouncing the umlaut over the N after the glottal stop in your made-up language correctly.
Is there anyone out there watching these movies who hasn’t read the book? I’m curious what they thought of Beorn. I was okay with his representation, but when I think back, it seems like a weird way to start this movie. I didn’t even remember exactly where the first one ended, but we show up here with the party on the run from Azog (who I just learned is Crixus from Spartacus!), they run come across Beorn, who’s kinda cool, stay the night at his house, then just start running again with no real plot advancement from meeting him. If you don’t know who this guy is or that he shows up again in the third movie, would that seem really random and pointless in an already long movie?
