I didn’t care for this one at all. The pacing just felt off. Oddly, for an almost two and a half hour movie, it seemed really rushed in some spots.

Alfrid


What the fuck? This guy? Peter Jackson for some reason had a real hard-on for this character. Ha ha. We get it Peter. He’s a slimy lickspittle that’s a coward and greedy. I think we all had enough of this guy in the last movie. Did we really need so much time taken for him? Also, he gets away??

I left the theater vaguely disappointed. The best part of the movie for me was Saruman kicking all kinds of ass.

Also, what happened to that battlewagon scene from the preview?

Haven’t seen any of the trailers. Maybe it’s from the battle between dwarves and elves that was cut from the movie? Will show up in the Extended Edition.

I watched and thought it was better than the second movie, but then again that’s not exactly a high barrier one needed to jump over.

impressons

[spoiler]I liked Armitage’s delivery, but I thought Thorin’s heel-turn was too quick and sudden. Given how long the trilogy is you’d think they could have spent a bit more time on that instead of lets say the bloody river scene in the second movie. Same for his ‘epiphany’. I also liked Freeman’s Bilbo, but it seemed like he was 5 minutes in the movie, the ending aside. Ken Stott’s Balin was wonderful, too.

The rest of the dwarves completely lacked profile, even the ones that got some more screentime and lines. Having seen three movies, I still couldn’t really tell you what kind of personality Kili has. Ah, the dwarves. I guess they wanted to give each of them a very distinctive look, but in some cases I thought the result was utterly ridiculous or looked as if it belonged into some other universe, e.g. Bombur or the guy who apparently stood to close to an hairspray explosion. Funnily enough, they went to heavy on prosthetics for everyone else that Kili again looked ‘unnaturally normal’.

Galadriel, Elrond and Saruman freeing Gandalf - Jesus, what was up with that scene? Very confusing part overall and it ended somewhat ludicrous with Sauron’s eye showing up and projecting the nazguls as if he was giving them a goddamn Powerpoint presentation of what’s to come.

The Laketown scene? Should have been in the second movie instead of the cliffhanger. I guess this actually purely came down to logistics rather than PJ or Warner Bros. decided to simply cut it and add it to the third. WETA spent a huge amount of time to get the scene done - far more time compared to the titular battle that is supposed the climax of the third movie.

I thought the score was overall rather weak. No real kick-ass moment. The only parts that really worked were based on themes already established in LotR, e.g. the ring tempting Bilbo.

The battle itself was ok and a mess at the same time, but it’s hard to impress given the battles we’ve already seen in The Two Towers and Return of the King. BotF armies felt like a mix of Helm’s Deep and Gondor (city breach). Given that most of the humans were poor fishermen, it’s really hard to see how they would last even three seconds against well armed/trained orcs. And they really turned up the Looney Tunes parts up to eleven, and I’m not even talking about the poorly animated Legolas stuff. When Bard jumped on the wagon to kill that troll, pretty everyone I was with was slightly groaning. And some of the troll designs really had written all over them: “We need something completely crazy even if it doesn’t make sense at all.”

It was really hard to follow what was going on and how the situation was. How close were the orcs to reaching the big hall? Where in the city was the big hall? What was really going on on the battlefield as we see Thorin et al fight Azog? Once the movie was over, someone asked: “Where was the fifth army?” Yeah, they were kinda at the top of the mountain? But did the main force also head to the battlefield? It seemed like the dwarves were already heavily outnumbered by Azog’s army. I had a much better idea of Helm’s Deep’s or Gondor’s topology.

I actually liked the setup/location for the fight between Azog and Thorin, and I thought it would have been a wonderful ending if Thorin (mortally wounded) kills off Azog by throwing the heavy stone to have him slide off the ice. But nope, there still had to be the gotcha-scene in which Azog shows up again for the stabby-stab.

Alfrid: What a waste of time. Apparently, the general audience liked him as comic relief though which is why he was featured so promimently.

Also, PJ really went George Lucas on this one. There are so many scenes that could have easily done with practical sets, props and real actors in a much shorter time, e.g. Gandalf walking away after parting from Bilbo in the end. Nope, was done in CG and probably ended up costing more and putting even more load on a studio that already had a hard time finishing the battle sequences. (Some parts really were as poorly animated as they are due to lack of time.)

Question to those in the know: Thranduil hinting at Strider/Aragorn - shoe-horned LotR reference aside, does that even make sense in the timelime of the books?[/spoiler]

Yup, like everyone else, I found Thorin’s “arc” in this movie didn’t work at all.

dragon sickness


Did we really need Thorin to turn into Howard Hughes? His “dragon sickness” was just too over-the-top. One minute, he’s leading the dwarves to drive Smaug out of the mountain, the next he’s brooding and mumbling in the hoard ready to kill people over imagined treachery. I think there’s something wrong when Thorin’s turn and redemption is more believable in the book.

I did like Billy Connolly as Dain.

Also, now that I’m mulling it over, where did the armored rams come from? They’re in the trailer, and we see Thorin, Fili and Kili using them to attack Azog’s position, but we didn’t actually see them used by Dain’s forces.

What’s funny about Dain is that I immediatly noticed that the character is complete CG while a friend of mine, an actual animator, didn’t it.

Yeah, there’s a lot to hate in this movie but I agree with others that the dragon sickness is probably the most egregious sin.

‘Dragon sickness again’

The literal interpretation of dragon sickness is a real problem. Is it not enough to say that dwarves, like dragons, tend to be greedy and that this lust for riches sometimes clouds their judgement? This is a compelling story of human (dwarven) failability. The choice to interpret dragon sickness as a magical enchantment bewitching Thorin completely undermines his story arc. There’s no growth or character development because he was never culpable. It’s emblematic of Jackon’s tendency in this trilogy to dial everything up to the point where the human scale of events is lost and the viewer disengages.

One question – Do I recall correctly from the books that Bard only knows about Smaug’s missing scale because Bilbo discovered it when treating with the dragon? Changing that once again diminishes Bilbo’s contributions. (See also the troll scene from the first movie.)

In the book the thrush relays the info to Bard.

Talking birds? That’s just crazy!

I would agree that its part of Jackson’s unmistakable tendency to make poor choices in this trilogy, in part based upon the noise. Although I spent my previous post mostly bagging on the movie, there is a lot to like in and about these movies: It just gets lost in trying to give the audience more of what was popular in LotR and the studio more return on its dollar (often at the same time) at the expense of the script, or the characters, or the moment.

Its the very definition of sequel-itis, except its in a prequel. I mean, for example I dislike every “ride” sequence: The barrels, Goblintown, golden Smaug, etc. That isn’t Peter Jackson trying to ruin the Hobbit, that’s him to make a thrilling action sequence in service of his movie. He does the same thing in Fellowship, though, by having Aragorn and Frodo ride the falling stair down in Moria. All of those set pieces in the Hobbit fall flat with me, in their contrivance. I was scared going into the 5 Armies that you would have of couple of Thorin’s company playing steel drums on rows of orc heads on the battlefield.

These movies are, to me at least, by no means Prequel-levels of bad but its serious fall from the LotR movies. I guess Lucas also, however, didn’t have Tolkien.

I set out trying to say more positive and yet again failed.

I just saw the last movie tonight. Now I guess I know how the people who hate the lens flare in the new Star Trek movies feel.

Something about the visuals for all 3 Hobbit movies really gets to me. From the very beginning of the first movie with the kaleidoscope roller coaster ride through the Lonely Mountain it’s bothered me. Some scenes are worse than others, the furnace scene from the second movie was particularly bad. It’s hard to describe what it is, but it’s the same feeling I get when I see faces in video games that try too hard to be realistic. They aren’t real, they just end up being uncanny and distracting. I guess for the Hobbit it was supposed to look fantastical and storybook like? Whatever the goal, it didn’t work for me and just drove home the impression that the movies never really figured out what they were trying to be.

Saw this on Christmas day. It was the first time we’d seen one of the movies in “Extreme 3D HFR” so that was quite a change from prior viewings. I don’t know what the “Extreme” did except add a couple of bucks to the price. It was being shown on a 70 foot screen (perhaps that’s what made it Extreme) and had reserved seating so we were certainly comfortable.

My wife couldn’t get over the HFR aspect so that was a downer for her. I know it’s been discussed a lot when the movies first came out, but she felt that it gave the movies a cheap feel - she kept saying it felt like a soap opera (maybe that’s partially a judgement call on the quality of the script though). It definitely made it feel more “TV like” and therefore less of a spectacle (to me).

As for the film itself, pretty disappointing. As I said to my wife after the first 20 minutes - I guess they didn’t feel the need to do any of that bothersome character development. And I agree with the discussion that they could have / should have wrapped up Smaug at the end of the 2nd movie, instead of having all those ridiculous slapstick chases through the foundries. Does anyone really think if Smaug had been killed at the end of the 2nd movie that people wouldn’t have wanted to go to the 3rd one?

The fight with Legolas doing all of his magical acrobatics (including climbing up the rocks as the broken tower he fought on disintigrated) was a bit much. And the amount of CG/pancake makeup on Legolas was a bit disturbing, but I guess that’s what you get for filming prequels 11+ years after the original movies.

The callout to the LOTR films was sort of goofy. “Hey Legolas - go north, there’s this dude you need to meet.” We don’t need that, guys.

And yeah, the continued focus on the Laketown doofus (Alfrid, was it?) felt like padding and a waste of time. Hey Peter Jackson: nobody cares about that guy, stop wasting screen time with him!

I guess overall the Hobbit trilogy is disappointing in that it surely felt like it could have been 2 decent movies with 4 to 5 hours of interesting storytelling. Instead what we got was 7 to 8 hours with a couple of hours of pretty obvious bloat.

At least I got a pretty good family experience out of it!

I went into the movie expecting it to be pretty bad, in some part thanks to the “disappointed” sentiment that echoed strong enough across the internet to be a meme. However, it still was a good movie to watch. Not great, but certainly good and therefore plenty better than I’d hoped. Every criticism indeed holds up, but none were strong enough to drive the fun from the experience for me and mine. I think, perhaps, that it’s the Civ V of films for this year.

Peter Jackson is the new George Lucas, with the exception that he does better action seens (but still occasionally ridiculous).

This movie, as with the past two, had good bits. This movie, as with the past two, had bad bits. And this movie, as with the past two, had inexplicable bits.

  1. Dragon Sickness - what? Why?
  2. Sky Lances - why did we spend all that time setting up the sky lance nonsense again? And that was all in the service of (1) not allowing Bilbo to locate the weak spot (a nice moment for Bilbo in the books) and (2) just having Bard do it with a regular bow (albeit one that was made out of bits of a bow and his, uh, son).
  3. Why include Beorn at all if you’re only going to have a 3 second clip of him getting Eagle Dropped into a mass of orcs? He’s practically the sixth army in the books. More imporantly, we could have skipped “next best dressed troll” #13 for more Beorn running around being super awesome shots.
  4. GUYS THE RING IS EVIL. Actually, that part felt toned-down in part 3. The rest of the “ZOMG WERE LEADING INTO LOTR” stuff was sort of obnoxious.
  5. Forbidden Love - no. Just. . . no.

Freeman and Armitage were terrific in their parts (all the returning players were just as good as before). The rest of the Dwarves performed admirably, and Luke Evans is best. Jackson’s Jacksonism sort of gets in the way of everything, though. Most of the action was solid, though at times some of it felt completely weightless (like Dain wrist-backhanding people with a gigantic hammer).

From what I’ve read, there were a few more Beorn shots planned, but since Weta didn’t have much time to finish all the battle scenes, Jackson wanted to remove Beorn completely from BotFA. It was then the studio to insist on there at least being a few brief bits to have some more ties to the previous movie. (Probably, for merchandising purposes as well.)

  1. Forbidden Love - no. Just. . . no.

BUT IT WAS REAL.

So Beorn should be expected in the director’s cut? Yay.

I would have preferred to watch it in 2D - it was too blurry and dark as I expected, but the kids really wanted to watch it in 3D so what can you do Re ‘dragon sickness’ - the kids (10 and 6 year old) interpreted as ‘Thorin was greedy’ and not at some mystical ailment so score one for Jackson I guess there. Other then that I enjoyed it for what it was - the base story is too good for Jackson to completely ruin, and I’m happy we got to see this on the big screen.

I hate the defense of this movie that I’ve seen in various places that boils down to “Wait until the extended edition!” Hate it.

It’s like when people tell me that something “makes more sense” with the backstory in some supplemental media like a tie-in comic or web site game.

I agree with that perspective. Much as I prefer the extended editions of the LotR films, they were still fantastic in their theatrical cuts.

I don’t really expect the extended edition to save this one, anyway.

Considering the fact that Jacksonian bloat is the film series’ worst sin, how could it? Less is more in the case of this trilogy.

Looking forward to reading through all the comments here after we see it tonight. Not going in with high expectations so hopefully it’ll at least be entertaining!