Master Index of Archived Threads


The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

1/2

1 votes

*

0 votes

*1/2

0 votes

**

1 votes

**1/2

0 votes

***

1 votes

***1/2

0 votes

****

0 votes

****1/2

0 votes

*****

0 votes

Edgy MD Dec 28 2013 09:19 PM

Peter Jackson returns to add a second of three scheduled installments to his adaptation of Tolkein's beloved novel. [fimg=1000:3uywtqwp]http://cdn.fansided.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/229/files/2013/10/The-Hobbit-Desolation-of-Smaug-Poster.jpg[/fimg:3uywtqwp]

Edgy MD Dec 29 2013 12:49 PM Re: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

Hmmm... just me again, huh? Well, you're not missing anything. I mean, you're missing a step on the evolutionary ladder of what filmgoing is to become, but other than that... no. Seems like Jackson did everything he could to avoid being the director on this series, and when it came down to him, he was more interested in using the property to advance filmmaking as a science, with no regard to filmmaking as an art. He also seems sad and angry. In many ways, Smaug seems like an analog for Jackson. He's achieved his wildest dreams of success and power, sitting on top of an unthinkable pile of wealth and artistic artifacts, and yet unsettled in it all, making a fight out of his encounter with Bilbo just to have a project to escape the day-to-day banality that complete worldly success brings. Jackson has taken on Bilbo and the dwarves for seemingly the same reason, and he's similarly awakening from a torpor and blowing a lot of smoke and wrecking something beautiful. The main result of the ballyhooed 48 fps technology was --- from my seat --- to make the sets look so vivid... that they look like sets, and the CGI looks like CGI.

Ceetar Dec 29 2013 06:09 PM Re: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

Edgy MD wrote: The main result of the ballyhooed 48 fps technology was --- from my seat --- to make the sets look so vivid... that they look like sets, and the CGI looks like CGI. was having this discussion the other day. I suspect it's just the newness of it. Once you get used to it you'll be immersed in the story the same way you always are. Also as filmmakers get better at using it as a companion tool and not a "Hey, let's see what we can do!" bit. Splitting the Hobbit into three parts for me took away all urgency to actually see them. Two parters don't both me quite as much, but usually only if a story has a good middle where you can cut it, and a lot of 'final' book adaptations have a lot of that going on do to the conclusive nature of them, but I'm not sure the Hobbit really has three distinct enough stories worth telling. Seems like I'm not the only one. I suspect I'll watch them on Netflix or something on successive days after the third one's out.

Nymr83 Jan 07 2014 08:00 AM Re: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

Ditto, waiting for all 3

Vic Sage Jan 10 2014 03:44 PM Re: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

i didn't hate it; i was engaged. I do hate that Jackson has padded the story out with lots of extra stuff to justify a trilogy (it doesn't), and this chapter ends in a particularly unsatisfying way, even given the usual problems a middle chapter has in its inconclusiveness. EMPIRE STRIKES BACK manages to be a middle chapter that has a relatively satisfying ending in and of itself while still leading you into the next and final (we thought) chapter. But this one just stops, right before a big battle. There are some stupendous set pieces, however... particularly the dwarf escape in barrels down a river as the elves and orcs chase them while battling each other. A spectacular sequence. And Watson & Sherlock squaring off in the guise of Bilbo and Smaug had its own additional resonance.

Edgy MD Jan 13 2014 11:39 AM Re: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

So what's your rating out of five stars? Who gave it half a star?

Frayed Knot Jan 13 2014 12:03 PM Re: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

For the record, I've never once desolated a smaug and anyone who tries to claim otherwise will hear from my lawyers.

Elster88 Jan 13 2014 08:51 PM Re: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

Vic Sage wrote: I do hate that Jackson has padded the story out with lots of extra stuff to justify a trilogy (it doesn't) I was surprised that Smaug shows up in the second movie.

Edgy MD Jan 13 2014 08:56 PM Re: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

Well, the name is in the title and everything. Anybody else go for the Jackson-as-Smaug notion? I can't recall any film whose production felt like so much a contradiction of it's own script's morals since... Titanic? ... Mary Shelley's Frankenstein?

Elster88 Jan 13 2014 09:21 PM Re: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

Edgy MD wrote: Well, the name is in the title and everything. I meant I was surprised when I first heard Smaug would be in the second movie. I thought he would first make an appearance in the last movie. Yes, when I realized his name in the title I figured he would be in the movie.

Edgy MD Jan 13 2014 10:53 PM Re: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

Ha! I joke! (This doesn't bode well for parody invitational this year.)

Elster88 Jan 14 2014 06:57 PM Re: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

Edgy MD wrote: Ha! I joke! (This doesn't bode well for parody invitational this year.) Nah I'm just a moron.