Explore
 Lists  Reviews  Images  Update feed
Categories
MoviesTV ShowsMusicBooksGamesDVDs/Blu-RayPeopleArt & DesignPlacesWeb TV & PodcastsToys & CollectiblesComic Book SeriesBeautyAnimals   View more categories »
Listal logo

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug review

Posted : 5 years, 2 months ago on 3 February 2019 08:11

SĀ­tĀ­aĀ­rĀ­t wĀ­oĀ­rĀ­kĀ­iĀ­nĀ­g Ā­aĀ­t hĀ­oĀ­mĀ­e wĀ­iĀ­tĀ­h GĀ­oĀ­oĀ­gĀ­lĀ­e! IĀ­t's bĀ­y-fĀ­aĀ­r tĀ­hĀ­e bĀ­eĀ­sĀ­t jĀ­oĀ­b I'vĀ­e hĀ­aĀ­d. LĀ­aĀ­sĀ­t WĀ­eĀ­dĀ­nĀ­eĀ­sĀ­dĀ­aĀ­y I gĀ­oĀ­t a bĀ­rĀ­aĀ­nĀ­d nĀ­eĀ­w BĀ­MĀ­W Ā­sĀ­iĀ­nĀ­cĀ­e Ā­gĀ­eĀ­tĀ­tĀ­iĀ­nĀ­g a cĀ­heĀ­cĀ­k fĀ­oĀ­r Ā­$Ā­6Ā­4Ā­7Ā­4 tĀ­hĀ­iĀ­s - 4 wĀ­eĀ­eĀ­kĀ­s pĀ­aĀ­sĀ­t. I bĀ­eĀ­gĀ­aĀ­n tĀ­hĀ­iĀ­s 8-mĀ­oĀ­nĀ­tĀ­hĀ­s aĀ­gĀ­o aĀ­nĀ­d iĀ­mĀ­mĀ­eĀ­dĀ­iĀ­aĀ­tĀ­eĀ­lĀ­y wĀ­aĀ­s bĀ­rĀ­iĀ­nĀ­gĀ­iĀ­nĀ­g hĀ­oĀ­mĀ­e aĀ­t lĀ­eĀ­aĀ­sĀ­t $Ā­7Ā­7 pĀ­eĀ­rĀ­ hĀ­oĀ­uĀ­r. I wĀ­oĀ­rĀ­k tĀ­hĀ­rĀ­oĀ­uĀ­gĀ­h tĀ­hĀ­iĀ­s lĀ­iĀ­nĀ­k, gĀ­o tĀ­o hĀ­oĀ­mĀ­e Ā­tĀ­aĀ­b fĀ­oĀ­r mĀ­oĀ­rĀ­e dĀ­eĀ­tĀ­aĀ­iĀ­l... Ā­

copy and paste...........spikecash.com


0 comments, Reply to this entry

"The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug" (2013)

Posted : 8 years, 10 months ago on 19 June 2015 10:39

FIRST IMPRESSIONS

If you missed my review of the first movie, I should point out that yes, I have deliberately held off on it until now. I didn't go to see any of the Hobbit movies in the cinema because I was so vehemently against the idea of splitting the book into three films that I refused to support the notion; I didn't want to vote yes with my wallet.
Just to recap, I thought the first movie was a surprisingly good start to a trilogy I had very little faith in.

In keeping with its predecessor, some of the adaptation choices work really well, particularly expanding the Bard character's role in the story so he doesn't seem like a deus ex machina. On the other hand, I have the same complaint everyone does: the love story between Tauriel and Kili was completely unnecessary. Kili was already becoming one of my favourite characters from the first movie; he didn't need a cross-species love triangle storyline to make him stand out. On top of that, the fight scenes get a little too choreographed at times, as the characters often easily dodge attacks from behind that they couldn't possibly have seen coming. Smaug himself was just plain awesome, though. :) Overall, this is definitely far inferior to the first movie ā€“ not bad, but a mixed bag.

My rating: 60%


0 comments, Reply to this entry

Entertaining.

Posted : 9 years, 8 months ago on 1 September 2014 08:20

I think it's safe to say that the hobbit prequel is a highly entertaining saga, it had everything you could ask for, performances, stunning visuals, music, characters, and overall a fantastic atmosphere.

I highly enjoyed the first hobbit, and i enjoyed this one pretty much the same amount, but there was something missing, at first, i really didn't know what it was, because peter Jackson's movies are about fantasy, so you can't really complain, but maybe that fantasy starts to wore off after a while, i mean i didn't watch the hobbit hoping that it would be the same as the LOTR trilogy, because that was once in a life time opportunity, but at the same time, i hoped that this movie had the same waw factor as the original, i mean the original trilogy had flawless visuals, and this have even better but come to think of it, it might be the only reason this prequel exist is to show off visuals, because there wasn't actually a story, specially this one more than the first hobbit, it was more like a journey to the middle earth, or an adventure through ups and downs but it didn't go any where for me, specially how the movie ended, no one expected to watch a two and a half hour movie and then end like that.

Now, to give credit when credit is due, i really enjoyed this movie, i thought that it was flawless, some scenes where amazing and blew my mind, like the barrels in the water fight scene, or the Spiders scene, there wasn't Yawn moments, although some of the scenes with the elf's talking or the scene with Gandalf and Radagast wasn't really interesting but it wasn't boring either, but the movie never crossed the barrier to be a powerful or even memorable, pretty much the same as the first hobbit, it haven't been a while since i watched it, and i don't remember it at all.

Something i also should mention is the Dragon Smaug, i was really surprised when i found out that the Dragon talks!, to me it lost all the intimidation and the scare factor when the dragon starts talking with Bilbo, although Benedict Cumberbatch does great job with the voice, but was it really necessary to hear a rant between Smaug and Bilbo for 10 or more minutes, it would be a lot better if we can hear Smaug talking only when Bilbo wears the ring.

In all reality, this whole prequel is based on cash grab, we all know that it can be one movie but it became three movies for financial reasons, so put that all in mind, i praise the movies for being highly entertaining even though the whole idea started on the wrong foot.


0 comments, Reply to this entry

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug review

Posted : 10 years, 2 months ago on 27 February 2014 04:27

I love Peter Jackson movies especially the Lord of The Rings saga. There are many things I really don't like though about The Hobbit prequels. One such reason is that prequels means plural as in there are 3 freaking movies from one book! If The Lord of The Rings can stick to being each book as one movie then why the hell couldn't The Hobbit just have been one movie as well? The big issue with the thought of splitting an easily one movie adaptation into three parts is for financial gain. He doesn't care about the quality of the movies he cares about the quantity. Leaving you guessing what next is what makes you pay to see the next film. He counts on that. Now don't get me wrong this one is probably my favorite of the saga, but the first one was pretty Plain Jane if you ask me.

Another Reason why The Hobbit is that since there are three movies and the book doesn't contain enough to actually be worthy of three movies it adds a lot of filler. Now don't get me wrong filler can be good, but sometimes in can be silly and unnecessary. We want to see action at least. Some filler is boring dialogue scenes that aren't very interesting and in fact are kind of yawn inducing at points.

One bone I have to pick with this addition in the saga is that I need more Gollum. Gollum is the coolest character of the saga and he is freaking hilarious. I am sure that has a lot to do with Andy Serkis being a total amazing badass. He is the heart of these movies!

Benedict Cumberbatch is truly an amazing actor even as little as his voice can cause chills down your spine. Smaug is one of the coolest dragons that has been on the big screen. He is highly intelligent and very intriguing to watch in action. If I had to die by a dragon I would definitely choose Smaug!

Bilbo Baggins I think is much more interesting to watch than Frodo was. The main reason why is simply that Martin Freeman is a much better actor than Elijah Wood. Also Bilbo was the first Hobbit to go on adventure which makes him a bit more interesting as he is discovering the world for the first time out of any Hobbit. Frodo pretty much plays follow the leader like his father did.

The additions of Luke Evans, Evangeline Lilly, and Lee Pace were smart choices. They are all good actors and are absolutely wonderful in this. Lee and Evangeline definitely pull of the looks of elves. The characters themselves are intriguing and probably have more to them than what we see in this segment.

I loved that Orlando Bloom and Cate Blanchett showed up on this. It was good to see more ties with the old films. Also who doesn't like Legolas. It was nice to see how Legolas used to be before Lord of the Rings. It was true to the book in my opinion. Also he was a complete badass for sure.

Gandalf didn't do much for me in this one to be blunt. I just didn't care for him this time around. He had very few interesting scenes. To be honest Gandalf isn't really one of my favorite characters. Yeah he has some cool scenes sometimes, but he doesn't spark that much for me. Although I think Ian McKellen plays the part perfectly. Maybe it's just the way the character is for me.

Anyways I truly loved this segment in the Rings saga. It was quite enjoyable and much more entertaining than the previous film. The cliffhanger leaves hope that the last of the trilogy should rock this world. Let's cross our fingers. Also Stephen Colbert makes a cameo.


0 comments, Reply to this entry

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

Posted : 10 years, 2 months ago on 9 February 2014 05:53

I think that itā€™s officially time to declare that Peter Jackson has gone full-on George Lucas mode. The Lord of the Rings was a trilogy of films that edited down the expansive material into something more manageable and workable to a general audience while maintaining the tone and flavor of the novels. They stand as a glorious testament to what a great literary adaptation could be; each frame filled with love and a tremendous amount of detail. However, that was also back when Jackson knew when to edit and where to do it.

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug is largely a very fun film, but bogged down with an obscene amount of filler and material created specifically for this trilogy of films. The Hobbit is a slim novel, episodic in structure, that could easily, and preferably, be adapted into one three hour long film and lose nothing. This is why I believe that the Lucas comparison is apt. Jackson has taken a beloved franchise and added onto it a bloated series of prequels that strive too hard to hammer home how this action here leads to the events of Rings.

Letā€™s get back to discussing Smaug and stop focusing in on the creator for a moment. For the most part, I rather enjoyed Smaug. The special effects work is top-notch, many of the supporting roles wisely cast, the costumes and sets are fully realized and spectacular to behold, and when the film moves through its numerous action sequences it can still inspire a sense of wonderment and awe. The only true drawback is the problematic script.

I do not believe for one minute that adding back in Legolas was a choice of any value or necessity. Legolas was an anemic character in the books, and Orlando Bloom is a charismatic black hole for me. I never got his appeal much beyond his blandly handsome looks. Piggybacking on this thought, the inclusion of a love interest for him, which soon becomes a love triangle when she express a romantic inclination to one of the numerous dwarves, was totally unnecessary. Evangeline Lilly plays the part well, but no one could make an awkward romantic gesture late in the film remotely plausible or emotionally valid given the purple prose nature of the whole thing. (Is it just me, or does she bear a striking resemblance to Link from Zelda?) Her inclusion feels like pandering to try and include another female role in the otherwise male-dominated cast. This wouldnā€™t be such a problem if she was allowed to only function as the Mirkwood guardā€™s captain. That love story really weighs things down and turns a kickass female character into another defined by her relationships to the males in the plot.

Coming out much better is the inclusion and additions of Gandalfā€™s journey that happens concurrently in The Hobbit but isnā€™t mentioned anywhere in the text. Prone to disappearing for long stretches of time while having his own adventures, Smaug visualizes them, and any excuse to spend more time with Sir Ian McKellen as Gandalf is always a great idea in my mind. His story is taken from the appendix, so unlike the stuff involving Legolas, this hasnā€™t been invented wholesale. I didnā€™t mind these additions since they explained a few of the questions one has about the events leading up to Rings involving this particular character.

Yet these arenā€™t the only moments that the film excels at doing. The spiders and hallucations as Bilbo and the dwarves succumb to the strangeness of Mirkwood is a executed flawless. I really liked the idea of Bilbo being able to understand the spiders while wearing the ring. And while the action sequence may have gone on a bit long (more on that in a minute), it still brought a bright smile to my face.

Even better is Lee Paceā€™s scenery-chewing, drag queen over-the-top reading of Thranduil, one of my favorite secondary characters in The Hobbit. If we must spend more time with the elves, Iā€™d have dropped Legolas entirely, the love triangle, and given Pace more to do. His essaying of this character is deliciously grandiose, a case in which overacting is perfect for the character in question.

Clearly though, if Smaug had not worked then this entire chapter in trilogy would have proven fruitless. Benedict Cumberbatch gave a motion-capture performance as the giant dragon and gives him a voice. He finds a mixture of menace, droll intelligence and vicious wit that matches the character as well as Smaug, another of my favorite secondary characters. The entire last third of the film takes place in the Lonely Mountain, and Smaugā€™s slow reveal beneath hundreds of pounds of gold coins is a perfect synthesis of material and creative team. And while roughly three-fourths of Smaugā€™s material is perfectly executed, an extended sequence in which he lays waste to a rekindled forge goes on for far too long and begins to move away from fairly realistic sequence of carnage and destruction and into video game boss battle. As the arena moves locations and our heroes must vanquish the boss in ever escalating and crazy means. This isnā€™t even the worst of these never-ending sequences.

I canā€™t think of a better encapsulation of Smaugā€™s problems with imaginative movie-making quickly turning into over-done strum und drag than the barrel escape from Mirkwood. It moves away from dwarves, elves, a hobbit and a never-ending army of orcs doing battle into Donkey Kong-level territory. That this sequence is not found in the book should be a tip off. Does this spectacle start off making you want to laugh and cheer? Oh yes, but it ends with you rolling your eyes and wondering how many barrels there were to begin with and which one is which and who is where. So while Smaug does much right, it still hasnā€™t presented a credible reason for existing as a trilogy.


0 comments, Reply to this entry

When Poetic License Remains...Poetic

Posted : 10 years, 3 months ago on 12 January 2014 05:08

The genre of fantasy fiction has always been and will forever remain my favorite among all of literature's offerings. No other genre offers such an endless vista for the exploration of imagination as there are, literally, no boundaries whatsoever. The only limits are those of the imagination of the writer. Many view the creation of Middle-Earth and the tales of J. R. R. Tolkien among the finest ever written and his epics of high-fantasy have been emulated time and again by others.

It's been years since I read The Hobbit last; yet it is a treasured, if dusty, memory which is afforded a grand place among the many adventures I was privileged to take throughout my life and, especially, my childhood. I'm not sure if that's a good or bad thing, regarding how long it's been since reading it, because age and memory don't always walk the same paths. I found myself, time and again, while watching The Desolation of Smaug, raising an eyebrow and remarking, to myself, "I don't recall that being in the book."

Now, it's a given, with the decision to make a trilogy of movies out of a book that was shorter than any one of the three LOTR's books, there were going to be parts of the book drawn out and a multitude of things added in that weren't there at all. There had to be. When I found out that they were doing this I immediately rolled my eyes and muttered something nasty about the collective greed of the Hollywood Machine. At the same time, I couldn't wait to see the movies.

What really gets me is the conceit of a filmmaker that they would know better than a celebrated author of an unarguable classic how the story should go. The immortal words of Yul Brynner, as he stands overlooking the sands of Egypt, echo in my mind, "So let it be written - so let it be done." Yet such is not the case within the realm of cinema for the ego of the filmmaker is an unrivaled beast.

Now, I love Peter Jackson, I really do; he's one of my favorite directors. Tolkien's works are among my favorites, too. So, I'm divided here. It's a perfect movie, just as the LOTR's trilogy was, and couldn't have been done in an earlier era of filmmaking and come close to doing the product justice. Such is the case with a number of films these days, with CGI; it opens up all sorts of avenues and options.

The Hobbit is a grand adventure and this trilogy, along with it's predecessor, will forever be among my favorites. Yet I can't help but wonder what it would have been like if those involved in it's creation would simply have stuck to the source material, shown the proper respect and not felt the need to add to it, or worse, take away from it. The excuse of not having Tom Bombadil in LOTR because of constraints upon length of film is a poor one because there wouldn't have been such if numerous scenes weren't (needlessly) drawn out. The same holds true for The Hobbit.

It was thrilling to see Legolas and Tauriel, and Evangeline Lilly makes for a beautiful elfmaiden, but neither were actually in the story. Radagast was only ever mentioned in passing in the book yet, here he is again, too. I'll admit that he's a humorous character but, ultimately, one must ask, "What's the point?" If the recipe is already perfect, and has stood the test of time, you don't tamper with it and then offer it up as the original. Ego and greed....ego and greed.

Still, complaints aside, this is a wonderful movie and an enjoyment to see. The humor that is present in this trilogy is welcome after the grimness of LOTR. The creatures, action and majesty that are present here could never have been made possible without the advent of CGI. In truth, Smaug is one of the greatest and most believable depictions of a dragon onscreen that I've seen since the unjustly-panned Reign of Fire.

Will most everyone love The Hobbit? Yes. Will purists, like myself, take offense (however slight) with the poetic license of the creators? Absolutely, but we'll still love it, too. It's hard to guess who might enjoy it more; those who have never read the book or those who have. The joy of having a treasured memory finally appearing onscreen weighed with the tampering of memory or a completely new experience which isn't tarnished by knowing how much it is different from what it really should be.

You be the judge; either way, it's a great movie.


0 comments, Reply to this entry

Awaken Smaug

Posted : 10 years, 3 months ago on 5 January 2014 05:22

So we got the 2nd installment of the prequel Lord of the Ring series, The Hobbit, entitled the Desolation of Smaug. Desolation of Smaug, had literally non stop action, from beginning to end. There was a small part where there was little or no action, but it was defiantly a good break from what was saw in the beginning. I can not count how many memorable scenes there are in this movie and there are plenty. The acting was superb once again, except I could have used a little bit more of Evangeline Livy and Orlando Bloom, I am not huge fans of them, but they killed it in this movie. I must say Desolation of Smaug is one of the best movies in the Hobbit/Lord of The Ring series, and if you cant wait for the next movie, there's only 12 months.

Oh and that dragon is amazing!


0 comments, Reply to this entry

Hugely satisfying revisit to Middle-earth

Posted : 10 years, 3 months ago on 31 December 2013 03:25

"The tales and songs fall utterly short of your enormity, oh Smaug...the stupendous..."

For some, 2012's The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey was a tough sell. Even though this reviewer loved it, some folks did not care for its prolonged runtime or lighter disposition, as they had hoped for something more in the vein of Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy. However, it did have a few flaws, most of which are thankfully corrected for 2013's The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug. This is a marvellous action-adventure epic, a crowd-pleasing continuation of Jackson's second Middle-earth trilogy that's smoother than its forerunner. It might still be bloated, and the jury is still out on whether or not The Hobbit needed to be a trilogy, but The Desolation of Smaug is a satisfying sit nevertheless.


The Desolation of Smaug picks up right where its predecessor ended, finding hobbit Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman), wizard Gandalf the Grey (Ian McKellen), dwarf Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage), and the Company of Dwarves on their way to the Lonely Mountain to reclaim the city of Erebor from vicious dragon Smaug (Benedict Cumberbatch). Battling orcs and giant spiders, the group also encounter a congregation of lukewarm Wood Elves, with warriors Legolas (Orlando Bloom) and Tauriel (Evangeline Lilly) reluctant to trust the dwarves. In their time of need, the heroes are also assisted by Laketown boatman Bard (Luke Evans) as they push ahead to the Lonely Mountain. The success of their quest ultimately depends on Bilbo, though, who's given the intimidating task of sneaking into Smaug's lair to steal the precious Arkenstone.

If there's anything about The Desolation of Smaug that doesn't entirely work, it's the love triangle between Legolas, Tauriel and dwarf Kili (Aiden Turner), which was reportedly added at the behest of the studio once the decision was made to split The Hobbit into three parts. It's not a deal-breaker, but it fails to justify its existence in the grand scheme of things, stifling the pace in an already fairly lengthy adventure. However, thankfully, the rest of the narrative does not seem as extraneous, with character development and side plots that feel essential, making for a cohesive story and developing narrative threads that will no doubt pay off in the third instalment. Most significantly, the film allows Gandalf to further explore the murmurs that Sauron is returning. In the book, Tolkien sent Gandalf out of the picture to do undisclosed wizard stuff whenever he wanted the dwarves to encounter a dangerous situation that would be much less intense with Gandalf to help, hence him exploring the origins of Sauron's re-emergence makes sense and ties into the Lord of the Rings movies without feeling forced.


The Desolation of Smaug is a darker movie than its bright, colourful predecessor, with Jackson and co. achieving a grimmer aesthetic more in line with the Lord of the Rings trilogy. The light-hearted tone of An Unexpected Journey is gone, and there are no songs, not to mention the amusing dwarf antics are dialled down as the story shifts into weightier territory. The Desolation of Smaug is peppered with set-pieces, moving from location to location to take advantage of the many sights of Middle-earth. Suffice it to say, production values continue to impress, with gorgeous technical specs across the board which are somewhat improved since the last outing. (Although there are a few low quality Go-Pro shots during a river scene, which stick out like a sore thumb and take you out of the movie.) It's unclear whether the digital effects have improved a hundredfold or Jackson used make-up this time, but the orcs look better here, and the battle sequences in general carry a more grounded disposition compared to the over-the-top opulence of the first flick. One of the standout set-pieces is the much-publicised barrel-riding sequence; it's fantastic, with a perfect sense of fluidity and exhilaration.

Without a doubt, though, Jackson saves the best for last - the climactic showdown with Smaug is something else entirely. Similar to the spellbinding game of riddles with Gollum in An Unexpected Journey, Bilbo's encounter with the fearsome dragon is the best scene of this new trilogy so far. Smaug is a terrifying creation, superbly-designed and executed with miraculous CGI. Voiced and performed by Cumberbatch, his dialogue is colourful and witty, and he owns the screen for every frame in which he appears. It's enthralling to watch his back-and-forth with Bilbo, and the action-heavy conclusion wows with its splendid visual intricacy and wonderful sense of tension. Indeed, after sufficient build-up in which Jackson establishes what's at stake and lets us get to know the ensemble of characters, the climax is a true showstopper.


As with its immediate predecessor, The Desolation of Smaug is presented in 3-D at 48 frames per second. Like An Unexpected Journey, the 3-D is nice but inessential, and the high frame rate presentation is more of a curiosity than a requirement. The smoothest way to view the movie is in 2-D and regular old 24 frames per second, especially since The Lord of the Rings did perfectly fine without the extra gimmicks.

Although this trilogy is called The Hobbit, Bilbo Baggins becomes more of a supporting player for the proceedings here, allowing Thorin to do most of the dramatic heavy lifting. Nevertheless, Freeman's performance as Bilbo remains hugely endearing, and you feel his fear and apprehension when he encounters Smaug. Cumberbatch and Freeman also co-star together on the TV series Sherlock, thus it's a unique novelty to see the actors bantering in this context. The Desolation of Smaug brings back a familiar face as well, with Orlando Bloom returning as the arrow-zipping Legolas. The character was not in the book, but his presence feels organic to this adaptation of the story, amplifying the sense of continuity between the trilogies. Meanwhile, Evangeline Lilly is a solid newcomer to the cast, and her character of Tauriel - who is a completely original creation - is a nice inclusion. Other newcomers include Luke Evans and Stephen Fry, while the returning actors make a positive impression, too. Indeed, Richard Armitage remains a passionate Thorin, and the irreplaceable McKellen is a wonderfully warm Gandalf.


Admittedly, by the end of The Desolation of Smaug, not a great deal of narrative material has been covered, but Middle-earth is such a rich backdrop for an action-adventure, and Jackson colours in the broad strokes with lively set-pieces and some welcome character moments (the film opens with an interesting flashback, and at various points we get the sense that the One Ring is beginning to take its toll on Bilbo). For a flick running almost three hours, it really hauls ass, and the pace rarely slows down, not to mention the showdown with Smaug is one of the best things you will see all year. The Desolation of Smaug is primo entertainment, and it concludes with a breathtaking cliffhanger for the next chapter.

8.9/10



0 comments, Reply to this entry

A good movie

Posted : 10 years, 4 months ago on 16 December 2013 11:37

I already saw this movie, I even saw it in the movie theater when it was released, but since I just bought an awesome brand new TV, I thought I might as well check it out again. On top of that, I just bought the Extended edition on Blu-ray. Honestly, the first time around, I was already rather skeptical about this flick. Indeed, while most of us were happy that Peter Jackson managed to make 3 movies for the LOTR trilogy (a bold move at the time), we also dreaded the fact that he decided to make also 3 movies from ā€˜The Hobbitā€™ which is, in contrary to 'The Lord of the Rings', a rather modest book. Furthermore, the more I thought about the first installment, the more I thought that my rating was too generous. Still, this sequel turned out to be quite a spectacle after all. The first positive thing is that I really enjoyed the 3D HFR version (in IMAX). The year before, I wasnā€™t sure about this technique but, this time, it looked just gorgeous . Concerning the story, it was still fairly entertaining but, unfortunately, it had become quite obvious that this trilogy will never reach the epicness of the LOTR. The first issue was that everything had a feeling of dĆ©jĆ  vu and most of what they came across (the spiders, the hidden door, the elf city,ā€¦) was already displayed in the previous trilogy. Furthermore, the fellowship with humans, elves, dwarves and hobbits was just awesome, whereas this company of dwarves was fairly entertaining but not really charismatic. On the other hand, in my opinion, Tauriel was a nice addition and her romantic angle with Kili didnā€™t bother me like so many other viewers. Furthermore, Middle Earth is still a fascinating world and Iā€™m obviously a huge fan. Anyway, to conclude, I have to confess it, my rating for this movie was too generous and I had to lower it after watching this movie a couple of times but I still think it is a solid fantasy feature and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.



0 comments, Reply to this entry

A better paced and much more exciting prequel.

Posted : 10 years, 4 months ago on 16 December 2013 02:41

After waiting for almost a decade, The Hobbit prequels to Lord Of The Rings began with the impressive yet somewhat poorly-paced and stretched predecessor An Unexpected Journey last year. Some could argue that it became a disappointment to Tolkien fans for stretching approximately one hundred pages of writing into an almost three-hour film. However, the second installment The Desolation Of Smaug is a much stronger, exciting and thrilling adventure. This sequel is in a dangerous position because its execution could go either way - whether itā€™ll provide central concepts to the plot thatā€™ll lead to the finale or that itā€™ll be an inaccurate, weaker follow-up. Although Jackson implemented certain features in The Desolation Of Smaug that were not in Tolkienā€™s book, it is an impressive sequel that somewhat redeems An Unexpected Journey and ends with a superb cliffhanger leaving the audience to eagerly await for There And Back Again next Christmas.


The main issue with this entire Hobbit trilogy is how Jackson is stretching the contents of a single 361-page book into three lengthy films. An Unexpected Journeyā€™s pacing was rather weak and filled approximately half of the novel into almost three hours. However, The Desolation Of Smaug gets straight to the point by filling in multiple plot concepts in the middle of the book whilst still providing enough narrative space and time for viewers to enjoy. While the main plot is of Bilbo, Thorin and companiesā€™ continuous quest to the Lonely Mountain, the sequel has many subplots - Gandalfā€™s search of Necromancer and the love triangle between Legolas, Tauriel and Kili. The latter may have been a ridiculous shoe-in for Jackson to initiate longer running time but it somehow does not ruin the film. Besides, Tolkien told multiple sub-plots in Lord Of The Rings, much like Jackson did in the films. In fact, Jackson is almost spot on with pacing this time. Also, the plot is full of multiple locations and new characters who werenā€™t in An Unexpected Journey (yes, even Smaug). Still, although we witnessed a weak opening sequence with no meaning of what happens in The Desolation Of Smaug (it becomes more of a reminder), Jackson has really picked up the pace.


Of course, Tolkien fans have been expecting The Hobbit film adaptations to appear as epic and realistic, visually, compared to Lord Of The Rings. However, the difference is that not only is there a ten-year gap between the trilogies but Lord Of The Rings is a trilogy primarily for a teenager and adult audience whereas The Hobbit has been described as a gem of childrenā€™s literature. So, quite frankly, the visuals are going to be different. At the same time, audiences would expect them to be identical seeing as The Desolation Of Smaug is part of a prequel trilogy and for it to feel connected to Lord Of The Rings. This sequel is not only darker, narrative wise, than its predecessor but it is visually darker and provides a more serious tone to the trilogy. Similarly, the 3D format is actually worth the money in this sequel, particularly the barrel sequence and of course, to finally see the dragon in the flesh.


Martin Freeman proved himself to be a fantastic choice for the role of Bilbo Baggins in An Unexpected Journey and once again, he maintains that in The Desolation Of Smaug. Bilboā€™s true character was exposed in this second prequel as he faced a great deal of danger which required bravery and courage. Freemanā€™s subtle execution of Bilbo became success as we saw him become more vulnerable at the same time slowly begins to be under the manipulation of the Ring. Ian McKellen delivers a great performance once again as Gandalf the Grey. While he was undoubtedly the best actor in Lord Of The Rings, his performance has not changed and it was great to see him back. Richard Armitage still does not entirely impress as Thorin Oakenshield. Yes, he possessed that bitter, cold attitude but his desperation to reclaim Erebor and signs of courage were lacking in this sequel. Hopefully, he can improvise one final time in There And Back Again.


Undoubtedly the highlighted character in The Desolation Of Smaug is Smaug himself, beautifully voiced and performed via motion-capture by Benedict Cumberbatch. In Tolkienā€™s novel and prior to fully witnessing Smaug, he has been known as a terrible, powerful dragon and Jacksonā€™s interpretation of the character was jaw-dropping. Dragons have always been portrayed as dominant species of special magnificence and Smaug ultimately fulfills that. Still, Cumberbatchā€™s role was absolutely fantastic and perhaps runs up towards the brilliance of Andy Serkis as Gollum. Perhaps Cumberbatchā€™s key quality as Smaug was his booming voice which served as a personal quality and was beautifully applied with the dragonā€™s visual image. Therefore in the cinema world, Smaug has ultimately become the beast of all beasts and Tolkien would be proud. Cumberbatchā€™s portrayal of The Necromancer is also worth noting too as he provided a sinister performance through voice which leads to the return of a certain villain in Lord Of The Rings.


On a similar note, the return of certain Lord Of The Rings characters who are not in the original Hobbit novel has been another big issue for fans. For example, Orlando Bloom reprises his role as Legolas. While he was great in Lord Of The Rings his involvement was not necessarily required. His physical appearance looked rather strange, particularly eye contact lenses. It looked too comical and did not entirely look like the Legolas who we saw in Lord Of The Rings. However, that does not necessarily mean that his general appearance was not terrible. No, Legolas was not mentioned in the original book, but Bilbo and the Dwarvesā€™ encounter with the Elves in Mirkwood would be another way for Jackson to provide slightly original ideas whilst still flowing along with Tolkienā€™s original story.


Although The Desolation Of Smaug had a few minor issues with sub-plot and implementation of characters, it is a vast improvement on An Unexpected Journey. The second prequel has provided more adventure, Tolkienā€™s literature trademark, and more action that has enhanced a more refreshing return to Middle-Earth. This Hobbit series perhaps was not going to be the exact same Middle-Earth that Jackson entered into with Lord Of The Rings trilogy but this second prequel really is not far. Nevertheless, The Desolation Of Smaug is an entertaining and intense film that has left us to enhance our excitement for the long-awaited finale in this trilogy.


0 comments, Reply to this entry


« Prev12 Next »