It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Hopefully this movie will be worth the wait, and if so then the next movie also going to be worth it!
It's only a matter of time until we see fan videos of the confrontation between Bilbo and Smaug being played with dubs from Sherlock.
And vice versa, of course.
It dawned on me about a week ago that they're allies in 'Sherlock' and enemies in 'The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug.' I can't wait.
Because of it's shorter running time, more things happens in a shorter span of time and the movie is overall more intense. There isn't much time to breath before new things happens and new characters get's introduced (all of which works well).
All the actors are great as usual, with the brilliant Freeman as Bilbo it can't go wrong. Cumberbatch was also splendid in his both two roles, even though i wouldn't know it was him if i didn't know it before. A small dissapointment is my fellow country-man Mikael Persbrandts role as Beorn, he wasn't in the film as much as the media here had made us belive. Oh, well he will return in the next film!
The CGI was unbelivably good, and that come's from someone who doesen't like overuse of CGI in movies.
The problem with the film is the editing, things just happens. Some things get's left out to carry on the story. And i can't get a sense of whom the story centers around because it's so much intercutting between the characters. I can't really relate to these characters in the same way as i did to The Fellowship in the LOTR-trilogy.
The editing is particulary evident in the climax of the film.
But the small references to the LOTR-trilogy is just great (especially one with Legolas) and it is a great buil-up to the last part and eventually to LOTR. The film ends with a huge cliffhanger that leaves me waiting for more.
Desolation of Smaug: 8/10
An Unexpected Journey: 7/10
It is interesting that you say that you can't have a sense of whom the story centers around, because that is one of the main complaints I have with Jackson's work in The Hobbit. The book centered around, obviously, Bilbo Baggins, it's his journey after all! Other characters, except maybe Smaug, are somewhat bystanders to his adventure. I heard some disturbing reports by fellow ringers that a large portion of the interaction between Bilbo and Smaug was changed. Originally only Bilbo and Smaug in a game of wits, no intervention by anyone else. All this need of having everyone doing something heroic only results in dilution of the story, in my opinion.
Obviously I'm still looking forward to see it! But I'm keeping by Tolkien-fan expectations at an all time low.
Yes, but if you are accustomed to regular films today it won't be a issue. There isn't cutting alá Paul Greengrass, even though it's quite fast.
The issue with the editing is that the film focuses on too many things on a short span of time, it isn't as smooth as it were in the LOTR trilogy were all stories blended into eachother nicely. It were just too much that were going on and that's were the editing fails from time to time.
I can, it's called play the game The Lord of the Rings: The Third Age, except you get the crappy characters from that game to play as instead of the Fellowship, meaning it's a lot worse.
It was going to be, but it'll release on December 17th, 2014 now.
I guess it was an idea to cash in on the summer box-office, but the films do well enough in December so I wouldn't see the point in it.
I wonder why I was reminded of James Bond talking to Auric Goldfinger...
Absolutely @113, though I understand it would require a lot more time. There are worse offenders in the franchise, I'm afraid. For example: Sam not putting on the One, no Gil Galad taking Frodo to Rivendell (or no Gil Galad at all), no Elladan and Elrohir (Elrond's twin sons), no grey company, forgetting about the 18 years that passed between the time Bilbo left Bag End and the time Frodo takes the ring out of the Shire, no Andúril forged from the start, no scouring of the Shire... I could go on forever. However, somehow, the LOTR film trilogy kept the spirit of the books intact.
Coming Soon to a GCSE curriculum near you!
Anyway, I'm glad I'm not a purist because I do enjoy these films for what they are. The LOTR trilogy is brilliant and I enjoyed the hobbit. I'm really looking forward to seeing this tomorrow.
Sam don't looking through Galadriel's mirror!
To tell you the truth, for me the things they add are worse than the ones they don't include. For example, Elves helping on Helm's Deep Battle, Aragorn seeming to be dead, Ents not wanting to fight at first.
One of the things that annoys me most is the take on Faramir. In the book he was so noble from the start, like Ulysses, with the proper amount of arete. But of course, it's more dramatic if he changes after some speech with a montage...
Well, if I got it right the dwarves
Anyway, back from the cinema: I haven´t read any of the books, yet I´m not sure what to think of this. If you enjoyed the first one you´re gonna love this. I got the impression that this whole Hobbit story is by far less complex than LOTR, yet the film doesn´t acknowledge that fact.
Like in AUJ, there are moments that seem more like a re-hash of than a nod to LOTR. There are great moments too.