*** The Hobbit: The Desolation Of Smaug ***

Guys how long do we think this will be showing for (IMAX Crawley only shows till the 19th).

After Christmas/New Year?
 
I enjoyed it but I wish they hadn't made so much of the Elf combat CGI :( Never felt long to me though, nothing felt drawn out and it was entertaining throughout. In fact some bits felt surprisingly quick.
 
Seen it last night and was a little disappointed with it. Got super-hyped reading about it, but thought it was a bit of a let down in parts. The visuals looked really good at times, but also patchy at times as well.

That Sauron bit was stupid I thought. The silhouette forming the Great Eye? Silly. Looked cheap.

Thought the bit in Mirkwood with Bilbo destroying that spider because it got near the ring was brilliant. Really portrayed the desire and addiction to it quite well.
 
Maxeh said:
Guys how long do we think this will be showing for (IMAX Crawley only shows till the 19th).

After Christmas/New Year?
Click to expand...

I've just looked and Imax or HFR showings are still scheduled in Crawley till the 26th but you can't tell beyond then. Don't think there are any more major imax films due atm so there is a good chance. I'm going to see it then so I hope so too!
 
Back from seeing it. It was enjoyable, if not a little too long and Smaug was great.

Shame PJ didn't make this in two parts. Some of it is drawn out and don't raise your expectation with some of the hype, it is not epic. The 3D and CGI is ok
 
I enjoyed it (I've seen it twice now) but it's still not up to the Lord of the Rings standard.

There were however some stand out moments and at the same time some face palming moments.
 
Watched last night in standard 2D at my local Odeon.

In my opinion a massive improvement when compared to very poor first movie, especially last 50 minutes. To me the CGi was alright, only scene which looked really poor was the barrel chase. I'd much prefer extras/stuntmen in costume portraying the Orcs/Goblins when possible instead of dodgy CGi. Good second outing, but so far Hobbits not a patch on the Rings trilogy, last film better be a jaw dropper. :)
 
Martini1991 said:
Is it me, or did sections of CGI get lower quality?
And LOL at the underwater little clips, they were hilariously bad.
Click to expand...

No, not you... some of the poorest high budget CGI I can recall. The ultra low budget film 'Monsters' did a better job.

Some of the animation looked like games of ten years ago :(
 
Martini1991 said:
Is it me, or did sections of CGI get lower quality?
And LOL at the underwater little clips, they were hilariously bad.
Click to expand...

Which underwater clips?

Pros:
  • Smaug looked fantastic and sounded better
  • Enjoyed the pacing of the film
  • Thranduil was superb, really gave the elves a slightly different dimension
  • Enjoyed the barrels and escape from the Woodland realm
  • Gandalf v Sauron was pretty brilliant to watch, but just didn't feel or 'fit' within what happens in the story with me, despite it being a bit badass
  • Thought all the performances were very good
  • 'She elf' was a welcome addition to start with
  • Bard and his extended presence was fantastic
  • Enjoyed the sets, Laketown and the Woodland realm looked fantastic
  • Beorn was brilliant, but could have done with more of him (confirmed more shots were filmed though and they should be included in the extended edition)
  • The many, many references to the Lord of the Rings were appreciated

Cons:
  • Fry was good, but nothing more, in fact, he was a little underwhelming but I would expect (hope) to see more of him in the extended edition
  • The whole fight with Smaug just felt unwarranted
  • The 'gold' and the 'statue' looked very weak (imho)
  • The gold looked average and considering the giant dragon landing on it I expected more from it
  • Tauriel started well, but quickly dissolved in to the love interested and became a poorer character for it I felt
  • Erebor just didn't feel quite right for me.
  • While I enjoyed the majority of the CGI (except the gold stuff towards the end) I really don't think (and this applied to the first film) there was any need to use CGI to do all the orcs, the make up and prosthetics and small uses of CGI worked so well in the Lord of the Rings and gave them just a better feel

I've probably missed loads of things off actually, but meh. The film, felt like a rollercoaster ride but one that left you wanting more and with an overwhelming sense of pleasure at the end, this wasn't totally true of the first for me, the very slow start to the first was problematic and I still feel that certain sequences of pure spectacle just aren't needed but this applies to them both.

It did look fantastic, 48 frames in 3D and in 'normal', it's a gorgeous film.
 
Last edited:
Shamikebab said:
Also the:

Dwarf/Elf romance thing

**** you Jackson, stop doing stupid things.
Click to expand...

Didn't you know? He's in-line to be the next Speilberg / George Lucas...

LateX'Dog said:
So given the option, 3D or non 3D?
Click to expand...

I didn't watch it in 3D but the general feedback from mates who have is it adds nothing. I'd save the money for something better next time, or upsize your popcorn/drinks.
 
Watched this over the weekend. I enjoyed it, better than the first one but still lacks that epic feel that LOTR had.

What I don't like about this series of films is the CGI orcs. It would give the film a much more grittier and immersive feel if they used actors in prosthetics like in LOTR rather than have them CGI'd.

Saying that, they did nail Smaug and Cumberbatch's voice acting was superb.

Like others have said, why oh why have a frigging elf falling in love with a dwarf!?

Also, the Dol Guldur scene. How much creative licence did Peter Jackson have for this? I've not read in between the Hobbit and LOTR and I don't remember any references to Gandalf fighting Sauron. Did this actually happen?
 
Yes it happened.


The book was purely Bilbo's tale, every so often Gandalf would leave the party but not being with Bilbo any more it wasn't covered. The film is covering all the additional material as it's pretty important and fits it in with LOTR better.
 
watched this yesterday. Quite good (not a patch on Fellowship or Two Towers but yes as good as Return of the King)

The 3d for me actually made the film much much better. Thought it was decent enough. But the way they presented the dragon scenes seemed to have 3d in mind to me..will mention more below.

I only have a few complaints....which ill put in spoilers

1. Only one even barely memorable line in the entire movie.."we dont have jiffy" :D
2. Dwarf/Elf romance..No No No No NO!
3. Biggest letdown and best bits of movie were the Dragon scenes. Whole scene of escaping from the dragon felt like an on rails rollcoaster experience...in other words **** ! Yes good from a special effects kinda woah! point of view but it felt quite unrealistic to me and was too drawn out... How does a dragon with that size of nose not able to smell exactly where Bilbo is or where the dwarfs are for that matter.

Its disturbing but this bit of the movie reminded me of the movie 2012 and the way it was shot.....those who have seen this monstrosity will know what i mean...on rails 'disney' disaster movie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom