New Movie: The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies

  • Thread starter Thread starter Thomas48
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Just watched it with the whole family last Saturday. If one were to consider the film a send-off to the Peter Jackson take of LotR, I would say it performs well enough. I admit though that it really looks like the franchise is on its last leg on this one.

Lastly, I’m not sure whether the depiction of Dain II Ironfoot was one of the greatest things in the film or maybe I have a subconscious, love-hate bias in favor of fantasy stereotypes.
 
Just saw it yesterday. A big thumbs up. I’m curious to see the other films now.
 
To expand on the above just seeing the opening scenes of Smaug destroying Rivertown was worth the price of admission. My 8-year-old son turned to me a few minutes into the movie and whispered “this is awesome…!”

Peter Jackson invented a few subplots to round out the movie and add a few female characters, but it didn’t bother me much, I suppose because it had some verisimilitude. I could have done with a little less of the villainous assistant to the Master of Laketown, especially because when his cowardice is played for laughs it seems jarringly out of place in the middle of the genuinely frightening overrunning of the ruins of Dale by an orc army.
 
Thomas48 said:
I am extreme lover of movies and a big fan of the director Peter Jackson, especially the movie The Lovely Bones. I watched his Middle Earth - J.R.R Tolkien based movies and found them to be pretty good as well. It seems the third installment to The Hobbit is coming out in December, anyone else excited for this?

**Trailer: **youtube.com/watch?v=iVAgTiBrrDA
Click to expand...
I have blissfully been spared having to see any of the Hobbit movies. 😃
 
tomarin said:
To expand on the above just seeing the opening scenes of Smaug destroying Rivertown was worth the price of admission. My 8-year-old son turned to me a few minutes into the movie and whispered “this is awesome…!”

Peter Jackson invented a few subplots to round out the movie and add a few female characters, but it didn’t bother me much, I suppose because it had some verisimilitude. I could have done with a little less of the villainous assistant to the Master of Laketown, especially because when his cowardice is played for laughs it seems jarringly out of place in the middle of the genuinely frightening overrunning of the ruins of Dale by an orc army.
Click to expand...
I agree - the Smaug scene was one of the best actions scenes I’ve seen in a long time. Tauriel was not as prominent in this movie, so that should quell the purists a little, especially since she was forced into the story to satisfy perhaps some feminist demand of having a “kick-*** chick” in the movie in the director’s words. Legolas also is not a character from The Hobbit, but I enjoyed many of his battle scenes and he is at least a true Tolkien character with a place in that world.

I thought the film was well-paced save for a dreamy sequence with Thorin and the Peter Jackson patented dragged out ending.

There were several times in the theater during an action sequence when different people in the theater around me went “Whoa.”

Best of the three Hobbit movies if you ask me. 😃
 
Joe_5859 said:
Here is Steve Greydanus’ review of the third Hobbit movie:

ncregister.com/daily-news/sdg-reviews-the-hobbit-3/

All in all, it seems along the lines of what I’d expect. I will probably enjoy the movie more so than Greydanus (as with the previous two installments). I generally agree with his criticisms, but I suppose I find it easier to overlook the faults than he does. 😛
Click to expand...
I often don’t agree with Gredanus’ reviews, but I frequently read them because he does provide useful information. I think he is much more character driven in his reviews and I am much more storyline driven. In other words, I think I can tolerate flatter characters if the story is clever, well-paced, ironic, or has a nice twist. Greydanus goes in very deep to the maturity or journey of personal development of characters way more than me. :o
 
tomarin said:
To expand on the above just seeing the opening scenes of Smaug destroying Rivertown was worth the price of admission. My 8-year-old son turned to me a few minutes into the movie and whispered “this is awesome…!”

Peter Jackson invented a few subplots to round out the movie and add a few female characters, but it didn’t bother me much, I suppose because it had some verisimilitude. I could have done with a little less of the villainous assistant to the Master of Laketown, especially because when his cowardice is played for laughs it seems jarringly out of place in the middle of the genuinely frightening overrunning of the ruins of Dale by an orc army.
Click to expand...
I’ve yet to watch the film, but to be fair, I have quite high expectations for Stephen Fry (the Master of Laketown). 😃
 
MarcoPolo said:
I agree - the Smaug scene was one of the best actions scenes I’ve seen in a long time. Tauriel was not as prominent in this movie, so that should quell the purists a little, especially since she was forced into the story to satisfy perhaps some feminist demand of having a “kick-*** chick” in the movie in the director’s words. Legolas also is not a character from The Hobbit, but I enjoyed many of his battle scenes and he is at least a true Tolkien character with a place in that world.

I thought the film was well-paced save for a dreamy sequence with Thorin and the Peter Jackson patented dragged out ending.

There were several times in the theater during an action sequence when different people in the theater around me went “Whoa.”

Best of the three Hobbit movies if you ask me. 😃
Click to expand...
Tauriel also does double duty as eye candy for men. In fact, I am willing to go further and say this is the primary reason why there is a Tauriel. PJ may say the need for a kick-a## chick since this is a more, ahem, PC, explanation.
 
Sarcelle said:
Tauriel also does double duty as eye candy for men. In fact, I am willing to go further and say this is the primary reason why there is a Tauriel. PJ may say the need for a kick-a## chick since this is a more, ahem, PC, explanation.
Click to expand...
I never found Evangeline Lilly particularly pretty, until I saw her in this.
 
I saw the movie opening night, I have to say not bad but with some drawbacks. Like the majority of critics, the CGI was a little too much but besides that P.J left out some very important scenes. In example, the whole concept of the movie was the issue of dividing the treasure among elves, dwarves, and men which starts the battle. For those who did not read the books, it leaves everyone wondering what exactly happens with the central issue.

Secondly, since the Hobbit movies tie more towards Thorin instead of Bilbo, and the retaking of Erebor, I’m very curious why P.J didn’t explain the status of the dwarven kingdom in the end. For those who read the books, we know that Dain is the heir apparent of Durins Folk and he becomes the new king with Thorin, Fili, and Kilis deaths but the movie didn’t touch on that at all. I was really disappointed especially because the director centralized on the dwarves. He really could of added these scenes and it would not have wasted time because the movie was shorter than the other two. Besides these three main issues, I really enjoyed the movie and it was a great way to end the Middle Earth Saga.
 
Sarcelle said:
Tauriel also does double duty as eye candy for men. In fact, I am willing to go further and say this is the primary reason why there is a Tauriel. PJ may say the need for a kick-a## chick since this is a more, ahem, PC, explanation.
Click to expand...
I dunno - she’s clad pretty heavily to be eye candy, at least compared to most other movies. But I believe him about the “kick-*** chick” demand in movies. She’s quite similar to Katniss actually - she wields a bow superbly and has 2 men desiring her at the same time. I think she’s more there for the women than the men.
 
We saw it Christmas Day and enjoyed it very much. Like Thomas48 I too was disappointed that after having introduced Dain PJ just dropped him without explaining that he was the heir to Erebor since all the heirs apparent, Kili and Fili had died, as well as the heir, having no issue. It would have been easy to insert a quick scene in which Dain would accept the kingship. As a woman I was fine with Tauriel. Not really that far afield from Tolkien who wrote a short story about a dwarf in love with a elf lady–can’t recall the name or the circumstances of it, but he did. I found that story line rather touching. And I could understand Legolas wanting to leave home even though his father had apparently abandoned his isolationist stance. As for the CGI–I hardly noticed. Frankly battles scenes bore me. I only cared about the smaller moments in the battles when the main characters were in play. I cried over the deaths and the grief of the survivors–and I wasn’t the only one. I could hear sniffling and nose blowing all around us at the theater. All in all a satisfying film. I’ll be buying the DVD when it comes out. I’ll have all the Tolkien’s ME stories except the Silmarillion to view. That’s the next one for someone else to make one day, I hope.
 
Saw it today. Good movie, no real complaints, not my favorite because there was no humor in this one.
 
Phil502 said:
Saw it today. Good movie, no real complaints, not my favorite because there was no humor in this one.
Click to expand...
Yes, it was a bit grim, wasn’t it? The only humor I got from it was very subtle, such as Thranduil and Gandalf’s reaction to Bilbo’s verbal defense of the Dwarves. And when poor Bilbo came back to his home to find it being ransacked and everthing being sold–retrieving his spoons from Lobelia Sacksville-Baggins.

It may be that PJ took to heart all the criticism that his first film adaptations had too much humor in them. In any case, together with the others, it holds up very well. Tolkien himself often referred to this life as the “long defeat” due to the fact that we cannot find lasting happiness in this world. Still, PJ could have put a few more ligther touches into the last film–as he had in the others.
 
Della said:
Yes, it was a bit grim, wasn’t it? The only humor I got from it was very subtle, such as Thranduil and Gandalf’s reaction to Bilbo’s verbal defense of the Dwarves. And when poor Bilbo came back to his home to find it being ransacked and everthing being sold–retrieving his spoons from Lobelia Sacksville-Baggins.

It may be that PJ took to heart all the criticism that his first film adaptations had too much humor in them. In any case, together with the others, it holds up very well. Tolkien himself often referred to this life as the “long defeat” due to the fact that we cannot find lasting happiness in this world. Still, PJ could have put a few more ligther touches into the last film–as he had in the others.
Click to expand...
Don’t forget the townsman apprentice - they guy with the hunch shoulder. He was supposed to be comic relief.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top