Anybody seen the Desolation of Smaug (Hobbit 2) yet?

[Overmind One]

I have this movie and have watched it a couple of times. But not solid all the way through. It is a long ass movie! 2 hours and 40 minutes. I was hoping perhaps somebody here went to see it, but no threads come up in the search, so what did you think? I am getting ready to watch it once again. I really have to be in the mood to watch this genre of movie.

 

[shavedape]

I find that Peter Jackson can get tedious fast so I'm just going to wait until this one hits Netflix.

Didn't GateFan go and see this one? I thought he was a Tolkien fan.

 

[Gatefan1976]

Going on Wednesday, have to arrange babysitters and such

 

[shavedape]

Well that was quick!

 

[Gatefan1976]

damn right

 

[Overmind One]

I find that Peter Jackson can get tedious fast so I'm just going to wait until this one hits Netflix.

Didn't GateFan go and see this one? I thought he was a Tolkien fan.

This time, a DVD screener was made available right away without having to tolerate a cam version first.



This second movie is better than the first Hobbit movie.

 

[Illiterati]

I really enjoyed it. Looking forward to the next one.

 

[Overmind One]

I really enjoyed it. Looking forward to the next one.

I agree. I liked this second movie a whole lot. I did not want to start writing about it because it is so new and easy to spoil. But it made me look forward to the next one too.

 

[Illiterati]

We watched the several hours long behind the scenes stuff from the bluray from the first movie. Fun and informative -- and some interesting background stuff from the actors, as well.

 

[YJ02]

From what I have read, this part is faster pace of action and just more engaging-a lot like the LOTR's trilogy-many ppl favor Two Towers and RofTK over Fellowship of the Ring

If anyone made a short and fast Tolkien movie it wouldn't be worth watching.

I have seen some of the deleted scenes from part one. Just like LOTR;s, watching the extended editions is the better bet for a "truer" lift of Tolkien. Though Jackson added characters like the elven girl, and put in the story line from the LOTR appendices into the Hobbit (giving us characters not in the Hobbit book like Galadriel and Saruman, the Necromancer, Radagast, ) it all is either from Tolkien's words or written in a Tolkien style (that is even though he didn't write it-the Elven girl-it still fits his style)

I am currently reading through the 10 volumes of Tolkiens "History of Middle Earth" which is really a compendium of alternate manuscripts, backstory, extended story and even the story of how all of this "lore" got into the hands of the modern world (a bit sci-fi'ish) How is that for "Uber geek"? It is really remarkable in how Tolkien devoted so much time and so many yrs into developing all of this knowing that so much of what he wrote (outlines and the "meat" and why's of everything that was published) would never be seen by readers-His son though has seen to it that we can.

 

[YJ02]

Just got in my order of "War of the Jewels" from amazon! Yes--

 

[Gatefan1976]

Just got back an hour ago, good story, good visuals, but some parts lacked a little "heart" such as most of the sequences in the Water town. Even though I am a big Steve Fry fan, I just found most of that entire section *flat* I know it lays important groundwork for later on, but, still, it just was "off". As for the rest, all very cool, especially the arrogance of the Silvan Elves and the desire to bury their heads n the sand while the world burns. The whole series in the lonely mountain were very cool as well, especially the discussion between Smaug and Bilbo.

I would give it a solid 8 out of 10, only losing a bit by the aforementioned lack of "heart" in bits.

 

[OMNI]

Just got back an hour ago, good story, good visuals, but some parts lacked a little "heart" such as most of the sequences in the Water town. Even though I am a big Steve Fry fan, I just found most of that entire section *flat* I know it lays important groundwork for later on, but, still, it just was "off". As for the rest, all very cool, especially the arrogance of the Silvan Elves and the desire to bury their heads n the sand while the world burns. The whole series in the lonely mountain were very cool as well, especially the discussion between Smaug and Bilbo.

I would give it a solid 8 out of 10, only losing a bit by the aforementioned lack of "heart" in bits.

bolded= +1

 

[Gatefan1976]

bolded= +1

Besides cutting it out, which is really not viable in the story, how do you think they could have done better with it dude? By my own admission it was missing "something" (and "my interest" is not a viable answer ) but it was missing something. It was not action, as their is plenty of elf on orc fun, it was not reason, as there was a clear reason for them going there, it's............. something else, something I cannot put my finger on. I said "heart", but that's not exactly it either. Was it Bard being a totally flat character? I admit I got no "goosebumps" when he pulled out the last shot for the ballista, in fact it was very "meh, what a shocker" which is the same response I would have given years ago when I first read the book. Being the desendant of the last person who tries something is a big thing in Tolkeins work, changing fate and so on, but yeah, this one just felt.......... meh.

 

[YJ02]

Besides cutting it out, which is really not viable in the story, how do you think they could have done better with it dude? By my own admission it was missing "something" (and "my interest" is not a viable answer ) but it was missing something. It was not action, as their is plenty of elf on orc fun, it was not reason, as there was a clear reason for them going there, it's............. something else, something I cannot put my finger on. I said "heart", but that's not exactly it either. Was it Bard being a totally flat character? I admit I got no "goosebumps" when he pulled out the last shot for the ballista, in fact it was very "meh, what a shocker" which is the same response I would have given years ago when I first read the book. Being the desendant of the last person who tries something is a big thing in Tolkeins work, changing fate and so on, but yeah, this one just felt.......... meh.

Jackson and his people are very goo at bringing alive " actual" events from the books, however they do fall flat when they are winging it. It's ok has story filler and IMO is done as close to a tolkien style as one could get. Laketown is flat probably because in the book not much really happens there other then the quarrel between Bard and the Dwarves. I heard that the Laketown parts have Elves and Orcs? If true, well that of course is total ad lib by Jackson -although it may make sense in following through from his previous ad libs of having orcs trailing the party since before they got to Rivendale. The only Orcs in the book were the ones in goblin town- under the mountains-and later, their allies from the Mt Gundabad/ Angmar.

I remember no ballista from the book, I believe it was solely bow and arrow action by Bard and his men

Bard is "flat" because he is little more then 1 dimensional in the book. His main purpose was in the actual killing of Smaug. Fulfilling a long destiny of a long dead forefather, Turin, that once killed another Dragon. (In Tolkien's world, only men are reckless/brave enough to take on a dragon--Elves just took out the Dragon's "ground support" the Orcs--Men fight for glory while the Elves are much more pragmatic)

The Elves are cold and aloof because that is their way, it is why they live in the forest and below ground to begin with. These Elves have had little to do with other Elves or men over the years and only engaged enemies as they entered into Mirkwood. In the Tolkien world, these Silvan Elves are 'dark elves' those that refused to follow through on the ancient summons to Aman and left the journey. Thranduil and some others are remnants of other Elves who completed the journey to Beleriand but then refused to leave Middle Earth, after the over throw of Morgoth, Thranduil's father led a remnant of these Elves east into both Lorien and then to Greenwood/Mirkwood. Therefore the elves you see in the film are aloof and carefree due to their ancient ways and they are only aroused to come forth because of their ruler Thranduil who is of a different Elven kind--OF course, I don't suspect that any of this (as a spoken backstory) was in the film though

But like I said before, so long as they stick to the core story then I can deal with reasonable additions

 

[Gatefan1976]

Jackson and his people are very good at bringing alive " actual" events from the books, however they do fall flat when they are winging it. It's ok has story filler and IMO is done as close to a tolkien style as one could get. Laketown is flat probably because in the book not much really happens there other then the quarrel between Bard and the Dwarves. I heard that the Laketown parts have Elves and Orcs? If true, well that of course is total ad lib by Jackson -although it may make sense in following through from his previous ad libs of having orcs trailing the party since before they got to Rivendale. The only Orcs in the book were the ones in goblin town- under the mountains-and later, their allies from the Mt Gundabad/ Angmar.

That's right dude. It makes "movie sense", but as you say, when he ad-libs, it tends to go sidewards. PJ is not someone I would expect to make "his own movies" (wanna see his own work, watch meet the feebles) He IS however very good at adapting a story to the screen, he can "translate" well. (which is a laudable skill all its own, but it is NOT the same as creating your own source material).

I remember no ballista from the book, I believe it was solely bow and arrow action by Bard and his men

It was, but PJ was setting up his own "legacy weapon" and the way they built up Smaug (as a now ancient Wyrm, rather than still an adult), a bow just would not cut it anymore.

Bard is "flat" because he is little more then 1 dimensional in the book. His main purpose was in the actual killing of Smaug. Fulfilling a long destiny of a long dead forefather, Turin, that once killed another Dragon. (In Tolkien's world, only men are reckless/brave enough to take on a dragon--Elves just took out the Dragon's "ground support" the Orcs--Men fight for glory while the Elves are much more pragmatic)

Yup, Men make their own fate in M-E, whereas the Elves, the dwarves and the Wizards are tied to a far older fate *that they are aware of* Hobbits have even more free will.

The Elves are cold and aloof because that is their way, it is why they live in the forest and below ground to begin with. These Elves have had little to do with other Elves or men over the years and only engaged enemies as they entered into Mirkwood. In the Tolkien world, these Silvan Elves are 'dark elves' those that refused to follow through on the ancient summons to Aman and left the journey. Thranduil and some others are remnants of other Elves who completed the journey to Beleriand but then refused to leave Middle Earth, after the over throw of Morgoth, Thranduil's father led a remnant of these Elves east into both Lorien and then to Greenwood/Mirkwood. Therefore the elves you see in the film are aloof and carefree due to their ancient ways and they are only aroused to come forth because of their ruler Thranduil who is of a different Elven kind--OF course, I don't suspect that any of this (as a spoken backstory) was in the film though

It's expressed via Tauriel, (Legolas' Girlfriend) rather than Thranduil in the movie, she is the one who still has a sense of wonder for the world, which is why she get Legolas in to help the dwarves (though she couches it as hunting the orc invaders instead of helping the Dwarves directly). So, the interest is still there, just expressed via a different character and given a "forbidden elf/dwarf love" makeover. (to be fair it's not really "love" more a mutual fascination with opposing views/lives)

Anyway, go see it dude, you will like it about 80%, same as I did I think

 

[YJ02]

That's right dude. It makes "movie sense", but as you say, when he ad-libs, it tends to go sidewards. PJ is not someone I would expect to make "his own movies" (wanna see his own work, watch meet the feebles) He IS however very good at adapting a story to the screen, he can "translate" well. (which is a laudable skill all its own, but it is NOT the same as creating your own source material).


It was, but PJ was setting up his own "legacy weapon" and the way they built up Smaug (as a now ancient Wyrm, rather than still an adult), a bow just would not cut it anymore.


Yup, Men make their own fate in M-E, whereas the Elves, the dwarves and the Wizards are tied to a far older fate *that they are aware of* Hobbits have even more free will.


It's expressed via Tauriel, (Legolas' Girlfriend) rather than Thranduil in the movie, she is the one who still has a sense of wonder for the world, which is why she get Legolas in to help the dwarves (though she couches it as hunting the orc invaders instead of helping the Dwarves directly). So, the interest is still there, just expressed via a different character and given a "forbidden elf/dwarf love" makeover. (to be fair it's not really "love" more a mutual fascination with opposing views/lives)

Anyway, go see it dude, you will like it about 80%, same as I did I think

It will be on HBO soon enough

Yes to all that, get what your saying,etc...

I always knew that Tolkien put in a lot of effort and thought into his books and that he felt he was being rushed to publish them, he wanted to wait longer for LOTR's but reluctantly agreed to let it out.

If you have the time-unless you already read them-there is a 10 volume "History of M-E" that has been out for about 10 yrs or so. Its title is a bit deceptive as these books include both other versions of stories we know, augmented forms of the stories published but edited out an commentary by both Tolkien and his son on the works and "backstories". Kind of like DVD commentaries but more detailed.

The one's I have read deal with the both the augmented history of the Silmarillion and the "history" of its writing. They are not biographies of tolkien at all but a combo of process and expanded story.

One bit from Morgoth's Ring that I just completed is that Tolkien designed both Elves and Men as two parts of mankind, the elves are the first born and are tied to the Earth and men are short lived followers who are meant to use the Earth and to carry out a plan that Tolkien never put to paper. These bits were left out because it was felt that the idea would be too confusing to readers.

A lot of the behind the scenes type stuff-writings of Tolkien criticizing himself on paper-about the origins of the Orcs, the role of the Maiar and the differences between Morgoth's evil and Sauron's evil.

An amazon page with some of the books

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0395710413/ref=oh_details_o01_s00_i02?ie=UTF8&psc=1

 

[Gatefan1976]

To be honest, I have not picked up a Tolkien book for quite awhile, but I DID read the "unfinished tales" stuff that James (the son) finished off and read most of the short stories and stuff like the silmarillion when I was younger. To be perfectly frank with you however, Tolkiens writing style bored the ever living crap out of me, it reads to me like taking a trip, writing, having the trip wear off and taking a new drug to continue the writing. It's disjointed, meandering, and at times laser foccussed on relatively pointless things from a novel point of view. It's like he put his world building notes into story form, and it's well, boring as a story. It's great from a geek background POV, don't get me wrong, but it is NOT stuff that grabs me and says "you must read me"

 

[YJ02]

To be honest, I have not picked up a Tolkien book for quite awhile, but I DID read the "unfinished tales" stuff that James (the son) finished off and read most of the short stories and stuff like the silmarillion when I was younger. To be perfectly frank with you however, Tolkiens writing style bored the ever living crap out of me, it reads to me like taking a trip, writing, having the trip wear off and taking a new drug to continue the writing. It's disjointed, meandering, and at times laser foccussed on relatively pointless things from a novel point of view. It's like he put his world building notes into story form, and it's well, boring as a story. It's great from a geek background POV, don't get me wrong, but it is NOT stuff that grabs me and says "you must read me"

It's Christopher Tolkien

and,I think, for all of the reasons you listed is the reason why so many who have followed in the genre come off as pure copycats. They do not have the depth and time committed to the story beforehand. I can't stand any of that other fantasy wizards and dragons stuff-it is so easy to see that it is TOO "inspired" by Tolkien (or Lewis or Lewis and Tolkien)

It definitely takes a bit of motivation to read these other books but hey, I am retired, semi-disabled, its winter and I have little else to do (my Master's courses are, as of yet, not very challenging either) so I read on...

 

[Gatefan1976]

It's Christopher Tolkien

I type corrected, you are quite right, I was thinking of the actor.

and,I think, for all of the reasons you listed is the reason why so many who have followed in the genre come off as pure copycats. They do not have the depth and time committed to the story beforehand. I can't stand any of that other fantasy wizards and dragons stuff-it is so easy to see that it is TOO "inspired" by Tolkien (or Lewis or Lewis and Tolkien)

What are these books, what authors??

It definitely takes a bit of motivation to read these other books but hey, I am retired, semi-disabled, its winter and I have little else to do (my Master's courses are, as of yet, not very challenging either) so I read on...

I have the motivation, I have read many of them, I just dislike his writing style.