The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies (Post-release)

Re: The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

Well, its the premier of "The Battle of the Five Armies" in London tonight and nobody really seems to have noticed. A certain teaser trailer seems to have entirely stolen all the thunder, the calendar slot ( and arguably even the 'flaming' sword) and that’s a little sad.
Although "The Hobbit" has been a bit of a disappointment so far I'm hoping this final episode will at least redeem itself. At least we’ll see Smaug exact his far too delayed revenge on Esgaroth (but still I really don’t think I’ll forgive Peter Jackson for that final cut after Smaugs golden shower, perhaps he was taking the proverbial!)
The high points for me so far were certainly the“Riddles in the Dark” in the first , and “Flies and Spiders” in the second. I’m wondering what will be the best in the third. There certainly seems more scope here to drift very much further from the book, as there are only about fifty pages left and I doubt that Bilbo will be asleep for the most of it. I wonder if that will be true of the audience???
It’s a shame that there seems such a sense of an “anticlimax” about this last trip to Middle Earth and I’m not really sure why this is. Perhaps the success of the LOTR was that they took a very dense and ,to be honest, complex text with all its back histories and mythology and made a lighter and far more enjoyable screenplay of it which was so successful that I still watch with pleasure each winter. I certainly felt a twinge of nostalgia for them as a series whilst looking at the swords at the Royal Armoury a couple of weeks ago. Perhaps a certain "Game of " has stolen the throne of fantasy lovers hearts everywhere now. People certainly seem more desperate for forth coming news and rumour of the next series and yet “The Hobbit” does not seem to manage to come anywhere close to that level of interest ,even at the very end of the journey.
For me I guess its the fact that an engaging and nimble story has just been somewhat suffocated beneath a few too many ponderous subplots and over exaggerated action sequences which just slowed things far too much. I know the same could be said particularly of GOT but then why does that work and The Hobbit doesn't?
I hope this last one does manage to lift the series as it would be a great shame if it doesn’t ,for a lot of talented people have put their heart and souls into it

PS Out next Friday 12th in UK
 
Re: The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

I know the same could be said particularly of GOT but then why does that work and The Hobbit doesn't?

Because one of these has interesting characters and the other doesn't. Also like LOTR, the ASOIAF series of books are very dense and complex texts. It seems that taking a complex story and distilling a simpler one works better than the reverse.
 
Re: The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

Because one of these has interesting characters and the other doesn't. Also like LOTR, the ASOIAF series of books are very dense and complex texts. It seems that taking a complex story and distilling a simpler one works better than the reverse.

Very true. For example the romantic triangle just doen't seem to work in "The Hobbit" does it? But GOT? Take your pick!

Alot of press releases this morning which was good to see and plenty of reviews , mostly on the positive side, if not actually glowing. Looks like the inevitable extended DVD edition might actually contain a fair bit more than the film, whose running time is somewhat shorter than the others and seems a little brusquely editted this time.
 
Re: The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

Reading all the reviews and being such a huge Tolkien fan...and originally a PJ fan for LotR...he has Lucas'ed all over the Hobbit. These are our Prequels.

I can't help but think this would have been better movies had they not been in Jackson's hands. I actually loved 'Unexpected' because it was canon! Well, now the most canon out of the three. From the over abundance of unneeded CGI, to the wordless dwarves merely thrown in for a few seconds of idiotic comedy....to completely screwing up the addition of Tauriel. Which I will not forgive. I was completely against her at first, but warmed up to the idea of female Mirkwood bad ass archers. I loved her design and even constructed her costumes...but then they threw in stupid romance for the sake of bating tweens. Unfortunately that worked...which makes me cringe the deepest cringe of my life.

I've started using the slogan, "Atleast we have LotR". The Hobbit was never meant to be akin to LotR. The book is profoundly different in it's story telling. That's the problem here. Yes the Battle of Five Armies is epic...but not earth shattering. And so little focus has been on Bilbo. And they've propped Thorin up farther than they should have. He's a bit of an ass...but not as much as he is in the book. I do realize that the books and the movies should remain separate...but this is getting so separate I'm gonna label it as "fan fiction on film". I'm putting this in the ranks of Prequel Lucas and Michael Bay; utterly ridiculous. And fan service to people who aren't Tolkien fans!

I'm seeing a prescreening of it next Wednesday...I'm sure my wounds will cut deeper...but yeah lol.
 
Re: The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

Well, being one for closure...I'll be at the premiere. Still hoping for a nice ending, although the first two films have left somewhat of an unpleasant taste in my mouth.
 
Re: The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

Regarding the trailer.. did they forget they have Smaug to deal with? Not a sign of him in the trailer.
 
Re: The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

Like I said months ago-if you read The Hobbit and then read Lord of the Rings it's a trip how different they are,actually saying it's the same is a stretch as Hobbit is straight up a kids fairy tale book and LOR is more of a fantasy war story akin to Dungeons and Dragons.

So in a sense I can see why Jackson went so nuts on it,just go look at these differences:

The dwarves in the hobbit dressed...well like jesters pretty much.

It was...silly in a lot of places,like something a five year old might come up with.

And many more,if it was me and somebody said "you have to make a film of the hobbit that ties with LOR" I'd be terrified as I could see that being a disaster in the making....yet I have to be honest and say again:The hobbit just didn't entertain me as did LOR so whatever this set of film is I don't really care,I haven't actually sat through two at all and have only caught a few bits here and there I just don't want to see it.

This last one....meh might be good to see the actual battle but some of the other parts might make that hard,I can see I'll be bored to tears.
 
Re: The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

IMO the second movie should have ended with the death of Smaug rather than the weird dwarf ballet that really accomplished nothing.. I guess that wouldn't have left much for the third though.
 
Re: The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

I guess that wouldn't have left much for the third though.

Well, see, that's rather the whole point, isn't it? There isn't that much to the Hobbit. It's worth one (1) film, and that's it. You could do additional films that showcase the years between the Hobbit and LOTR, detailing the rise of the Shadow and such, but they'd be mostly made up or at best pieced together from bits and bobs contained in the appendices and some of Tolkein's notes. In other words, they'd be ideas and snippets, rather than full stories.

Instead, what they've done is taken The Hobbit and spread its story out over 3 films, patching over what would otherwise just be empty spots of dead air with those bits and bobs from the appendices, coupled with a crapload of material that was entirely made up out of thin air.

Where LOTR did this, it was probably about 60% source material, 20% appendices, and 20% made up, depending on the film (Return of the King -- the weakest of the three, in my opinion, skews that to more like 50%/15%/35%). With the Hobbit films, though, it's more like 20% source material, 20% appendices, and 60% made up stuff. And let's face it. The made up stuff just...isn't as good.

I watched the first movie (the regular version) and liked it well enough to entertain me on a cross-country flight. I haven't felt any great drive to watch the 2nd film, and I feel no real compulsion to watch the 3rd film. The 1st film was...ok...but bloated. The appendices stuff blended in better than I thought, but the made up stuff was noticeable and weaker, just as it was in the LOTR trilogy when it appeared in most cases.

I mean, maybe the films are better than I suspect they are. But everything I've seen just says they're bloated and not well executed.
 
Re: The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

Reading all the reviews and being such a huge Tolkien fan...and originally a PJ fan for LotR...he has Lucas'ed all over the Hobbit. These are our Prequels.

I can't help but think this would have been better movies had they not been in Jackson's hands. I actually loved 'Unexpected' because it was canon! Well, now the most canon out of the three. From the over abundance of unneeded CGI, to the wordless dwarves merely thrown in for a few seconds of idiotic comedy....to completely screwing up the addition of Tauriel. Which I will not forgive. I was completely against her at first, but warmed up to the idea of female Mirkwood bad ass archers. I loved her design and even constructed her costumes...but then they threw in stupid romance for the sake of bating tweens. Unfortunately that worked...which makes me cringe the deepest cringe of my life.

I've started using the slogan, "Atleast we have LotR". The Hobbit was never meant to be akin to LotR. The book is profoundly different in it's story telling. That's the problem here. Yes the Battle of Five Armies is epic...but not earth shattering. And so little focus has been on Bilbo. And they've propped Thorin up farther than they should have. He's a bit of an ass...but not as much as he is in the book. I do realize that the books and the movies should remain separate...but this is getting so separate I'm gonna label it as "fan fiction on film". I'm putting this in the ranks of Prequel Lucas and Michael Bay; utterly ridiculous. And fan service to people who aren't Tolkien fans!

I'm seeing a prescreening of it next Wednesday...I'm sure my wounds will cut deeper...but yeah lol.

I couldn't have said it better myself and pretty much fell the same way, but will also be there on opening day. I love middle earth and Weta has done and amazing job bringing it to life. Regardless of the story issues it does look good.
 
Re: The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

Reading all the reviews and being such a huge Tolkien fan...and originally a PJ fan for LotR...he has Lucas'ed all over the Hobbit. These are our Prequels.

I can't help but think this would have been better movies had they not been in Jackson's hands. I actually loved 'Unexpected' because it was canon! Well, now the most canon out of the three. From the over abundance of unneeded CGI, to the wordless dwarves merely thrown in for a few seconds of idiotic comedy....to completely screwing up the addition of Tauriel. Which I will not forgive. I was completely against her at first, but warmed up to the idea of female Mirkwood bad ass archers. I loved her design and even constructed her costumes...but then they threw in stupid romance for the sake of bating tweens. Unfortunately that worked...which makes me cringe the deepest cringe of my life.

I've started using the slogan, "Atleast we have LotR". The Hobbit was never meant to be akin to LotR. The book is profoundly different in it's story telling. That's the problem here. Yes the Battle of Five Armies is epic...but not earth shattering. And so little focus has been on Bilbo. And they've propped Thorin up farther than they should have. He's a bit of an ass...but not as much as he is in the book. I do realize that the books and the movies should remain separate...but this is getting so separate I'm gonna label it as "fan fiction on film". I'm putting this in the ranks of Prequel Lucas and Michael Bay; utterly ridiculous. And fan service to people who aren't Tolkien fans!

I'm seeing a prescreening of it next Wednesday...I'm sure my wounds will cut deeper...but yeah lol.
Hi. So...since I believe you've seen it already, were you as disappointed as you expected you'd be? I no longer have expectations for this but I'd just like reading what you thought. I, too, was disappointed by what became of this and my biggest gripe is the amount of CGI used. From what is visible in the trailer for this film, I feel I'm looking at pure green screens. Too much bloom on the land, purple-ish looking skies, it reminds me of a film that also heavily used cgi which I didn't like. (that film had yellow skies ffs, but the style was intended for that film). I wouldn't go as far as saying this is in the ranks of Michael Bay's stuff lol but definitely like what Lucas did with SW prequels. Peter tried to make this as epic as LotR is. And that just was never going to work for people who are familiar with the book.


I mean, maybe the films are better than I suspect they are.
You've no idea!
 
Re: The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

Hi. So...since I believe you've seen it already, were you as disappointed as you expected you'd be? I no longer have expectations for this but I'd just like reading what you thought. I, too, was disappointed by what became of this and my biggest gripe is the amount of CGI used. From what is visible in the trailer for this film, I feel I'm looking at pure green screens. Too much bloom on the land, purple-ish looking skies, it reminds me of a film that also heavily used cgi which I didn't like. (that film had yellow skies ffs, but the style was intended for that film). I wouldn't go as far as saying this is in the ranks of Michael Bay's stuff lol but definitely like what Lucas did with SW prequels. Peter tried to make this as epic as LotR is. And that just was never going to work for people who are familiar with the book.

I did see it on Wednesday night. My bf and I were "special guests" for an advanced screening, as we came in costume and "portrayed" the characters for our local theater.

10518987_10100256883680535_2870526750856667563_n.jpg10264263_10203026103762826_6548027846175646470_o.jpg10850114_10100256883650595_5913757803910612555_n.jpg

I'll say that these movies are obviously not my favorite. 'Unexpected Journey' is! I loved it so much, while others had less than favorable things to say about it.

I'm still compiling my thoughts. We may go see it again on opening night, as we had a IMAX 3D viewing for the screening and 3D bothers the hell out of me. Just can't completely focus. But the detail in the costumes (that weren't FRIGGIN' CGI'D TO HELL AND BACK), were outstanding in 3D!

I did do a bitter write up as soon as I came home though, lol...it's spoilery, so if you're saving yourself avoid this: http://celticruinsdesigns.tumblr.com/post/104901025213/well-were-back

I'll probably write an even longer, more thorough report soon. Without a doubt in my mind now, I know these are the Tolkien fan's prequels. PJ has followed the exact footsteps of Lucas in the fact that he reached the highest of highs, got cocky and blew his wad on something that should have been simple and bitter sweet.

I wanted to have a good cry at the end of this...but I didn't. Scenes that should have been heartfelt were rushed or underplayed. The fact that such amazingly epic and beautiful scenes like Boromir's death, Theoden's death, the split second of Eomer finding Eowyn on the battle field...the Fellowship running out of Moria....were done by PJ and he gave us what we're getting now?? Sad.

So yes, the least I can say is that I'm slightly bitter. But eh lol. I still love the design work and the over all aesthetic of this Middle Earth. I always will. The costuming is fabulous as well as the set designs...again..THAT WEREN'T CGI'd.

I still have the hashtag: #AtleastWeHaveLotR...lol
 
Last edited:
My heart has rooms that sigh with dust, and ashes lie upon the hearth, that should be blown and cleared away by daylights breath”.
“ But I cannot assay this task, for even dust is to me dear, for dust and ashes still recall my love was here.”

There were moments in this film, and I do mean just moments, when “The Hobbit” as it should have been made could be seen on the screen. I hoped ,as the last of them, that this would be the best, and in some respects it is. There are elements here that work well, and were recognisably connected to the LOTR, events that made me smile and recall all the affection I hold in the rooms of my imagination for all of Tolkien’s tales of Middle Earth.
But sadly ,in this final act, once again the best of the most essential truths of “The Hobbit” and its most beloved characters were simply drowned beneath a tidal wave of such improbable stunts and ridiculous creatures all I could do was shake my head in sorrow at what could have been. And the “Dune” moment anybody???
I really don’t understand it. With nearly all the films I have seen this year the one thing that has been almost always been consistently brilliant has been the standard of the effects work but it feels as if its almost gone backward in “The Hobbit”. They could have halved the budget and made much better films.
An uncharitably large part of me thinks that the grossly overstuffed story and the subsequent inflated effects work required to make them was a deliberate and calculated move designed just so WETA could charge an enormous sum of money. I wish I could say it was.money well spent but it wasn't. It was mostly excessively wastefull.
Perhaps this relates to all the legal problems that arose from the studio’s “mishandling” of the profits from LOTR (which caused such terrible bitterness ,note just how much the “dragon sickness” was overplayed in this final act).
Talking of Dragon sickness, you’ll see just how wrong it was to have cut the last film when you see the beginning of this one. Its a great climax at the BEGINNING of the film!!! And with all the other storylines added to pad the film out what the hell happened to Beorn!!!!! He is literally absolutely pivotal to the outcome of the battle in the Tolkien story and in this one???? And the “comedy element” (if you can call Alfred that) was for the most part simply awful and so clumsy you’ll just cringe at the mistiming (and that includes Billy!).
There are a few extra scenes that actually worked unexpectedly well. The battle against “The Necromancer” was handled differently to that of my expectations but was no less impressive for that. For those of you yet to see the movie I'll leave it at that.
And I suspect that the inevitable special DVD edition will help smooth out some of the strange editing decisions made. There are scenes such as the wolf chariot chase in the trailer that are obviously missing and it feels like a few others were left that needed resolving.
This is not a terrible movie far from it, its certainly action packed and certainly more emotionaly moving than the others. But it could have been a great one but for some horrible flaws. If you've liked the first two then you'll enjoy this one as much as if not more than the others. And there were actually some members of the audience sobbing at the right moments in this but the only real sadness I felt was for the films I hoped they would have been but were not. Right at the very end you you get that glimpse again, but for me all thats left of the fires and passion I held for "The Hobbit" are mostly just dust and ashes now.

PS CelticRuins longer write up link is pretty spot on .
 
Last edited:
Stephen Colbert interviews Smaug. Epic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaRoqslM4W0

Sadly I found this funnier and cleverer than the "comedy" moments in the film. And at least Smaug got a few more lines!

CelticRuins - your reviews are brutally honest but at least you shoot with some accuracy and staight to the heart of the matter. It is as if PJ read all of GLs notes on "How not to make Prequels" and then copied them word for word. I watched "Fellowship" last night, just for an immediate comparisson and the live action , use of actual landscapes and natural lighting immediately draw you in to the world as if Middle Earth could exist as opposed to being something like version done as a Turner painting in CGI. The orcs and goblins here are strikingly depicted and believably real creatures (with perhaps the slight exception of the cave troll but even he is several times better than some of the orcs in Dale), the combat feels authentic and perilous, the whole atmosphere is one that is grounded and well crafted. And if anything it made me feel more exasperated and saddened by The Five. I'll be interested to see what the EE looks like, having noted that the EE Desolation version restored some of the original story ,most notably at Beorns house and the dark river . Unlike the LOTR trilogy I didn't find it improved the films as markedly.

PS But what ever they do I don't think I'll ever forgive the "Sand worms", sorry "were worms" and Billy Connelly's audience mocking comment.
 
Last edited:
This thread is more than 8 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top