Welcome Guest 

Register

Forum Home » Movies Discussion » Discuss the Movies » The Desolation of Smaug... thoughts, anyone? [SPOILER ALERT]
1234
Author Topic:
findemaxam48
Council Member
Posts: 9188
Send Message
Avatar
Post
on: January 19, 2014 05:10
I am looking forward to the third film in the sense that, well, it's another film, but I will cry so hard when Thorin, Fili, and Kili pass on to a better world. In my mind, though, they will always live...
We were one in the same, running like moths to the flame. You'd hang on every word I'd say, but now they only ricochet.
LadyElarinya
Council Member
Posts: 115
Send Message
Post
on: January 19, 2014 06:08
Gandolorin said:
LadyElarinya said:Hahaha, that was an awesome scene! I loved it too. Well, anything funny with the dwarves I like. I think it's funny the way most of the dwarves are. Their stubborn nature.


Um, PJ's Dwarves, yes.
While JRRT might not be all to put off by Legolas's depiction as a very dangerous warrior (though true to form PJ goes overboard), PJ's use of the Dwarves is probably the cause of some serious rumblings out of a grave at Wolvercote cemetery.
Naugrim was their Sindarin name, especially in the First Age. Coincidence or not, it contains their most telling characteristic: they are grim. They remember hurts and favors about forever, and hold loyalty in extremely high esteem. If you manage to become their friend, great for you. If enemy, laughing at or about them is a very short-term pleasure.


I didn't mean stubborn in a comical way. I know they are more serious than shown in the movies. But I find even that funny. It's a personal thing. I wouldn't laugh at them to their faces, for instance.
"O môr henion i dhû: Ely siriar, êl síla. Ai! Aníron Undómiel. Tiro! Êl eria e môr. I 'lîr en êl luitha 'úren. Ai! Aníron…"
findemaxam48
Council Member
Posts: 9188
Send Message
Avatar
Post
on: January 19, 2014 06:22
I think I would faint dead away if i saw one of Tolkiens dwarves to their faces. Either way, I wouldn't be saying very much.
We were one in the same, running like moths to the flame. You'd hang on every word I'd say, but now they only ricochet.
Silmelirie
Council Member
Posts: 148
Send Message
Post
on: January 23, 2014 10:02
I really enjoyed the movie. Sure it was a bit long, and there were characters that wasn't supposed to be there, but I forgive these thing because no movie will ever be a perfect adaptation from a book or whatever. And absolutely no movie will ever satisfy everyone in every aspect.

Granted, the part with Kili and Tauriel was a bit forced and not very well made, but I thought it was cute. I'm a girl...And that's a "forbidden" love kind of thing.
~*You are not wrong, who deem That my days have been a dream; Yet if hope has flown away In a night, or in a day, In a vision, or in none, Is it therefore the less gone? All that we see or seem Is but a dream within a dream.*~
ImageImageImage
~nólemë~
Fan Creations Admin & Creations Forum Moderator
Posts: 10423
Send Message
Avatar
Post
on: January 28, 2014 03:53
I’m disappointed. Most of DoS felt like an average fanfic story.

Acting
+ Better than in AUJ overall. Good performances by Evans, Fry, Cumberbatch as Smaug, most of the ‘Dwarves’, and even Freeman who I wasn’t sold on in AUJ (and still am not).

Language
+ I appreciate more Dwarvish (beautifully pronounced, too)! More please. I heard no modern terms this time, good.
- Another ‘Thrane’ (No! It’s ‘Thraa-in’ and likewise ‘Daa-in’!)- this time by Dwalin(!). ‘Tilda’, ‘Sigrid’, ‘Percy’(!) - why pick names that are still in use? I’m sure there are enough Old Norse names that have died out. Biggest offender: ‘Elros’! Elves don’t recycle famous names. Sloppy, sloppy work; even most fanfic authors come up with original names.
- Why don’t the subtitles match the Elvish lines? E.g. Legolas says the blades were made by the Noldor, but the subtitle says ‘by my kin’; he’s not a Noldo.
- I’m not too enthusiastic about movie-Orcish either: since when does a Middle-earth language reflect words of European origin? (per fan script – Ekinskeld = Oakenshield in Orcish? What the.)

Effects/ CGI/ Art
+ Smaug (he wasn’t golden, but I don’t care), Erebor, Sauron, Beorn’s house
- Oversized spiders and orcs (detract from the Uruk-hai and Shelob), the generic fantasy feel of Thranduil’s halls (also, no murals or decorations there, why?).

Music
+ Lake-town theme, some LotR spinoffs (Shire, Mordor, Bree themes)
- no strong central theme (what’s wrong with reusing Misty Mountains Cold?), again a closing song with guitars and high-pitched voices (when watching Middle-earth, I don’t want to think ‘Simon and Garfunkel’ but Tolkien’s races. The deep Dwarven voices in AUJ carried much more gravity). Biggest offender: ‘Arwen rescuing the Ringbearer’ theme variation - applied to a made-up Woodelf saving a Dwarf. Outrageous.

Characterizations
+ Bard, the Master, Smaug, Bombur, Beorn (but why does he chase the company rather than Orcs, if he hates Orcs more?)
+ Thorin finally says ‘Thank you’! Wonders never cease. Hopefully, in Lesson 2 (movie 3), we’ll be moving onto Advanced Manners and learning to say ‘I’m sorry’ or ‘Please’.

+/- Bilbo: sympathetic but at times silly (enters Smaug’s lair noisily), too much influenced by the Ring already (Mirkwood I get: the Necromancer is close. But Erebor?). Gandalf: nice but too silly compared to the books; doesn’t even tap a narrow ledge with his staff to check for loose rocks & is then surprised when he steps on one. Balin: nice to the point of over-nice (‘his name is Bilbo’)

- some Dwarves, all Elves:
- Thorin isn’t making much sense. Thorin the Saint has to be wheedled into going to reclaim Erebor; he doesn’t want treasure as much as unite all Dwarves; he saves Legolas’s life, and promises Lakemen a generous share of his treasure. Thorin the Villain is nasty towards his injured nephew and some others, and doesn’t want to repay his life debt when Bilbo needs help in Erebor. Split personality? Odd lord-retinue relations, too: why doesn’t he get up earlier and check the state (and number) of his company before setting off from Lake-town? Why do some Dwarves (Glóin) question him right in his face? - Dwalin is downright repulsive, suggesting first theft and violence against Bard just because he ‘doesn’t like him’, then threatening a child (wow, what a hero). And no other Dwarf objects. Thorin cries that Thranduil has no honour, but his own company aren’t much better.
- Out-of-character Dwarves. Book-Glóin would sooner die attempting to kill Legolas than silently suffer his hideous insults of Gimli (not funny).
- Elves are even more despicable, celebrating starlight but acting and speaking almost like Orcs.
- Tauriel would score high in any Mary Sue test (young ruthless killer with a noble heart – how original), and provides the most untolkienseque joke ever (the pants one). But what’s worst about her is that JRRT’s own characters are villainized or dumbed down so she can be the only true hero.
- Thranduil is a hypocritical villain, moralizing about Thrór’s greed while demanding ‘his’ part of the treasure, then lying to an Orc while all but echoing the words of Tolkien’s Grishnákh.
- Legolas is degraded to a daddy’s boy without his own personality or opinions (only to have his eyes opened by Tauriel, naturally). He’s also cruel without need (‘goblin mutant’, said about young Gimli), and gives us the least Tolkienesque line in DoS: killing a Dwarf would be a ‘pleasure’ to him. Dear whoever created this gem - noone but wicked folk find pleasure in killing *anything* in JRRT’s world. Tauriel’s line of ‘You like killing, orc?’ sounds comical in this context, as apparently, her lord likes killing too.
- The rest of Mirkwood Elves lack personalities (noone questions Thranduil but Tauriel the Hero), space (Thranduil’s soldiers are only led by Tauriel and Legolas), and battle prowess (Orcs mow them like grass).
Tolkien’s Elves? No way.

Plot
+ all lines & scenes from the book (precious few: talking spiders, Bilbo & butterflies, Bilbo-Smaug debate etc.)
+ Bree. Thank you at least for this, team. The talk there is 80% nonsense but at least it’s clear how Gandalf hooked up with Thorin, and why they needed a hobbit. The PJ cameo brought nostalgia.
+ Dwarves facing the Door and entering Erebor
+ some odd but funny additions – Smaug ogling the statue, Thorin balancing on Smaug’s muzzle, the ending.

- Nonsense that doesn’t move the plot anywhere:
- Why does Gandalf urge Thorin to march on Erebor with Dwarf armies? Do they have a chance of killing Smaug? Why shouldn’t they enter the mountain without him, when he’s obviously unable to be there on Durin’s Day? Why not just say ‘I’ll join you when I can’?
- the entire sappy, cheesy love triangle. I can’t believe experienced adults wrote this and not a fangirl. Awful plot, awful lines. Detracts from Gimli’s affection for Galadriel.
- Athelas doesn’t grow in Lake-town. Any Elf captain who leaves Mirkwood without any belongings or healing supplies when searching for a dying person, needs a head check and a demotion.
- the Nazgul tombs (they didn’t die!) hike. Why not just deduct the Necromancer’s identity from the Red Eye drawing, and send for the White Council?
- Thranduil’s face-changing spell – we’re not in Harry Potter. I almost expected him to sprout Moody’s magic eye. Same for the invisibility spell of Orcs in Dol Guldur, too much like HP magic.
- PC-game-like moments: A gold-spouting statue. Repetitive combats. Dwarves only obey the one who has the Arkenstone (why not obey Smaug, then?); revenge and covetousness are not good enough to stress the jewel’s importance? (also, are we to infer from this the morale that loyalty is sworn to the richest, and not the eldest & appointed?) In AUJ, the Dwarves are singing about reclaiming their gold, and suddenly all they want is unite all Dwarves? Hmm…

I’m just sad to imagine from all the + marks what DoS could have been if the team had stuck to the book more in plot and characterizations.
---------- Image "If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." J.R.R. Tolkien - The Hobbit
Gandolorin
Council Member
Posts: 24040
Send Message
Post
on: January 28, 2014 01:56
~nólemë~ said:I’m disappointed. Most of DoS felt like an average fanfic story.


I MUST tape that above quote of yours above the big monitor of my tower PC on which I will see the DoS DVD.
Should keep the hardware from harm which would be almost certain to occur if I made the mistake of expecting "this is based on the Hobbit by JRRT".
Image
findemaxam48
Council Member
Posts: 9188
Send Message
Avatar
Post
on: January 29, 2014 12:50
I have two things to point out, one of which will bring hate and wrath upon me:


1- Bolg gets a credit in AUJ. Watch the credits on the DVD. He's in the left hand side, right under Azog. So he was in the film- it just wasn't centered on him. I know here isn't really the place, but...whatever.

2- Definition of a love triangle: The said female, in our case, Tauriel, must have romantic relations with both of the men (Elf? Dwarf?)involved for it to be considered a "love triangle." The only romantic relation we see with Tauriel is with Kili. Of course, we can imply that something is going on between Tauriel and Legolas, especially after Legolas went after her, but we see no other "romantic" interaction.
We were one in the same, running like moths to the flame. You'd hang on every word I'd say, but now they only ricochet.
~nólemë~
Fan Creations Admin & Creations Forum Moderator
Posts: 10423
Send Message
Avatar
Post
on: January 29, 2014 02:02
@ findemaxam, point 2 - not according to the Cambridge and Oxford dictionaries. Legolas's interest in Tauriel in the movie is clearly a romantic one, as also halfheartedly confirmed by Thranduil.

p.s. - no need to fear 'hate' and 'wrath' in these forums - Tarcolan, our movies mod, takes good care of them and would eliminate all hateful posts.

-----

@ Gandolorin - LOL. You might want to try watching the making-of DVDs first, they somewhat mollified me in the case of AUJ.

[Edited on 01/29/2014 by ~nólemë~]
---------- Image "If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." J.R.R. Tolkien - The Hobbit
Gandolorin
Council Member
Posts: 24040
Send Message
Post
on: January 29, 2014 03:06
~nólemë~ said
@ Gandolorin - LOL. You might want to try watching the making-of DVDs first, they somewhat mollified me in the case of AUJ.


Yes, I Looked at the appendices first, too - in the AUJ EE. In the theater version of AUJ available in Germany (or at least the one I found), there was exactly zero additional material. The EE will be even later, so I need something to calm me down for the theater version of DoS - your quote.

[Edited on 01/29/2014 by Gandolorin]
Image
tarcolan
Movies Moderator and General Dogsbody
Posts: 6046
Send Message
Post
on: January 29, 2014 04:09
Most of DoS felt like an average fanfic story.

I disagree nólemë, I'd have to say a poor fanfic story. But I think there's something altogether more sinister at work here. It's no accident that the movie seems to be similar to a lot of other movies. Particularly noticeable is the amount of violence, not present in the book and not necessary to the story. I suspect there is a studio formula applied which involves a mean-time between violence quotient. Very disturbing. When I get the chance I'll do some content analysis.

Swedish Beorn was great. The reason he didn't attack the orcs is because in the book it's the goblins he and his pals hunt down. Not possible with Azog and his gang. As to chasing the party into his house, this may be a nod to Gandalf's warning in the book not to go out when he's a bear. I still miss the bunny honey thing though, maybe it'll be in the extended.
The whole Nazgul tomb scene might as well have been from another movie, it made no sense at all. They go, it's empty, they come back. Padding perhaps?
Looking at all your observations nólemë, it makes me think they had two scripts, a real one and a generic studio one, and they riffle shuffled them together.

[Edited on 01/29/2014 by tarcolan]
Hangman Helper program
~nólemë~
Fan Creations Admin & Creations Forum Moderator
Posts: 10423
Send Message
Avatar
Post
on: January 31, 2014 02:45
I might be wrong, but I don't think any of the theatrical cuts come with the making-of DVDs?

Tarco, I agree that it appears they might have shot several different versions of the key scenes. My impression is that the team pay heed to the complaints that frequently appear in reviews, and a number of people criticized AUJ for being 'too boring'. But adding heaps of action is not the universal cure for this, IMO. Others including me complained about how having no injuries in the company is unrealistic, given the numbers of terrifying enemies they face; and look, DoS has one Dwarf injured. Which I *do* welcome; but I'm not happy that it brings about a love plot, nor that the injury has to be 'speshul' (not just ordinary orc poison, but a Morgul arrow).

@ Beorn - I'm not opposed to the idea of having bear-Beorn chase the intruders who head for his house, but I can't understand why he doesn't pursue the Orcs too. It looks like Azog's gang are nearby, so why doesn't Beorn smell them, and why aren't the Orcs afraid and hiding?
---------- Image "If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." J.R.R. Tolkien - The Hobbit
tarcolan
Movies Moderator and General Dogsbody
Posts: 6046
Send Message
Post
on: January 31, 2014 10:19
Maybe they're saving the bear fight for later, him and his bear troop. I hope so.
Hangman Helper program
Gandolorin
Council Member
Posts: 24040
Send Message
Post
on: January 31, 2014 10:33
If they stay anywhere near the book the only outcome of a Warg + Orc battle against Beorn-Bear is just so much minced Warg + Orc - but then I do have the slight impression that PJ secretly sympathises with the baddies, which is why he reduces the "goody two-shoes heroes", at times to the point you (OK, I) want to choke him.
Have I ever voiced my opinion of film-Faramir on this site? *cough, cough*
Image
Dwarflord
Council Member
Posts: 30
Send Message
Avatar
Post DoS - huge disappointment (spoilers)
on: February 02, 2014 10:43
Hi

I just have to share my thoughts about the 2nd Hobbit movie...
Well, I know it has "the Hobbit" in the title, but for me it shouldn't. It had more Hollywod/PJ than JRR in it.

I was a little scared before watching the film, because I thought there were too many unnecessary changes in the first Hobbit film.

When the information came out, that 3 Hobbit movies will be made, a lot of my friends said: This is crazy, one book - three movies? I defended the idea, by saying: They have lots of other stuff to film, from the appendixes.
But in DoS I felt 20 or 30 minutes of the film have no basis in Tolkien's texts - most notably: Tauriel and Legolas.
So now we will have 3 films, but the scenes "added" to the text of the Hobbit, are not based on them, but on Peter's ideas?

So basically I think that DoS is probably great for young people, who haven't read the books, but for me - as a Tolkien fan, who loves the books, appendixes and Middle Earth - this is a major let down. The reason is this: I think that Tolkiens writings are great, and you don't have to change them a lot to make them into a movie. I saw the appreciation and love for Tolkien's works in the LOTR movies. In spite of the changes, I felt like I was watching Tolkien's world on the screen.
In DoS the changes were absurd, and waaay, to long!


Tauriel and her mini-romance with a Dwarf?? (oh, come on!!)
Tauriel - is she really necessary?
The interaction between the Dwarves and Smaug??
The golden dwarf??
Thranduil with his burnt face??
The dwarves staying in Lake-Town, while the others go on??
So many scenes with Legolas (why so many?)
...and many more...

My question is: WHY?

I am really sad, that I have this opinion about the movie.
Summing up: In the LOTR I saw and felt the love for Tolkien's texts. In the DoS I feel like Peter is saying: Tolkien, you had some great ideas, but you didn't pull them off. I'll show you how it should have been written...

I see many positive opinions about the movie - on this forum and in other places.

Anybody else is disappointed, like me?



[Edited on 02/02/2014 by Dwarflord]
tarcolan
Movies Moderator and General Dogsbody
Posts: 6046
Send Message
Post
on: February 02, 2014 11:14
Smaug was good though eh? Smaugy, Smaug, Smaug. No? I can't wait for the release of the extended version so that I can ritually edit most of it out. The clips would make an acceptable rasndom movie. I'd love to see more of Beorn the Swedish Bear, very good. The spider scene was completely wrong, apart from the lack of Bilbo's taunting. It was where he finally found his courage yet in the movie it seems like the only reason he killed the spider was to get the Ring. Perhaps the Ring might have started working on him by then, but it was overdone. And then the Elves come to the rescue. I think PJ is addicted to fight scenes.

So no, I think most real Tolkien fans were disappointed. I have to admit though, I'd like to see Smaug again...just one more time.
Hangman Helper program
~nólemë~
Fan Creations Admin & Creations Forum Moderator
Posts: 10423
Send Message
Avatar
Post
on: February 03, 2014 02:28
Don't worry, Dwarflord, there are more of us who feel this way. You can take a look at the reviews in this thread - not all of them are full of praise. Mine for example, targets pretty much what you pointed out, though I was mainly miffed about the mediocrization and loss of moral values / didactic purpose.

Tarco, I'm curious - are you looking forward to the bear-Beorn, human-Beorn, or both? I'm a bit at a loss as to what you mean by 'Swedish Bear' (though I know the actor's nationality).

@ absence of Bilbo taunting the spiders - I think that Thorin taunting Smaug might be intended as its substitute.
---------- Image "If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." J.R.R. Tolkien - The Hobbit
findemaxam48
Council Member
Posts: 9188
Send Message
Avatar
Post
on: February 03, 2014 03:23
I think he means Human Beorn.
We were one in the same, running like moths to the flame. You'd hang on every word I'd say, but now they only ricochet.
tarcolan
Movies Moderator and General Dogsbody
Posts: 6046
Send Message
Post
on: February 03, 2014 05:00
I mean both The bear was pretty good. I was pleasantly surprise by the vaguely North European accent of Beorn, it seemed quite fitting that he and his people would have different accents. It made a nice change from the Scots and Irish accents and the London East End accent for all the baddies. Straight out of Oliver Twist. Tolkien must share some of the blame for that last one though. There was also no need to kill off all of the other Beornings for the sake of adding a bit of pathos.

I have to agree with you again nólemë, in fact I'd go further. The sentiments expressed in the movie often appear to be the very opposite of those Tolkien conveyed in the books. The best example of this is Gandalf's aphorism about courage in the first movie. I cannot imagine Tolkien agreeing with this at all. It sounds good at first but I think it's an empty truism. Many other lines had the effect of jarring me out of the world of Middle-Earth, portrayed so well visually, and did not do justice to the excellent actors.

From the reviews here and elsewhere I would sum up the general feeling as bemusement. As Dwarflord says - why? It is not only disappointing but quite confusing and disturbing. It could have been such a great film. I appreciate that many people enjoyed the movie for its own sake, and I have to admit it was quite entertaining. Perhaps we'd been spoilt by the LOTR films.
Hangman Helper program
~nólemë~
Fan Creations Admin & Creations Forum Moderator
Posts: 10423
Send Message
Avatar
Post
on: February 04, 2014 01:26
I haven't noticed the importance of the Dwarvish accents, but then, I've never been good at assigning English accents to a place of origin. Beorn sounded fine to me, and looked good as a bear, though I had an issue with his human appearance. I truly imagined human-Beorn as a grumpier, better groomed Hagrid from the HP books.
Actually, having watched the extra DVDs for AUJ this weekend, I don't really understand this: the team were bemoaning Tolkien's lack of descriptions in TH as the reason for letting their imaginations soar, but the only characters which are more or less described in the books, Smaug and Beorn, do not really match Tolkien's words either, Beorn especially.

I have to agree with you, tarcolan, about the lines. Just yesterday, I noticed the courage one you mentioned (with the 'all we have to decide' LotR music playing in the background). If this is how they define courage, how then do they define mercy (which, incidentally, was supposed to be one of Gandalf's defining traits)? I'd have preferred if the moral value was taught in TH movies through showing (Dwarves being grateful to Bard instead of making faces at him all the time, for example) rather than through made up pep-talk.
---------- Image "If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." J.R.R. Tolkien - The Hobbit
starofdunedain
Council Member
Posts: 1747
Send Message
Post
on: February 07, 2014 07:44
I had some misgivings when I first saw it and some of my fears were true. I wanted to like Tauriel as a strong female character, but to me it seems that they only but here in there for the romance which was disappointing. Not only because she wasn't in the books, but because they seem to think that female characters are there solely for the romance. I think I would have tolerated it if she was just there for a strong female role.
I can't for the life of me figure out what was with Thranduil's face or what the point of it was.
I didn't like that they had to sneak into Dale, and how Bard was treated. I was disappointedthat they didn't focus more on Bilbo since the story is about him and his courage and how he changes.
However... at risk of the purists throwing the book at my head I'll say that I loved every bit of the Lonely Mountain and Smaug. I loved the forges and the statue melting and covering Smaug in gold and the various rooms and architecture. I think that's the only change that I didn't mind.

~nólemë~ I was wondering why you think Smaug was supposed to be golden originally? It says in the book that he's a red-gold color which I think is what they showed.
findemaxam48
Council Member
Posts: 9188
Send Message
Avatar
Post
on: February 08, 2014 12:02
I think I remember what was up with Thranduil's face--didn't he say something along the lines of "Do not speak to me of dragon fire" to Thorin or something, implying that he had fought dragons before?
We were one in the same, running like moths to the flame. You'd hang on every word I'd say, but now they only ricochet.
Nevaratoiel
Council Member
Posts: 85
Send Message
Post
on: February 13, 2014 03:58
findemaxam48 said:I think I remember what was up with Thranduil's face--didn't he say something along the lines of "Do not speak to me of dragon fire" to Thorin or something, implying that he had fought dragons before?
He may have. He also said: "I have faced the serpents of the north". (Correct me if I'm wrong.) Which would basically suggest he has faced dragons. I don't know if there's any information in the appendixes or any other Tolkien written material.

I still have to write a full review, but I'll do so once I've seen the film again.
~Nev~
findemaxam48
Council Member
Posts: 9188
Send Message
Avatar
Post
on: February 13, 2014 04:20
Ahh yes, that is correct, Nevaratoiel. It has been two months since i have seen DoS, and sadly, my poor memory is waning.
We were one in the same, running like moths to the flame. You'd hang on every word I'd say, but now they only ricochet.
tarcolan
Movies Moderator and General Dogsbody
Posts: 6046
Send Message
Post
on: February 13, 2014 05:18
There is no information about Thranduil fighting dragons in the books. He was Sindar so maybe he had an argument with Glaurung.
Hangman Helper program
~nólemë~
Fan Creations Admin & Creations Forum Moderator
Posts: 10423
Send Message
Avatar
Post
on: February 14, 2014 04:19
@ Thranduil / dragons

Thranduil could have faced dragons: "Dragons steal gold and jewels from men and elves and dwarves [...] There were lots of dragons in the North in those days" (The Hobbit book, Thorin's speech in Bag End). He could have also participated in some Silmarillion battles where dragons appeared (Bragollach, War of Wrath).
But I'm so not buying his magic 'facelift'; he's not Finrod, and even Finrod's disguise was just temporary. Looking at his face change, I cannot help thinking of Harry Potter magic (Polyjuice wearing off, Thrandy?), or the Terminator.

starofdunedain said:~nólemë~ I was wondering why you think Smaug was supposed to be golden originally? It says in the book that he's a red-gold color which I think is what they showed.


His epithet is The Golden, and red-gold is how all book-knowledgeable artists drew Smaug before the movies (and how many still portray him). The movie dragon is neither red, nor golden, but what I'd call dark maroon.
---------- Image "If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." J.R.R. Tolkien - The Hobbit
tarcolan
Movies Moderator and General Dogsbody
Posts: 6046
Send Message
Post
on: February 14, 2014 10:52
The Thranduil transmogrification was a bit gross but I take it as more of a vision shown to Thorin alone. Much like Blue Galadriel was for Frodo. I can live with that, just.

On the front of my copy of The Hobbit is a picture of Smaug done by Tolkien, with yellow wings and a green back!! But then I think my feelings about movie Smaug are well-known now.
Hangman Helper program
Nevaratoiel
Council Member
Posts: 85
Send Message
Post
on: February 14, 2014 04:37
I do hope we get an explanation on what's going on with Thranduil's face. I've been wondering from the beginning what that was all about.

And, contrary to many other people, I still love the films, especially Thranduil, even through they're not true to the book in many cases. I'm (almost) desperate to see the third one the end of this year. And Smaug was just grand.
~Nev~
findemaxam48
Council Member
Posts: 9188
Send Message
Avatar
Post
on: February 14, 2014 05:28
Yay, another Thranduil fancier! ^^

I eagerly await the day we go see There and Back Again.
We were one in the same, running like moths to the flame. You'd hang on every word I'd say, but now they only ricochet.
Bartimaeus
Council Member
Posts: 65
Send Message
Avatar
Post
on: February 15, 2014 06:48
I would have liked Lee Pace's Thranduil if I hadn't been comparing with the book, but they did kind of miss the point of the Elven scenes in the book. (PJ makes everything simpler and cruder, doesn't he?)

Yes, most of the violence was absolutely pointless. And the ring thing. Bilbo was a pretty interesting character in AUJ, but here he seems to be going the PJ way. He just isn't the cute naive Hobbit from the book at all. I liked Freeman's portrayal though, it was the screenplay that seemed lacking.

Why exactly did Thorin have to leave Fili and Kili behind? Loyalty is one of Thorin's defining qualities. It's why he's so bitter and driven. That, again, seemed like PJ giving in to the Hollywood formula - so much violence, so much tension.

I agree with starofdunedain - Tauriel seemed to be there only for the romance!
~nólemë~
Fan Creations Admin & Creations Forum Moderator
Posts: 10423
Send Message
Avatar
Post
on: February 15, 2014 09:57
tarcolan said:The Thranduil transmogrification was a bit gross but I take it as more of a vision shown to Thorin alone. Much like Blue Galadriel was for Frodo. I can live with that, just.


But what is the vision intended to convey? That puzzles me. Galadriel's transformation was clear to me: she was showing what she would, or could, become if she had the Master Ring. Were Thranduil's scars possibly a warning of what might happen if the dwarves wake the dragon, who in turn gets peeved and destroys all in his line of flight, including Mirkwood? But if so, the speech didn't match this. Neither did the scene resemble the power of the Elven minstrels and poets who have the ability of making the hearer 'see' what they describe, in this case the Elven victims of dragon attacks: but this clearly wasn't Thranduil's case, because the face is his and not an unnamed soldier's, while the injury shown seems not to match anything one can survive, even if he were an Elf. It's not making any sense to me.

Bartimaeus said:Why exactly did Thorin have to leave Fili and Kili behind?


I interpret this as him already going slightly bonkers. First he's all soft - 'stay here, get healed' - which makes sense. His kinsman would die of the poison on the mountainside, while there's a chance that the Lakemen would heal him. Nor can they stay in Laketown for another year to wait for the next Durin's day. But after he's finished being reasonable, he suddenly starts along the vein of 'I will not risk this quest for one person, not even my kin'. Completely unnecessary, unless they were trying to show he's going cold-hearted and crazy. Which, naturally, I do not like. Book-Thorin wasn't a great hero, but he was more sound-minded and relatable than his movie version; he definitely wasn't cracking until he actually saw the hoard.
An interesting question would also be 'why did *PJ's team* leave the Dwarves in Lake-town'.

[Edited on 02/15/2014 by ~nólemë~]
---------- Image "If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." J.R.R. Tolkien - The Hobbit
Nevaratoiel
Council Member
Posts: 85
Send Message
Post
on: February 16, 2014 03:40
findemaxam48 said:Yay, another Thranduil fancier! ^^

I eagerly await the day we go see There and Back Again.
Yup, utterly and completely.

I'm really interested how they progress Thranduil's character, and possibly his dealing with Smaug. We all have seen the combat outfit in the B-rolls.
Bartimaeus said:I would have liked Lee Pace's Thranduil if I hadn't been comparing with the book, but they did kind of miss the point of the Elven scenes in the book. (PJ makes everything simpler and cruder, doesn't he?)

Yes, most of the violence was absolutely pointless. And the ring thing. Bilbo was a pretty interesting character in AUJ, but here he seems to be going the PJ way. He just isn't the cute naive Hobbit from the book at all. I liked Freeman's portrayal though, it was the screenplay that seemed lacking.

Why exactly did Thorin have to leave Fili and Kili behind? Loyalty is one of Thorin's defining qualities. It's why he's so bitter and driven. That, again, seemed like PJ giving in to the Hollywood formula - so much violence, so much tension.

I agree with starofdunedain - Tauriel seemed to be there only for the romance!
After all I've read and seen, I think you should see the films separately from the books. A film like this should have much appeal to the non-readers too. Money is always the key word, and then there's artistic freedom. And it's not like the Tolkien fans will massively leave these films on the side.

I've come to terms with that the films will differ (more than people had hoped for) from the book. I can enjoy the films just as I can enjoy the book. Just differently.
~Nev~
findemaxam48
Council Member
Posts: 9188
Send Message
Avatar
Post
on: February 17, 2014 04:55
If we all go to the films with an empty- Tolkien head, I believe we will all love them. No adaption will be perfect.
We were one in the same, running like moths to the flame. You'd hang on every word I'd say, but now they only ricochet.
~nólemë~
Fan Creations Admin & Creations Forum Moderator
Posts: 10423
Send Message
Avatar
Post
on: February 18, 2014 02:20
I don't think so, Finde, because it depends on what you are looking for in a movie. If you love Tolkien's books precisely because they don't contain what PJ's team inserted (and which you don't care for in any movie, fantasy or not), you'll end up diappointed.
I agree that no adaptation will be perfect, but I'm optimistic that sooner or later, someone makes a TH adaptation that I'll enjoy more than this one, one that will be more faithful to the source material. Which others won't like for a change, no doubt, but that's just fine with me.
---------- Image "If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." J.R.R. Tolkien - The Hobbit
findemaxam48
Council Member
Posts: 9188
Send Message
Avatar
Post
on: March 24, 2014 12:59
I have seen DoS for the second time yesterday, and I have thought up a question: if Legolas seemed so desperate to have Tauriel around (even by leaving Mirkwood to get her, directly defying Thranduil's orders), why did he leave her to pursue Bolg and leave her with the dwarves?
We were one in the same, running like moths to the flame. You'd hang on every word I'd say, but now they only ricochet.
LadyIridel
Council Member
Posts: 3
Send Message
Post
on: March 30, 2014 12:06
I'm just going to say this: Desolation of Smaug would have been one of my favorite movies ever had I not ever read The Hobbit. Jackson pretty much threw the book out the window for this movie.
1234
Members Online
Print Friendly, PDF & Email