On My Shelf: The Hobbit: Desolation of Smaug (2013) and Battle of the Five Armies (2014)... The Nail in the Coffin

I really didn't want to spread this discussion over another two whole posts -- so I'm just going to be as concise and succinct as possible in this one to register some specific concerns about The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug and The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies.

In a nutshell:


The Desolation of Smaug is about our heroes running the last stretch to the mountain, and then dealing with the dragon (Smaug. Pronounced "Smawwoog".) The Battle of the Five Armies is about five armies battling about the results of the last movie, and wrapping up the story.
It's interesting, though -- I actually began to feel a bit more favorably towards these movies in the middle of the second part, The Desolation of Smaug. I'm not saying I suddenly thought they were great movies -- just, somewhere in the middle there, I began to feel like they were passable. Maybe because this part dealt more with the ACTUAL STORY OF THE BOOK and needed less padding -- or, maybe, just because the extended footage gave us a bit more time with the characters and one actually began to feel that one knew them and maybe -- just maybe -- cared about them. (Also, Gollum is in this part, and his CGI is the best in the entire series of films, including LOTR. Some of the best CGI I've seen in recent years. Although I'm not sure how much can simply be ascribed to the fact that a) CGI always looks better in dim light, and b) Andy Serkis [the guy behind the CGI] just really understands the art of motion-capture.)

Conversely, it's also in the second part that I began to somewhat wonder if, maybe, Martin Freeman was a small part of the overall problem with this series of films. Although I do like Martin Freeman, and more or less felt he gave a sound performance -- in the second part of this, I began to feel like his more "realistic" style of acting was just, not, perhaps, the right level for this story. Perhaps his performance is just not quite theatrical enough to seem like he fits in a world full of elves and dwarves and magic bear people? Or maybe I should just blame Peter Jackson for not instructing his actor to take it to the next level and be more over-the-top and presentational in his style.
Not "next level".I mean, it's not like Martin Freeman could just make up dialogue that wasn't there. (BECAUSE THAT CERTAINLY NEVER HAPPENED ELSEWHERE IN THE FILM. NOBODY WROTE IN DIALOGUE THAT WAS GROSSLY INAPPROPRIATE. Sarcasmmmmmm.)
And if we're going to start talking about things that shouldn't have happened -- when you're watching the second part of this series, you also can't help but think about the fact that, underneath the crappy CGI dragon, somewhere, this is happening:
Benedict Cumberbatch, noted actor, rolling around on the floor
and pretending to be a dragon. WAS THIS NECESSARY?!
You CAN'T TELL ME that this helped anybody animate anything!So, I guess what I'm getting at is that, even at this series' best points, there were still major problems with the infrastructure. But never mind infrastructure -- let's talk about stuff RIGHT OUT IN THE OPEN, like dialogue and situations completely unfaithful to the original story. There were a heinous number of characters who were not in the book that made an appearance in these films (including Legolas from Lord of the Rings, who had no business AT ALL being here). There were lousy double-entendres, smatterings of suggestive dialogue between the sexy dwarf and the "not-in-the-books" elf lady ("Aren't you going to search me? There could be anything down my trousers..." *suggestive eyebrow waggle*) And we also get introduced to the most disgusting character in the entire series (and yes, I am counting the troll who snots all over our hero as less disgusting): Stephen-Fry-with-red-comb-over.

Just pretend that coin in his mouth is a gravy-covered testicle. Because, yes, we have a character specifically eating testicles in the extended cut of this movie. Because that's not at all something that would make J.R.R. Tolkien roll over in his grave. (I would really like to know what Stephen Fry thinks about these movies. I'm not as much of a Stephen Fry fan as I used to be, but I appreciate the fact that the man is exceptionally well-read -- and I don't see how, or why, anyone who liked the original book would agree to be in these films. Well, then again, maybe he doesn't like the original book. Or maybe he just really needed the money.)
Oh, there's also this "not-in-the-book" Most-Obnoxious-Character in the entire series:
Alfrid I'm-Clearly-A-One-Dimensional-Villain-Because-
I-Have-A-Unibrow."Alfrid Lickspittle". I'm not even sure why this guy was in the movie. I guess they felt they needed more villains in the human realm than just the greedy and gross Stephen Fry-character -- or maybe they were seriously just killing time. Confusingly, though, in the theatrical cut, I think Alfrid just disappears at one point and never gets a comeuppance for his excessive, Dr. Smith-level evil-cowardice. In the extended edition, he does get some comeuppance. (It's not that exciting, but it is something. It might have been nicer if the character redeemed himself somehow... You know, give him a little bit of depth. But, depth was the last thing the writers of this film were concerned with, so Alfrid Lickspittle is accidentally catapulted into a troll's mouth, who then chokes to death on him.) I'm not even kidding.Now, I will give you this. In the third film, The Battle of the Five Armies, there is a rather more battling for our characters, and this is a good thing. As I recall, in the theatrical cut, the final battle was edited into complete nonsense. In the extended cut, at least it makes sense -- we had a clear sense of where people were going, why they were going places, and who was going places. However, in both the theatrical and extended cuts, there is also this scene, where Legolas (who also shouldn't even have been in The Hobbit) defies both gravity and physics in the most brain-paining way possible:

... a scene that makes me want to start punching some computer-animation majors in the mouth.
Not to mention that this film introduces us to this character -- a foul-mouthed Scottish dwarf played by Billy Connolly:

...Who was so ridiculously over the top, he might as well have been played by Mike Myers. I mean, seriously? WHY NOT, if you're going to have a character in The Hobbit calling other characters "b*stards" and telling them to "sod off" -- why not just freaking have Mike Myers? He would have done just as good a job and been just as wildly inappropriate in a story by mild-mannered university professor and theologian, J.R.R. Tolkien.
"Hmmm.... I should have put more wee-wees in the book."Okay. Moving on: After the conclusion of the battle, when (despite sad losses) we should be having some fun and rejoicing, ala this section in another climactic movie in a series that shall remain nameless:
"Yub yub!"We are instead treated to this: 
*sobbing*...A SLOW-MOTION FUNERAL SCENE, with all our friends crying. For a long time. And, no, it's not then followed by a joyous feast -- "Yay! The Dwarves are finally back in their ancestral mountain! The dragon and the evil White Orc are dead! Our dead friends would have wanted us to be happy! Joy and gold forever!" No, it's followed by everyone still being pretty sad, and Bilbo going home. THE END.

Except, NOT QUITE THE END, because Bilbo goes home and finds his good-for-nothing relatives raiding his house. Then, we foreshadow the Lord of the Rings events with some grim music, implying that Bilbo then more or less lives in scary, psycho misery for the next sixty years or so, thanks to a certain ring he picked up on the trip. THE ENNNNDDDDD! (Hooray.)
The ending of this movie is so heinously sour and unsatisfactory, I wanted to ask for my money back. AND I WAS GIVEN THIS SET FOR FREE! 
Really, I just want my time back. I invested what felt like about eight thousand hours in re-watching this series in in its extended edition, and what was I treated to? Drastic improvements? NO, I was treated to extremely mild improvements that pushed sections of the film up to "watchable" -- and yet, still had an overall unsatisfactory experience.
If you're a glutton for punishment and you want to give the series another try -- give the extended editions a shot. At least there are sections of it that aren't entirely horrible. But if you really didn't like the theatrical cut, I don't think you would be any worse-off in life if you skipped the extended editions and never, ever watched these movies again. Just watch Lord of the Rings and pretend these movies don't exist. That's what I'll do.
NOT RECOMMENDED. PERIOD.