The Desolation of Smaug (Hobbit 2)

[Rebecca]

It was amazing! Some excellent performances all around. Not so impressed with Tauriel though...

[Elentarri]

I don't know why they have to create silly extra characters that are found no-where in the whole Tolkien universe. This is an adventure story with one Hobbit and 13 Dwarves, NOT a love story (I assume that's what the girl elf is there for?)!!!

[Micaela]

I hated it because it was so far off from the book and some of my favorite parts were changed so much and why does there now have to be a love triangle? Its The Hobbit not a young adult fiction book.

[Elentarri]

Micaela wrote: "I hated it because it was so far off from the book and some of my favorite parts were changed so much and why does there now have to be a love triangle? Its The Hobbit not a young adult fiction book."

Love triangle??!! Shudders......

[Jamie]

I haven't watched it yet but I did see the first one and from that experience I can tell they are not only making a movie about the story of the Hobbit. It is including The Similarion, Unfinished Tales, Durin's Children and I think one more that I don't have all wrapped up into one story. I have all of those mentioned and I guess I will do the same with this movie that I did with the first. Hit the indices after to try and find those points that I either just forgot or it's really not there.

[Hazel]

Micaela wrote: "I hated it because it was so far off from the book and some of my favorite parts were changed so much and why does there now have to be a love triangle? Its The Hobbit not a young adult fiction book."

Elentarri wrote: "I don't know why they have to create silly extra characters that are found no-where in the whole Tolkien universe. This is an adventure story with one Hobbit and 13 Dwarves, NOT a love story (I as..."

I think you've both failed to realise that the story being told is not just contained within the book called "The Hobbit", but also in Unfinished Tales, and The Lost Road, and the appendices of the Lord of the Rings, as you see, Tolkein put far more effort into creating his stories than simply writing one book about them.

[Rebecca]

I don't mind the fact that there are several books being blended into one series of movies, but I really don't appreciate the things they have just made up. It was completely ridicules to add in a female elf, she was not needed and she brought nothing to the story. But the real killer was the love triangle; how stupid! As if a love interest for Legolas wasn't bad enough, they had to throw Kili in the mix and make it triangle? Before I saw the movie I thought that was just some sort of rumor, but sadly, it was not. I think I liked just about everything else in the movie, but that was going too far.

[Elentarri]

Hazel wrote: "Micaela wrote: "I hated it because it was so far off from the book and some of my favorite parts were changed so much and why does there now have to be a love triangle? Its The Hobbit not a young a..."

I've read all of Tolkien's stuff. Nowhere does it say anything about Legolas' love life. Also Azog got killed a looooong time ago - he doesn't pitch up in the Hobbit (book).

[Jamie]

I'm updating my comment. I saw the movie last night and it was ok but that's all. I was a disappointed with the first Hobbit movie because they changed some of the sequencing around but I thought, perhaps that was needed because it was obvious they were including more material from other works that most folks didn't read. But no, the disappointment continued. I wasn't overly impressed with the 2nd one and Tauriel just didn't work, she didn't look like she fit in.. she looked like a Robin Hood plucked up from somewhere else and plopped down in this movie. That is just the costume.. nevermind the acting.. Evangeline Lilly just didn't cut it for this kind of movie. I agree with Faith, the movie industry is profit first. That's ok with me too, I prefer my books anyway.

[Mark]

Too bad that you can appriciate the moviemagic Tolkiens world has, Tauriel is added for the younger females, that will undoubtely be dissapointed when they read the book. And too be honest Tolkien was a bit short on female characters.
I like both Hobbit movies so far and will undoubtely enjoy a jolly long sitting in 2015 with all three movies in extended version read to make their run in my player at home.

[Jamie]

Tolkien wrote for his time and females just weren't these ass kicking types. So yes I don't appreciate changing sinething to appeal to the younger generation when it isn't even about them. It's only about the money they will bring in. How about basing mivies on more recent books with the features the masses crave instead. They are out there and just as exciting.

[Will]

Hazel wrote: "Micaela wrote: "I hated it because it was so far off from the book and some of my favorite parts were changed so much and why does there now have to be a love triangle? Its The Hobbit not a young a..."

I agree. But you forgot The Silmarillion!

[Will]

KryZad MantappZ wrote: "Hey, what else do you want in the 2nd movie? Explain every freaking detail in the book. Then it will be a 4 hour super boring adventure movie. Do you know why Peter Jackson deviates from the book? ..."

The Necromancer WAS in the book.

[Nurlely]

KryZad MantappZ wrote: "I watched it, and it was super awesome.. It was fantastic and the ending was like icing on the cake, just flawless. I give it a 10/10 and its the BEST MOVIE OF 2013 What about you guys?"

Me too! I love the movie!!! When it was over and the lamps at the theater came back, everyone was silent. A second later everyone was wondering why it was over. We didn't even realise that we have been sitting for 2.5 hours and still wanted more...

[Mark]

Faith wrote: "Mark wrote: "Too bad that you can appriciate the moviemagic Tolkiens world has, Tauriel is added for the younger females, that will undoubtely be dissapointed when they read the book. And too be ho..."

Not so ridicolous as one would think, but it also made the movie better than just the men going on a trip. And the enlarhgement of the Bards role is also a smart move as he suddenly popped up in the book for one feat. I find that mr Jackson does an excellent update on Mr Tolkiens writings.

[Petter]

Well, we like what we like but over time our tastes can change. I for one have developed a taste for dynamic and emotionally moving relationships, realistic and gritty yet exciting action, and interesting stories told at a well balanced pace.

If I am to explore the wonders of Middle Earth, I would definitely want to see both men and women of that world's various races unless there are explicit reasons why that is not possible. The disappearance of the Ent Wives, for instance.

Since The Hobbit novel suffers from an acute shortage of active female characters, I for one thought it proper to use the artistic license and include one in the movie. However, I am disappointed at the way it was done: I am getting more and more frustrated at the way single female characters appear in stories otherwise dominated by males, with the main mission of being a love interest. Seriously, isn't it about time that we move on from that?

[F.F.]

I dedicated my first book to Tolkien. I don't know what he would have thought about that. I don't know what he would think about this. Tauriel is however a smokin hot babe. Even J.R.R. could appreciate that I'd wager.

[Jericho]

I loved the movie! I would have loved it even more if I'd never have read The Hobbit. I like Peter Jackson's take on Tolkien's world, but there are a few things that made me sigh with dissatisfaction.

[Kerry]

Faith wrote: "The fight scenes in Erebor were way too long and comical in my opinion...."

I enjoyed the film but your issues are the same as mine. Some of the fighting was too comical. Which is fine if The Hobbit, a children's story, is aimed at children. But Jackson with his added material has decided to make this an extension of LOTR. A good thing for LOTR loving adults like me. Except Jackson is going bipolar with scenes that are at one moment developing the heavy gravitas of LOTR material, then flip flopping to scenes that have the light-hearted ("physics defying" fighting) slap-stick of The Hobbit for kids. The latter is better suited to fans of The Adventures of Tin Tin.

[Lariela]

I think it more as a movie than an adaptation of one of my favourite childhood books. Does that make sense? Things I really liked- the acting, scenery, and of course the music.

[F.F.]

Here is my Blog post on the subject, actually it's about the first hobbit movie, but I'll do another one after I see Desolation of Smaug. The Post is called, J.R.R. Tolkien Did Not Write the Hobbit in 3D.

[Jeffrey]

I don't think Jackson was interested in telling the story of the Hobbit. He wanted to tell the whole backstory for The Lord of The Rings. I think he managed to take all the joy and charm out of the story to tell something darker.

[Kim]

I thought the addition of material from other books added more depth into the situation, other than leaving us hanging when Gandalf left. The fight scene with Smaug in Erebor, though not in the book, added suspense because Smaug just does damage to the town, Bard shoots him, and he drags the town underwater. Not much climax with that.
The love triangle, mind all you, is sure to end because *SPOILER* Kili dies in the end anyway (still upset about it).
Hollywood is Hollywood and their not just making movies for the nerds who read the book (as they would probably say) but for an entire populace.

[Sarah]

I really did not like this movie. The first one was good, but in the second they went pretty off on the story. The whole dwarf elf love thing was so stupid. The fact that some of the dwarfs were left behind in the town was really disappointing also. What really got me, though, was the last half hour. About when Bilbo and Smaug stopped talking and the dwarves fought Smaug. This was when I lost interest and started getting bored. I wish there was more Bilbo and Smaug dialog. I think there was too much fighting in the movie too. I felt that the golden statue was over the top and unnecessary. Many things in this movie were unnecessary. I do understand, though, why they put many of these things in there. They have to make the movie appeal to all sorts of people. I just wish it was more like the book... I am glad, though, that some people really enjoyed it. If I hadn't of read the book I probably would of loved it. The fact that overall they did make a good movie and many people liked it makes me happy, even though it didn't meet my picky standards.

[Breanna Joy]

Sarah wrote: "I really did not like this movie. The first one was good, but in the second they went pretty off on the story. The whole dwarf elf love thing was so stupid. The fact that some of the dwarfs were le..."

I agree with everything you said. While in the first, any changes were taken from simultaneous events occuring in the appendices, Silmarillion, etc. the secound one had many unnecessary changes and additions. The worst were the two major differences toward the end. First, the Laketown episodes were strange and I didn't understand WHY they were changed. In the book they were given a hero's welcome. This strengthens the character of the Major or whatever they called him, the head of the town, and offers a more exciting scenario. The whole sneaking around thing was weird and pointless and somewhat confusing. Not to mention the fact that some of the dwarves were left behind!! Totally pointless. The second thing that really irked me was the battle scene between the dwarves and Smaug. Obviously he was trying to pull in a little more action and strike a dramatic ending, but the scene was slightly confusing and over-the-top, just kind of felt like a video game to me. A good movie but towards the end it fell apart. Tauriel I didn't mind as much as I thought I would. Will never be my favorite addition but not TERRIBLE.

[Jeffrey]

Sarah wrote: "I really did not like this movie. The first one was good, but in the second they went pretty off on the story. The whole dwarf elf love thing was so stupid. The fact that some of the dwarfs were le..."
I totally agree with you Sarah. I don't know where the elf/dwarf thing come from. The conversation between Smaug and Bilbo is the highlight of the book. I thought it was totally botched in the movie Another thing they messed up was the way they portrayed Beorn. There was some humor in the book with the way Gandalf introduced the dwarves though the telling of the story of their previous adventures. It just seemed to Jackson wanted to take all the humor and charm out of the story to add a dark chapter to the war for the ring.

[mrbooks]

Please try not to be so enamored with the new printing of an old classic. We who only know it as the Hobbit, Cringe at the beautifully written and descriptive novel being broken down like this I mean really the desolation of Smaug. This book is about the adventures of Bilbo and the finding of the one ring.

Why didn't a sword kill Smaug, only the cheifest anf greatest calamity to descend on the Lonely mountain. Try getting close to a monster who has scales thicker and stronger than armor, one that breath in death and spears for claws. The Black arrow is a mystical arrow forged by the true king under the mountain. And the Arrow hit the only venerable spot on smaug. Remember what Bilbo said "There is a hollow in your left breast as bare as a snail out of it's shell."

Sorry please forgive my ranting's. I am a Tolkien fan and hate those that are raving about a movie they have watches and haven't read the book.

[Mikaela]

I actually loved the film. But i just didnt understand why they put in the little romance between Kili and Tauriel. I enjoyed watching it and it was sweet but just totally not true to the book. I was also really looking forward to the barrel scene and with Bilbo and Smaug and they were totally great. I loved them! Even though the movie went for a long time, i didn't even notice the time going by!

[Mikaela]

Kim wrote: "I thought the addition of material from other books added more depth into the situation, other than leaving us hanging when Gandalf left. The fight scene with Smaug in Erebor, though not in the boo..."
Dang! i forgot which of the dwarves die and I was hoping it wouldnt be Kili because he is some serious eye candy!

[C]

Elentarri wrote: "I don't know why they have to create silly extra characters that are found no-where in the whole Tolkien universe. This is an adventure story with one Hobbit and 13 Dwarves, NOT a love story (I as..."

Agreed!

[Aiyanna]

I haven't seen it yet! I really wanna see it, though. :(