jghenderson
Well-known member
They actually shot the pale orc with practical makeup in the first Hobbit, but apparently decided in post that he wasn't scary enough so replaced him with CGI.
The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug
- Thread starter refocusedmedia
- Start date
They actually shot the pale orc with practical makeup in the first Hobbit, but apparently decided in post that he wasn't scary enough so replaced him with CGI.
Batutta
Major Contributor
Agree with most of the comments. A better film by almost every metric; better story, better character development, better directing, more use of practical sets, better CGI even if its relied on a bit too much. Still not up to the level of LOTR though. PJ doesn't seem to know when enough is enough with his action scenes, with some of them going on past the point of ridiculousness. And Bilbo still gets a little lost in some of the proceedings. When it shifts focus to him its almost always for the better. His scenes with Smaug were great.
Sometimes I think this is a case of a director getting to big for his britches. No one is going to tell Jackson what to do since he's made them a Billion dollars. But a less powerful director might have a producer over his shoulder going ok, let's reign it in just a bit. Some of those scenes are ridiculous, and this is WAY to long. That can often help a movie, just like a recorder producer can help a band make a great album.
Batutta
Major Contributor
I actually think it all started in Return of the King and the moment Legolas brings down the Oliphant single handedly. PJ heard the applause that got in the theater and decided that's what people want, so let's do that scene over and over again, bigger and bigger.
adkimery
Veteran
I saw it last night and agree that Smaug scenes (especially w/just him and Bilbo) stole the show. I saw the first film in 3D HFR but saw this one in 2D and was disappointed by the visual texture of the movie. To me it looked a lot more like the HFR version than I thought it would which was a bit disappointing as I was going in hoping for a 'traditional' film look.
-Andrew
-Andrew
klas
Active member
Did anyone notice the, what I presume, Go Pro shots in the barrel sequence? Don't know why they couldn't just strap a couple of epics with housing instead because the shots stick out even if they are cutting away pretty fast. Enjoyed the film. The whole Smaug scene was incredible. No LOTR though but PJ is still a hero.
This is what made me want to create movies in the first place!
I just got the extended version of An Unexpected Journey and it became instantly better, which is pretty ironic as I thought it was a tad too long in the theatrical version. The new scenes made the tone of the film more coherent. More fun stuff, more songs and a little more childish. It wasn't torn as much between being serious and more fairytale like anymore.
I just got the extended version of An Unexpected Journey and it became instantly better, which is pretty ironic as I thought it was a tad too long in the theatrical version. The new scenes made the tone of the film more coherent. More fun stuff, more songs and a little more childish. It wasn't torn as much between being serious and more fairytale like anymore.
Ian-T
Veteran
Ok...didn't know they used GoPro's. I had complained in another thread about how the image kept breaking badly during the rough water scenes. I was not looking for any anomalies...they just stuck out that bad.
The first time I really noticed that habit of his was in King Kong, when I almost fell asleep during the big dinosaur chase scene.
Ryan Farnes
Well-known member
Yes. Beyond stupid.
It was a fun movie. Better than the first. Departs heavily from the book to the point of....betrayal of the material. Still a fun film and will probably rent from Redbox.
That is all.
Postmaster
Dark Side of the Camera
It started getting ridiculous, when Legolas was surfing down the stairs of Helms Deep on a shield, while taking out Urukhai with his bow - at least that was the point when Jackson lost me. The only thing missing was some Beach Boys tune.
Last edited:
Batutta
Major Contributor
That moment was a real stunt at least. The oliphant scene was a digital creation with weightless heroics, unanchored to any believable reality. I realize these are fantasy movies, but action sequences need some tether to a real, three dimensional world for any sense of jeopardy to be generated. When people are bouncing around like animated cartoons, the mind knows that nothing it is seeing has real consequences.
Mike Lorushe
Active member
I think the Legolas surfing thing looked cool personally.
The Hobbit 2 is a decent movie, although I actually enjoyed the first better. One thing for sure though is that neither movie comes close to rivalling any of the LOTR movies.
One thing I disliked particularly was how abruptly it ended. Sure, we all know there's gonna be a third movie but the idea of having to wait a whole year to see it after being left with a cliffhanger is not particularly enticing and actually rather annoying. Sort of reminds me of how the Matrix 2 ended, just not nearly as bad.
The Hobbit 2 is a decent movie, although I actually enjoyed the first better. One thing for sure though is that neither movie comes close to rivalling any of the LOTR movies.
One thing I disliked particularly was how abruptly it ended. Sure, we all know there's gonna be a third movie but the idea of having to wait a whole year to see it after being left with a cliffhanger is not particularly enticing and actually rather annoying. Sort of reminds me of how the Matrix 2 ended, just not nearly as bad.
claystevens
Member
Still don't have time to the cinema. Hope it won't let me disapponint tomorrow
tmnt
King of Australia
Saw it in 3D at 48fps, surprisingly the HFR didn't bother me like I thought it would. I also didn't see any difference in the 3D being 'smoother', though I've never had a problem with my eyes and 3D.
Though I've never read the books I can see that it really, really should have been only two movies. I expected them to slay the dragon so kind of weird to me the whole movie is about them pretty much just getting there and unleashing it. To me there wasn't a big event to end the movie.
3/5
Though I've never read the books I can see that it really, really should have been only two movies. I expected them to slay the dragon so kind of weird to me the whole movie is about them pretty much just getting there and unleashing it. To me there wasn't a big event to end the movie.
3/5
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
Re: book vs 3 movies...
The "Hobbit" is a rather short novel (when compared to the 3 volume LOTR canon...). I believe Jackson and Co. 'mixed in' other writings to fill out for 3 films, which includes the rise of Sauron. This is found in "The Silmarillion" a book that was edited and augmented by Christopher Tolkein after JRR's death.
The Silmarillion gives 'back stories' on figures found in LOTR and Hobbit, as well as additional 'mythic' material.
tmnt
King of Australia
I liked the story but the movie felt incomplete to me as a story on it's own. Definitely can't be a bad thing to tie in the Hobbit more with the LOTR.
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
It definitely did end abruptly.