The Hobbit : Battle of the five armies (December 2014)

ancapailldorcha

I saw this recently. I've neither seen nor read the LOTR films or books and I have to say that this is one of the worse trilogies I can name. I'm about two thirds of the way through the book and why it was decided to extrapolate 3 films out of it is beyond me. 2? Perhaps. 3? Absurd. I loved the second film but the preceding and succeeding entries are woeful, lack any sort of weight and are just overly padded for greed's sake.

Other posters have succinctly described the trilogy's failings so I won't go on. Taken 3 was better than this.

Mr Freeze

I honestly don't think I'm going to go see this now.

I've not heard or read a good word about it really.

Liamalone

Saw this last night and by gum it is awful, way too much CGI for a start, the flaws have been well covered in this thread so I'll not repeat them.

If you multiplied the number of times I went "aaaww ffs that's just stupid" by the number of times I just laughed at it's absurdity then you would get 68536855784 x 10^4 ..... roughly.

Saipanne

It would be great if a talented fan took the trilogy and edited down to one movie, trimming the crap out.

bucketybuck

Saipanne wrote: »

It would be great if a talented fan took the trilogy and edited down to one movie, trimming the crap out.

Would have been even better if a talented director had done that from the very beginning.

david75

bucketybuck wrote: »

Would have been even better if a talented director had done that from the very beginning.

I do find myself wondering what Guillermo del toros version of the Hobbit would have been like

Liamalone

david75 wrote: »

I do find myself wondering what Guillermo del toros version of the Hobbit would have been like

Good call, forgot that he was in the running to make it originally. If only

Heroditas

Deleted User wrote: »

Then in the third movie, they are running around in the sun with not issues what so ever.

Were they trolls ??

Different types of trolls. IIRC, in Tolkien's world there were cave trolls, stone trolls and hill trolls.

Saipanne

Saipanne wrote: »

It would be great if a talented fan took the trilogy and edited down to one movie, trimming the crap out.

I have already contemplated doing this and have already started cutting out certain scenes in my head to do this. Time is the problem :P

I actually enjoyed the movie, you can see that its really one elongated movie. I thought Ironfoot looked stupid though but his character was great. Way to Much CGI. The battle scenes were ok although it looked a little like the Total War game at times. Would have loved it if he got away from the green screen though. They whole point of filming in NZ was to use its amazing scenery.

cailinardthair

Just saw it today with the boyfriend and the overall feeling I have is just sheer disappointment. (I now know how my boyfriend and my brother feel about the transformer movies compared to the comics)

I can't help feeling that the bones were there for a brilliant movie if it stuck to two films and not three.
When they stuck to the hobbit book I thought it was good...Martin Freeman is brilliant as Bilbo. The dragon sickness was great with the parallels with the beginning of the first hobbit but could have shortened in length IMO.

Would have preferred more time with the dwarfs throughout the three films just to feel more for them. I feel that the actually main hobbit characters get sidelined for the LOTR plot!

I know a lot people have said these points but I'm just so disappointed when I think back to how felt when I left the cinema after the return of king and it was a mixture of sadness that its over but thinking this is one of the best films ever....and tonight after the Hobbit I feel meh! and that's the sad bit!

Saipanne

Fans make reduced form of film.

http://kotaku.com/fan-cuts-the-hobbit-into-a-single-4-hour-movie-1680489729

TheDoc

Realise I didn't post here.

Saw it two weekends ago and really thought it was borderline garbage. I was a big fan of the LOTR trilogy and came into this with some high hopes. But the first two films I really failed to take too and thought they were extremely average.

As a finale, it flattered to deceive. The battle scenes looked as someone said extremely cartoony and silly and I really had little interest or care for what was happening, if anyone was in danger etc.

As much as I've watched the LOTR trilogies again, I doubt I'll watch these. Potentially back to back they won't be as poor as the first viewings, but dragging it out over three films and nearly three years was a poor call.

I saw it as the film I wanted to see wasn't on anymore, I'd actually no intention of seeing it and finishing the trilogy. So it "should" have really won me over considering I went in with low expectations. That I came out thinking it was trash, well.

And typically I force myself to enjoy most films I go to. Two adults tickets and medium combos, €38.90. I REALLY try to like films I see in the cinema....

.ak

Heroditas wrote: »

Different types of trolls. IIRC, in Tolkien's world there were cave trolls, stone trolls and hill trolls.

...and Olog-hai, which were supposed to be intelligent black-speech speaking trolls who would captain the forces of Mordor and were immune to the effects of the sun unlike other trolls.

The weird large things running around in the hobbit movie I don't think were supposed to be trolls. Probably some sort of goblin thingy.

Heroditas

Wasn't one theory regarding Gothmog that he was an Olog Hai?
The other one of course being that he was a Wraith.
It's never fully explained in ROTK.

Saipanne

Saipanne wrote: »

Fans make reduced form of film.

http://kotaku.com/fan-cuts-the-hobbit-into-a-single-4-hour-movie-1680489729

Downloading now. I'll give it a lash.

J Mysterio

Saipanne wrote: »

Downloading now. I'll give it a lash.

Where'd you find it?

Saipanne

J Mysterio wrote: »

Where'd you find it?

The link.

I was going to do it but wanted to wait for the release of 5 armies on blu ray.

Goldstein

What a mess.

.ak

Heroditas wrote: »

Wasn't one theory regarding Gothmog that he was an Olog Hai?
The other one of course being that he was a Wraith.
It's never fully explained in ROTK.

Yeah it's never really explained. It's an Orcish sounding name and as he's the lieutenant of the witch king you could assume he's from the north, which would imply he's not an Olog hai as they were only first seen in mordor

J Mysterio

Saipanne wrote: »

The link.

Duh.. didnt think those videos could actually be the full edited fan vid. Seemed would be begging for a lawsuit.

So... whadidyathink?

Saipanne

J Mysterio wrote: »

Duh.. didnt think those videos could actually be the full edited fan vid. Seemed would be begging for a lawsuit.

So... whadidyathink?

Haven't watched it yet. Not in the mood for a four hour film yet!

candy-gal1

An excellent last piece to the trilogy imho, and the best of this trio and the LOTR, actually quite a strong ending in many ways but moreso to definitly make you go a bit teary no matter what!

Boom_Bap

The first 10 minutes of this were ace.
Everything after that was brutal.
Who stops for a chinwag during a battle...repeatedly?

The cheese was also layered thick throughout.

jones

I liked it but I didn't love it.
Why oh why did they hold smaug's ending until the third film if it was literally going to last 5 minutes? PJ should of just tacked it onto the end of DOS. Decent trilogy but not a patch on LOTR's obviously

7/10 overall

Frankie5Angels

candy-gal1 wrote: »

An excellent last piece to the trilogy imho, and the best of this trio and the LOTR, actually quite a strong ending in many ways but moreso to definitly make you go a bit teary no matter what!

Ah here, whatever about it being the best of this trilogy, there's not one film in the whole of the Hobbit trilogy that comes in any way close to the worst of the LOTR trilogy!

david75

Frankie5Angels wrote: »

Ah here, whatever about it being the best of this trilogy, there's not one film in the whole of the Hobbit trilogy that comes in any way close to the worst of the LOTR trilogy!

that was super ultra laughable...it is not nor ever will be better than LOTR hun...sorry but it wont..

FloatingVoter

I read The Hobbit and The Lord of the rings trilogy in the late 80s long before Peter Jackson (bless his hobbit boots) was near the franchise. Even at that point the best was contained in The Return Of The King. Those of you who have just seen the movies haven't seen the Scouring Of The Shire chapter. Read the books and you will (special effects provided by the reader).

jones

Must actually reread LOTR's i have this fancy hardback 50th edition that i last read about ten years ago. The books are wonderful and i can see why it was said for so long that they were unfilmable. PJ did a great job on LOTR's - on the hobbit not so much

Saipanne

FloatingVoter wrote: »

I read The Hobbit and The Lord of the rings trilogy in the late 80s long before Peter Jackson (bless his hobbit boots) was near the franchise. Even at that point the best was contained in The Return Of The King. Those of you who have just seen the movies haven't seen the Scouring Of The Shire chapter. Read the books and you will (special effects provided by the reader).

As books I liked the hobbit. Lotr just bored me.