Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Tables]

I'm going to watch The Desolation of Smaug tomorrow with some friends. Should be good. I'll possibly give thoughts when I get back.

[Eevee]

Just watched the new hobbit movie

Comments in spoiler:
It was quite fun to watch, but I feel at some points stuff didn't make much sense. Like, did those Dwarves never play Pokemon.
Thorin uses Molten Gold on Dragon. It's not very effective.
How does that come as a surprise?

I assume the plan was for the gold to solidify over the dragon. But, if it was liquid long enough to form a statue, I don't think it's going to solidify fast enough to catch a dragon that is immune to heat.

So.. that was the scene that didn't make sense to you in the movie? That one?

[Kuildeous]

Just watched the new hobbit movie

Comments in spoiler:
It was quite fun to watch, but I feel at some points stuff didn't make much sense. Like, did those Dwarves never play Pokemon.
Thorin uses Molten Gold on Dragon. It's not very effective.
How does that come as a surprise?

I assume the plan was for the gold to solidify over the dragon. But, if it was liquid long enough to form a statue, I don't think it's going to solidify fast enough to catch a dragon that is immune to heat.

So.. that was the scene that didn't make sense to you in the movie? That one?

I think that scene was probably one of the most egregious. There's other parts like what the hell is Gandalf doing anyway? Though, to be fair, Gandalf was not that cool in the books either. You would have expected more from a powerful wizard.

What got me about that scene was that it advanced the plot not one iota. Smaug was intending to lay waste to the town, but the dwarves' master plan caused him to abort his plan and deal with the dwarves instead.  But then he goes and does it anyway. What was even the point of that scene except to show something really cool and pretty in CGI?

And I think that people who read the book probably really got screwed by that. At least if you didn't know how the movie ends (or in terms of the book, continues) then there might be some degree of suspense as the plan might just work. For someone who read the book, you know the plan won't work because that would derail the entire rest of the story.

It's really the same thing that's been bugging me about action movies. I do like the eye candy of a good action scene, sure, but at least make it relevant to the plot. Everything with Smaug was pretty good up to a certain point. The barrel scene was pretty good—even the stupid parts (though not necessarily the Legolas parts). Those moved the story along. If the scene could be removed without notice, then there's a problem.

A great example of this was the first Hobbit movie. The chase scene with Radagast was atrocious. It just kept going. And at the end of it, what changed? The group (dare I say, fellowship) was still trapped.

Still, it could be worse (I'm looking at you, B-13).

[Witherweaver]

Just watched the new hobbit movie

Comments in spoiler:
It was quite fun to watch, but I feel at some points stuff didn't make much sense. Like, did those Dwarves never play Pokemon.
Thorin uses Molten Gold on Dragon. It's not very effective.
How does that come as a surprise?

I assume the plan was for the gold to solidify over the dragon. But, if it was liquid long enough to form a statue, I don't think it's going to solidify fast enough to catch a dragon that is immune to heat.

So.. that was the scene that didn't make sense to you in the movie? That one?

I think that scene was probably one of the most egregious. There's other parts like what the hell is Gandalf doing anyway? Though, to be fair, Gandalf was not that cool in the books either. You would have expected more from a powerful wizard.

What got me about that scene was that it advanced the plot not one iota. Smaug was intending to lay waste to the town, but the dwarves' master plan caused him to abort his plan and deal with the dwarves instead.  But then he goes and does it anyway. What was even the point of that scene except to show something really cool and pretty in CGI?

I thought about this too, and I kind of came to the conclusion that it was to show that the dwarves actually tried.  They take some responsibility for unleashing the dragon. It ultimately failed, but instead of just waking up a dragon and letting him loose on Lake Town for Bard to take care of, they try to take care of their own problem.  In the book, well, I don't remember the details of the chapter, but it feels like they kind of just ran away, Smaug leaves, and then they kind of have Erebor to themselves.

And I think that people who read the book probably really got screwed by that. At least if you didn't know how the movie ends (or in terms of the book, continues) then there might be some degree of suspense as the plan might just work. For someone who read the book, you know the plan won't work because that would derail the entire rest of the story.

It's really the same thing that's been bugging me about action movies. I do like the eye candy of a good action scene, sure, but at least make it relevant to the plot. Everything with Smaug was pretty good up to a certain point. The barrel scene was pretty good—even the stupid parts (though not necessarily the Legolas parts). Those moved the story along. If the scene could be removed without notice, then there's a problem.

A great example of this was the first Hobbit movie. The chase scene with Radagast was atrocious. It just kept going. And at the end of it, what changed? The group (dare I say, fellowship) was still trapped.

Still, it could be worse (I'm looking at you, B-13).

I guess I kind of had the "wait, why are they doing this?" reaction, too.  But I went along with it and I wasn't too unhappy.  I think the scene of Bilbo meeting Smaug was the best in this movie. (I also thought Bilbo meeting Gollum was the best in the previous one.)

[Kuildeous]

I guess I kind of had the "wait, why are they doing this?" reaction, too.  But I went along with it and I wasn't too unhappy.  I think the scene of Bilbo meeting Smaug was the best in this movie. (I also thought Bilbo meeting Gollum was the best in the previous one.)

The nice thing about the meeting of Smaug and Bilbo is that it really conveyed the arrogance of the dragon. If the scene wasn't filmed well, you'd wonder why the villain just doesn't up and kill the intruder.

But no, Smaug is a conceited villain, and he lets it dominate him as he distracts himself from his ennui. And this is pulled off without looking like a cheesy, "I will tell you my plan, Mr. Bond," moment.

Although, the fact that he couldn't kill a single dwarf in that scene disrupts the illusion that Smaug is so utterly powerful. It becomes less of an I'm-evil-incarnate-and-will-just-fucking-kill-everything moment and more of a waah-you-hurt-my-feelings-so-I'm-going-after-something-weaker moment. I think that final scene diminishes Smaug's badassery, which is too bad, because it was going so well at first. I mean, that is how you portray a dragon!

[Witherweaver]

I guess I kind of had the "wait, why are they doing this?" reaction, too.  But I went along with it and I wasn't too unhappy.  I think the scene of Bilbo meeting Smaug was the best in this movie. (I also thought Bilbo meeting Gollum was the best in the previous one.)

The nice thing about the meeting of Smaug and Bilbo is that it really conveyed the arrogance of the dragon. If the scene wasn't filmed well, you'd wonder why the villain just doesn't up and kill the intruder.

But no, Smaug is a conceited villain, and he lets it dominate him as he distracts himself from his ennui. And this is pulled off without looking like a cheesy, "I will tell you my plan, Mr. Bond," moment.

Although, the fact that he couldn't kill a single dwarf in that scene disrupts the illusion that Smaug is so utterly powerful. It becomes less of an I'm-evil-incarnate-and-will-just-fucking-kill-everything moment and more of a waah-you-hurt-my-feelings-so-I'm-going-after-something-weaker moment. I think that final scene diminishes Smaug's badassery, which is too bad, because it was going so well at first. I mean, that is how you portray a dragon!

Yes, but on the other hand, Smaug is HUGE and they are very small.  He mainly specializes as killing a hoard of things (like an entire village, or an army on an open battlefield), because he can simply lay waste to everything with his fire.  As long as the dwarves are able to take cover from his breath weapon and get into places where it would be awkward for him to claw them, they should be alright.  He also has limited maneuverability inside of a mountain.  Plus, he's been sleeping for a long time and maybe he just wanted to play around a bit (until they dumped lava on him). 

But yes we have to suspend disbelief that Smaug didn't nab a single one.  Especially Thorin swinging around on chains.  But oh well.

[Nevermind]

Just saw this thread. I am a big fan of anything LOTR. I have read the LOTR books, the hobbit, and the silmarillion. I think that the hobbit movies are pretty good, but Peter Jackson always has to have a 3-hour movie. Why? If you just left Dol Guldur and Azog (which is dead in the book), you could have a normal movie. Although, it is kind of interesting, because the guy that plays smaug also plays the necromancer/SAURON and also is the main character in a TV show with Martin Freeman co-starring, Sherlock. I liked how desolation of smaug ended, but why say you can only kill a dragon with a certain arrow and it has to be shot from a wind lance ? I remember something about a black arrow in the hobbit, but I don't think it was the only thing that could've killed the dragon.

[Witherweaver]

Just saw this thread. I am a big fan of anything LOTR. I have read the LOTR books, the hobbit, and the silmarillion. I think that the hobbit movies are pretty good, but Peter Jackson always has to have a 3-hour movie. Why? If you just left Dol Guldur and Azog (which is dead in the book), you could have a normal movie. Although, it is kind of interesting, because the guy that plays smaug also plays the necromancer/SAURON and also is the main character in a TV show with Martin Freeman co-starring, Sherlock. I liked how desolation of smaug ended, but why say you can only kill a dragon with a certain arrow and it has to be shot from a wind lance ? I remember something about a black arrow in the hobbit, but I don't think it was the only thing that could've killed the dragon.

Well, the point is his scales are impenetrable.  Or close to it.  But Bilbo notices that one scale is missing, so if Smaug gets hit there it could kill him (say,  hit some vital organ).  So arrow is the natural thing, since the dragon is flying around and such and you can't get close enough to poke him.  So it was kind of the only practical thing.  It's in the book, too, though I think Bard just shot with a regular bow.

[2.71828.....]

Just saw this thread. I am a big fan of anything LOTR. I have read the LOTR books, the hobbit, and the silmarillion. I think that the hobbit movies are pretty good, but Peter Jackson always has to have a 3-hour movie. Why? If you just left Dol Guldur and Azog (which is dead in the book), you could have a normal movie. Although, it is kind of interesting, because the guy that plays smaug also plays the necromancer/SAURON and also is the main character in a TV show with Martin Freeman co-starring, Sherlock. I liked how desolation of smaug ended, but why say you can only kill a dragon with a certain arrow and it has to be shot from a wind lance ? I remember something about a black arrow in the hobbit, but I don't think it was the only thing that could've killed the dragon.

Well, the point is his scales are impenetrable.  Or close to it.  But Bilbo notices that one scale is missing, so if Smaug gets hit there it could kill him (say,  hit some vital organ).  So arrow is the natural thing, since the dragon is flying around and such and you can't get close enough to poke him.  So it was kind of the only practical thing.  It's in the book, too, though I think Bard just shot with a regular bow.

yeah.  regular bow, regular arrow.  The trick was the thrush overheard Bilbo telling the Dwarves about the missing scale, and then since Bard was from Dale, he understood the language of the thrush, who told him about the missing scale just in time for him to shoot the big lizard down.   Kind of anti-climactic really.  I suspect adding the special bow, Bard going to jail, and the dwarves fighting Smaug was all done to just show off his dragon and add a little bit of excitement to the storyline for moviegoers.  In the book Smaug is basically just there, flies to Laketown, and dies.  Not too exciting.

[Awaclus]

yeah.  regular bow, regular arrow.  The trick was the thrush overheard Bilbo telling the Dwarves about the missing scale, and then since Bard was from Dale, he understood the language of the thrush, who told him about the missing scale just in time for him to shoot the big lizard down.   Kind of anti-climactic really.  I suspect adding the special bow, Bard going to jail, and the dwarves fighting Smaug was all done to just show off his dragon and add a little bit of excitement to the storyline for moviegoers.  In the book Smaug is basically just there, flies to Laketown, and dies.  Not too exciting.

Wasn't it still a black arrow? It's been a while since I read the book, and I'm not sure if the arrow was supposed to be somehow extra special like it is in the film, but I remember the term "black arrow".

[2.71828.....]

yeah.  regular bow, regular arrow.  The trick was the thrush overheard Bilbo telling the Dwarves about the missing scale, and then since Bard was from Dale, he understood the language of the thrush, who told him about the missing scale just in time for him to shoot the big lizard down.   Kind of anti-climactic really.  I suspect adding the special bow, Bard going to jail, and the dwarves fighting Smaug was all done to just show off his dragon and add a little bit of excitement to the storyline for moviegoers.  In the book Smaug is basically just there, flies to Laketown, and dies.  Not too exciting.

Wasn't it still a black arrow? It's been a while since I read the book, and I'm not sure if the arrow was supposed to be somehow extra special like it is in the film, but I remember the term "black arrow".

From the book:  "Arrow! Black arrow! I have saved you to the last. You have never failed me and always I have recovered you. I had you from my father and he from of old. If ever you came from the forges of the true king under the Mountain, go now and speed well!" -Bard before he shoots the dragon

From the Tolkien Gateway wiki: "Bard served as a soldier in Lake-town, and was one of the most skilled archers among Men. He was the heir of Girion, the last lord of Dale. Noted for his grim face and spirit, he was an able archer and inherited his Black Arrow from his ancestors. Considering it a lucky heirloom, he always used it last."

[2.71828.....]

[Nevermind]

So, just saw this trailer. Wow. I heard the song Pippin sang in Return of the King around the 1:00 mark. That song, just, fit the scene quite beautifully. But I must know, how could Gandalf have gotten away? Maybe Galadriel and Radagast come and save him, but they're facing Sauron. What hope do they have? I really hope there will be a beautiful battle sequence for the battle of the five armies. Do not disappoint, Peter.