Critics review 'Desolation of Smaug' | POSSIBLE SPOILERS

Tinuviel wrote:A part of me wonders if they had to fill up almost three hours of screen time, like WB forced them too, thus the ridiculous additions and pointless exposition we got to fill up that time. Usually its the other way around, they ask to cut four or five minutes. Then again, with PJ, I think that it's almost never the case where he has to add more, which makes me think he left something out.

A couple of months ago Jackson fans on TORn were speculating that WB had forced him to make the movies less than three hours long, since DOS and AUJ are shorter than any of the versions of the LOTR films. I suspect that the versions we're seeing are products of PJ, though.

There are also people are people on TOrn under the impression the snow in the US is the main factor keeping people away from the cinema   

Well, snow does have an affect on winter movies sometimes (Avatar's opening weekend is a good example), but it's been long enough and the snow hasn't been constant, so I seriously doubt the snow is a major factor for the final gross.

Eldorion wrote:

Tinuviel wrote:A part of me wonders if they had to fill up almost three hours of screen time, like WB forced them too, thus the ridiculous additions and pointless exposition we got to fill up that time. Usually its the other way around, they ask to cut four or five minutes. Then again, with PJ, I think that it's almost never the case where he has to add more, which makes me think he left something out.

A couple of months ago Jackson fans on TORn were speculating that WB had forced him to make the movies less than three hours long, since DOS and AUJ are shorter than any of the versions of the LOTR films. :PI suspect that the versions we're seeing are products of PJ, though.

Even so there is so much filler in these movies. Petty might be an extreme example, but what did he say he would have left when he cut away all but the book storyline? About 3 hours or the lenght of one movie.

Like with DoS. If you cut out the overlong action sequenses, what would you have left?

Certainly not a 3 hour long movie. So I'm struggling a bit with the theory that Peter Jackson restrained himself here.

Though that there could have been even more filler? With Peter that's alltogether possible, I guess.

And if they cut out a big piece of book story, like the celbration of the dwarves in Laketown. It makes one wonder.   

I always like to hear Bendy-wendy-bum speaking ! Hes articulate, intelligent & very charismatic, practically hypnotic, he can just "hold you there !"  

oh yes  totally agree  

Ayup All...

Boots' squeeze here. Thought I'd gone, eh ? He He He. I've been a little preoccupied... But here I am just to look in on you kids.

Well, TBH, I can't wait to see the extended (Extreme Irony here, eh ?) version of the dreadful part 2. As this film already has more filler than a cut and shut car; and we'll get even more ? It'll be interesting to see how far Jacksie indeed ventured up his own... Which is a shame, as just 'The Hobbit' as the prof intended would have been fine. Sometimes 'just' Vanilla IS good. Pixie Boobs Good... And lets face it, what do the critics know either, they're neither Film makers, nor Literature scholars in the main.

Laters.

My God !   And where the fook have YOU been ? Just going out for ciggs you said ! 5 WEEKS AGO ! Men !!     
What could Peejers put in the EEs ? Ads for double glazing ? Info on how Thandypants keeps the shine & gloss in his hair ? Tips on washing yer smalls by the Dwarves ?

The only thing I can think of is the feast for the dwarves at Laketown. Wasn't that even talked about in the run up to the movie?  

There will definitely be that, because watching the film you could just feel that they cut out so much from laketown. There will probably be some interaction between Legolas and Tauriel again to boost the whole Leggy's got a crush storyline, and more of Girion in Dale. I mean the best way to guess is to look at the trailer and see what was shown in that that wasn't in the movie.

On the plus side we should get a version of the enchanted stream, although probably ruined by being all trippy and not very enchanting.   

that's true! I remember watching the B-roll I think and PJ was telling Armitage to point at a boat by the river or something. So it was there, and then deleted for the heroic wheel barrel   

Yeah there are a couple of shots where just at the edge of frame you can see they are carrying a stretcher- so the falling asleep stuff should be there somewhere in the EE- but it will still all be weird and trippy Id guess, rather than dangerous and enchanting- and I dont suppose we will ever get the partying elves and there disappearing/reappearing fires- a huge shame as its a much, much better way to introduce wood elves than Legolamb leaping in unlikely fashion from tree top to tree top whilst absent-mindedly slaughtering huge spiders   

Well, anything that can be used in the edits will be warmly welcomed. Let's just hope it isn't too trippy.

theres an article over in TORn thats making the natives restless    its called the Desolation of Jackson, its great.

That sounds fun! You got a link I can never find anything on that bloody site   

Wait...you guys are still talking about DOS?

Here's the article Figgy referred to.

http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2014/01/30/86419-the-desolation-of-jackson-a-review-of-the-hobbit-the-desolation-of-smaug/

          


I read the comments to the review, why do some people take it as a personal insult?

I'm in shock TORn posted that!

Good solid points made throughout, although not so sure about his own suggestions for changes   
Whats wrong with just adapting the basic story? Changes yes, major deviations no, simple.

Many people on TORn seem to have the attitude

'I didn't mind very much because it was a kids book, so I'm glad they changed it for us adults screw it's target audience , Professor Tolkien would agree with me as the films were awesome. I know all about Tolkiens thoughts on the hobbit due to some edited letters drafts published a short while ago which I haven't actually read, and oh yeah His Son's a money grabbing git, who does nothing but collect checks, oh if only Peter Jackson was the literary executor then I wouldn't have to read the boring Silmarillion and see a cool film totally in his spirit, and oh yeah Thorin is a fitty...'

You get the point.

With the benefit of hindsight I don't think I would have minded if some of the dwarves were cut out, yeah there is the whole 'lucky number' idea in the book, and 13 is a sizeable team to take down a dragon, but I'd rather have a few less terminators with bad hairstyles and more developed central characters, the dwarves in the film came across as even more baggage than the book to me (in the book, to me at least the whole sense of them being a homogenous rabble was the point of the book-a point that Jackson didn't care about) lessening the group heightens the odds.

It might have also shortened the number of close ups on Thorin's hair.

Instead of The Hobbit, we could then call it 'Fan Fiction Shite and the Seven Dwarves'.

I'm feeling rather crabbit today sorry guys (and gals).

The books conceit, that they are largely an interchangeable mass who all look alike is fine, it a running joke in the book used first at Bag End again in the confusion in the goblin tunnels, once more at Beorns ect and could easily be in the film.
Put them all in coloured hoods but make them all look like the ones at the Council of Elrond, like dwarves, then make your stand outs the ones you need, Balin, Fili, Kili, Thorin, Ori and Dori- but make them stand outs not by looking ridiculous and designing them by silhouette, but by character.
Six is more than enough to emphasise and give more dialogue and character too, the rest dont require deeper defining because your film has no reason to be nearly nine hours long so you shouldnt have all that time to fill anyway.