In theatres: 'Desolation of Smaug' | SPOILERS

Wiki said the site went up in 1999, that's ancient by internet standards.

And I usually stay out of the default subreddits, and stick to the ones I'm subscribed to. Something like this is more likely to be brought up in the defaults where discussion tends to meander and turn to seedier things.

You know, I've never seen "Two Girls, One Cup." And I'm proud of that fact.

thank you for letting me know it exists, so I know what to avoid!

I guess this is one of those moments where I say thank God for my adblock.   

I could not unsee that during the entirety of TDKR. And when she started fiddling with the "finger" bits at the end...

And people say IM warped   

So after the High Fells scene, Gandalf and Radagst are outside having a burping contest and Gandalf says that Azog is a "commander of legions" and he's working with Sauron.

How do you know that? How do you know he's working with the enemy. He could just have a personal vendetta against Thorin.

Bay-eornnen says that there's an alliance between the Moria orcs and the Necromancer, but he doesn't say that Ass-hog is the leader of everything.

Where is the evidence that he's collaborating with Sauron. The audience saw it earlier when Ass-hog had a powwow with Sauron's fart cloud, but you didn't.

Wait, what's that on the ground. Is that the script? Did you read the script too?

Hey, answer me thing-in-the-mouth-face. What's wrong with your face???

bungobaggins wrote:Hey, answer me thing-in-the-mouth-face. What's wrong with your face???

  

Azog seems to run around the colder parts of Middle-eart without a shirt on, a lot. Do you think he runs around with hard nipples the entire time?

I think it's more than apparent at this point that Boyens and Walsh doesn't do logic very well.

There are large logical faults in the LotRs movies that were introduced by their "improvements".

how do i logic

I assume that was meant rhetorically.    

the movie made more sense and was more enjoyable the second time  i think i might be in love with thorin.. and kili... and bard.. and fili..and Ori.....and.. er.. Azog.

Nice Game of Thrones tie-in there Norc.  

I don't understand how you can like Azog though!  
Bard, I get; Kili I can imagine; but Azog? And Thorin?!

No mention of Thranduil!!

Wow.




I'm glad you liked it more the second time around though, coolios.

The second time around I saw Stephen Colbert, noticed what you said about Bilbo being shocked with himself for killing the mutant grub, and was subtly mad about all the little stupid things that I saw.

By the way, why couldn't Cumberbatch play a character who's face we can see? That would be awesome! Cumberbatch as Bard, or as a slightly sinister Wood-elf, or some random Lake-towner who makes disparaging comments about the dwarves!

So people are getting around to seeing it for a second time and I haven't even gotten around to seeing it yet.   

Having decided I really wasn't over keen to see he film I hadn't made plans to see it. Unfortunately as part of the Christmas festivities my mum and squach wanted to go and see it, so reluctantly I went. (After Squach had made me promise not to moan throughout.)

I was as good as my word until we were safely back in the car and my response was simply, what a pile of balls!

Have since read through this thread, I had been avoiding it.

Unlike most people I though beorn could have been brill, if given anything decent at all or true to the character to work with. Again in contrast to most I really didn't like thranduil at all, it felt too much like a sulky fifteen year pretending to be grand. Yes I intend to run for cover after posting this   

I actually felt sorry for Evangeline. I thought actually she did really well, but was doomed by the insistence of the love story bit. Without that I don't mind the addition at all. I enjoyed Bard, I'm curious about the dislike of the family, no it doesn't add to the story, but it is simply a background, didn't worry me.
The dragon in the mountain is largely best ignored, there should simply be the stench of roasted hobbit and dwarf if there had behaved that way.

On the melty gold statue, I assumed that the statue had been under construction before the dragon came, but not finished. The furnaces were used to fill the stone mould, the outer edge hardening enough due to the cold stone so it held it's sharpe momentarily before the residual heat of the molten gold inside turned it back to liquid. Daft, unlikely, and the gold would have dropped instead of spurting out, but a possible logic?

On a side note, I did keep half an eye on edit possibilities and came out b depressed. I am not surprised the initial edit is less than an hour long, it might be possible to forgive the extras if the rest was in any way true to the book, but it is clear a vast red pen has been taken to the book to allow time for the extras.

Far more interesting to me was the fact that this is the first 3d film I've seen, and I was surprised by a couple of things. Firstly is that little thought seems to have gone into depth of focus as the scenes move, it works best were you move throughout the depth of the image naturally, in the case of the hobbit in the slower scenes not the quick camera moves. Secondly is subtitles, invariably in the nearest foreground, completely out of focus with the depth of the action you are watching and really disorientating. I feel to make it work well, and it could and should, filmmakers or at least Jackson need to be a little more careful of shot composition.

Oh and a belated happy Christmas to all, hope the festive season has been good to all.

Welcome back Kafria!    We have missed you and Squach.

For me the biggest problem with DOS is that whole sections of the book and whole characters like Beorn are swept aside or rushed past solely in order to make room for PJ and the Covens completely un-Tolkien like flights of fancy and pure fan fiction.
Its one thing to add stuff or to alter something for pacing or changes to medium, but there is no excuse for PJ ditching the original story just to fit in more of his own made up nonsense.   

Bendydick Cumberbumber should have been Thranduil. Lee Pace was good but Cumberwumber would have given him gravitas and scaryness. Only problem is Cumber looks horrible in blonde wigs.

Is it my turn to say "Something crabbit this way comes.  " this time, Figg?   

I actually think Cumberbatch might have been an interesting casting as Bilbo. I don't really see why they needed a cuddly lovable actor in the role.

Forgot to mention, I suddenly had a false logic moment in the middle of the film.

As Gandalf visits the empty tombs of the Nazgul I suddenly thought that in a truncated timeline this was possibly logical, if these were meant to be direct sequels then the tide needs to be turning and the set up for LOTR needs to be starting. It was only a few minutes later that I went, but there's still 60 years for this to happen in. If you assume that Bilbo is already old, Frodo is at home waiting to set off in  a year or two then what is happening in the films is horrible, but logical. Shows how much the time cut in LOTR is seered into my brain.

Kafria wrote:On the melty gold statue, I assumed that the statue had been under construction before the dragon came, but not finished. The furnaces were used to fill the stone mould, the outer edge hardening enough due to the cold stone so it held it's sharpe momentarily before the residual heat of the molten gold inside turned it back to liquid. Daft, unlikely, and the gold would have dropped instead of spurting out, but a possible logic?

I'd say no. And I refuse to entertain any notions of rationalizing such a ridiculous scene that ends being a waste of everyone's time, including the viewer's.