The dwarves, along with Bilbo Baggins and Gandalf the Grey, continue their quest to reclaim Erebor, their homeland, from Smaug. Bilbo Baggins is in possession of a mysterious and magical ring.
Bilbo and company are forced to engage in a war against an array of combatants and keep the Lonely Mountain from falling into the hands of a rising darkness.
Director:
Peter Jackson
Stars:
Ian McKellen,
Martin Freeman,
Richard Armitage
A reluctant Hobbit, Bilbo Baggins, sets out to the Lonely Mountain with a spirited group of dwarves to reclaim their mountain home, and the gold within it from the dragon Smaug.
Director:
Peter Jackson
Stars:
Martin Freeman,
Ian McKellen,
Richard Armitage
Jack Sparrow races to recover the heart of Davy Jones to avoid enslaving his soul to Jones' service, as other friends and foes seek the heart for their own agenda as well.
Director:
Gore Verbinski
Stars:
Johnny Depp,
Orlando Bloom,
Keira Knightley
Captain Barbossa, Will Turner and Elizabeth Swann must sail off the edge of the map, navigate treachery and betrayal, find Jack Sparrow, and make their final alliances for one last decisive battle.
Director:
Gore Verbinski
Stars:
Johnny Depp,
Orlando Bloom,
Keira Knightley
As Harry, Ron and Hermione race against time and evil to destroy the Horcruxes, they uncover the existence of the three most powerful objects in the wizarding world: the Deathly Hallows.
Director:
David Yates
Stars:
Daniel Radcliffe,
Emma Watson,
Rupert Grint
Blacksmith Will Turner teams up with eccentric pirate "Captain" Jack Sparrow to save his love, the governor's daughter, from Jack's former pirate allies, who are now undead.
While Frodo and Sam edge closer to Mordor with the help of the shifty Gollum, the divided fellowship makes a stand against Sauron's new ally, Saruman, and his hordes of Isengard.
A meek Hobbit from the Shire and eight companions set out on a journey to destroy the powerful One Ring and save Middle-earth from the Dark Lord Sauron.
After successfully crossing over (and under) the Misty Mountains, Thorin and Company must seek aid from a powerful stranger before taking on the dangers of Mirkwood Forest--without their Wizard. If they reach the human settlement of Lake-town it will be time for the hobbit Bilbo Baggins to fulfill his contract with the dwarves. The party must complete the journey to Lonely Mountain and burglar Baggins must seek out the Secret Door that will give them access to the hoard of the dragon Smaug. And, where has Gandalf got off to? And what is his secret business to the south?Written by
Otaku-sempai
The forty-eight frames per second 3-D movie was shipped to some theaters via a standard SATA hard drive. It was shipped with a security code that prevented the content from being viewed, or copied, until the code was released by the distributor about twenty-four hours in advance of the initial release time of the movie. The forty-eight frames per second 3-D version of the movie, occupied six hundred thirty-nine gigabytes of data on the SATA hard drive. The theater in question, could have downloaded the entire movie via a secured satellite link, but the download would have taken more than twenty-four hours. Given that ninety-six frames per second are required for the 3-D picture (forty-eight frames per second for each eye), the data size for each frame, for each eye, is about .66 megabytes. See more »
Goofs
During the elvish interrogation of the orc, the orc refers to his master (Azog) who "serves The One." But in Tolkein's world, The One is the Creator of all that exists: Over-heaven, Middle-Earth and the Underworld, i.e. God. The orcs only ever refer to Sauron as Him or Himself, and would never, under any circumstances, refer to The One or confuse that entity with Sauron. See more »
Quotes
Bard the Bowman:
[upon hearing Smaug's arrival]
Listen to me! All of you! Do you not see what is coming?
See more »
Alternate Versions
The Extended Edition that was made for the home theater market adds 25 minutes of additional footage. These include the following new or extended scenes:
At the Prancing Pony, Gandalf asks Thorin about his business in Bree. Thorin tells him that he is searching for Thrain, his father who was presumed dead after the Battle of Moria; Thrain has supposedly been seen again. Thorin also mentions that Thrain was wearing one of the seven Dwarf Lord rings when he disappeared.
After having spent the night in Beorn's house, the Dwarves are discussing how they can get past Beorn unseen; however, Gandalf assures them they will need Beorn's help. Gandalf goes with Bilbo to carefully introduce the group to Beorn, but the Dwarves mistake his gestures for a sign that they should come out of the house, much to Beorn's unpleasant surprise.
Upon leaving with Beorn's ponies, Beorn makes the group swear to free the horses before entering the forest. He then has a talk with Gandalf about Azog, the Necromancer at Dol Guldur, the tombs in the mountains (featuring a flashback with a voiceover by Galadriel) and a possible return of Sauron.
Gandalf warns the Dwarves not to disturb the water in Mirkwood, use only bridges, and be wary of illusions.
The Dwarves find the bridge in Mirkwood destroyed, so they cross the river with the use of vines hanging above the water. Bombur falls in the water and is asleep, so the other Dwarves need to carry him. They see a white stag, which Thorin tries to shoot unsuccessfully. Bilbo states this will bring bad luck.
The Master of Laketown and his aid Alfrid talk about Bard and their desire to get rid of his influence on the people of the town. As Alfrid serves the Master a plate of goat and ram's testicles to eat, they discuss a possibility to silence Bard.
While being smuggled into Laketown, the Dwarves are discovered. They fight off the guards with the help of the townsfolk. Braga, the captain of the guards, enters, and Bard bribes him into leaving by offering him a fancy piece of underwear for his wife.
Master and Alfrid are discussing an old prophecy that when the king of the mountain returns, the streets will run with gold.
Alfrid asks whether Thorin can be trusted to keep his word, prompting Bilbo to vouch for him.
The remaining Dwarves ask Alfrid to help the wounded Kili, but he coldly dismisses them.
Balin describes how the desolation of Smaug was once a lush woodland.
While at Dol Guldur, Gandalf is suddenly attacked by a Dwarf. After a brief scuffle, Gandalf recognizes his assailant as Thrain, and uses an enchantment to give him his memory back. Thrain mentions how he lost his finger and the Dwarf Lord ring during the Battle of Moria. He also warns Gandalf that no one should get into Erebor.
Gandalf and Thrain are attacked by Azog at Dol Guldur. Gandalf fights him off and they run away, only to be caught by the Necromancer, who uses black smoke tendrils to grab and kill Thrain.
I won't "review" the content of the movie in any detail, but provide some thoughts about how this film should be approached. I consider myself a Tolkienist (in fact I saw this movie on opening night because I secured a promotion deal with the local cinema: I spent four hours until midnight writing people's names in Elvish writing!) It is to be expected that many fans of of the original book will perceive this movie as a bloated, garbled monster version of the written story they loved. It is important to realize, before going in, that this is not simply "the movie of the book". This is Jackson's The Hobbit, not Tolkien's, and they are best appreciated as independent works. They represent different media, come from different centuries, and have partly different target audiences. The children's book was written before Tolkien had any idea of the grand trilogy to follow; Jackson had already produced his Lord of the Rings trilogy and somewhat understandably tries to make the prequels resemble it, in tone and scope.
One could argue that Jackson's Hobbit trilogy, when complete, will set up the LotR film trilogy far better than Tolkien's simple children's book sets up the literary LotR. (The change in tone from children's book to grand epic is VERY pronounced, even grating for those who try to read The Hobbit after finishing LotR.) Incidentally, Jackson's prequel trilogy apparently will not spoil the LotR trilogy the way the Star Wars prequels give away important plot points of the original movies. When finished, Jackson's six Middle-earth movies can be profitably watched in sequence of internal chronology.
To be sure, Jackson's Hobbit trilogy is "based on" the 1930s children's book in the sense that the characters have the same names and visit much the same places in somewhat the same order (though new characters and places are also added). Their basic motivations are also the same. But beyond that, one should not expect much "fidelity". There is hardly anything that isn't greatly embellished and vastly elaborated, mostly so as to allow for a FAR darker tone and MUCH more fantasy action (i.e., fights). The spiders of Mirkwood here approach actual horror, as compared to their rather more children-friendly literary counterparts (where we have Bilbo insulting them with silly "Attercop" rhymes).
The wizards' conflict with the Necromancer of Dol Guldur, which in the book happens entirely "offscreen" and is just briefly alluded to when Gandalf has returned near the end, is here actually shown. This is understandable; Gandalf would otherwise be completely absent for much of this movie. Also, Jackson's audience will already know that this is the start of the war with Sauron, and the all-important Dark Lord could not well be ignored. Tolkien in his letters noted how Sauron casts just "a fleeting shadow" over the pages of The Hobbit; in Jackson's movie the shadow is darker and deeper.
Entire new subplots are freely created and added to the story. The Elf Tauriel and her unlikely infatuation with one of the Dwarfs is clearly meant to add a love story where the book has none, and have at least ONE strong female character (no concern of Tolkien's when he wrote a story for children in the 1930s).
The continued survival of ALL the protagonists despite their endless brushes with death doesn't just strain credibility -- it utterly and completely banishes and eliminates credibility. We are left with FANTASY action in the truest sense, to be enjoyed for choreography, not plausibility. If cats have nine lives, a Jacksonian Dwarf clearly enjoys a three-digit number of lives.
So, viewed as an independent work, is this a good movie? Technically it is nothing short of brilliant, full of detail that can only be appreciated on the big screen. Smaug is, hands down, the best-designed movie dragon the world has yet seen. If I were a teenager instead of a ripe old 42, this wealth of fantasy action would probably have exited me no end. It is nice to see Legolas again, even if he is not in the book. I liked the sequences with the amorphous Sauron. Poor Evangeline Lily would however look better without those silly ears, which are simply too big and look just as fake as they are. Also, I'm not sure the hinted-at Elf-Dwarf romance adds much to the story. All things considered, I'll award Jackson's re-imagined "The Hobbit" seven stars.
There were also seven stars in Durin's crown, for those of you who can understand the literary allusion ...
513 of 732 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this
I won't "review" the content of the movie in any detail, but provide some thoughts about how this film should be approached. I consider myself a Tolkienist (in fact I saw this movie on opening night because I secured a promotion deal with the local cinema: I spent four hours until midnight writing people's names in Elvish writing!) It is to be expected that many fans of of the original book will perceive this movie as a bloated, garbled monster version of the written story they loved. It is important to realize, before going in, that this is not simply "the movie of the book". This is Jackson's The Hobbit, not Tolkien's, and they are best appreciated as independent works. They represent different media, come from different centuries, and have partly different target audiences. The children's book was written before Tolkien had any idea of the grand trilogy to follow; Jackson had already produced his Lord of the Rings trilogy and somewhat understandably tries to make the prequels resemble it, in tone and scope.
One could argue that Jackson's Hobbit trilogy, when complete, will set up the LotR film trilogy far better than Tolkien's simple children's book sets up the literary LotR. (The change in tone from children's book to grand epic is VERY pronounced, even grating for those who try to read The Hobbit after finishing LotR.) Incidentally, Jackson's prequel trilogy apparently will not spoil the LotR trilogy the way the Star Wars prequels give away important plot points of the original movies. When finished, Jackson's six Middle-earth movies can be profitably watched in sequence of internal chronology.
To be sure, Jackson's Hobbit trilogy is "based on" the 1930s children's book in the sense that the characters have the same names and visit much the same places in somewhat the same order (though new characters and places are also added). Their basic motivations are also the same. But beyond that, one should not expect much "fidelity". There is hardly anything that isn't greatly embellished and vastly elaborated, mostly so as to allow for a FAR darker tone and MUCH more fantasy action (i.e., fights). The spiders of Mirkwood here approach actual horror, as compared to their rather more children-friendly literary counterparts (where we have Bilbo insulting them with silly "Attercop" rhymes).
The wizards' conflict with the Necromancer of Dol Guldur, which in the book happens entirely "offscreen" and is just briefly alluded to when Gandalf has returned near the end, is here actually shown. This is understandable; Gandalf would otherwise be completely absent for much of this movie. Also, Jackson's audience will already know that this is the start of the war with Sauron, and the all-important Dark Lord could not well be ignored. Tolkien in his letters noted how Sauron casts just "a fleeting shadow" over the pages of The Hobbit; in Jackson's movie the shadow is darker and deeper.
Entire new subplots are freely created and added to the story. The Elf Tauriel and her unlikely infatuation with one of the Dwarfs is clearly meant to add a love story where the book has none, and have at least ONE strong female character (no concern of Tolkien's when he wrote a story for children in the 1930s).
The continued survival of ALL the protagonists despite their endless brushes with death doesn't just strain credibility -- it utterly and completely banishes and eliminates credibility. We are left with FANTASY action in the truest sense, to be enjoyed for choreography, not plausibility. If cats have nine lives, a Jacksonian Dwarf clearly enjoys a three-digit number of lives.
So, viewed as an independent work, is this a good movie? Technically it is nothing short of brilliant, full of detail that can only be appreciated on the big screen. Smaug is, hands down, the best-designed movie dragon the world has yet seen. If I were a teenager instead of a ripe old 42, this wealth of fantasy action would probably have exited me no end. It is nice to see Legolas again, even if he is not in the book. I liked the sequences with the amorphous Sauron. Poor Evangeline Lily would however look better without those silly ears, which are simply too big and look just as fake as they are. Also, I'm not sure the hinted-at Elf-Dwarf romance adds much to the story. All things considered, I'll award Jackson's re-imagined "The Hobbit" seven stars.
There were also seven stars in Durin's crown, for those of you who can understand the literary allusion ...