The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

Mickeroo

He seems like a savvy enough dragon to be keeping up to date on middle earth current affiars surely. :pac:

nice_guy80

I hated this movie.

I watched part 1 again in advance of going to the cinema

Why did I hate it?
very little of a prelude to the movie, its just straight into it. Not very subtle.
Rush through Beorn's part in the book/movie

rush the journey through Mirkwood, dwarves getting lost - lights in the forest, captured by spiders, Bilbo freeing them

rush through the length of time they are held by the wood Elves. I thought these elves were meant to be really wild and savage, with little refinement compared to their kin???

introduce a new main character - elf girl, and some sort of a romance with a dwarf. wtf??
split up the company of dwarves? why? speed through them returning to the mountain - which they earlier salivated over.

change what Bilbo does to enrage the dragon

Underlying all this is the plot of sauron and his re-appearance/emergence.
I feel cheated.

There was plenty of material to make a decent movie out of this, but Jackson seems more intent on setting up the already filmed LOTR than adhering to some of The Hobbit storyline

EDIT And also to note, as a fan of the previous movie scores, this sucked.

emo72

granted i was tired, but i fell asleep twice in there. the movie had no charm, well, except the bit with bilbo and gandalf at the edge of mirkwood. see mr jackson? a bit of dialogue between 2 great actors. simple. it doesnt need to be a breakneck setpiece moving so fast that your mind cant absorb whats happening anyway. im really getting sick of all these action scenes in movies. who likes them anyways? the book had the charm. 3 hours of what exactly was that movie. pointless if you ask me, well you didnt but im telling you anyway:D

sorry for the rant, im getting too cynical as i get older. hopefully other people enjoyed it.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

That barrel scene was a load of balls btw. Went on for about 15 minutes. And jesus can we have a scene without orcs in it? Sick of looking at the ****ers, they totally lost any sense of menace. Particularly after Legolas merrily killed about a million of them. Why not just send him against Sauron's army?

Frank Black

emo72 wrote: »

granted i was tired, but i fell asleep twice in there. the movie had no charm, well, except the bit with bilbo and gandalf at the edge of mirkwood. see mr jackson? a bit of dialogue between 2 great actors. simple. it doesnt need to be a breakneck setpiece moving so fast that your mind cant absorb whats happening anyway. im really getting sick of all these action scenes in movies. who likes them anyways? the book had the charm. 3 hours of what exactly was that movie. pointless if you ask me, well you didnt but im telling you anyway:D

sorry for the rant, im getting too cynical as i get older. hopefully other people enjoyed it.

That's the last thing the first two movies suffer from IMO. Too much talking, not enough action.

I thought the barrel sequence was great, a real cinematic treat. 10mins of pure adrenaline that leave you exhausted and remind you what a great action director Jackson is, - seems like I'm in the minority though.

duckysauce

Just back from and loved it , doesn't deserve all the criticism it's getting here. Great bit of escapism.

SarahBM

I really cant understand the hatred for DOS on here. It has flaws, as most films do, but does it really deserve to be picked apart to this extent? I think the big problem here is that LOTR was epic and a once off. There was nothing like it before and there can be nothing like it again. People keep comparing them but I really think you have to take them as being separate. You cant compare the books. The Hobbit is often classed as a childrens book, but LOTR is far from that.

I do admit I dont like the over use of CGI, especially with the Orcs. It has been years since I read the Hobbit so I cant exactly remember, but I didnt think there was that many Orcs in it, I dont remember the Necromancer so he obviously didnt leave that much of an impression on me. I dont like the intro of Tauriel. ads nothing to the story. And the "breaking of the company" was unnecessary I think.

Other than that I really enjoyed it and I cant wait to get the extended editions. I think there will be a lot more character development, like there was with LOTR.

Sorry for going on but I have one more thing to say about it. The score. What are people complaining about? There was nothing wrong with it!

johnny_ultimate

SarahBM wrote: »

Sorry for going on but I have one more thing to say about it. The score. What are people complaining about? There was nothing wrong with it!

It was awful - I'm sure individual compositions were well crafted (although outside the LotR reprises, few stood out as being particularly memorable), but the in-film execution was poor. The most effective cues were the ones based on little more than nostalgia. Generally, it fell into the same trap a couple of other 'epic' films recently fell victim to where neither Shore nor Jackson seemed to understand the dramatic effect of silence. The result was a score that insisted upon the film's epicness so incessantly that it became grating sooner rather than later, even negatively impacting on the film's pace (making it all seem like a constant rush, even during the moments of breathing space). I'd even go as far as to call it a tad condescending: it doesn't trust the audience to pick up the weight and emotions of scenes, instead destroying any subtleties that may exist in the conversations or drama by near constantly blaring out melodramatic musical compositions. It's an unsubtle, brute force soundtrack even by the standards of rollicking Middle Earth fantasies. And I think that would have been more forgivable if the music itself was as imaginative or memorable as previous films.

And Ed Sheeran - ****ing Ed Sheeran - was the icing on the cake. It takes a lot to make Enya seem like a reasonable choice, but as seems to be the trend these days (The Hunger Games is also pretty bad for it) the credits roll with the most insipid, middle-of-the-road music choice imaginable. There's nothing but commercial motivations there.

Or maybe I'm just annoyed because it didn't live up to the standards of Frozen's surprisingly inspired musical work last week :pac:

Necronomicon

SarahBM wrote: »

I think the big problem here is that LOTR was epic and a once off. There was nothing like it before and there can be nothing like it again. People keep comparing them but I really think you have to take them as being separate. You cant compare the books. The Hobbit is often classed as a childrens book, but LOTR is far from that.

That's exactly the problem that a lot of people, myself included, have with the film. The Hobbit is at such a different scale to LOTR, but Peter Jackson is trying to scale it up and in doing so has fundamentally compromised the story in telling it.

SarahBM wrote: »

Sorry for going on but I have one more thing to say about it. The score. What are people complaining about? There was nothing wrong with it!

There was nothing particularly wrong with it but by Howard Shore's incredibly high standards it was just completely pedestrian, felt very perfunctory. I adore the score from the first film, absolutely loved it, and this doesn't come close. There were some inspired moments in the first film that the score played a huge part in, like the Dwarves coming to the rescue against the trolls with the Dwarf theme kicking in as the cavalry arrives. There is nothing like that in the second film IMO.

SarahBM

Necronomicon wrote: »

That's exactly the problem that a lot of people, myself included, have with the film. The Hobbit is at such a different scale to LOTR, but Peter Jackson is trying to scale it up and in doing so has fundamentally compromised the story in telling it.



There was nothing particularly wrong with it but by Howard Shore's incredibly high standards it was just completely pedestrian, felt very perfunctory. I adore the score from the first film, absolutely loved it, and this doesn't come close. There were some inspired moments in the first film that the score played a huge part in, like the Dwarves coming to the rescue against the trolls with the Dwarf theme kicking in as the cavalry arrives. There is nothing like that in the second film IMO.

Fair enough, Im going to have to listen to it a few more times and watch the film a few more times I think. I have actually lost count how many times I have watched LOTR, and listened to the soundtracks. I love them.
I havent had the time to watch and listen to the Hobbit enough yet. Hopefully over xmas I will. Unfortunately HMV have sold out of the Hobbit.
At least I can listen to the soundtrack on the way home for xmas.

MetalDog

Well I saw it on Friday, and yeah the Ed Sheeran song just p*ssed me off at the end. Should have had a powerful score over the end credits.

I did enjoy it though, Smaug looked great and

the next one is going to have to open with him tearing towards Lake Town like something from a Judas Priest song

SarahBM

MetalDog wrote: »

Well I saw it on Friday, and yeah the Ed Sheeran song just p*ssed me off at the end. Should have had a powerful score over the end credits.

I did enjoy it though, Smaug looked great and

derftgyhujik

Really? I love the song! I think its brilliant

nice_guy80

I was so looking forward to marvelling at the powers of Mirkwood (as per Bilbo in the Fellowship)
the wood elves -
Beorn
and also the lonely mountain (they climbed that pretty quick!)

so let down.

SimonTemplar

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

It was awful - I'm sure individual compositions were well crafted (although outside the LotR reprises, few stood out as being particularly memorable), but the in-film execution was poor. The most effective cues were the ones based on little more than nostalgia. Generally, it fell into the same trap a couple of other 'epic' films recently fell victim to where neither Shore nor Jackson seemed to understand the dramatic effect of silence. The result was a score that insisted upon the film's epicness so incessantly that it became grating sooner rather than later, even negatively impacting on the film's pace (making it all seem like a constant rush, even during the moments of breathing space). I'd even go as far as to call it a tad condescending: it doesn't trust the audience to pick up the weight and emotions of scenes, instead destroying any subtleties that may exist in the conversations or drama by near constantly blaring out melodramatic musical compositions. It's an unsubtle, brute force soundtrack even by the standards of rollicking Middle Earth fantasies. And I think that would have been more forgivable if the music itself was as imaginative or memorable as previous films.

I'm struggling to understand the rational behind your opinion. I concede that the themes for The Hobbit trilogy may not be as memorable as the fellowship theme from LOTR for example, but surely a score cannot be solely judged on the memorability of its themes. You criticize the music for not being memorable yet also claim it destroys subtleties and patronises the audience for not picking up on the emotions of the scene. Surely a more memorable score would be less subtle and even more noticeable for the audience?

If you felt the music in DOS didn't trust the audience to pick up on the gravitas of the scenes, than the music for Aragorn / Arwen must have seemed intolerable for you, to give just one example from LOTR.

The score to DOS is heavily thematic and its application of these themes displays an intelligence lacking in a majority of modern scores. I also don't understand your opinion that the score has a negative impact on the film's pace because the approach Shore took to scoring this film is very similar to the LOTR trilogy with the music very much being another character in the drama. Only a minority of scenes in all five movies play without music. I should also point out that the final moments of both DOS and AUJ are played without score exactly for the dramatic effect of silence that you feel Shore and Jackson don't understand. I'm pretty sure that Gandalf's

battle with Sauron

is also without score (and possibly the

Bilbo/Spider/Ring

moment)

Necronomicon wrote: »

There was nothing particularly wrong with it but by Howard Shore's incredibly high standards it was just completely pedestrian, felt very perfunctory. I adore the score from the first film, absolutely loved it, and this doesn't come close. There were some inspired moments in the first film that the score played a huge part in, like the Dwarves coming to the rescue against the trolls with the Dwarf theme kicking in as the cavalry arrives. There is nothing like that in the second film IMO.

Again, having listened to the score with its 8+ new themes, I would completely disagree that the score is pedestrian. I know the track you are talking about from the first movie and it is a great moment. However, Shore's application of the new themes for Tauriel and The Woodland Realm in frantic action mode during the river scenes is just as awesome and satisfying as that rendition of the Dwarf theme. There are also some inspired variations of Smaug's themes in the score.

(if you really want to hear a pedestrian score, try Zimmer's Man of Steel)

krudler

SimonTemplar wrote: »

(if you really want to hear a pedestrian score, try Zimmer's Man of Steel)

Having listened to that plenty since it came out I'd have to disagree, there's some great moments in that score.

SimonTemplar

krudler wrote: »

Having listened to that plenty since it came out I'd have to disagree, there's some great moments in that score.

The music during the flying scene is OK but the rest of awful, to my ears anyway.

SarahBM

SimonTemplar wrote: »

(if you really want to hear a pedestrian score, try Zimmer's Man of Steel)

Have to agree there. bought it and regretted it.

As for themes in DOS - I did miss the company theme, I felt it could have been used a bit more. But in fairness, if Shore kept re-using theme's people would accuse him of being lazy and not writing new materiel. I think Shore is an absolute genius. To write such amazing scores for LOTR and then to go and do it again for the Hobbit, well it's dedication for one, and also a love for Middle Earth I think!
I agree that in these epic works, the score is another character almost. I think the "themes" that above posters appear to be looking for will become more clear when the trilogy is complete. I hate doing this but if you compare to LOTR, in the fellowship you get a tiny taster of the Gondor Theme when Boromir is talking at the council of Elrond. You dont get the full blown Gondor theme til ROTK. Shore likes to tease the audience a bit I think. But that is just what I think.

SimonTemplar

SarahBM wrote: »

Have to agree there. bought it and regretted it.

As for themes in DOS - I did miss the company theme, I felt it could have been used a bit more. But in fairness, if Shore kept re-using theme's people would accuse him of being lazy and not writing new materiel. I think Shore is an absolute genius. To write such amazing scores for LOTR and then to go and do it again for the Hobbit, well it's dedication for one, and also a love for Middle Earth I think!
I agree that in these epic works, the score is another character almost. I think the "themes" that above posters appear to be looking for will become more clear when the trilogy is complete. I hate doing this but if you compare to LOTR, in the fellowship you get a tiny taster of the Gondor Theme when Boromir is talking at the council of Elrond. You dont get the full blown Gondor theme til ROTK. Shore likes to tease the audience a bit I think. But that is just what I think.

Yeah, that brief appearance of Gondor's theme (on solo French horn I think) is an amazing example of fore shadowing.

A similar thing happened with The Woodland Realm theme. It is a major theme in DOS, and briefly appeared only once in AUJ (the first track at 3:23 sang by choir)

Mr Freeze

SimonTemplar wrote: »

The score to DOS is heavily thematic and its application of these themes displays an intelligence lacking in a majority of modern scores.

I'm going to take your point that its actually a good score, and maybe on rewatching, I will see/hear that for myself.

But, I see no reason for the exclusion of the Dwarven\Company theme. From watching AUJ, this theme, along with the usual Hobbit theme from LOTR, I expected them to prominent throughout the trilogy.

And I really noticed the exclusion of the Dwarven\Company theme watching DOS, I was waiting for it kick in so many times, and it ever did. Very disappointing.

DesperateDan

Yeah I'm gonna stop reading this thread now, it's grossly misrepresentative of the movie. This movie is even rather critically acclaimed whether people like it or not!

Frank Black wrote: »

I thought the barrel sequence was great, a real cinematic treat. 10mins of pure adrenaline that leave you exhausted and remind you what a great action director Jackson is, - seems like I'm in the minority though.

You're in the minority here but every review I've read and listened to has widely praised it.

krudler

DesperateDan wrote: »

Yeah I'm gonna stop reading this thread now, it's grossly misrepresentative of the movie. This movie is even rather critically acclaimed whether people like it or not!



You're in the minority here but every review I've read and listened to has widely praised it.

It's people's opinions who have seen the film

SimonTemplar

Mr Freeze wrote: »

I'm going to take your point that its actually a good score, and maybe on rewatching, I will see/hear that for myself.

But, I see no reason for the exclusion of the Dwarven\Company theme. From watching AUJ, this theme, along with the usual Hobbit theme from LOTR, I expected them to prominent throughout the trilogy.

And I really noticed the exclusion of the Dwarven\Company theme watching DOS, I was waiting for it kick in so many times, and it ever did. Very disappointing.

I do agree with you there - the complete exclusion of the company theme is disappointing and puzzling. It has been replaced by a new theme called The House of Durin which is a nice noble theme but not as robust as the company theme.

Again, it is worth noting that the company theme wasn't written by Shore. It is actually the melody from the end credits song in AUJ by Plan 9. Shore just used that melody in his score.

It is possible that the company theme doesn't feature in the score because Plan 9 had no involvement in DOS this time, so Shore wrote the House of Durin theme as a replacement.

Perhaps the commentaries on the enivitable special edition DVD might shed some light on this.

e_e

DesperateDan wrote: »

Yeah I'm gonna stop reading this thread now, it's grossly misrepresentative of the movie.

Watched and enjoyed all 4 of Jackson's Middle Earth movies prior to this. Paid extra for 3D, endured the HFR headache and sat through all 161 long minutes occasionally fighting back sleep. I think I'm entitled to speak on behalf of the movie and like to think that my opinion is as valid as anyone else's. :rolleyes:

Also other than Empire's ridiculous 5 star rating I don't think the film is being all that widely praised. Sure the reviews are more in the positive but it's hardly anywhere near the level of LOTR or some other films this year. The resounding positive seems to be that it's a pacier film than the original and while I agree, it doesn't make it more enjoyable when the film is so full of obvious filler and little of consequence actually happens. The film can just be summed up as "a bunch of stuff happens, and then they meet a dragon. End credits."

tunguska

DesperateDan wrote: »

Yeah I'm gonna stop reading this thread now, it's grossly misrepresentative of the movie. This movie is even rather critically acclaimed whether people like it or not!

Agreed. Saw it at the weekend and I really enjoyed it. The scenes with the Dragon at the end were great, lots of tension and when the film ended I was wanting more. I thought Armitage's acting was a class above the usual LOTR standard, he puts in an absolute stormer. I've always had the hots for Evagaline Lilly so its hard to be objective, but I thought she did a good job with what she was given, I bought her as an action hero.
I was watching film 2013 the other night and claudia & Danny really enjoyed this movie, the other critic hated it but admitted she was a Tolken nerd. I think thats were the division lies in the reviews, most people who read the book seem to have been expecting God knows what. I mean the points that critic made the other night as to why she hated the film were very petty and nit-picky. I tried to read the Hobbit once but it was a kids book so I think Peter Jackson has done a pretty good job at delivering a great adventure film.

Mr Freeze

SimonTemplar wrote: »

Again, it is worth noting that the company theme wasn't written by Shore. It is actually the melody from the end credits song in AUJ by Plan 9. Shore just used that melody in his score.

It is possible that the company theme doesn't feature in the score because Plan 9 had no involvement in DOS this time, so Shore wrote the House of Durin theme as a replacement. .

I couldn't image watching Return of the King, and not having the Rohan theme in it, after growing so used to it in The Two Towers. It's absence would be glaringly obvious.

Written by Shore or someone else, Shore used the Company theme extensively in AUJ and it was used in all the advertising for the film. It was used so much, that I was positive it was the central theme for the series. (along with the hobbit themes from LOTR of course).

It is definitely bizarre to totally exclude it, you think they would have acquired the rights to it and use it for the whole trilogy.

In my opinion, this film is very lacking without it, they need to use it again in the next film.

I'm just going to have to accept its gone, and the next film might not have it either, its crazy not to include it.

yourdeadwright

I for one really enjoyed this, it was fun and whart i expected ,

Its funny all the moaners on here, is anyone actully surprised its not as good as LOTR ? because it was never goin to be,
I enjoyed it for what it was and as many said before the Hobbits a kids book so the movie isn't to be taking a serious as LOTR,

Im convinced some people on here complain just for the sake of it, and think because they do so they have a better knowledge and understanding of movies, get of your high horses and enjoy the movie for what it is,

Cant wait for the next year already ,

krudler

Mr Freeze wrote: »

I couldn't image watching Return of the King, and not having the Rohan theme in it, after growing so used to it in The Two Towers. It's absence would be glaringly obvious.

Written by Shore or someone else, Shore used the Company theme extensively in AUJ and it was used in all the advertising for the film. It was used so much, that I was positive it was the central theme for the series. (along with the hobbit themes from LOTR of course).

It is definitely bizarre to totally exclude it, you think they would have acquired the rights to it and use it for the whole trilogy.

In my opinion, this film is very lacking without it, they need to use it again in the next film.

I'm just going to have to accept its gone, and the next film might not have it either, its crazy not to include it.

I haven't seen it yet but it does seem bizarre not to include the most memorable theme from the first one, it was in all the trailers and the big hero moments of the film like attacking the trolls and running through Goblin Town. Even the Fellowship theme was kept for the LOTR sequels in various forms.

e_e

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Im convinced some people on here complain just for the sake of it, and think because they do so they have a better knowledge and understanding of movies, get of your high horses and enjoy the movie for what it is

Ugh not this post again, appears in the thread for almost every popular movie and completely misunderstands everyone else.

Look, I haven't read the books and I haven't even seen an LOTR film since, I dunno, when Return of the King came out in the cinemas. I went into this with the same expectation I do every movie: to have a good time or at least an interesting experience and it failed on both of those levels. I'm not somebody who spends money just to complain and to just shut out every voice that differs from yours reeks of fanboyism.

e_e

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Its funny all the moaners on here, is anyone actully surprised its not as good as LOTR ? because it was never goin to be,
I enjoyed it for what it was and as many said before the Hobbits a kids book so the movie isn't to be taking a serious as LOTR,

If it's not trying to be LOTR then why did they try to make the scale so much bigger and pad it out to 3 movies? Again I haven't read the books but much of the complaint seems to be that Jackson is trying to make The Hobbit something that it isn't. Personally I found DOS to be overblown and empty, possibly for this reason. It's expanding something that doesn't need expanding.

johnny_ultimate

Play nice folks. If you can't accept or at least politely disagree that other people will have different opinions to you (especially on a film where the critical and audience responses have been very mixed indeed), then I don't think a film discussion forum is forum you. Anymore 'elitism / fanboy' type posts will be deleted.

e_e

Sorry, sorry. I'm just becoming more impatient of accusations of pretentiousness/elitism whenever anyone has to say anything negative about the week's popular film.

It's really naive and shuts out discussion, which I feel is the opposite of what this message board should be.

johnny_ultimate

I agree, but I also don't think responding in an equally aggressive manner helps Report the post, and the mods will try and deal with it without dragging the thread off topic*

*absolutely aware this thread has now been dragged off-topic :pac: Back on track time!

Zubeneschamali

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Its funny all the moaners on here, is anyone actully surprised its not as good as LOTR ? because it was never goin to be,

I moaned a lot about the LOTR movies, too, there was enormous scope for improvement on what Jackson did in those movies.

SimonTemplar

Mr Freeze wrote: »

I couldn't image watching Return of the King, and not having the Rohan theme in it, after growing so used to it in The Two Towers. It's absence would be glaringly obvious.

Written by Shore or someone else, Shore used the Company theme extensively in AUJ and it was used in all the advertising for the film. It was used so much, that I was positive it was the central theme for the series. (along with the hobbit themes from LOTR of course).

It is definitely bizarre to totally exclude it, you think they would have acquired the rights to it and use it for the whole trilogy.

In my opinion, this film is very lacking without it, they need to use it again in the next film.

I'm just going to have to accept its gone, and the next film might not have it either, its crazy not to include it.

I'm not trying to defend that theme's absence but simply offering a possible explaination.

I completely agree with you, it's absence from this movie is a major drawback of the score.

snausages

SarahBM wrote: »

I really cant understand the hatred for DOS on here. It has flaws, as most films do, but does it really deserve to be picked apart to this extent? I think the big problem here is that LOTR was epic and a once off. There was nothing like it before and there can be nothing like it again. People keep comparing them but I really think you have to take them as being separate. You cant compare the books. The Hobbit is often classed as a childrens book, but LOTR is far from that.

That's the thing though, Jackson can't help but invite those comparisons when he decided to split the book in three. Had they gone for simpler more humbler take on Bilbo's story you probably wouldn't hear these criticisms. But as others have said he tries to imbue everything in the new trilogy with the same epic significance as the older one.

I've only seen an hour of this new film though so I can't comment on much except that Orlando Bloom's face is a lot rounder than it was in LOTR :pac:

SarahBM

snausages wrote: »

I've only seen an hour of this new film though so I can't comment on much except that Orlando Bloom's face is a lot rounder than it was in LOTR :pac:

I have to say I actually didn't care to much for his character in this film. Or any of the Mirkwood Elves for that matter. He has aged about 10 years, remember and he is supposed to look younger

I really thought the love story was unnecessary, whether you had read the book or not.

Philo Beddoe

Apologies if this has been asked before (or if this is the wrong place to ask) but does anyone know if the Cineworld Imax performances of the Desolation of Smaug are the high-framerate 48fps version? Because I'd rather avoid that if I could!

snausages

Philo Beddoe wrote: »

Apologies if this has been asked before (or if this is the wrong place to ask) but does anyone know if the Cineworld Imax performances of the Desolation of Smaug are the high-framerate 48fps version? Because I'd rather avoid that if I could!

The 3D imax ones definitely are anyway.

Alfred Borden

Just back from the cinema after watching this. refused to watch it in 3D as its only a money racket. Found the film enjoying but pretty average and nothing spectacular, suppose thats to be expected, a solid film with no real massive flaws or pros.

SimonTemplar

I can provide some clarity regarding the absence of the dwarf/company theme from DOS.

I just listened to a podcast featuring Doug Adams who wrote the liner notes for the soundtracks. He stated that that theme is in fact related to the Misty Mountains. This makes perfect sense because it is the melody of the song "Misty Mountain Cold" that features in the end credits and that the dwarfs sing in Bilbo's house at the start of AUJ. Obviously, that song is all about the Misty Mountains which feature at the end of the first movie, underneath which is Goblin Town.

So, if this theme represents the Misty Mountains and the dwarfs journey to the Misty Mountains, its absence in DOS makes sense because they have already past those mountains by the time we start DOS. It wouldn't make sense for DOS to feature a theme that was sung in AUJ about a place that is no longer part of the story.

Obviously, that is the intellectual argument that explains its thematic application and usage within the scores, but at the end of the day, it is still a great theme and its absence from the new score is missed. The new House of Durin theme is definitely meant as its replacement given the scenes in which it appears.

Mr Freeze

SimonTemplar wrote: »

I can provide some clarify regarding the absence of the dwarf/company theme from DOS.

That is disappointing news.
It should really be the central theme to the series.

krudler

Mr Freeze wrote: »

That is disappointing news.
It should really be the central theme to the series.

Indeed, especially since the opening line is "far over, the Misty Mountains cold", implying the journey is going past them, the song isn't just about the mountains themselves it's the quest to get the city and gold back.

loveisdivine

SarahBM wrote: »

I have to say I actually didn't care to much for his character in this film. Or any of the Mirkwood Elves for that matter. He has aged about 10 years, remember and he is supposed to look younger

I really thought the love story was unnecessary, whether you had read the book or not.

All plot contivances aside, I love me a bit of Legolas and I must say I thought he looked pretty handsome in this film

tok9

Haven't seen it yet but I admit the most worrying criticism is regarding the score.

The score of a movie is always something that I take note of and usually affects how much I enjoy a movie.

Mr Freeze

tok9 wrote: »

The score of a movie is always something that I take note of and usually affects how much I enjoy a movie.

I would be the exact same, hence my disappointment with this film.
I just feels a bit flat without the theme that was very prominent in the previous film.

Maire2009

I enjoyed the film - not a whole lot happened truthfully - but it sets it up for the 3rd installment nicely. I loved the banter between Bilbo and Smaug - Cumberbatch and Freeman are a great duo even when one is a dragon.

Carlos Orange

Philo Beddoe wrote: »

Apologies if this has been asked before (or if this is the wrong place to ask) but does anyone know if the Cineworld Imax performances of the Desolation of Smaug are the high-framerate 48fps version? Because I'd rather avoid that if I could!

You can filter by hfr on their website.

Carlos Orange

SarahBM wrote: »

I have to say I actually didn't care to much for his character in this film. Or any of the Mirkwood Elves for that matter. He has aged about 10 years, remember and he is supposed to look younger

I really thought the love story was unnecessary, whether you had read the book or not.

I read the book so many years ago it hardly matters. Apparently the love story was added when the studio expanded it from 2 films to 3. I liked it but apparently it was filler,strange for such a long set of films.

Zemuppet

I saw it earlier on in 3D. Looks good, enjoyed the story but the film was running at faster speed than normal and this bugged me throughout. Either this was a mistake or Jackson has his characters on steroids .

Josey Wales

Zemuppet wrote: »

I saw it earlier on in 3D. Looks good, enjoyed the story but the film was running at faster speed than normal and this bugged me throughout. Either this was a mistake or Jackson has his characters on steroids .

You must have seen it in HFR format. At the beginning it feels like things are moving faster but you get used to it. I saw last years film in HFR and had the same impression. But with this one I didn't get it too much.