The Second Hobbit Movie

[Sagewell]

I saw it in the imax 3d, and... Mind blown!
Aside wishing I had my own private imax 3d theater, I sorely wish I would have seen it sooner so I could go back to see it again. Sadly, the theater is only showing it on a regular screen, likely for less than a couple weeks now. Still, I think it's one of the few that are worth going to see again. I didnt see it sooner because of car issues.

What do you guys think of the movie?

Dont know what an imax is? Its a 30 foot screen. Even in the back row, it will still span you peripheral vision. It's also louder. And incredibly more epic than those other theate screens.

[Fordil]

I saw it in a general movie theatre and I liked it... Only thought there was very little storyline in the movie, but that was to be expected when you stretch 1 small book over 3 movies. Also, the part about Bilbo entering Erebor wasn't matching the original story (something I dislike usually), but it didn't have too much of a negative impact for me this time.

[ellahad]

Overall I enjoyed it very much - if only to see many of the fantastic thoughts of Tolkien in the middle part of the Hobbit book brought to the big screen. I understand the concessions and need for changes that need to be made to transformation story from book form to movie, but I didn't get many of the choices Peter Jackson made; e.g. Bilbo's growth as a character is handled so beautifully in the book, but so strangely in the movies. And although Smaug was visually and auditorially awesome, the logic of the 30 minutes or so of Smaug left me bewildered. One example is Thorin's solution to handle Smaug by "splitting up". Really. 'Cause there's no way that a dragon could deal with that. For Smaug to leave his hoard to fly off to Laketown with a host of dwarves inside the mountain is against everything Tolkien wrote about dragons and their lust and protection of their treasure. But I know I sound ultra-serious here. On another note, Howard Shore's score was again brilliant. I had a hard time dealing with the ultra digital graphics, but when I saw it on an old school screen it was better. Overall I'd give it a B-, but I'm such a Tolkien nerd I'll see it again and again.

[Vendla]

I loved the movie. I don't really care about the artistic license they take when adding or changing things. I read the books so I know the full story, and I love seeing it played out on the big screen. They did a great job of making an exciting and entertaining movie.

[Cuarlang / Legladhor]

I really enjoyed the movie (and I wish I had seen it more than just once as of this writing). =) That said, I'm torn. On the one hand, I've come to terms with the fact that Peter Jackson's "The Hobbit" is even more of a departure from the book from which it takes its title than his "Lord of the Rings" is, because Peter Jackson's "The Hobbit" is not merely a screen adaptation of Tolkien's "The Hobbit", it's the story which Tolkien partially told in "The Hobbit" — at its core, the story depicted in this new Middle-earth film trilogy is that which Tolkien actually imagined but didn't tell in the same epic, spanning-several-books way he did with the story of "Lord of the Rings". On the other hand, so much of Peter Jackson's "The Hobbit" is changed from the source material (granted, I don't have the encyclopedic knowledge of said source material that persons like Herebrand do hehe) or is practically made from whole cloth.

Where specifically I'm torn is that with these three further movies Peter Jackson (and, of course, his co-screenwriters and the varied cast and the gigantic crew) will continue to generate interest in Tolkien's stories and introduce yet more people to the delights thereof; yet I can't help but wince at the thought that many might see the Hobbit movies and then eagerly start reading Tolkien's book and think "This... this is kind of boring. It's like a children's book(!)" ("I'mma just finish reading that first Game of Thrones book I got a few chapters into." XD) Because in the movies there is so much more action, and certain characters (the ones who are even in the original book to begin with >.>) act rather different (i.e. more courageously and successfully) than in the book.

Fanboyish teeth-gnashing aside, I indeed look forward to when I'll be able to see TH:TDoS again. =) Not only was Smaug properly and thoroughly impressive and terrifying, there was another element which was rather blood-chilling in its own way: [[redacted so as not to give spoilers]]! Props to Weta Digital for the turned-up-to-11 visual effects for Smaug and to Benedict Cumberbatch for furnishing The Chiefest and Greatest of Calamities' ominous voice.