Escape to the Movies: The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies - There and Back Again

Sewa_Yunga

I love this highway!
Nov 21, 2011
253
0
0
Wait... there were actually supposed to be rams in the movie?!

1:07 Chariot being pulled by rams...
1:40 an entire DWARVEN RAM CAVALRY?!

Why the hell were they cut from the german screening? They're charging extra for an overlong film and then they cut what looks like a badass scene AND even explains where Thorin & co got their mounts from!

In the version I saw, there haven't been rams in the entire movie until the point where they saddle up.

We even made some jokes about MMO-style pocket mounts after the movie -.-
 

P-89 Scorpion

New member
Sep 25, 2014
466
0
0
Enjoyed the film when I saw it on Tuesday (yay UK got a film first again) and even though it was mostly action it didn't feel like it dragged on to long like some films manage (the final fight in Godzilla).


Spiderman in the Avengers why do people want this? I have only read a few Spiderman comics, my Spiderman is from the 90's cartoons were he is a competent young adult but when ever they have put him in with the Avengers in a cartoon it's always as the incompetent kid sidekick and I hate that. If they did that in a film it would just ruin it for me as Spiderman is a big hero not a sidekick.
 

NinjaDeathSlap

Leaf on the wind
Feb 20, 2011
4,474
0
0
See, the question of whether or not The Hobbit would be a 'worthy successor' to Lord of the Rings, outside of just been worth watching in their own right was never a big deal for me. I love LOTR. I think The Hobbit is fun but ultimately pretty forgettable besides Smaug himself, and The Hobbit existing and not being quite as good does nothing to diminish the knowledge that I have LOTR on DVD and can go back and watch it as many times as I damn well please... which is a lot.

Also, I have to ask... was anybody REALLY expecting The Hobbit to land the same kind of impact as LOTR did a decade ago, regardless of what Jackson did with it?

P.S. If Spidey does ever show up in the MCU, I'm rooting so hard for Miles Morales. Peter Parker already has two movie canons in the past 15 years dammit. If we're really gonna have to face down another ground-up reboot, don't give us more of the same. You're Marvel, half the fun of going to your movies 7 years after Iron Man is that you can still surprise me.
 

Gizmo1990

Insert funny title here
Oct 19, 2010
1,900
0
0
Sniper Team 4 said:
Gizmo1990 said:
I liked it. It was much better than the 2nd one. Plus I also don't care how much fan service or unnecessary it was:

Seeing Saruman and Elrond kick the shit out of the Nazgul while Galadriel made Saruon her ***** was epic
"You should have stayed dead." Best. Line. Ever.

I enjoyed this movie a lot. I loved the battles in the Lord of the Rings movies, and this movie is literally just that. While I do admit that you could tell this movie was bloated, stretched, and cutting the whole thing into three movies instead of two wasn't the greatest idea, I'm in the same camp as Bob. The movies were fun, and this was a nice little trip back to Middle-earth.

Question! I was the only person in my theater to laugh at the end of the movie when a joke was made about relation of Bilbo's. Did anyone else here get the joke, or am I alone here?
Nope I got the joke. Think I was the only one in my showing as well.
 

MatsVS

Tea & Grief
Nov 9, 2009
423
0
0
Ugh. I've been saying since the first Hobbit film that this is a disaster of Star Wars Prequel levels, and I still think history will be on my side in this. Not even considering that these films are structured and written awfully, "epic showdowns" in the context of the Middle-Earth universe isn't cool, it's contrived, infantile, and most importantly, contrary to the creator's vision. It's tantamount to neck beards sitting around having "who would win between"-discussions (which I guess is painfully accurate). Hell, even the most grandiose fight scenes from the Silmarillion were tinged with tragedy and melancholy more than anything else.

That this is now the "face" of the franchise is utterly devastating.
 

CoffeeOfDoom

New member
Jun 3, 2009
161
0
0
Gizmo1990 said:
Sniper Team 4 said:
Gizmo1990 said:
I liked it. It was much better than the 2nd one. Plus I also don't care how much fan service or unnecessary it was:

Seeing Saruman and Elrond kick the shit out of the Nazgul while Galadriel made Saruon her ***** was epic
"You should have stayed dead." Best. Line. Ever.

I enjoyed this movie a lot. I loved the battles in the Lord of the Rings movies, and this movie is literally just that. While I do admit that you could tell this movie was bloated, stretched, and cutting the whole thing into three movies instead of two wasn't the greatest idea, I'm in the same camp as Bob. The movies were fun, and this was a nice little trip back to Middle-earth.

Question! I was the only person in my theater to laugh at the end of the movie when a joke was made about relation of Bilbo's. Did anyone else here get the joke, or am I alone here?
Nope I got the joke. Think I was the only one in my showing as well.
Out of interest what was the joke? I haven't had chance to go to the cinema yet.
 

SilverUchiha

New member
Dec 25, 2008
1,604
0
0
Haven't seen the last one yet. But I've surprisingly enjoyed the first two way more than the Lord of the Rings movies. I don't hate LotR, but I also never really got into them too much either. In comparison... they got really boring, especially during the middle bit of the trilogy. But Hobbit, to me, has been mostly fun the entire way through, though unnecessarily long. More meaning or not, I'd still rather rewatch hobbit over LotR just on that logic alone.
 

Ishigami

New member
Sep 1, 2011
830
0
0
Ulquiorra4sama said:
GamerLuck said:
Ulquiorra4sama said:
bobdole1979 said:
i'm happy with the bloat its a well made world with nice production values and im more then happy to sit and watch it.

Lets be honest if they did this in 1 or even 2 movies then this winter would really suck.

I'll happily take a bloated Hobbit movie over nothing

the one thing i didn't like was Legolas dad telling him to go north at the end of the movie and why.
Yeah, about that. I haven't read the books or anything, but i was under the impression that the Hobbit took place 50 or 60 years before Lord of the Rings. Yet they phrased that last scene with Legolas in such a way that it seemed as if
Aragorn
was already born. Like i said, i didn't read the books, but i'm pretty sure he wasn't supposed to be in his 60's in LotR.
Hes actually well into his 80's as of LOTR... The Dunedain are Men who are far longer lived. If I remember correctly he lives to be 400 or so.
Interesting. I was not aware of that. Perhaps its time i got my lazy ass back in that couch and did some reading. Guess it all checks out then. Thank you for clearing that up for me!
If you don't want to read it is also in the movies as well. Not in the theatrical release but in the extended version.
In The Two Towers Eowyn talks to Aragon and he reveals he is 87 at the time.

So yea he is alive during The Hobbit.

Hu I'm surpised Bob liked it. You never know...
 

ZippyDSMlee

New member
Sep 1, 2007
3,959
0
0
All in all its good, LOTR was heavy and over the top so this being in the shadow of greatness without pissing on itself is a good thing. You are always going to get off adaptations depending on the drugs despeanced. So in all good, I'd like to see more doubt it tho but still its a good thing. If you have a large enough IP you can stipulate more things and even have some creative control, if you are big enough that is but I doubt it would make the project better just because in visual some mediums you are going to have to get enough average consumer support to make it worth anyone's time....
 

ccggenius12

New member
Sep 30, 2010
717
0
0
I'll give the whole thing a free pass if someone can confirm one thing for me; Does Bilbo still get knocked out prior to the battle starting? As long as they kept that part accurate, all the junk that happens after is completely fine to me.
 

Mahorfeus

New member
Feb 21, 2011
996
0
0
ccggenius12 said:
I'll give the whole thing a free pass if someone can confirm one thing for me; Does Bilbo still get knocked out prior to the battle starting? As long as they kept that part accurate, all the junk that happens after is completely fine to me.
Not at the very beginning of the battle, but around before the eagles showed up. He doesn't wake up until the rest of the battle is more or less over. I do think that's about how it was in the book.

I do not recall the battle being all that detailed in the book, so I guess Jackson had some leeway in determining on how it went.
 

ccggenius12

New member
Sep 30, 2010
717
0
0
Mahorfeus said:
ccggenius12 said:
I'll give the whole thing a free pass if someone can confirm one thing for me; Does Bilbo still get knocked out prior to the battle starting? As long as they kept that part accurate, all the junk that happens after is completely fine to me.
Not at the very beginning of the battle, but around before the eagles showed up. He doesn't wake up until the rest of the battle is more or less over. I do think that's about how it was in the book.

I do not recall the battle being all that detailed in the book, so I guess Jackson had some leeway in determining on how it went.
Thanks for that info. And yeah, in the book it basically goes "oooh, there's like, five armies and junk", and then Bilbo get's cold cocked within a couple seconds of the fight starting, regaining consciousness after the whole thing is over.
 

Kerethos

New member
Jun 19, 2013
250
0
0
Is it just me or does it seem that recent adaptations of Tolkien's works seem to miss out on his "war only creates misery and tragedy" message?

I mean the entertainment can certainly be (and often is) fun, but I can't help but also feel that it's a sign of our times where "justifiable evil", in the form of military interventions and wars against global terrorist franchises, causes awful amounts of misery and refugee numbers comparable to World War 2.

Anyhow I'll wait for the inevitable extended versions of all 3 movies on DVD. Might as well get the complete experience at a lower price, kind of like buying games once all the DLC is included and at a discount. I'm cynical like that.
 

TsunamiWombat

New member
Sep 6, 2008
5,870
0
0
Ulquiorra4sama said:
bobdole1979 said:
i'm happy with the bloat its a well made world with nice production values and im more then happy to sit and watch it.

Lets be honest if they did this in 1 or even 2 movies then this winter would really suck.

I'll happily take a bloated Hobbit movie over nothing

the one thing i didn't like was Legolas dad telling him to go north at the end of the movie and why.
Yeah, about that. I haven't read the books or anything, but i was under the impression that the Hobbit took place 50 or 60 years before Lord of the Rings. Yet they phrased that last scene with Legolas in such a way that it seemed as if
Aragorn
was already born. Like i said, i didn't read the books, but i'm pretty sure he wasn't supposed to be in his 60's in LotR.
He was, actually. Aragorn was at least in his 50's.

He's part numenorean, aka superhuman.


ccggenius12 said:
Mahorfeus said:
ccggenius12 said:
I'll give the whole thing a free pass if someone can confirm one thing for me; Does Bilbo still get knocked out prior to the battle starting? As long as they kept that part accurate, all the junk that happens after is completely fine to me.
Not at the very beginning of the battle, but around before the eagles showed up. He doesn't wake up until the rest of the battle is more or less over. I do think that's about how it was in the book.

I do not recall the battle being all that detailed in the book, so I guess Jackson had some leeway in determining on how it went.
Thanks for that info. And yeah, in the book it basically goes "oooh, there's like, five armies and junk", and then Bilbo get's cold cocked within a couple seconds of the fight starting, regaining consciousness after the whole thing is over.
Not exactly, Bilbo goes "this is idiotic" after like five minutes and throwing some rocks and instead gives himself a bruise and finds someplace to hide under a rock until the fighting is over.
 

Gizmo1990

Insert funny title here
Oct 19, 2010
1,900
0
0
CoffeeOfDoom said:
I will put it in spoilers just in case

Upon returning to the Shire he finds out he has been declared dead and all his stuff is being sold. As he starts telling people to put everything back he catches Lobelia Sackville-Baggins trying to run off with his silverware. Not a big joke but it made me smile.
 

Gizmo1990

Insert funny title here
Oct 19, 2010
1,900
0
0
Ulquiorra4sama said:
bobdole1979 said:
i'm happy with the bloat its a well made world with nice production values and im more then happy to sit and watch it.

Lets be honest if they did this in 1 or even 2 movies then this winter would really suck.

I'll happily take a bloated Hobbit movie over nothing

the one thing i didn't like was Legolas dad telling him to go north at the end of the movie and why.
Yeah, about that. I haven't read the books or anything, but i was under the impression that the Hobbit took place 50 or 60 years before Lord of the Rings. Yet they phrased that last scene with Legolas in such a way that it seemed as if
Aragorn
was already born. Like i said, i didn't read the books, but i'm pretty sure he wasn't supposed to be in his 60's in LotR.
TsunamiWombat said:
Ulquiorra4sama said:
bobdole1979 said:
i'm happy with the bloat its a well made world with nice production values and im more then happy to sit and watch it.

Lets be honest if they did this in 1 or even 2 movies then this winter would really suck.

I'll happily take a bloated Hobbit movie over nothing

the one thing i didn't like was Legolas dad telling him to go north at the end of the movie and why.
Yeah, about that. I haven't read the books or anything, but i was under the impression that the Hobbit took place 50 or 60 years before Lord of the Rings. Yet they phrased that last scene with Legolas in such a way that it seemed as if
Aragorn
was already born. Like i said, i didn't read the books, but i'm pretty sure he wasn't supposed to be in his 60's in LotR.
He was, actually. Aragorn was at least in his 50's.

He's part numenorean, aka superhuman.


ccggenius12 said:
Mahorfeus said:
ccggenius12 said:
I'll give the whole thing a free pass if someone can confirm one thing for me; Does Bilbo still get knocked out prior to the battle starting? As long as they kept that part accurate, all the junk that happens after is completely fine to me.
Not at the very beginning of the battle, but around before the eagles showed up. He doesn't wake up until the rest of the battle is more or less over. I do think that's about how it was in the book.

I do not recall the battle being all that detailed in the book, so I guess Jackson had some leeway in determining on how it went.
Thanks for that info. And yeah, in the book it basically goes "oooh, there's like, five armies and junk", and then Bilbo get's cold cocked within a couple seconds of the fight starting, regaining consciousness after the whole thing is over.
Not exactly, Bilbo goes "this is idiotic" after like five minutes and throwing some rocks and instead gives himself a bruise and finds someplace to hide under a rock until the fighting is over.
Normaly I don't do this but something about LotR makes me super nerdy so. Aragorn is 87 during the events of Lotr and for his kind that is just entering the prime of his life. He lived to be 210 years old.
 

walsfeo

New member
Feb 17, 2010
314
0
0
GamerLuck said:
What I'd really love to see is Bob do an episode (maybe on big picture instead of escape to the movies) covering what he thinks of the extended edition once they are all out. I just saw the extended of Desolation a couple days ago, and let me tell you, it elevated that movie from probably a solid 7/10 to full on 10/10. All the pieces of the adaptation that I had WANTED to be in the theatrical movie were right where they were supposed to be, and certain parts of the plot (including WHOLE CHARACTERS COMPLETELY ERASED FROM SCENES) were right where I had wanted them to be. I am holding off on seeing the one for Journey until they release all three together in a box set, but I expect that the films are much better when everything that was left on the cutting room floor is put back where it belongs..
I'll be pleased and surprised if I feel longer versions are better because I've felt the first two Hobbit movies would have been better with more cutting. They felt so bloated that after I felt like I'd tried to eat 50 pounds of sweet rolls. My hope until this point had been that they'd eventually release a "Hobbit, the good and worthy bits" with all the extra crap cut out.

But you say it's better with more? I'll try it and see.
 

Swarmcrow

New member
Dec 11, 2008
40
0
0
sorry but i disagree

it wasn't fun .. it was tiresome and this the shortest of all the film


the film creates plot holes (does freaking giant zerg worms could have made the orcs won with out even having to battle )


the film waste the potential of its characters stories and throw away all they constructed in the other films in favor of a over simplify the plot ..to the point the film keeps telling you stuff you already know and it already told


there is noo good pay off for not killing smaug in the last film or all the stuff the necromancer


the action is dull .. and feels out of a videogame ( more specific god of war , starcraft and castelvania )



the cgi makes the action scenes have no power .. like everytime a dwarf headbutt anything, i don't feel it .. doesnt feel like they are fighting


the character are all written like idiots (specially the elfs )


they keep reusing icon line or scenes of the lord of the rings but dont do anything new with them ! (expect the eye of sauron but that was better use in the other two films)

and ..thats all i have to say for now
 

tzimize

New member
Mar 1, 2010
2,391
0
0
CrazyBlaze said:
Well I haven't seen the last one yet I will say that I think the first two could have benefited from a trimming of 20-30 worth of stuff. They were just so damn long and some of the things felt like they were there just to push the movies towards three hours. The second one especially dragged with the both the barrel set and the final Smaug set being far too long (not to mention the total lack of pay off with the Smaug set).
The Smaug stuff in the second one too long? I beg to DIFFER!

Smaug is the coolest thing I have seen on screen in my entire life as a movie-goer. And its pretty much all I do.

The dinosaurs in Jurassic Park brings a tear to my eye. The Alien is horrible and fascinating. Gollum was a technical achievement, although he still looked animated. The Transformers are cool, but overdesigned, the Balrog is...probably cooler than Smaug, but it has no screen time and doesnt say anything...but Smaug...Smaug is a PERFECT 10.

His look, his TERRIBLE grin and the brilliant voice. The Smaug section in the second movie is probably my favorite of anything. To infuse a creation with the exact amount of cleverness, evilness and majesty...my hat is off. Smaug is FANTASTIC.

The third movie was as bob said, fun. To me the second hobbit movie is the best one, the dwarves finally going into the mountain being one of my favorite moments in the entire 6 movies. But the final one was a fun romp through Middle-Earth. I like how he has tied the story together with the lotr trilogy, and how future generations can watch them both, the hobbits first and it still makes sense. I got what I wanted, more ME adventure. There wasnt enough to make a proper story of the hobbit anyway, I'm glad PJ made this as he did. And yeah, the HFR or whatever its called is...jarring.
 

Baresark

New member
Dec 19, 2010
3,908
0
0
I have honestly enjoyed this trilogy much more than the first one. Lord of the Rings was good, but it had so much panoramic flying around and extended just looks at things, it was boring as hell after the first time through. I have watched the first two Hobbit films multiple times and enjoyed them each time. Don't get me wrong, the ending to the second film was bullshit. But overall these are much more enjoyable films.