The Hobbit: Desolation of Smaug

"

CajunKinoodle wrote:

Anyway, I have no sympathy for people who don't understand filmography and moan and complain over impossible details or the lack thereof.

A man of my mind.

Movies != Books. They are different media, with different strengths and different weaknesses, require a different touch to create a different experience. If you want to witness the books exactly as they were, reread the god damn books.

That said, there is probably plenty of room to criticize the movie for what it is... a movie. I wouldn't know; I haven't seen it yet ;)

Yes movies are not books but money whoring is money whoring.

I thought the first movie kinda sucked so I am not too keen on even seeing the second one. Despite how badly I wanted to see some of the Smaug scenes done. I just don't care for all the effort to make everything 'epic' so that it compares with LOTR(Which also wasn't great). I think Peter Jackson and I just don't see eye to eye when it comes to movie making.

"

CliveHowlitzer wrote:

I thought the first movie kinda sucked so I am not too keen on even seeing the second one. Despite how badly I wanted to see some of the Smaug scenes done. I just don't care for all the effort to make everything 'epic' so that it compares with LOTR(Which also wasn't great). I think Peter Jackson and I just don't see eye to eye when it comes to movie making.

compared to this LotR was something.

And btw: http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3v8vdy/

You guys do realise that Peter Jackson combined both the book hobbit and another 'book' called "Silmarillion" Which is essentially tolkiens notes on the LOTR universe. Hence why radagast and other characters have more of an influence.