The HOBBIT: The Battle of the Five Armies (Dec 17, 2014) -

rfx45

rfx45

73,120
59,880
Joined
Dec 13, 2004
2hfucy0.png




From Academy Award-winning film-maker Peter Jackson comes The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies, the third in a trilogy of films adapting the enduringly popular masterpiece The Hobbit, by JRR Tolkien. The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies brings to an epic conclusion the adventures of Bilbo Baggins, Thorin Oakenshield and the Company of Dwarves. Having reclaimed their homeland from the Dragon Smaug, the Company has unwittingly unleashed a deadly force into the world. Enraged, Smaug rains his fiery wrath down upon the defenseless men, women and children of Lake-town.Obsessed above all else with his reclaimed treasure, Thorin sacrifices friendship and honor to hoard it as Bilbo's frantic attempts to make him see reason drive the Hobbit towards a desperate and dangerous choice. But there are even greater dangers ahead. Unseen by any but the Wizard Gandalf, the great enemy Sauron has sent forth legions of Orcs in a stealth attack upon the Lonely Mountain. As darkness converges on their escalating conflict, the races of Dwarves, Elves and Men must decide: unite or be destroyed. Bilbo finds himself fighting for his life and the lives of his friends in Battle of the Five Armies, as the future of Middle-Earth hangs in the balance.
Click to expand...







​
 
Last edited:
Brahs, sorry for the dumb question, but I haven't seen any of the Hobbit movies, and I remember reading the book in the 8th grade.

How the hell did they get 3 movies outta that small book?
 
I love how they film each movie back to back giving us 1 each year. I hate how we have to wait like 3 years for another installment of marvel films.
it just shows you Hobbit and Lord of the Rings was done for the passion and not the $$. Even if the first Hobbit didnt do well, the other 2 would still be made and enjoyed by those who can appreciate it
 
Dropten said:
I love how they film each movie back to back giving us 1 each year. I hate how we have to wait like 3 years for another installment of marvel films.
it just shows you Hobbit and Lord of the Rings was done for the passion and not the $$. Even if the first Hobbit didnt do well, the other 2 would still be made and enjoyed by those who can appreciate it
Click to expand...

But they stretched out a short book like the hobbit for 3 movies though. People have thought that was a money move.
 
P43 days time...

Will be nice to see this finally wrapped up. I still enjoyed the first two overall, despite all the "Woodland Fever" mixed race love story tripe lol.
 
Last edited:
Like alot of people, I skipped on the first Hobbit movie when it was in theaters.Then when Smaug came out last year, I decided to watch Hobbit 1 and then Smaug in Imax.

I was pleasantly surprised. I didn't think it would hold a candle to LOTR but it had the same vibe, even though it was a little more lighthearted because we weren't in a world of doom with Sauron.

I wonder why it hasn't gotten as much fanfare and acclaim as LOTR?
 
still havent watched the first 2....gonna be like when i first decided to watch the lotr movies, all in one day haha
 
ConcordFlightXI said:
Like alot of people, I skipped on the first Hobbit movie when it was in theaters.Then when Smaug came out last year, I decided to watch Hobbit 1 and then Smaug in Imax.

I was pleasantly surprised. I didn't think it would hold a candle to LOTR but it had the same vibe, even though it was a little more lighthearted because we weren't in a world of doom with Sauron.

I wonder why it hasn't gotten as much fanfare and acclaim as LOTR?
Click to expand...

Probably because the first 2 movies were disappointing. First one dragged on without anything too epic happening. Second one was better but should've finished the story instead of making you wait for the third movie.
 
ConcordFlightXI said:
I wonder why it hasn't gotten as much fanfare and acclaim as LOTR?
Click to expand...
Well, for a start it just simply isn't as good a story as LOTR.

And secondly, because of the reason Shogun stated above, that it was unnecessarily stretched out for $ and they just added far too much stuff that wasn't in the book. LOTR wasn't perfect by any means and it had some stuff missing, but it was a lot more faithful and about as close to the book as you could practically get.

But despite it's flaws, I agree they definitely made the right choice by giving it the same overall vibe as the first trilogy. After watching LOTR you can't really imagine any other cinematic vision of Middle Earth working than PJ's.
 
I enjoyed the first two.

First one was well phased I thought, the story kept me interested and never really felt dragged on to me.

Second one was pretty chuck full of action. The spiders, the barrel riding and then the dragon in the end. I felt they really didn't need to end there then it would be rushing it.


I still watch both when it comes up on HBO, it entertains me.
 
Last edited:
As for it being stretched out for money, after reading the reports I am not really sure that is the case.

It initially started as a 2-part film by Del Toro but even back then (2006?) Del Toro was already talking about a trilogy.

When they passed it on to Jackson again, it seems he just felt he couldn't fit everything into 2 films and by everything we have seen, you really couldn't.

Now I am not going to say I read the book (I didn't) so I don't know what is actually added on for the film (I know that Legolas wasn't in the book) but I felt like everything in the first 2 films fits and works.
 
Nah, everyone knows two would have been adequate, there is a LOT of filler in these films.
 
Firepower said:
Nah, everyone knows two would have been adequate, there is a LOT of filler in these films.
Click to expand...

Like which parts though? Again I've never read the book so I wouldn't know and I never really felt like the movie dragged at all. I even enjoyed the first part where the dwarves gathered and arrived one by one. Sure I could have done without the song(s) but it didn't really bother me. I liked the journey overall, the trolls, the chase, fighting mountains, the capture, the hunt, smeagol, etc... All from the first ones and all watchable and entertaining. To me at least.


Not really arguing or disagreeing, I just have no clue what was the fillers as I enjoyed most of the moments of the film.
 
Last edited:
Just off the top of my head (been a good few months since I watched them)
The whole She-elf/Hobbit love story for a start (see my Woodland fever reference above) ...Tauriel isn't even a Tolkien character...and if you combine all the scenes that's she's in that must be a good 40 mins or so?

Then there's the water barrel fight with the orcs, Smaug being covered in Gold, all the scenes with Azog (again, like Legolas, he doesn't even appear in the book... I could go on and on...
I mean, yeah, PJ does make it all work and like I said I have enjoyed both so far... but at the same time, as someone who has read The Hobbit maybe 8-10 times over the years, it's easy to see why a lot of people weren't overly impressed with all the added extras.
 
Last edited:
Barrel riding was one of the coolest thing in the series and it was their escape from the elves, not sure how and why they would cut that?

Smaug being covered in gold and that whole sequence was also just good action fun, I wouldn't remove that or call that a filler. It's pretty much the dragon action most waited for.

Azog seemed relevant because he is the necromancers right hand right now and gathering an army.

Tauriel seems minor enough, along with Legolas. I guess the love triangle thing I could do without but did it really felt like it dragged? Didn't seem like it to me. It seemed fine especially the part where they were just killing orcs anyways. Plus if you cut their scenes out I doubt they can fit what the whole third film in there unless the third is just going to be full of fluff? Doesn't seem like it with the defeat of Smaug and the actual war and conclusion of the trilogy that leads to LotR?

I guess I'm just in the minority that enjoyed both films so far. Not as good as LotR but it was still entertaining to me, even the fillers you mentioned because there some nice sequence and visuals with it (minus the cross-breed lowers I guess :lol: ).
 
I wanted to see that guy in the village do work against that dragon. Saw that I had to wait for the next movie and was mad.
 
@RFX45

Nope, nothing wrong with admitting you like them bro, most of those scenes were definitely cool 
smokin.gif


But just to reference what got the discussion started, is that if you cut them all out, you wouldn't miss those scenes (because you wouldn't know about them lol) ...and you'd still be left with two very good films that are closer to the book.

But yeah, definitely looking forward to the 3rd... I mean I must clarify that I never said I had any major problem with it being a trilogy... just what the general consensus was as to why they're not acclaimed as much and why most view it as a money grab.

For me personally, I can never have enough PJ Middle Earth 
laugh.gif
 
 
Last edited:
I got you.

I don't think I'll enjoy the films as much though if most of those scene were cut. Specifically the barrel riding and Smaug action/chase sequence after his convo with Bilbo.

I do with they could keep going and they get a license to use the other books.
 
Last edited:
On a side note... just imagine when all 3 are released on extended DVD/Blu-Ray and there's probably another 2-3 hours of even more added scenes! 
tongue.gif
 
laugh.gif
 
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom