And so we come to the Misty Mountains at long last. long long last. Even longer last. Did I mention long? Overall all 3 Hobbit movies are reasonably good, but suffer from too much of a good thing and would have worked better being edited to two. There are some great pieces in this movie. Plus a good number that will leave Tolkien fans scratching their heads going WTF??? Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings these movies are not. Deeply ruined by the inclusion of tons of extraneous characters that never appeared in the original story. The hot Elf on Dwarf romance was kinda odd. The Dwarbes fighting the dragon was certainly unexpected as well as being rather idiotic and long.

The best part of the Extended edition is it put back in some critical scenes that really should have been left in to begin with. I mean they actually explain why Thranduil is such a jackass. But they cut the needed story and exposition in favor of an extra 10 minutes of idiotic dwarves in barrels like some amusement park ride. Someone really needs to explain to Peter Jackson the difference between using a feather and using the whole damn chicken.

For Tolkien and LotR fans it is pretty much a must see in order to get to the end of it all. And the extended edition is the better cut. But if you haven't seen The Unexpected Journey this will make no sense to you. If you saw the prior movie but also read the book, this will make even less sense to you. Probably just best to forget that it has anything to do with JRR Tolkien and convince yourselves that this is the best Dungeons & Dragons movie ever made. Your soul will die a little less that way.

Like the Lord of the Rings director Peter Jackson had a theme for each one of the Hobbit movies. The first film was about starting the quest. The second one, The Desolation of Smaug was about Bilbo’s courage.

That’s seen in several scenes such as when Bilbo saves his Dwavish friends from spiders and then unfriendly elves. Of course this is also when he first comes across Smaug.

Speaking of which the dragon was awesome. What a great job they did with the effects and his personality.

That brings up the biggest problem. The Orc Azog returned and he looked like garbage in comparison. Why they couldn’t use an actor like they did with the Orcs in the Lord of the Rings was anyone’s guess but the CGI Orc didn’t cut it.

Finally, Jackson wanted to connect the Hobbit with the Lord of the Rings and that’s shown the most in The Desolation of Smaug. That’s through Legolas (Orlando Bloom) shows up when the Dwarves and Bilbo go through the Mirkwood. He was not in the original book but would become a main character in this movie and the next one The Battle of the Five Armies as well.
C

One of the best movies I have seen in years. I was not a big fan of the Lord of the Rings movies, but this second Hobbit movie changed my mind and I went back to rewatch the LORD because the Desolation Of Smaug was so awesome.

The Hobbit Trilogy is the best Trilogy I have seen since the original Star Wars.

Martin Freeman is amazing as Bilb and Richard Armitage does a great job as Thorin. Sir Ian Kellen is really good as Gandalf.

But I have a special place in my heart for all the Dwarves and Balboa scenes.

The spiders were as creepy as can be. And who doesn't think that Thronduil want perfect?

Legolas and Turkey were perfect additions.

But Smaug was the jewel in the crown. The effects used to give Smaug life and personality, especially Benedict Cumberbatch's voice, give Smaug legendary proportions.

Best dragon ever.

I am not a fan, at all of fantasy fiction. But the Hobbit movies are amazing.

Peter Jackson and crew did a stunning job of bringing The Hobbit to life.

I read a number of reviews for this trilogy of movies with people complaining that the films aren't true to the book. BIG SHOCK. When has a movie EVER given you the same experience as the book? I remember one, maybe Abyss but that book was written AFTER the screenplay.

I loved these films. Could the story have been told in less than 3 movies? Probably. And suffered for the abbreviation. The casting and chemistry were awesome. Didn't realize that Messrs Cumberbatch and Bennett were in the films until the credits. Should have. After all who else could possibly pull off those roles?

Many thanks to everyone who had a part in the making of the Hobbit films for a visually stunning, emotional and all around amazing interpretation of Tolkien's work. My only regret is waiting so long to watch them.

This movie is very different from the book, but it is still a great movie in and of itself. They did an amazing job in the depiction of the SIZE of Smaug in comparison to Bilbo and the treasure-laden surroundings in the Dwarven stronghold.

Peter Jackson included a lot of material that is not in The Hobbit book itself, but is actually going on at the same time in other areas that will lead into the happenings of The War of the Rings at the end of the third age of Middle Earth depicted in The Lord of the Rings books and movies. He does this to show the audience watching the film that there is much MUCH more going on, unawares of Bilbo & the Dwarven company of Thorin Oakendshield.

Finally reviewing it after the third viewing, and I really don't have much to say other than this is a must see. The visuals are epic, the acting is believable, the CGI is seamless.

The parts that are faithful to the book are beautifully realized, and the invented portions are consistent and entertaining. As a lifelong fan of this series and all of it's attendant media, I couldn't have asked for a better representation of what my imagination has been conjuring all these years.

Thank you.

This is a review of the (3) disc Blu-Ray extended edition of The Hobbit part 2: The Desolation of Smaug, which finally came out a few weeks ago, and I just finished watching today. There's also one of those "ultraviolet" vouchers you can use to view it on other devices. Keep in mind, at pretty much the same time there was also released a FIVE disc version containing extended Desolation of Smaug in 3-D (2 discs), extended Desolation of Smaug "normal" Blu-Ray (one disc), and the same 2 discs of Appendices called 9 and 10.

I've had so many versions of Lord of the Rings, and now the Hobbit, that I kinda lost track of the numbering for these appendices. I think the way it ends up, with the extended edition of Lord of the Rings, movie 1 had appendices 1 and 2, movie 2 had 3 and 4, movie 3 had 5 and 6, and with the extended first film of The Hobbit had 7 and 8, which gives us 9 and 10 with Hobbit film 2.

As the manufacturer's review and dust jacket and other reviews all say, the extended edition of the film itself adds 25 minutes-for a total of 3 hours 6 minutes for the movie. There's also a very short "filming in New Zealand" feature, only 7 minutes long, which recaps some of the spectacularly beautiful exterior locations they used in Desolation of Smaug (clearly Paradise, where they located Beorn's house, must hands-down be the most beautiful, but the river which they used for barrel-ride scenery in my opinion would be a second.

As for the extra 25 minutes: without dwelling on them at length, I would say that while not all of it may be quite from the books, it was all very well-done and well-integrated with the rest of the film, and might help someone who never read all the books (that is, both The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings) understand a little better what is going on in the story.

As for the Appendices 9 and 10, this is what is really new to the extended version. One is 5 hours total, and the other is 5 hours 6 minutes. Adding those, plus the movie, plus the short-short gives us a massive 13 hrs 19 minutes of viewing time. And I must say, I enjoyed virtually every minute of it (though that's why I spent about a week getting through it all. The Appendices to this film are a very extensive "making-of", but not the kind of "making of" that you so often see in other films, half of which consists of clips of the movie itself, and the other half consisting of the director and actors and cinematographer etc. all congratulating themselves on what a great job they did. No, no, no, this was (in typical Peter Jackson style), a mixture of him and members of his crew showing us how they tackled filming various scenes, interspersed with snippets of casting interviews and the actors talking about how they got selected, interspersed with the actors goofing off with each other on-set in between takes, and sometimes with the actors giving Jackson a hard time (or him getting them back, often as he talks to us, the audience). I haven't been in the film business but it seems an open secret that often actors HATE directors (and vice versa) for a variety of reasons: often it's because the director has a very strict vision of what he wants to see in the film and won't tolerate any deviation from what he's trying to get, even if the actors don't understand exactly what that is. On the other extreme are directors (especially comedy movies with great comedians) who let them ad-lib as much as they want, and often use whatever parts they like the best. Or (another type of director actors don't much care for) the ones who are very into the technology of the filmmaking, but lousy at giving actors explanations of what they want from them in a scene. Jackson clearly has (almost always) clear visions of what he wants to see, but he also involves the actors in the process, particularly in how they deliver their lines. Which leads to what I suspect would be the one universal complaint the actors would have, if they had to pick any complaint about working in these films: SO MANY TAKES. The appendices (long as they are) only hint at how many takes are actually done for many scenes, but he'll do it over and over again until he finds one performance he feels is perfect (or synthesizes pieces from several takes into the perfect sequence). And if there's one thing I think the actors, the crew and we audiences alike can all admire about Jackson is his absolutely incredible attention to details. So many fine details appear in many of his sets---unfortunately stuff the audience will never even SEE (except you get to see some of it in these appendices) but which, in the "real" sets, are all there to make the actors feel they're in a real middle-earth world. There are many quite memorable moments in these appendices: Steven Colbert and his family visiting and all being put into the move; Ian McKellon fooling Peter Jackson; Jackson's disastrous attempt at a cameo appearance in Laketown; the unbelievable insanity of the rush to produce the final 20 minutes of the film (which were delivered late in the end); the problems of converting a 2-film plan into a 3-film plan; some erudite discussions by scholars of the derivation of some of Tolkien's ideas which first appear in the Hobbit, and so much more. The appendices are alternately fascinating, funny, touching, enlightening, but almost always great watching for anyone who enjoys the movie.

Yes there are always problems turning books into movies (typified by complaints I think I've heard 1,000 times "the book was SO MUCH BETTER"). I read the books, I imagined the scenes myself, and I've watched the movies (except the final Hobbit film). All 3 are excellent. Jackson's vision of Middle-Earth is superb. Even where you find that some actor isn't quite how you pictured them, or some detail in the book was left out, or some dialog in the film was added, as far as I'm concerned it all produces the effect of bringing the books to the screen in a way which nobody else could ever do. These will, I think, remain the definitive film versions of both Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit. When I first heard that little book, the Hobbit, was to be 3 whole films, my reaction was "NO WAY!" After watching just the first film, that had already changed to, "Way!" Now, before even seeing it, I'm already sad that the third Hobbit film is probably the last of Tolkien we'll see directed by Jackson and with this cast. Almost everyone already knows whether they like or don't like The Hobbit. If you do like it, do yourself a favor and get the extended editions of all 3 films.

Well first off they erase a year between the opening scene and the next, then the CGI is so overpowering no one looks normal, the scenery becomes cartoonish, the trees and things just poke out of the ground, the Orcs are silly-putty things.
Every single moment has dramatic and ominous portent so it's hard to distinguish between what's common and what's really important, it all has the exact same tone. Like a song written in all half notes it's a dull thrum of noise.