Haha wow, I came here to share my excitement with you guys not to defend the movies
I agree the Hobbit isn't perfect in
many regards, I find this one was more for money and entertainment compared to the LOTR series, which might also explain why the Hobbit is lacking academy award nominations.
I'm just tired of the formula Jackson's gone with, especially with respect to adding stuff that flat out doesn't exist in the story.
1) Elven wire-fu scene is required.
2) 'Theme park' scene is required (eg dwarven lava ride under the mountain).
3) Random love triangle inserted to the story.
4) Constant witty quips between friendly rivals during fight scenes.
5) End movies at non-logical breakpoints, to allow for the actual climatic moment to occur partway through the next movie (eg Smaug should have died in the second).
He did that for the entire LOTR series, and has done that for both of the Hobbit films so far.
I don't think he had a choice but to add some scenes into the movie due to it being a trilogy, if it was a two part movie in its entirety then I think this could have been one of the best series of all time right next to LOTR but what's done is done I guess, he took the path that lead him to more money.
I don't think the elven wire-fu scene was bad if its the scene where they're escaping Woodland Realm, it added for some laughs with a mix of cool action. I deffs agree with the lava bit, it all felt kind of forced to me, and I hated the fact that Legolas and ****ing Tauriel were in the book, aside from that I can live with the other points you made simply because I don't think they're hurting the entertainment aspect of it too much.
One thing I wish they added was the forest scene, they could have probably cut out the whole time they spent developing Tauriel and Legolas and maybe even cut down on the Smaug scene (chasing the dwarves through the halls and the lava bit you mentioned too) and then put that time into prolonged Mirkwood forest scenes how the company gets lost (although they did add the bit about the stag and falling into the river in the extended scenes) and also put more development into the happenings at Dol Guldur. In the book it feels like the forest part lasted forever yet it was pretty damn short in the movies so that was disappointing.
edit: just remembered the inclusion of Azog the Defiler, also pointless
LOTR is GOAT movies.
Hobbit movies are... meh. I'll tell you this much though, I HATE THE CGI. I mean, irrationally hate it. LOTR looked AMAZING because they used prosthetics and real actors & extras. Hobbit looks like a 3rd rate Dreamworks cartoon at times.
I mean, I get that Smaug has to be CGI. Fine... he was actually done fairly ok. The rest though.... dear lord. Looks terrible. TERRIBLE.
I'll see the 3rd Hobbit movie because it's Tolkien, but it's been a disappointing trilogy, to say the least. So many bad decisions. It just doesn't seem to have the same kind of soul that LOTR did... Jackson's just going through the motions.
I agree, LOTR and Hobbit CGI are on two entire different levels. LOTR was a masterpiece, even when they did use CGI they did it in such an amazing manner. You can seriously tell the huge difference by contrasting the fight scenes in LOTR and the Hobbit...the scene in the 3rd LOTR where the fighters of Rohan are going down the hill lead by King Theoden and then the scene wit the elephants used heavy CGI butt here was just a realistic feel to it whereas the Hobbit looked like a video game at times lol. I feel like this final one will be extremely heavy on the CGI, oh well.
edit: continued my rant on CGI for you in the bottom reply lol
An Unexpected Journey was fantastic: it was light-hearted and really conveyed the distance travelled all while giving a bit of gravitas that is "required" by big budget movies that was tactful: making the dwarves care about their "country" and giving them an enemy makes them more relatable and easier to root for (in the book the only thing they care about is the gold).
I walked into to the theatre very skeptical but the movie won me over.
Then Desolation of Smaug ruined everything. Holy **** is that movie ever awful... One of the most unenjoyable theatre experiences I've ever had, I came real close to walking out. They made it into some stupid epic with a ******* love story that makes no sense. I get wanting to add a woman, I'm down with it, but they did it the worst possible way. They also utterly ruined my favourite scene of the book with the barrel scene by making it some ****ing stupid roller coaster ride. It went from a story about travelling Middle Earth and discovering it's lore and inhabitants to some lame epic. That movie makes me very, very mad.
I have no hope for the third one. There's like 60 pages left in the book by the time Smaug goes to burn Lake-Town and they are going to sttttttrrrrreeeeeeeettttttccccchhhhhhh it out to 2h30. **** off Peter Jackson: you built me up with the first one, then kicked me in the nuts with the second one and are going to be laughing at me while you make the battle of five armies (that is all of 3 or 4 pages long) fill an entire movie?! No, just no.
Haha wow, I hated the addition of Tauriel too but your hate is on another level
I actually didn't mind the barrel scene, it added humour and entertainment I find but for the most part I agree with them ruining Desolation of Smaug by adding Legolas and Tauriel and cutting a few other more important scenes (Dol Guldur development and the Mirkwood forest scene was so damn short)
But yeah I was talking to my friend about the 3rd movie too and I said literally the same stuff you said, the battle scene is literally 3 pages long and they'll somehow stretch it out to at least an hour long (it's inevitable so we might as well begin to expect it) so I hope it's at least somewhat entertaining and not too CGI packed, I liked LOTR because the way they used CGI didn't impact the quality of the movie.
But as BonkTastic said the CGI in the hobbit is brutal and it won't get better in this one, I would bet all my money on it. You could see the development of CGI throughout the entire series, the fellowship of the ring had some CGI but they used it right, to make places like Rivendale and Mordor more beautiful (or scary) and realistic. Then in the Twin Towers we saw a bit more CGI with the Black Wings (the beasts the kings were riding) tearing down buildings and breaking walls, then the Return of the King had a lot of CGI during the war scenes but to be honest even then I was fine with it as it helped the movie in terms of quality, it wasn't too much you know?
But the 1st Hobbit took it a few steps further than the Return of the King and the Desolation of Smaug took it even further than the 1st Hobbit so yeah...Peter Jackson has said this movie in a bad directions in terms of technology.
But yah, to get back to your point, they should have made this a two-part movie from the start so they could cut out the Tauriel/Legolas BS entirely and cut down on other scene (like Smaug scenes)