Anyone else find themselves disappointed by the Desolation of Smaug?

[basement farmer]

I'm no JRRT geek, but I know enough about the story to understand that much of this movie is filler that's not part of the actual story.

With the LOTR I got it, a bunch of shit had to be left out because each of the movies would be six hours long if they followed the story literally. Just in case you're thinking that yes, Basement Farmer does sound an awful lot like a JRRT geek, the story is that I listened to the books on tape readings several times doing long road trips with my kids.

Anyway, I thought the first installment of the Hobbit was acceptable. Especially the visual effects. I heard a few JRRT geeks complain about how the movie deviated from the story. One major bitch was that what Radigast was to the Hobbit, Jar-Jar Binks was to the Star Wars prequals..nearly causing nerd on nerd violence.

I understand artistic license and I get how literature doesn't necessarily translate to visual arts but D of S really bummed me out man. Way too much gratuitous violence for no real purpose other than a chance for Legolas to prove how badass he is as he demonstrates mad ninja-like skills as he merciously slaughters hundreds of orcs. I was like fuck, where's all the blood? He's hacking at them like a mofo and no gut's or blood, just an occassional severed head falling here and there.

Anyone else kind feel the same about the film? Or I just being too harsh?

 

[Enchantre]

The Hobbit is a lovely little story.
LOTR is an epic tale, crammed with the substance of a world's history (further outlined in The Silmarillion). Okay, okay, it is actually a close-up of a specific portion of a world's history, which itself is presented in The Silmarillion. There are a bunch of other tales, short stories, and poems, I think, which are also snapshots of this sprawling history, most of which I've not yet read.

In the making of LOTR, I think they did a decent job of picking out a pathway to follow, though I disagreed with a few specifics, over all, it was okay.

With The Hobbit, there is so very little to the book, and they wanted to use the opportunity to work some of the more interesting bits into the story from LOTR (and, I would presume, the other tomes), along with cameos and creatures from LOTR, thus tying the two tales into one grand adventure.

It is so very nearly a disaster. It was PAINFUL to watch Orlando Bloom trying so very hard to be this elf of the forest, when he developed the character in LOTR, which itself was not really the literary one. Far, far less is it the denizen of the Dark Forest (Dark Wood?). I did love Smaug, and his incredible Voice, but the whole lake town, lake town people, and the war...

... I am seriously hoping that the third installment will vindicate the choices made, and the inclusions/exclusions will not manifestly alter the basic history.

 

[vapirtoo]

It was a hand job with no climax!
By the way I also loved Smaug's voice.
What did he mean when he said, "Maybe I should let
you take the orb