The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

[ER]

I was disappointed. Not a bad movie "exactly" but a washed-out, filler-oozing misrepresentation of The Hobbit beyond any doubt. Jackson's changes to LOTR were forgivable; those to The Hobbit are just padding. I spent years waiting for The Hobbit to come to the big screen and the anticipation hasn't been justified.

[Josso]

I was a little confused when they said it was going to be 3 parts considering the size of the book vs the size of the LOTR books.

[Andrew]

I only recently watched the first installment, The Hobbit (2012) and was disappointed.  Biggest complaint being the changes to certain key events, such as the encounter with the trolls.  The changes make Bilbo feel like a liability.

Adding Radagast to the story was an interesting idea, and probably the best thing that the plot had going for it in terms of "poetic license" or whatever you want to call that nonsense.

Your description of the second film as a misrepresentation of the Hobbit makes me think it just continued what had been started with the first.

[indianasmith]

I enjoyed the first one - I didn't really mind the additional material that much, but when they start CHANGING the central narrative, the purist in me cringes.  As a movie, it's a fun popcorn flick.  As an adaptation of the book, not so great.

[VenomX73]

I enjoyed it. Smaug was awesome.

[WingedSerpent]

Smaug is my favorite character out of these Peter Jackson JRR Tolkien movies.   

I thought the movie was pretty good and enjoyable.  Really most of the additions didn't bother me too much. 

By the way-who else caught the Stephen Colbert cameo?

[tracy]

Smaug was awesome,that's very true. However,having read the book many times,the changes kinda threw me. However,to quote Indy,as a book adaptation it wasn't so great.

[Ted C]

Finally saw it. Sense the LOTR movies have desensitized me to PJ's gratuitous story changes, I found it quite watchable.

I do, however, consider these to be movies loosely based on the Hobbit, not a proper screen adaptation of the novel.

[BoyScoutKevin]

I wouldn't mind seeing a big screen version of Tolkien's "The Hobbit," but what I see is Jackson's big screen version of "The Hobbit," which is why I am staying away from it. But . . . ?

Hollywood is not going to argue with one of the top grossing films of last year, nor a film that seems to have "legs," which is why we are getting the 3rd part next year, and a film already considered to be one of the top grossing films of 2014.

After that . . . ?

There is some talk of adapting some of Tolkien's lesser known works for the screen. People are especially interested in a film adaptation of the time in Middle Earth between the end of "The Hobbit" and the beginning of "The Lord of the Rings."

There was also talk of bringing "The Hobbit" as a theme park attraction to a theme park in the U.S., which means Disney or Universal, but that ship may have already sailed. Disney is working with a surfeit of riches . . .

Avatar at Disney's Animal Kingdom
Cars already at Disney California Adventure and soon at Disney Hollywood Studios
Frozen at both EPCOT and Disneyland, if the rumours are true.
Indiana Jones, now that Disney has the rights to make any future films based on the character.
Marvel which Disney is just scratching at, besides Hong Kong Disneyland. Though, Captain America is coming to a meet 'n' greet some time this spring at Disneyland.
Star Wars with the next film being in 2015 and the Star Wars Weekend being a big to do at Disney Hollywood Studios. A greater presence at the theme parks.

Universal, not as rich, but it has success with Harry Potter, so it is tearing out some of its older attractions such as Jaws and replacing them with Harry Potter.

Thus, I don't see any The Hobbit attractions anytime soon at any them park in the U.S.