The Hobbit – The Desolation of Smaug
With Wit, Reviewed By Kimmo Mustonenen
————-
Here are the facts:
The Fellowship of the Ring – Book pages 432 – Film minutes 2:58
The Two Towers- Book pages 352 – Film minutes 2:59
Return of the King- Book pages 512 – Film minutes 3:21
———————-
The Hobbit – Book pages 300
Now for the movies.
The Hobbit – An Unexpected Journey – 2:49
The Hobbit – Desolation of Smaug – 2:41
The Hobbit – Ka-ching!!! – Who the hell knows?
—————–
So, The Lord of the Rings – Book pages 1296, Total Time 9:18
The Hobbit – Book pages 300, Total Time (so far) 5:30
‘Nuff said.
Are we still there for the caring?
I am done.
How long can this go on?
The Hobbit (Kim Kardashian) continues on its quest.
Things go on forever. BUT, 3-D IMAX made my pants a place for the peeing.
Awesome!!
Go see it.
You will if I do or if I do not say the right things.
As much as thinking Peter Jackson drools over money, the film still makes the mind flop on itself.
Good work, moneygrubber!!!
In other ways, go see “Afternoon Delight.” Independent films make on feel the smarter.
This is the time of year when Hollywood makes the liking of Hollywood seem like the boning of one’s sister.
Kind of hot. Totally sleazy.
If Hollywood was a man, “The Hobbit” would have been 10 movies.
Hollywood – you are a pussy.
So…Two thumbs up.
Made up story is still good story. IMAX 3-D is still IMAX 3-D.
Hey, Hollywood whoredom works. I must deal with this.
See this three times.
Kimmo Mustonenen – (Kimmo On Kino) – Behind The Proscenium
P.S. Now for brain expanding Vonnegut (Dead Eye Dick – 1982 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadeye_Dick) – “We all see our lives as stories, it seems to me, and I am convinced that psychologists and sociologists and historians and so on would find it useful to acknowledge that. If a person survives an ordinary span of sixty years or more, there is every chance that his or her life as a shapely story has ended, and that all the remains to be experienced is the epilogue. Life is not over, but the story is.
Some people, of course, find inhabiting an epilogue so uncongenial that they commit suicide.
P.P.S. “Survivor” finale on Sunday! Whoop dee whoop!!
If Hollywood can turn a pamphlet into a movie (“Where The Wild Things Are”) they can stretch anything out for money – 5 pounds of shit into a 10 pound bag.
How witty, erudite, and devilishly clever you must think you are. This film is a piece of entertainment and a fantastically exciting one at that. All of this talk of long running times and story threads that aren’t “canon” is just the white noise of pseudo-intellectual babble speak and the clatter of the intelligentsia as they pat each other’s backs in agreement over how much they loathe these movies.
It, unlike this film, bores me.
Amen.
What a piss poor attempt at a review.
Well said! People should take the film at face value – it is an interpretation, and a pretty cool one at that. I loved it 🙂
Good review Kimmo. Can’t say that I’m utterly shaking in my shorts for the next movie, but I do hope it’s as fun and as tense as it seems to be promised as being.
I was a big fan of LOTR, as I was of the books. I am a huge fan of The Hobbit (the book). Like Mostonenen, I was pretty appalled by how a charming yet epic story was completely overtaken by the the desire to re-make LOTR again with thousands of orks being splattered left and right and centre within minutes. It’s an arcade version, and a pretty predictable one at that.
did you read the hobbit before or after LOTR?
i’m a fan of both genres (books & films), and have no issue whatsoever with the length of either. for as much as people want to piss & moan about turning a relatively short novel into a trilogy (and a long one at that), there are plenty who found that there were sections of each book that were interminable.
as to my original question; i ask it because i read LOTR first, and then when i read the hobbit, i felt there was sooo much missing; i’m kind of relieved that the parts that were missing from the hobbit (but that were explained by tolkien in appendices in LOTR) have found a home in the movies. so it’s not really fair in this review to do a simple page count & compare/contrast against the length of the respective movies, without also taking into account the source material for gandalf’s side adventure with sauron/necromancer, etc.
lastly, the hobbit was a children’s story, which no-doubt explains the lack of orc-dismemberings; i don’t think jackson – nor those interested in seeing the hobbit put into movie format – were interested in seeing an exact duplication of the G-rated story.
He pretty much lost me at ” ‘Nuff said. ”
The teenage mentality has to go.
If this is what you call a review, please stop writing.
Great blog.