As a fan of the Lord of the Rings and a fan of Middle-earth, I watched the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy over and over ten times. Compared with Tuo Lao's original work, I came into contact with PJ's three films that lasted more than ten hours earlier. When I later completed the novel, I felt that the Middle-earth described by Tuo Lao's pen was properly interpreted by PJ. A friend said that with so many fantasy movies, the only successful series so far are "Lord of the Rings" and HP. Not only relying on the foundation of the original book, but also the efforts of the director, actors and the entire creative team behind the scenes. Their dedication to telling the story and shaping the world makes the audience willing to believe in the possibility of such a world, and indulge in it. . I originally thought that I would have to wait until mid-to-late February to see the movie. I didn’t expect that DVDscr has been released on the Internet recently. Although the clarity is still not enough to allow people to appreciate Middle-earth in a subtle way, it is enough to relieve greed. Anyway, it is still in February. Will go to the cinema to experience it. Overall, the viewing process is still very pleasant. The rhythm of the film is smoother than the previous one, the arrangement of the action scenes is also very brilliant, the scene is grand, the actors perform outstandingly, the consistent advantages of these series have been maintained and carried forward. The degree of excitement of the film alone is actually better than the previous one, but it also reveals some problems, or what I don't like. Feel free to talk about your feelings. No matter how many opinions and complaints, it is all because of love. ================================================== ================== 2.22 After the dividing line brushed imax3D, I was deeply shocked by the special effects, and the score was revised. It does not mean that there is no dissatisfaction with the adaptation and arrangement of the plot, but the score is given from the standpoint of a fan. The best in Middle-earth is really the big screen. ================================================== ================== 1. Visual effects and pictures First-class special effects and pictures have always been a major reason for many people to be obsessed with the series of movies, and to some extent I am also like this. Although the clarity of the version seen so far is not high enough, it is also enough to see the visual excellence of the film. If you insist, I feel that the movie relies too much on CGI. Although the application of model and makeup technology in "Lord of the Rings" is more "primitive", it can often give people a more realistic feeling. The color processing of the lens makes the picture of the movie look quite classical, and many lenses are not as good as they are now. High-definition, like a layer of fog, vaguely like an oil painting, whether intentional or unintentional, it really fits the film's temperament. I still remember the scene where Gandalf rode Pipin across the Palano Plain and looked at Minas Tirith. It was so beautiful that it was numbing to my scalp. Later I realized that it was not just CGI. The crew made a very detailed model for Baicheng. . Over the past ten years, the technology of the film industry has advanced by leaps and bounds, and more things that could not be done in the past can be achieved, and various special effects have become more exquisite and beautiful. Thranduyi is like a secret palace, the decaying and mysterious Dol Gordo, the fairytale town of Long Lake and the broken ice and the diffuse fog on the lake, the majestic and majestic lonely mountain, the magnificent and exquisitely designed Airabol, and There are expressive fantasy creatures such as wolves, spiders, and giant dragons. These are indeed visual feasts that are overwhelming. But the fly in the ointment is that the pictures of the movie are too clean and bright, neat and delicate, and beautiful, but it is easy to know that they are all phantoms of CGI. Thinking of watching "The Lord of the Rings" with relatives and friends several times, I was asked whether there is a city like Minas Tirith in reality. I don't think "The Hobbit" will bring us any more questions. 2. Regarding Taurier, whether it is before or after the movie is released, this role is one of the focus of controversy in the movie. Because in the original book, the role of Taurier does not exist. But I can understand why PJ added this character to the movie, and I am not disgusted with the emotional scene between her and Kili the dwarf, and even feel a little cute. In "The Lord of the Rings," there are Guerard Lier, Alwyn and Iowen. The three female characters have their own styles, and the audience chooses their cuteness. In the previous work "Unexpected Journey", the Queen came to the rescue, and by the way, recounting the old with Gandalf and pulling his hands to trigger the audience's endless reverie. But the female characters in "Smaug Desert" are too scarce. Taurier's appearance can balance the drama on the gender level and bring a different color to the plot. As the only capable female elf in the series, it is quite eye-catching and not too unreasonable. Different people have different opinions on the setting effect of the emotional drama, but it can be seen that PJ and the screenwriter are trying to use Taurier to promote Legolas's character creation, change and growth. So the final effect is to wait until the third part is finished. But I still have questions about Taurier's role in healing Kelly. In the movie, the bow and arrow used by Kellett is the Morgul Arrow. The material is estimated to be equivalent to the Morgul Blade of the Ring Spirit. According to the orcs, the power seems to be equivalent to the Morgul Blade. In "The Lord of the Rings" Frodo can't heal the sword after Arwen (Grofindale can't be healed in the book). At the end of the story, we learn that King Elrond can't completely cure the effects of his wounds. Why Tauriel (in the movie) She claims to be Lowly silvan elf) Will she have this ability? 3. Rhythm and structure The rhythm of "Smaug Desert" is faster than the predecessor, the entertainment of watching movies is stronger, and the action scenes are more intensive than the predecessor. The design of the action scene is a big highlight of The Hobbit. The action scenes in the movie do not simply show the cool action of fighting, but try to combine the action scenes and the scenes, and use the props provided in the scene as much as possible (how to say it is so like playing a game) ...... ) In "Unexpected Journey", a section of the goblin cave's chase, run, jump, and scene are seamlessly combined. In this part, there are barrel rafting and three-way melee, and the action arrangement is done in one go and hearty. At the end, the battle and dealings with Smaug also showed the exquisite and complex design of Airapol from all angles, and the high-end atmosphere made the audience addicted to their eyes. The film strives to develop a multi-line plot to move closer to "The Lord of the Rings", but in general the structure is not perfect. The structure of "The Twin Towers" is very complete, with a lot of beginnings, inheritances, and turns. The two climaxes of the Battle of Saint Helm Valley and the Treemen's attack on Isengard are the two major climaxes of the battle. But "Smaug Desert" lacks a real climax. After more than five hours of plotting, the audience still hasn't waited for the plot. The cat and mouse game with the dragon is really exciting, but it is obviously not enough as a climax. The dwarves are alive and unscathed in the flames, and the tension of the plot is relatively reduced. In the end, the movie left an American drama-style cliffhanger, pushing all the climax of each line to the third. That is to say, in "Go and Return", the film needs to deal with at least three climaxes-Saint White Conference vs. Sauron, Middle-earth "Avengers" attack; Smaug attacks Long Lake Town, Bud slays the dragon ; There is also the Battle of the Five Armies that everyone is looking forward to. Isn't this really too rush? 4. Film positioning: the magnified Hobbit To tell the truth, "The Hobbit" is not easy to shoot because it carries so many other meanings. Many viewers and fans do not want the movie to be just the simple fairy tale written by Tolkien decades ago. They even hope that what PJ produced is the prequel to the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy, a magnificent and majestic epic. . If it is photographed according to the original photo, and the plot is restored to its simple, fairy-tale temperament, some fans will not buy it. As a result, the film moved to the epic direction as best as it could. The length changed from one to two, and two to three. The connection with the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy was reflected everywhere. PJ's goal was very clear. Filmed as a prequel to "The Lord of the Rings". But after all, the name of the movie is "The Hobbit". No matter what kind of grandeur or spectacle you need, the original framework and positioning of the story restricts "The Hobbit" as a trilogy of "Lord of the Rings" as "epic". Prequel performance. In a sense, the film and television adaptation of literary works is like a dance in shackles. The film's positioning has always been between "The Hobbit" and "Lord of the Rings". In order to get closer to the "epic", almost everything in the movie has been magnified. Dol Gordo is not just an abandoned fortress, it has become a “dead city” of staggering scale; Elabol’s magnificence makes Moria dwarfed; Smaug and its treasures are larger than those in the book and Tolkien The illustrations I created show much larger, so the weapon that killed Smaug had to be enlarged and turned into an "anti-aircraft bolt" placed on the tower. What I am puzzled is that if the scale of the treasure is really as overwhelming as in the movie, and there is a giant dragon to guard it, Bilbo is afraid that he will be unable to find the Arkenberg from this golden mountain in his life, because it is nothing more than looking for a needle in a haystack. . But the solution in the movie is very convenient-far in the sky, close in front of you. In addition, the length of the movie has also been enlarged, adding plots that mostly pave the way for "The Lord of the Rings". The Holy White Conference and Necromancer, mentioned in the original text in a few sentences on the side, became an important branch line in order to tell how Sauron regained his power. In order to tie up with the growth of Sauron's power, the film even modified the reason for the Battle of the Five Armies. In the original work, the orcs wanted to get a share of the pie because they learned that the dragon guarding the treasure was dead, so they headed towards the Lonely Mountain. However, in the movie, this action was also given a more "epic" motivation-under Sauron's command to conquer the human world (in the movie, Smaug was not killed at the time). Given that Sauron's power had not fully recovered at the time, it seemed unreasonable to advance so hastily. Not everything is as ambitious as possible, in order to go to camp To create a grand and epic atmosphere, the film sacrifices some small, detailed, relaxing and interesting elements in the original. In Tolkien's story, the key words of "The Hobbit" are not "grand" or "epic". "The Battle of the Five Armies" was only a few pages long, Bilbo's eyes went dark, and it was over when he woke up. The positioning of the original work makes the film an "epic" somewhat inherently shortcomings. In all fairness, does the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy really need such a comprehensive prequel? Its completion and completeness are quite high. We already knew that Sauron had regained his strength, that the world would fall into crisis, and that the ring possessed the mighty power of bewitching people's hearts. And what we don’t know is how Bilbo as a little character sees this strange and novel world, what we don’t know is how Bilbo grows and changes in adventure as a little character, what we don’t know is the dwarf squad The characteristics and stories of each member in the movie actually take these into account, but those epic and grand plots dilute the centrality of the hobbit and his sense of existence, and the multi-line plot makes the movie appear even more. There is a sense of incompleteness forcibly pieced together. It is unfair to prepare for the story that will happen in "The Lord of the Rings" so hard, and even seem to hesitate to become the 2.0 version of the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy. PJ also made drastic changes when filming "The Lord of the Rings", but the final works made the audience feel that the "Lord of the Rings" movie should be like this. "The Hobbit" is different. It does not carry the important task of saving the world. It does not need to sing the elegy dedicated to the age of the elves. The ring that bewitched people's hearts and evil was only an interesting magic weapon that could make people invisible at that time. It was an adventure. Unexpected treasure. It was originally a fireside story for children. It is a story of how a hobbit who lives in an underground cave must have the courage to walk out of the house to learn about this colorful world, not the story of the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy. Periphery and shadow. Version 0 is unfair to this story. PJ also made drastic changes when filming "The Lord of the Rings", but the final works made the audience feel that the "Lord of the Rings" movie should be like this. "The Hobbit" is different. It does not carry the important task of saving the world. It does not need to sing the elegy dedicated to the age of the elves. The ring that bewitched people's hearts and evil was only an interesting magic weapon that could make people invisible at that time. It was an adventure. Unexpected treasure. It was originally a fireside story for children. It is a story of how a hobbit who lives in an underground cave must have the courage to walk out of the house to learn about this colorful world, not the story of the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy. Periphery and shadow.
View more about The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug reviews
