Good action film. No relation to Tolkien
919242
My title says it all.
Tolkien's books and whole world was philosophical and very specific about certain things.

Mercy is a virtue (elves would never behead a captive orc, as they do in this film). They "Americanized" elves in this film, and like all our other major media, it teaches that killing "bad" people is actually good. Tolkien knew better, and would never have approved of this disgusting corruption.

The animosity between the Dwarves and Elves in this film bears no relationship to the real history of that distrust in Tolkien's mythology (has much more to do with the sacking of Menegroth, taking of the Nauglamir+Silmaril, and killing of King Thingol by the Dwarves 5,000 years ago and nothing to do with the coming of Smaug. BTW, if you don't know, the Ents killed every single dwarf involved in that shameful deed and none ever returned home. Also, Berin recovered the Nauglamir/Silmaril, which eventually went to Ereandil, and is now a star in the sky (Elbereth, who's light is contained in Frodo's "phial of Galadriel."

In fact, the way in which Hollywood has corrupted Tolkien's message (which is sorely needed today), is similar to how Morgoth or Sauron's one ring corrupt everything in Tolkien's works. Tolkien was prophetic, like Orwell, Huxeley, and others. What he suspected has in fact come to pass.

Tolkien believed in the power of the humble and unassuming. This movie is all about the mighty heroes and how great they are.

Basically, this movie (and the previous LOTR trilogy) undermines everything Tolkien was trying to teach (all great wisdom, by the way). Tolkien fought in the Somme battle in WWI. He was not a sycophant for how great military power is. To the contrary, he taught that power corrupts, and the desire for power, wealth, beauty, whatever, leads to evil.

Might as well call this movie "Hobbit Rambo." Great example of the shallowness and banality of Hollywood.

This movie cheapens and distorts the magnificent vision and wisdom of the late Professor Tolkien. That distortion is unfortunately as American as apple pie, and contributes to our collective mental illness.

In other words, read the book if you think you like Tolkien. If you liked the LOTR films rather than the books, then you are not a Tolkien fan, but a Peter Jackson fan. The two visions have nothing in common except Jackson ripped off all of Tolkien's ideas for his Rambo film.
204914
Peter Jacksons middle chapter to The Hobbit trilogy, The Desolation of Smaug (TDOS) is good, but not great.

We pick up right where An Unexpected Journey (AUJ) left our band of adventurers. Immediately, the film jumps into a quickly paced series of events. We meet Beorn (although his intro and time spent here is far to short), and quickly the troop finds themselves in Mirkwood. Racing along at record pace, the dwarves and Mr. Baggins find themselves in one perilous circumstances after another. Spiders, Mirkwood elves, orcs, etc.

Given the overly long moments from AUJ, this films initial quick pace is as much a boon as it is a burden. The environments of Beorns home, Mirkwood and the elvish kingdom are so short that its hard to really get a solid grasp. Theyre beautiful sets, but less time is given to them than they deserve.

In terms of the characters, film-created Tauriel (Evangeline Lily) fits right into the story. She feels right at home and welcomed to a male-centric story. Fan favorite Legolas is back and is less wise and more teen-like in his approach which fits with his character progression from the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Bard (Luke Evans) is well done as is the Master of Laketown (Stephen Fry). Theyre brief roles ultimately in this film, but the pieces are set for their stories in the final chapter of The Hobbit trilogy. Yet, despite all this, the one incredible performance that deserves a ton of credit is Smaug (voiced by Benedict Cumberbatch). Cumberbatch breathes fire (pardon the pun) into Smaug and you can feel the repressed hate of dwarves in his performance.

Visually, Smaug is stunning, as is the scene between Bilbo and Smaug. Their back and forth conversation is ripped right off the page and is a joy to watch unfold. This all leads to the most disappointing part of the film, which is sadly the climax. I won't say more other than its far too long and someone suffers from a complete characteristic reversal.

TDOS isn't a bad movie. It has breathtaking visuals, amazing set pieces and is fun but its missing a few things to really make it great. In retrospect, it ends in a logical place, but sitting in the theater, I was surprised when it ended. I had expected the story to get farther along. Middle chapters in trilogies sometimes suffer because the film doesnt really end and doesnt tie anything up, thats for the conclusion obviously, so maybe after we see the final chapter, my reaction will change. Until then, its absolutely worth seeing, but odds are you won't be blown away other than by a few choice moments and scenes.
5383
For the action alone this movie was perfect. It was exciting, beautiful, unique, all of it. The characters and acting though was mediocre. I like the actors very much as well which makes that unusual. Oh well, a solid 3 star movie I think though anyway.
406546
I drank the Kool-Aid, so I will never say there is a bad Hobbit movie.  However, if you never read the books and don't plan to, these movies are great.  I groaned when they said they would made three installments.  I groaned more when I saw this one (and the second movie earlier today).  These two movies loosely interpret the events in "The Hobbit".  I won't talk details, but if you read the books, you would understand. (Legolas in the second movie?  Really, guys!?!?! Beorn given bits? Sorry, this is about the first movie.)  Peter Jackson and Guillermo del Toro are the best, but someone in Tolkien's family should have stood up and said, "Enough is enough".

I will say the casting was well done.  Each actor (first and second movie) did an excellent job of playing the role required of them in the movie.  (Maybe they were barred from reading the books so they would not get confused during filming. . .yes, that was a dig.)

So, if I rate it on the quality of the movie alone, I give it 4.5 stars.  If I rate it on accuracy, it barely gets 2 stars (being gracious, of course).
2908947
Fun story, great action.  Not sure the Avengers were really necessary.  The Chitari are pretty stupid and their invasion force would definitely have been crushed by the military, but a fun movie anyway
1531983
The movie had good action, plot kind of lacking but none the less a great action. Kinda slows down at the end but lots of fight scenes.
4279433
I'm writing as a fan of reasonably-well-made action movies based on interesting ideas. Also I've always believed that a goal of "remaining faithful to a comic book" would be a ridiculous goal of a commercial adventure flick. So if you are offended by what I call the "blasphemy against the inane" then you might be offended by this film which features a great performance by Sean Connery even though you've seen this character portrayed by him many times.

The spirit of a comic book is retained with much posturing and pretentious dialogue, the starkness between the heroes and villians and plenty of campy banter and comeradery. The main bad guy turns out to be a madman who wants to take over the world (surprise, surprise.) Foibles of the heroes are well explored - we see Jekyll's cowardice, Sawyer's youthful inexperience, Nemo's Kali-worship, Quartermain's indifference to his nation's plight, etc. The characters from famous literature are a bit "off" from their original, but fun nontheless; I can't imagine that Mark Twain wanted Tom Sawyer to become an intelligence agent for the United States, but it's played out cleverly in the plot.

The effects are stunning; I especially liked the Nautilus design and the way the Invisible Man was portrayed. The dialogue never gets too silly and when the viewer feels that it's about to it was saved by an action segment. This film will be enjoyed by people who like all the Batman movies, James Bond, and stuff like "The Rock" with Sean Connery or "Air Force One"; basically anyone who, like me, is not too picky about action movies as long as they don't try to be too much more than that.
3763115
Good action flick if you suspend belief on a few things - and who wouldn't for a nice time at the movies ?!
1079200
Not sure why this movie was so well received. While I can see it being a fun ride in a movie theater, that same experience does not transfer home. Overall though, a good, mindless action flick.
3294110
The last time I wrote a review, it ended up getting trolled, because someone had a problem that my opinion was not the same as his. So before reading this understand this is one man's opinion. The first two Hobbit movies were done well, this last one felt rushed, and unfinished. Many questions were not answered. Now image Return of the King with Frodo, and Sam sitting their talking, and then imagine the movie just ending. I am pretty sure the response to that movie would not have been positive. This is what happened with this film, they ended it without a proper wrap. First things first, you are introduced to a new character called Dain, the complete meaning, of what it is to be a dwarf. They show him, then at the end of the battle, they do not tell you what happened to him during the last section of the battle. I also read the book and the battle scene felt like something taken out of the Heart of swarm Starcraft 2, rather then what was in the book. If I remember correctly it was a frontal assault, with Humans, Dwarfs, and elfs fighting up hill. Also if I remember correctly the reason why they were having such a tough battle was because the Orcs used warg Riders during the battle, and allot of them. So watching this understand this was one of Hollywoods normal blunders rush things, and don't hold true to form. Also they ever explain in the movie why these orcs were deadly and organized, compared to the orcs you see in lord of the rings. Those orcs were horde like but not organized, they just mowed everything down by sheer numbers. To top it off they completely changed the Nine compared to the ones you see in Lord of the rings, and give no real explanation. Another loose end never tied up they mention Gondor soldiers on the Mordor wall, and your left with the question wait whats the Mordor wall? Not to mention they never show them being warned by Saruman. Something else that bothered me too. In lord of the rings the impression you get is the Elves are a strong, disciplined race, and are not known for running away from Orcs. Yet in this film the Elf King tries to retreat.  I have to say too many strings left unfinished, too many questions not answered. This film reminded me of someone making a movie not to hold true to form but rather score a quick buck with what may be popular. Badly done plain and simple. This is again the opinion of one man.
1975706
Fairly predictable, but enjoyable action thriller.  Given the high level of talent for the supporting actors (Keira Knightley and Kevin Costner) I was disappointed the script  did not explore the other actors in more depth.  As with many Kenneth Branagh films, he did a fine job of keeping things on point while developing his character, but I felt the others suffered as a result.  But hey, its an action flick and it succeeded there.
1093394
It is a fun movie.  Impossible martial arts moves, sexy women, almost mythically strong Japanese swords, etc..  Forget the plot, just a simple story of sick individuals doing someone wrong.  The victim was originally one of the bad guys and ends up being cheered on while seeking revenge.  Happy ending as it should be in a fun, lose yourself, action movie.
1616203
After the great special effects laiden but terribly done remake of "Clash of the Titans", it was expected a sequel would come. Now with "Wrath of the Titans" it has, in this flick Perseus (Sam Worthington, "Man on a Ledge") is asked by his father Zeus (Liam Neeson, "Taken") to help the gods before Hades (Ralph Finnes, "Red Dragon") releases the Titans from the underworld and they along with their demonic leader Kronos can wage war on the earth and the heavens.

Thats about it for the story, the sets are lush and impressive, and much like "Clash" there's not a lot of good acting (which honestly isn't what people go to these movies for). A few other characters in the cast are Ares (Edgar Ramirez, "Vantage Point"), Agenor (Toby Kebbell, "Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time") and Queen Andromeda (The beautiful Rosamund Pike, "Die Another Day"). As we all know with these type of movies, the main focus is the action and special effects which are the only good parts of the film. The creatures are impressive especially Kronos but like the Krakken in "Clash" it makes a big splash but isn't on for long.

Of course if you don't turn your brain off before watching this you'll be bored 10 minutes in, sadly I did this and it still got boring. This should've been called "Wraith" not "Wrath" cause any tension, suspense or caring for the characters is as transparent as a Wraith. "Immortals" to me was a perfect example of how to do a swords/sorcery/gods themed movie, "Clash" missed the mark and "Wrath" does also. So "Wrath" is great to look at but just so hollow. *1/2 out of 4 stars.
609145
For starters, let me start this review by saying overall, it is a good movie. There are some pretty cool sequences in the film. The story is good. The acting is good. But when the cover states "Action Scenes Rival Raid 2", I would have to say this is a bit of false advertising. Any action movie fan knows the Raid and the Raid 2 are two of the best action movies in terms of the actual action. There are fight scenes and fight moves not seen in any other movies. That being said, while I watched No Tears for the Dead, I kept waiting to see a scene that compared to the Raid movies. By the end credits, I do not remember seeing any similarities.

Here is the plot and it may contain a few SPOILERS but I will try to be a little more vague. The star of the movie is a hitman who botched a job. He accidentally ended up killing someone he didn't intend to. This hits him very hard and he has a hard time recovering from this. To make things worse, his boss orders him to clean up his mess and this takes him to Seoul. He was born there but was raised in the United States. He was sent there to take care of his loose ends, but he ends up making a personal decision that now sets the wheels in motion for others to go to Seoul to now take care of THIS loose end. What happens next is a series of gunfights and a few unexpected plot twists.

The gunfights in this movie were done well. There were a few fist/knife fights that were also done well. But this film was a more Shoot'em Up type film than a film similar to the Raid or the Raid 2.  This movie had more emotion to it that the Raid. You could see remorse in the face of the star and anguish in the face of the female lead.

A few of the things that could have been better. People were almost indestructible in this film. If someone gets shot, it should take them a little time to recover and not just jump into the next scene. A few scenes, you think someone should have died yet they are able to recover.

Overall, I liked this movie. It had a dark overtone that a lot of Korean action movies have and the acting/action was good. I would have seen the movie based on seeing a preview of it, but was lured in by the "Action Scenes Rival the Raid 2" tagline on the box that is a bit misleading. Don't mention the Raid/Raid 2 if you are nothing like it.
4342800
Desolation is entertaining enough. Three hours is unnecessary, let alone three films, but that's greed for you. I like the cast, but too much silliness undercuts the story. Elves (Legs and Tauriel shouldn't even be there) can do such amazing, supernatural fighting moves it becomes a joke to watch. A visually and audibly grueling, one-hour long encounter w/Smaug wherein main characters jump  and duck the dragon over and over when Smaug, an ancient and wise being, could've easily smoked all of them in seconds. After the LOTR trilogy The Hobbit just seemed like an unneeded series that probably should have waited longer, had a new director and a new film location. I think Hollywood should've put The Hobbit out first, as is chronologically correct, because the series is so much like watching a football game well after one team has a huge lead over the other and there's no reason to watch anymore.
1414431
This movie has got to be one of THE slowest moving films I have ever seen.  It has more meaningful glances than The Lord of the Rings, which really is what takes up the majority of the time.  It was beautifully shot and has an interesting storyline, but also almost had me falling asleep.

Now, I certainly do not dislike movies where there is not copius action.  I loved Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and Girl with a Pearl Earring.  When the non action does nothing to develop the storyline, I have a problem.  There is not a lot of character development in this movie, despite how much time there is to do it.  I didn't really end up understanding or knowing the charcter of Sissi by the end.  Bodo was more well done because we ended up actually seeing more fragments of his past life.  With Sissi we only see her mother speaking to her once.

There is an air of mystique and magic around this film, and I do appreciate that.  It was beautiful and over all not bad.  I just did not feel that I ended up knowing the main character.  Because of the title, one could presume that there does not to be too much character development because these people are supposed to be archetypes, but with the way the storyline played out I felt that it was important.
1617115
Good action movie.  A few scenes could have done without, but most movies have a love scene, but this one didn't add to the movie.  Overall I'd watch again,