Change Your Image
MegaGothmog
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Thor: Ragnarok (2017)
Entertaining, and yet...
I saw this movie a few days ago. And i liked it enough to write a review. Although... i liked it, yet it also had some major flaws that need to be pointed out.
Tradition-wise... Good sides first:
The Acting: The acting is overall good, as we can expect from Marvel by now. They hardly ever get a serious miss-cast and they did not have it here either. The lines are good, the story is solid and the overall feeling of the movie is absolutely entertaining. Also newcomers like Cate Blancett (Hela) and Karl Urban (Skurge) were part of the world immediately.
CGI: Again a no-brainer with Marvel, yet i'd like to point it out anyway, mostly because it is heavily relying on CGI. We spend our entire movie either in Asgard or on other worlds, and practically no time on earth. A lot of blue-screen and CGI had to go into this for it to look even remotely good.
Story: The story on itself is not a bad one. Thor comes back from saving another day and finds out that Loki has taken Odin's throne (we knew that from The Dark World). But then Hela comes in and tries to claim Asgard for her own and banishes the brothers. Thor becomes a gladiator (somehow) and Loki is up to his usual mischief. Slightly predictable when it comes to characters and story, yet entertaining nonetheless.
Now for the bad sides... because every movie has those.
Acting: It is also listed as a good side, yet it has become predictable. The characters have lines that are their trademarks. Thor being bad-ass, Loki being mischievous again and all the characters are no different. We know it by now, and despite that it is part of their character... there is little new there. Although... that is not true, because:....
Jokes: .... they now have jokes. I have no idea where this came from, but the entire movie felt like a buddy-action-comedy. There was not the more serious Marvel feel that we had during Thor 1 or The Avengers. A few gags here and there, but still during a serious story. Now the one joke came after the other, with almost slap-stick like comedy. This is definitely the biggest thing that i do not like about this movie.
New characters like Jeff Goldblum's 'Grandmaster' were awkward as hell. I don't know why Marvel felt the need to do this, but it did not feel right. The only jokes that were worth it were the ones we saw during the trailers, but the rest were made by characters that had no real sense of humor before. And that was also the main reason why this felt so out of place. Thor was never the joking kind of guy... yet now he made about a dozen jokes. The characters felt almost re-written to suddenly, and inexplicably, be more funny. This was a definite misfire.
Overall it was an entertaining movie, but the joking around was almost cringe-worthy at times. It put a huge damper on the overall feeling of what a Marvel Movie should have. I like the movie... don't get me wrong.... but they should go back to the original, and more serious, mood of storytelling. 6.5
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016)
Expecto Samethingicus
I saw this movie a few nights ago and i found it enjoyable up to a certain degree. I like certain parts about it, and disliked other parts. As is tradition: Good sides first, bad sides later.
Good sides:
A fun new story: The story on itself was enjoyable enough. Newt Scamander arrives in New York with a briefcase full of the most outrageous and fantastic beasts known and unknown to man. But then... a few escape and he finds himself to be arrested for doing it on purpose. Dunn.. Dunn. DUUUNNNN
Rowling's Imagination: we are once again astounded by the fantasy that J.K. Rowling has to offer to us. The animals are as crazy and as adorable and as awesome and as cute as you can think of... and possibly even more so. It is truly fun and mind-blowing to see that she has made this world come alive and i agree with one of the muggles: "I know i'm dreaming, because i don't have the brain to make this up."
New lands to explore: We get to see a new side to the Wizarding World that JK has created, besides just seeing Hogwarts in England. This time it is New York and how the magic society works there.
Effects: The special effects and the animals that are there in the movie look truly amazing. The special Effects department did an amazing job to make everything look real.
Now for the bad parts, because it does have those too.
Same Things happen: I must say that despite the fun story, it was predictable. Main guy gets in trouble, the Ministry goes after him and only makes things worse. They react as you would expect. They don't trust the main character and say he is out of line when suggesting something even a little bit crazy... You live in a magic world! Nothing should be too crazy for you! We are also again confronted with problems that should not be there in the Magic World. You have an entire world in your suitcase? Why do you need a place to stay?
Same humor: I'm not sure if this is to blame on JK, or on the director David Yates, but we have the exact same feeling and scenes as the last 4 Harry Potter movies. The same type of acting, the same type of emotions (or lack thereof), the same type of awkward moments. It is the same thing again. There is little new in that regard. You watch the same movie, just a different setting and story.
Special Effects: It is also listed as a good thing, yet i'd also like to point out that the movie heavily relies on that. In the first few Harry Potter movies the special effects were only a part of it, not the backbone of the movie. That has changed now. The real 'magic feeling' is gone, so now the directors and producers need to make it look good for it to stay interesting.
All in all i liked the first time watching, but i must say that it will take a while before i will see it again. The awkward acting and the same type of pacing is difficult to enjoy after 30 minutes of the same.
There is no natural feeling to the movie. I felt like i was watching a scene-book. You don't watch an entire movie that is put together perfectly so that one scene flows over into the other. You're watching scene 1. Scene 2. Scene 3 and so on and so on.
6 i can give it. a 7 is a bit too much.
Captain America: Civil War (2016)
Very fun, but very flawed
OK... I saw this movie like half an hour ago, so this review is as fresh as your neighbours mowed lawn on a Saturday morning. Please keep in mind that i did not read the comics, and don't know a ton about the characters backstory, so i'll only review this based on the movies. A movie should be able to stand on its own.
As is custom with my reviews: good sides first.
It has proper acting: This is basically a no-brainer. Marvel always has good casting choices so even the new comer Spiderman (Tom Holland) did a pretty good job as a jolly kind of Spiderman. All of the characters do their jobs and give you a feeling like time is not even passing. Thumbs up.
Proper CGI: It is a Marvel movie so there will be tons of CGI, and it payed off quite nicely. Remember the third Hobbit movie? That moment when you saw the Elven army? HOLY CGI! That is not the case here. It all looks good, so i got nothing else to say here:) Thumbs up.
The Story is also nice: The movie has a nicely developed story-line, and with a few twists and turns along the way, made it very entertaining to watch. Again; thumbs up.
Now for the bad parts, cause the movie does have them.
The story is weirdly developing: I know i said that the story is nice, yet there are also moments that are weird. Characters jump into the action without any previous knowledge about said characters, and they seem to change their opinions about each other very quickly. There is little consistency in a bunch of characters when looking at their opinions.
Plots seem to disappear: There are several plot moments that just seem to vanish in the background because other stuff is happening. Someone stole a deadly virus, and we'll never hear from it again after 10 minutes.... What? What happened there? (Also, very quickly, there are more references to The Avengers movies. Like Marvel really needs to remind us about those movies that were already shoved down our throats)
Characters jump in suddenly: We get to see a new character: Black Panther (Chadwick Boseman), but where did he come from? Honestly he just shows up and everyone is like; "Ok... new character. Welcome to the club." Who is this guy? What do we know of him? What are his powers? Does he have powers? I want to know Marvel! Don't keep me in the dark here!
No consistency: We have seen how Cap' can hold his own against Iron Man, but in this movie he gets tossed around by characters who (as far as we know) have no special powers. There is also this moment when he runs past cars on a freeway, so like 50ish mph. But that happens only once. Later, when speed is needed, he just runs like a normal person... He couldn't run any faster? Whas there a speed limit now?
These and more moments make the movie very flawed, but i'll never say it wasn't entertaining. But i guess that is what Marvel does. It is always very entertaining, but when you search for the logic, you can just keep searching...
Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials (2015)
A feel-good Running man movie
I watched it like, 20 minutes ago, so this review is as fresh as i can make it :) To say it very short: It was a feel-good movie, that should have been given a different name.
As is traditional with my reviews, i'll start with the good sides of the movie.
The movie took little to no time to develop. Within the first 10 minutes stuff already goes down. Within 15 minutes, sh*t has already hit the fan. So you don't need to wait for stuff to get interesting.
There were a lot of moments that were really cool. Those feel-good moments, where you can sit there and think: "Ah that was cool!" "WOW did you see that?" "Oh man, that character was bad-ass there!" Those kind of moments. There were plenty of them so unless you have no feeling of suspense, you won't walk out of the theater without anything to remember.
The acting overall was also pretty nice. Oscar-worthy? No, hell no. But it was good nonetheless. The one actor/actress did it better than the other but i cannot complain.
The visual effects and make-up all looked pretty darn good so you are also in for a visual ride. Everything did look like 50-shades of brown, but since the whole movie takes place in a desert-like environment, you can't really argue with that.
Now for the bad parts. I'll try to keep everything a secret and not reveal anything.
There were too many moments that were basically the same: They go to this place, find out stuff is bad, and have to run. And this goes on 6 times in a row. Why do they call it the Scorch Trials? Call it the Running Men.
As i said before, there are a lot of feel-good moments in the film. But in between those moments, there is not a whole lot to see. This film basically thrives on those moments and tries to keep the scenes between those moments as short as possible.
Since the movie takes no time to develop, there is little to no introduction of characters. Aidan Gillen (Janson) (and Petyr Balish from GoT) has a pretty impact-full role, but gets a 2 minute intro and that is it.
There were also plenty of moments where i thought: "Seriously? Are you kidding?" "Wait what? Do they even....?" I cannot say what those moments exactly were, so sorry for that, but there were plenty of those moments, and unless you are not paying attention, you WILL notice them.
All in all, the movie was entertaining, but very flawed. As i now say for the 6th time, there were a lot of feel-good moments, but also plenty of weird moments, weird choices the characters make, and once again: Thomas is the most important character of them all, and only he can save the day. SERIOUSLY? Why can't this other dude do something? Isn't it so that Thomas is not the only one in the team? Ah, screw it. I'll watch Vikings again.
In total i can give it a 6.5, maybe a 7, but no more than that. I have no idea if the book is any better, so don't judge me for that :)
The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 2 (2012)
There are two types of reviews for this movie. I'll try to be the third one.
OK. I know this movie came out years ago and people still love it, or hate it. The reason why i post this review anyways is because it was on TV and i thought: "What the hell, why not. Lets check". I am not a Twilight fan, or a mindless hater, so i'll try to be as neutral as possible.
Lets start with the good sides, because i'll be lying if i said that the movie doesn't have those. The story on it self (this includes part 1) is good to follow, even if you didn't see the previous movies. I could understand everything without issues, and i'll confess; The story was not as horrific as people made me believe.
There are also a few actors in the movie that seem to know what they are doing. Not all of them but there are a few that are not bad.
That is all i could think of when it comes to the good side of the movie. Now lets go for the bad part, so please ladies and gentlemen. 'Fasten your seat-belts.'
The general acting is nothing near immersive. With the main characters like Bella (Kristen Stewart), Edward (Robert Pattinson) and Jacob (Taylor Lautner) i got used to their way of acting. It is not very exiting to see them act, because they have a very passive way of acting. They don't shine on screen, and if they show major emotions, it is only for a few seconds. As for the other characters? Every time they introduced a new character, they seemed weird and a bit... 'over the top'? No... out of place? Yea. something like that.
Lets also dive into the lore of Vampires and Werewolves. I HATE THE VAMPIRES AND WEREWOLVES IN THIS SAGA!!!!!! So, now that i released that, lets explain. The vampires in (almost) every other story have the 3 basics: Sucking Blood (or else they die), Deathly vulnerable to sunlight, and have enhanced abilities like speed and strength. The vampires here only have the enhanced abilities, but they kind of need blood, but animal blood will do just fine. So why are they a threat to humans if they can feed on your cat just fine????? Also they are not weak to sunlight, but sparkle in them. THEY!!! FREAKING!!!! SPARKLEEEEE!!!!. I am sure that Bram Stoker is spinning in his grave and Dracula just committed suicide. The vampires also seem to have a random grab-bag of powers that make no sense in any way, and are not related to Vampires at all. This dude can control the four elements? What is this? Avatar? Someone else can generate lightning in her fingers? ehhh... right? Needless to say, these guys suck. And with that i mean ass, and not blood.
The Werewolves are also dumb and can transform into... a normal wolf form. Just a bit bigger. Whenever and wherever they like! This is not a Werewolf, but an Animagus from Harry Potter. Also they are in full control, do not go into a feral rage and do not need the full moon, or the moon for that matter.
The CGI in the movie looks weird and amateurish. Especially the running of the vampires. They just look like they are played in fast- fore-ward.
They story also has incredible weird and even disturbing moments. Given the fact that a Vampire (whose body is actually dead) has sex with a human. Therefore: Necrophilia. Also a Werewolf guy gets over his childhood crush by instead falling in love... with her creepy, CGI baby, while excusing it as 'Imprinting and he cannot control that'. Ugghh, this takes underage romances to a whole new low.
With all of that i think it is safe for me to say that i will never watch this movie again. It was not as horrific as i feared, i did not have to puke every time during the commercial-brake, and i did not throw it out. But the movie stays incredibly bad, with terrible lore, acting, CGI, romances and basically everything that makes a movie bad. Now please excuse me, while i play Castlevania. I really need to see a real Vampire.
Jupiter Ascending (2015)
The cool visuals are the only redemption.
OK, how do I put this? In short the movie had great visual effects and everything looked so real. But that is the only redeeming thing about this movie. The story is kinda meh, and the characters are not very interesting.
Let me start with the visuals. THEY ARE AMAZING!! Everything, from earth to Jupiter (the planet, not the girl), from the buildings to the environment, everything looked amazing. The high-tech toys that the characters were using did not seem unrealistic, but more like stuff that we could buy in 2050. I am waiting for that. Every last detail about the buildings, clothes, jewelry, plants and planets is there. It was one hell of a visual experience.
But now for the bad part. The story seemed kinda weird. Jupiter Jones (Mila Kunis) finds out that Humans are not the only ones in the universe, and that she is actually some reborn queen from another planet. It was explained but it went really fast. They should have explained it a bit more. She is this uncertain protagonist that is kinda being dragged from one situation to another.
The characters are also kinda bland and cliché. She is always super uncertain with what everybody says and just goes with it. Caine Wise (Channing Tatum) is this ?werewolf? hunk who lost his wings (Werewolfs have wings? Apparently yes) and slowly falls in love with Jupiter (the girl, not the planet). Sean Bean also makes an appearance but had so little to do with the plot, except for explaining 3 things, that he is not really needed. I guess Sean needed a paycheck. Also the main bad guy, Balem (Eddie Redmayne) is the weirdest bad guy i have seen in a long time. I think he tries to pull of a Voldemort like attitude, but it is not working. He whispers all his lines, with 2 yells, and that just seems weird and makes him difficult to understand. He doesn't look intimidating or scary, just really really tired.
In total it is kinda a one-time only movie. I watched it once and I don't think I'll watch it again. The amazing visuals are not enough to safe this movie.
Middle-Earth: Shadow of Mordor (2014)
Un-lorefriendly, an AC rip-off, but it has its charm
I finished the game recently, and I do have to say that it was a game that you can enjoy.
When we saw the trailer, many of us already say the mechanics, and the climbing from Assassins Creed, and we were not wrong. The climbing, sneaking, distracting and fighting are a complete copy of the AC games. We even have bushes to hide in, stealth-take-downs from above and below, and that convenient counter-button. Thank goodness I know the AC series, that helped me get the hang of the game.
The game has it's lore-friendly moments. As a Middle Earth fan I know too much about the world and lore of Middle Earth so there were plenty of moments where i smiled all smug-like because I knew this detail, this artifact, this piece of back-story etc. On the other hand (and that hand is quite big), there are a lot, as in a lot, of moments that are not lore-friendly at all. I prefer not to give any spoilers, so i can't get into that too much. But prepare for some major flaws in the Middle Earth universe when you play this game.
There are also good points about the game. For one is the fact that it stays difficult. It is always fun to mow down 200 enemies with ease, but you always feel overpowered. Not with this game. Sure, at the end you are powerful enough to take down any enemy, but prepare to run when you fight 15 or more. Also the fighting mechanics are fast, and you need to pay attention if you don't want to die. No longer that single-button spam. The fights will keep you on your toes. The cut-scenes are also beautiful, and the environment looks amazing. The effects are nicely done and overall the game just looks really good. At least as good as AC IV.
If you are thinking about buying the game, think twice before you do it. If you are a Middle Earth fan like me, you will cringe a few times because of un-lorefrienly moments, but all in all it is a game that I can play without throwing it out.
Lucy (2014)
Began good, became amazing, then took a free fall.
I watched this movie a couple of weeks ago, and i was really excited to see it. I saw the trailer and it looked really promising.
The first part of the movie was really entertaining, made sense and was pretty exciting. There was action, there was emotion and there was complexity. Lucy was caught in a drug deal where the drugs were implanted in her lower belly. She then was caught by some Asian dudes (how they got her is not explained) who then beat her up. The bag of drugs tore and the drugs were released in her bloodstream and she slowly developed powers beyond that of normal humans. So far the story as we have seen it in the trailer.
After that it became really good. More action, more back-story and explanations and more complications. I don't want to give too much away but lets just say that the story developed in a reasonable way and everything still made sense (sort of).
But after that, in the last 20 minutes of the movie it became ridiculous. The whole story got stuck way to far up it's own ass by the time Lucy reached 95% of her brain capacity. Things became just impossible, unexplainable and just straight up dumb. Again i don't want to give to much away, but the story began to defy every law of nature and even time itself.
Overall i found this movie entertaining, that is until the last 20 minutes. Check it if you are into this type of story but be prepared for the weirdest ending since the movie adaptation of The Last Airbender.
The Last Airbender (2010)
Worst Cartoon-adaptation Ever!!!
I know that there are already tons of reviews about this movie, but i can't resist to give you another one. I'd never thought I'd say this, but: Believe the critics!
What is wrong with this movie? Everything! The acting is bad, the CGI looks like crap (and with the 3D it looks even worse), the characters are just weird adaptations from the originals, the bending is painful and the pacing is just disturbing.
Lets start with the acting. I am not an actor or director, but even I can see that the acting is horrific. The delivery seems forced all the time and there is no emotion in it, and even if there is it is the wrong kind of emotion.
The CGI looks terrible: The animals look weird, especially Appa, and it makes the bending look ten times worse than it already is. Given the fact that it was shot in 3D, I am still surprised I didn't get a headache.
The characters are terribly portrayed. Aang had nothing of his childishness or innocence. Katara had nothing of her motherness, Sokka nothing of his wackiness. Zuko nothing of his anger (which is pretty much Zuko's trademark) or passion. Iroh had nothing of his wisdom or humor and the rest of the characters looked like they didn't even belong there. All the lines are just weird and seemed forced, had no emotion and didn't fit at all.
Given the fact that this is Avatar: The Last Airbender, where people can bend the elements; Water, Fire, Earth and Air, you'd expect some good bending with good moves. Forget it. All the moves make no sense, it is a lot of jumping around for no reason: Punch, turn around, punch twice, do a back flip, press x,x, square, and triangle twice aannddd..... a small fireball is the result.
I can understand that you cannot punt twenty episodes of back story in 1 movie, but come on. This was just ridicules. If they tried, the could have made this into a trilogy like Lord of the Rings. 3 hours = 1 book. Every episode is twenty minutes long, so in a 3 hour movie you can fit like 9 episodes. On the other hand I am glad they didn't make it longer. It would have been even worse
I have no idea what the director was thinking, but it was nothing good. If you still haven't seen it, don't watch it. Unless you want a huge disappointment, or you want to see for yourself if the reviews are correct, stay away from this. It saves you 2 hours of your time and some money.
The Legend of Hercules (2014)
No. Just no.
I'll jump right in; I didn't know what to expect, but I got disappointed anyway.
The first 2-3 minutes were pretty good. I got my hopes up when I saw how cool it looked, how good the fighting was and the actors looked like the knew what they were doing. Then the movie just went down hill from that.
Hercules is played by another really handsome man (I'm not gay) with huge muscles... and that is pretty much it. Hercules is know for his incredible strength but we don't see any of that. He just looks jacked with a pretty face. The acting overall was not horrific, but nowhere near good. I do have to say that King Amphitryon (Scott Adkins) was doing a better job than the rest and I couldn't help myself but hoping he would win. The CGI looked good on moments, but the next shot it looked just weird an amateurish. I don't really know what everyone was thinking with this movie but in total it was just meh.
I watched this movie once, and by all indications, I like to keep it that way. You can check it out if you want, but don't expect too much.
Why can't Hollywood just make a movie out of Hercules' 12 Labours.
Red Riding Hood (2011)
Honest Review: Call it cliché, but it's fun.
You can hate the sh*t out of this movie, or you can love it. Personally, I enjoyed watching it, and I'm in for a second time.
It is a new version of the story of Red Riding Hood. It is not the traditional one, but an alternative. Does that ruin the movie and spoil the story? No, not at all.
There are totally points in the movie that are cliché, far-fetched or just dull, but in total, it is a movie that is, by far, better than any of the critics claim. The acting overall is not that great, with exception of Amanda Seyfried and Gary Oldman, but not terrible.
You can say it has the same type of romance as Twilight, but this is much better and not near as much swooning and staring. It does have a (sort of) love-triangle but, this one makes sense.
The special effects, are pretty good, the story is solid, the acting could have been better, but all in all it is a movie that you can watch without falling asleep.
King Kong (2005)
Long, but truly amazing
I saw this movie last night, and I loved it. Sure it was a very long movie, some scenes were not needed, some characters were very close for reasons never explained, but if you like action/adventure movies, you will be glued to your seat.
We all know Peter Jackson's eye for detail and perfection. Which is good, though sometimes (as we all know) he can get carried away and make the movie way longer than it needs to be. The same is with this movie. There are scenes in it that are way longer than they should be, or just not needed to see at all. With some scenes I was thinking: "Yea, yea. They are chased, they escape, 1 or 2 die. I get it." You can sort of fast-foreward through these scenes if you want. But you don't want to because: The visual effects are just mind-blowing. Everything looks so incredibly real that, as a fantasy/adventure fan, time for me just stopped and I was just bound to the screen. King Kong is a gorilla, and he really looks and acts like a gorilla. Not like a half human half animal like you can expect, but like a real gorilla, just bigger.
There are scenes that you will hate, there are scenes that you will love. There are scenes that will send shivers down your spine. There are scenes that are scary. There are scenes that are amazing. There are scenes that you want to forget. There are scenes that you want to remember for the rest of your life. There are scenes that will take your breath away, and there are scenes that will make young adults crie like little babies.
I know that people can complain about the characters and the actors, but I don't really want to say anything about them. Why? Because I am not an actor or director, so I have no idea what I am talking about. But my personal opinion is that all the actors, including the extras that you see for 2 seconds, gave it their best, and did an amazing job. Only the ending (The final 5 to 10 seconds) were kind of weird. That was the only thing about the movie that seemed forced. But everything else was something I just can't complain about.
As for the length of the movie? Yes it is long, yes it can be much shorter and yes, sometimes less is more. With this movie the length is the only thing that you will complain about. If you see this movie for the first time, you will never look at your watch, or clock. After the first time, the length does indeed become a pain, but if that is the price I have to pay for an amazing film... Then so be it.
RuneScape (2001)
A really entertaining game that surpasses COD and BF with ease
Let me say this straight of the bat. I can understand that people don't really like this game because it has: -no story, -bad graphics, -no character development, etc. and I can agree on that. But that is not the point of this game. With these games, you'll have to look past what the game doesn't have, but look at what it does have, which is a list that can go on for quite a while.
This is one of the few games that you can play, with ease, for free, and with endless hours of game-play.
First off, With ease: You can make your own account any time you want, and with no strings attached. Just file in the user-name, password, and a handful of other standard things, and you are good to go. With games like BattleField, you need a special EA account, Keycode and who knows what more. With Runescape it's just, Register, Fill in the blanks, and go! Easy cheesy
For Free: You don't need to pay for Runescape if you don't want to. You can become a Member anytime you want, but even without it you have dozens of hours of game-play completely free. You can explore, fight, train and do almost anything you want. In comparison: COD games drop you in the game, and you need to follow the story, whether you like it or not. Runescape offers you full freedom in every way.
Endless Hours of Gameplay: Let's say you have a full membership account. Here are the things you can do: Train 26 different skills, That range from attack and defense, to magic and cooking, to summoning and farming. By the time you have a lvl 100 in all skills, you are three years ahead. In comparison: that is every COD and BF game that exist, played 20.000 times. You have almost 200 quests, from helping the Cook to get some flower, an egg and milk, to slaying a lvl 100 dragon. There is always a quest for everyone.
This only gives a short summary of Runescape. If I were to explain everything, I might as well give you a ten page essay. And you may think that I am some nerd who is getting nerdgasms over a game, don't worry, I just know what game is worth the money, and I can look past the bad graphics and flimsy storyline. I mean, we played the 2D Mario Game for days, with only the mission to rescue a princess.
Now please excuse me, I have to defeat this lvl 120 fire demon. This guy is tricky...
The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)
Amazing movie and loved it. HOWEVER....
Let me say this straight off; I loved it! it was action packed, the story kept going and it didn't take too long to develop.
However, being a Middle Earth fan I loved the story (Spoilers ahead!) and Peter Jackson altered the story on a lot of points.
1: I liked that they added Tauriel. She is a fierce character and fun to watch, but then the sort of romance between her and Kili is something that I didn't like that much.
2: The orc attacks on the elves and Laketown. It makes everything a bit more interesting and gives some more tension. On the other hand there is no mention of any attack on the elves, nor Laketown.
3: Dwarfs fighting Smaug. It was epic to watch and truly thrilling, but in the books, the dwarfs don't even see Smaug. Now they have this entire fight with him was something that I kind of disliked later on.
4: Beorn. In the books he is described as a big, black-haired man. So i expected a Hagrid-sort-of-guy. It was a surprise to see him like he is now but it is still fun to watch.
The extra story with Gandalf and Radagast was something i did enjoy. It is not mentioned in the books, but it is there. Peter Jackson did look it up in the appendices and it all fits.
Despite that they altered the story (for the better or worse is up to you) on many points, I truly loved the movie and I will surely watch it again. It is a movie that goes fast enough to keep paying attention and you'll keep sitting on the edge of your seat.