The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug review

Dragons can be be pretty damn greedy sometimes. How about some gold for the rest of us Smaug?

About a year ago, the much anticipated film, Peter Jackson's The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey was released. Although I vastly enjoyed the first installment in the Hobbit movies, it was met with fairly mixed critical reception. That was quite a surprise considering the massive critical praise (and numerous awards) for Jackson's Lord of the Ring's movies. Just reminding you, I had very little problems with the first Hobbit movie. It wasn't up to par with the Lord of the Ring's films, but it was pretty good. With the newest Hobbit movie, I think it's safe to say Peter Jackson is back on his A game. Sure, it may not be Return of the King, but it's still pretty awesome. This time around, Bilbo Baggins and The Dwarves (Is that a band name?) continue their unexpected journey of trying to reclaim The Lonely Mountain where the dwarves once resided until it was taken over by Smaug the dragon. Meanwhile, Gandalf the Grey goes off to find out more about the mysteriously evil being called The Necromancer. First off let me say, this is a much more exciting and well done film than the first. That's coming from a guy who liked the first. Pretty much everything about it is better. I saw this in 3D. I've only seen a few movies in my lifetime, like Gravity and Avatar, that have been worth seeing in 3D. The Desolation of Smaug is one of those movies. The big sweeping shots of these beautifully CGI-ed fantasy landscapes really pop with the 3D. It makes the whole thing seem so real and exciting. That's another great thing about the film everything seems very wonderful and fantasy-like, yet I was so drawn into the story and visuals that I didn't notice the preposterously fantastical element of it all. I was there with Bilbo, trying to run away from Smaug. I was with Gandalf and Radagast, climbing up and old enchanted fortress. It all is so enthralling. Not to say the movie doesn't have it's problems. I thought the CGI in the beginning was a little shoddy and strange looking, but it only increased in quality after that. A whole lot of people were complaining about the film's three hour running time. First of all, it's only about two hours and forty minutes. Second, with the fast moving and exciting plot plus Jackson's nice direction, i barely noticed the time pass. Some movies, I'll use Lincoln as an example, make their running time feel stretched out ten fold. It feels like you can barely sit through it! The Hobbit make it's running time feel necessary. I don't think this movie'd be the same if it was shorter. I think the three hours are all used to their full extent. The actors aren't really the showcase here, but they do a good job. Martin Freeman, (coming off a nice turn in The World's End) plays his courageous and small hobbit quite well and Ian McKellen is good as always as the wise wizard, Gandalf the Grey. Benedict Cumberbatch does some deliciously evil voice over work for both Smaug and The Necromancer. Luke Evans shows up for a bit as some guy named Bard. He really didn't do anything that he hasn't done in any of those crappy period flicks he's been in recently (The Raven? Ugh.). Orlando Bloom comes back as the very awesome Legolas. I know Bloom can act, but he doesn't really show it here. He's not bad, but he's not great either. He does kick some serious Orc ass though. Most middle-of-the-trilogy films almost always falter and almost never live up to the first one. The second installment in The Hobbit trilogy completely the first in so many ways. Overall, The Desolation of Smaug is an exciting and entertaining film that I can definitely recommend. In a season of movies trying too hard for Oscars, it's good to have a well made blockbuster like this to break everything up. I give The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug 4.1 out of 5 stars. Happy Viewing! As always, you can follow me on Twitter @WhitsMovies and like me on Facebook at Facebook.com/WhitsMovies. 

12 Years a Slave review

This film is directed by Steve McQueen. The art house director, not "The King of Cool". Just wanted to clear that up.

I've heard a lot of people call 12 Years a Slave 'the best movie they never want to see again'. I couldn't disagree more. While 12 Years a Slave is a damn good film, I would love to see it again. Many people are saying how gruesome and visceral it is. It was hard to watch at parts, sure. Yet, I feel like multiple viewings would be helpful in getting a truly full experience from the movie. All the terrific performances and techniques the movie has are just too good not to see again. Some movies, like Lincoln for example, were very well done, yet so incredibly boring that I wouldn't want to sit through it again. 12 Years a Slave isn't boring. I know the reason people wouldn't want to see it again is because of how sad and violent it is. Even so, I'd still want to recreate the incredible experience it was to see this film again. The movie is really gritty and bloody. but that's how it should be. A movie about the horror's of slavery shouldn't be sugar coated and censored. Therefore the sheer bloodiness of the film is unfortunately necessary. I hope the academy doesn't snub McQueen with a Best Director nod like they did with Kathryn Bigelow and Quentin Tarantino last year for the subject matter of their movies. 12 Years a Slave is well acted, directed, and shows an unbelievable true story for what it is: a tale of survival and horror. It's not Hollywood-ized or made into some heroic adventure tale. Yeah, it's heartbreaking and sometimes very painful to watch, but it works. I think it's safe to say 12 Years a Slave is one of the better films of the year. Solomon Northup (Chiwetel Ejiofor) is a well-to-do free black man with a nice family living in Saratoga, New York. One day, he is kidnapped and sold into slavery. His past life is stripped away and everything that once mattered to him is seemingly forgotten. Even his name is changed. He is first a slave under the kind Master Ford (Benedict Cumberbatch). Unfortunately, Ford's second in charge, named Tibeats (Paul Dano), is quite cruel and hates Solomon right away. A series of brutal events leads Solomon to serve under the crueler and angrier Master Edwin Epps (Micheal Fassbender). There, he is worked hard and beaten. Northup's will is put to the test. At Epps' plantation is where he spends most of his time in the film. Solomon's fantastic skill of playing the violin is of some help, but he is still targeted by Epps and his wife. Some of the most depressing and harsh moments take place in this point of the movie. As harsh as they were, they were necessary in making the movie as realistic and gritty as it is. I can't stress that enough. As I said before, the performances are terrific. The best being form Chiwetel Ejiofor and Micheal Fassbender. I feel like Benedict Cumberbatch and Brad Pitt could have given some truly memorable portrayals here, but they are only given a very small amount of screen time. I have no doubt whatsoever that Ejiofor will get a Best Actor nomination and I hope Fassbender will get a Supporting nod. The acting, while good, isn't the only good part of the film. McQueen does a great directing job here. Regretfully, I haven't seen Shame or Hunger (yet!) but I already know he will go on to be one of the great directors of our time. 12 Years a Slave is filmed with a certain character-based realism that almost made me believe I was there. At the end there's a close up shot of Ejiofor's face with the background blurred out. The rack-focus close up technique ,especially used with Chiwetel Ejiofor, just shows how worn out and weary the once free man was. It's powerful stuff. I was expecting 12 Years a Slave to be a pretentious over-hyped bore. It wasn't any of that. As much as I loved Prisoners, I think '12 Years' tops it as Best Movie of the Year So Far. Believe the hype. 12 Years a Slave is damn good. I give 12 Years a Slave 5 out of 5 stars. You can follow me on Twitter @WhitsMovies and like me on Facebook at Facebook.com/WhitsMovies.