In response to your last question, FK, the Council did not realize that Sauron and the Necromancer were the same person until he had basically left Dol Guldur. I'm thinking that they will use the description of Galadriel's tearing the place down from the Appendices of LotR (which took place during LotR while the other big battles were raging) and put it here, which is fine by me as I'd like to see that on screen, but they have generally moved the Dol Guldur plotline faster than the books have it in order to set up the Hobbit trilogy as a sure-enough prequel to the LotR trilogy of films.

About the trailer:

Overall, I like this trailer more than the previous one. Far less silly stuff.

Underall, I'm still disappointed with everything but the set dressings, cast and costumes, and score.

I saw the final movie last night. The first watching was pretty impressive, especially as a lot of smaller plot items were unknowns. Overall a big production, with the team giving its finale in Middle Earth.
(It was big and loud, but there is no way a cute kiddie-friendly version could have competed in the modern movie world)
I am not doing spoilers but I was satisfied, and did enjoy most of it, and am not disappointed. It does encourage me to re-read the Appendices to LOTR.

Cool, coracle!

So, is anyone else going to see TBotFA this week? Opening day is tomorrow here in North America. We may see it this weekend. I'm not exactly jumping up-and-down with anticipation (the polar opposite to awaiting the release of The Return of the King in Dec/03!), but we will see it once, at least, in the theatre. To be honest, I guess I am rather more apprehensive, than anything.

I saw TBotFA on Tuesday evening (I can't believe we got a major film in the UK before the US! ) I enjoyed it - it was long, but didn't feel it. I liked it better than TDoS. I felt it expanded upon the original story, rather than departed from it and did its own thing as TDoS did.

Well, I just got back from The Hobbit: King Under the Mountain.

Wait, it was called something a lot longer and with too many "the"s in it, wasn't it?

Initial impression: a superior film to the first two, and a vast disappointment.

I'm still trying to figure out exactly what I think of it.

I just found (on a Tolkien board) a link to a real gem:
The Telegraph has reprinted an interview with JRR Tolkien originally published March 22, 1968.
JRR Tolkien: ‘Film my books? It's easier to film The Odyssey’

Tolkien receives innumerable offers for film rights, musical-comedy rights, TV rights, puppetry rights. A jigsaw-puzzle company has asked permission to produce a Ring puzzle, a soap-maker to soap-sculpt Ring characters. Tolkien worshippers are outraged by these crass approaches. “Please,” wrote a 17-year-old girl, “don’t let them make a movie out of your Ring. It would be like putting Disneyland into the Grand Canyon.”

He feels strongly that the Ring should not be filmed: “You can’t cramp narrative into dramatic form. It would be easier to film The Odyssey. Much less happens in it. Only a few storms.”

(In the end he did sell the film rights to The Hobbit and LotR, though [not to the then unpublished Silmarillion] - he felt he needed the money.)

About God's place in Middle-earth:

Some people have criticised the Ring as lacking religion. Tolkien denies this: “Of course God is in The Lord of the Rings. The period was pre-Christian, but it was a monotheistic world.”
Monotheistic? Then who was the One God of Middle-earth?
Tolkien was taken aback: “The one, of course! The book is about the world that God created – the actual world of this planet.”

The electronic reprint also includes some BBC footage about Tolkien, including Tolkien watching fireworks while somebody reads from the chapter about Bilbo's birthday party

Well, now that I managed to see TBotFA last night, I came to read everyone's comments. I was trying to stay as spoiler free as possible -- and was also very busy with the school semester -- so I tried to stay away from a lot of marketing for The Hobbit.

I think it's safe to say that as 'The Epic Prequel to The Lord of the Rings' (just a title I somewhat sarcastically coined), it did a good job. For example, I was really intrigued by what they did with Saruman. It's an excellent piece of foreshadowing -- not too blatant, not too subtle. However, the movie isn't always so subtle with its foreshadowing. Keeping these changes, I may have to watch FotR again...

A second of the many problems I have with the Dol Goldur scene was
I should also mention something I liked about this film. I thought Richard Armitage was amazing as Thorin. He excellently portrayed I thought it was superb acting on Armitage's part.

As for the very ending...

I've paid scant attention to this thread - in fact Christmas has kept me rather busy, especially as I haven't been all that well, having had really painful difficulties with losing some use of my left arm.

But yesterday, being Boxing Day, I attended the release of the last episode of The Hobbit - the Battle of the Five Armies. Actually, I thought it was an improvement on the first two episodes. Some things I liked and disliked:

I liked the use of the same actors and actresses throughout both The Hobbit and LOTR, though the new cast members and characters, like Martin Freeman as Bilbo, Smaug, Thorin & Bard were good. Cate Blanchette, who is an internationally famous actress, apart from her role as Galadriel in this film, lives a busy lifestyle in Sydney, as a normal mother, who does routine things, like daily taking her three sons to their school etc. Recently in a newspaper interview, she complained about some mothers at her sons' school who sound uncommonly like the sorts you might get in the Harper Valley PTA song. According to them, it seems, Cate Blanchette doesn't dress tidily enough, or help enough with the school. Whilst looking at Galadriel's depiction in this movie, I couldn't help thinking - Go Cate. Those criticizing mothers can "suck it up" for want of a better expression.

I saw Hobbit 3 with my family today. I liked it better than DoS but not as well as the first one.

Likes:

Dislikes:

Confusion:

I could say a lot more but that is enough for now.

Finally got to see it myself as well.

So, my initial reaction is to BoFA is "I want to go read the book now."

The Good
The background and corner of the eye stuff is stunning. Like, I'd pay money for Middle-Earth the Travelogue.

Pretty horses! Pretty elves! You can send me Thranduil's wardrobe ASAP.

Dialogue lifted from the book!

The Bad
Who is this movie about again??? Is there a hobbit in here somewhere? Oooh, elves! Men! ...were we supposed to mention dwarves? ...and a hobbit? Nah, elves! (Alas, poor Bilbo. Did you even get a fourteenth share in the movie?)

The Ugly
The battle:

Without prior knowledge of the story would this have made as much sense as it did? It wasn't an utter reject but it was not a good fan-fic version...

Now that The Hobbit trilogy of films has been completed, I plan to watch the whole six films from beginning to end, when Bo5A comes out on DVD, besides re-reading the books. One other thing I would love to do is to visit New Zealand, itself, again, shown in all the films so beautifully in its alter ego as Middle Earth. There should be Oscars for best supporting countries.

I finally got around to viewing the newest installment this weekend so I can read this thread. I'm in agreement with much of what has been said.

So, my initial reaction is to BoFA is "I want to go read the book now."

Exactly!

I liked it better than the second movie. We joked that we expected extensive fight scenes given the title of the movie. A few things that stuck out to me:

Bard:

Trying too hard to tie it into the LOTR story/movies. For example,

I didn't mind Tauriel too much as an additional character but was occasionally distracted when the way she said or did something reminded me of her Kate character in LOST.

There was a lot to like, such as the auction of Bilbo's stuff and the pictures over the end credits (as well as Billy Boyd's solo there).