Konyicska-Székely Ágota

Review: 'The Hobbit: The Desolation Of Smaug' Is Better Without Being Good

             The article I have found on the Forbes magazine's website is a critical review of the second part of the Hobbit trilogy, The Desolation of Smaug, written by the film critic, Scott Mendelson. The article was written in December 2013, after the release of the second film. The first part of the article deals with the budget of the film, and the second part focuses on the critical review. In this evaluation, I will analyze the second part, the critical review. The main aim of the review is to reveal the weak points of The Desolation Of Smaug. Mendelson tries to convince the reader that this movie is not more than a story without content.

             To support this opinion, he presents three key arguments which are supported by interesting examples and illustrations. According to the critic, the second film is technically better, but not superior to the first one. The first argument claims that The Desolation Of Smaug is painfully weak in plotting and writing because it lacks character development and has no real characters. Through the movies the characters are the same, without any development in personality. He compares the film with The Lord of the Rings trilogy, to prove his opinion. Mendelson claims that the only real character is the new character, Tauriel, but the film unfortunately involves her in a love triangle.

          The second argument states that the story is just an empty spectacle, a two and a half hour movie without any progression. He claims that the story is filled with padding, narrative strands and pointless characters just to fill up time. This argument is well supported, as the film itself is extremely long, if we take into consideration that The Lord of the Rings is made from three books, yet this trilogy will be made from a 320-page book.

            Thirdly, Mendelson's last argument claims that the film is just a fantasy with special elements and effects, created for those who desire to see stunning visual effects without a meaningful story in a fantasy setting. The author admits that the action scenes are interesting, but compares the film to Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, arguing that visual effects do not make a story good.

            To conclude with, Mendelson's arguments are well structured and supported, but the examples he brings are sometimes too extreme or off the topic. The ideas are not always logically structured, but I think that this type of criticism does not require a strict structure. The tone is ironic and sometimes funny, which makes the article interesting, even if the reader does not agree. My opinion differs from the author's opinion, but the article made me think, and I realized that Mendelson is right in many points. The Desolation Of Smaug is truly just a long movie with outstanding visual effects, lacking many elements which are necessary to create a meaningful story.

The article can be retrieved from : 
http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2013/12/09/review-the-hobbit-the-desolation-of-smaug-is-better-without-being-good/