Not bad but not really an adaption of the book and too much filler

Rating: 7/10 (30 December 2013)

I'm really torn in two here with this movie. The fundamental mistake with The Hobbit trilogy is that it would have made an excellent single 3 hour movie; and therefore padding it out to three films has nothing to do with art and everything to do with money.
The 2nd film in the series, The Desolation of Smaug, has exactly the same faults as the first film. It's very good in spots, and then very stilted and overlong in other areas. A romance between a Dwarf and an Elf, which takes place here, merely serves to convince that Peter Jackson, having made vast amounts of cash from The Lord Of The Rings, cares little about the reaction of fans of Tolkien's work.
I was able to enjoy it because I put the book completely out of my mind, some cannot and I sympathise completely with their view - give it a 1 or a 3 or whatever if you wish - I won't argue. But THERE IS enough good stuff here to keep you interested. Biggest problem is each good idea is dragged out beyond all reason and flogged to death.
Tauriel is not a bad character in herself, but Tolkien purists are going to go all JAR JAR on her. Jackson's idea to get her romantically linked to one of the dwarfs is just jaw droppingly bad. If that's all you can come up with Peter it might have been better to just leave it out.
I liked Beorn and Mirkwood, which perhaps are dealt with too briefly, while Jackson frequently goes off on his flights of fancy which are nothing to do with the book. I also admired the Barrel Sequence, until it ran on too long, and ditto Smaug.
Ah, yes Smaug. Brilliantly realised, but the Erebor climax to the movie is way way too long. Might have been better to cut part of it (including the truly silly lighting of the furnaces) for an extended edition.
The movie is certainly better than a lot of other Hollywood product out there but the reasoning behind it is way too cynical. Still, better this than Avatar....