User Reviews

In my previous reviews of the Hobbit trilogy, I said that as we go further into the trilogy, the quality of movies decreases; and it's right; The Battle of Five Armies has the lowest rating in my opinion among the movies. Why? I can think of a couple of reasons. But the most obvious would be that in BOFA, it's really clear that they stretched what easily should have been a two parts story into a third one. I mean, Desolation of Smaug obviously had padding too, but I really felt it in BOFA. Another thing would be the pacing. The pacing in BOFA is rather slow until almost halfway into the movie. There is one or two exciting sequences (one of which is my highlight of this movie), but in terms of the main plot (Durin’s quest), it progresses rather slow up until the halfway point. As for CGI, yes, unfortunately BOFA is the most CGI fest of the trilogy (CGI’d dwarves, elves, etc.) and in some cases it really shows! But overall, I really can't say I hated it. In fact, it is one of my guilty pleasures rewatching this trilogy alongside the LOTR. Look, we all know the Hobbit will always be inferior to LOTR, in terms of storytelling and overall production. But I can't say that the actors and actresses in it didn't do a fine job. More importantly, Jackson is a good storyteller, even though he was forced to stretch this story more than it should have been and that he certainly can entertain the audience. But above all and with another set of trilogy under his belt, Jackson really and truly left his mark on Middle Earth. In fact, I would say that his world building (first with LOTR and then with Hobbit) and bringing this mythical fantasy to life has been his greatest achievement. And that is what I feel most of all when I watch Hobbit and LOTR. it is a sense of going on a grand adventure and immersing yourself in it. And that is something I honestly haven't found in any epic mythical fantasy works on a large screen. So that being said, I love BOFA with all its’ flaws and shortcomings. I always tear up during its emotional scenes and by its ending I always feel sad as I do by the Return of The King’s because I know that I’ll miss the magic and adventure of Middle Earth.

What’s the point of arkenstone? What’s the point of those jewels Elves want? The only “sort of motivation” motivation that one side has is orcs. Mentioned once by Gendalf. Then there is Torin. Torin makes a promise, breaks it, burned all the bridges, went mad, snapped out it and died. Awful pointless character.

Le battaglie più epiche viste in un film fantasy. Ho passato, per la terza volta, tutto il film sulle spine per come andava dopo, anche se sapevo come andava a finire.

Much more action and adrenaline than the previous chapters, reproducing the atmosphere of the main saga. Appreciable the development and conclusion that are connected to the first film of the original series

Awesome Movie. The battles, the scenes and the combat. Also the story is alright with the saddest scene in the ****'s not boring at all. The villain and the awesome moments. This is the best hobbit movie.

Peter Jackson finishes with Middle Earth, again, six films and well over a thousand minutes of screen time after he began. It should go without saying that Bilbo's last fight is over-extended, indulgent and often very slow - at this point, those have become LotR calling cards - but even amidst such expectations, this is a pretty big stretch. There's just so little substance here, especially after the ferocious dragon Smaug is dismissed very early in the first act, that it feels like we're watching a medieval war reenactment and not a polished bit of Hollywood storytelling. The cast gets plenty of linguistic work, with lots of tongue-twisting names and locations to murmur in a foreboding tone, and the screen dances with all manner of wild paperback-cover visuals, but it deeply hurts that there's so little plot. Even the battle scenes, large and loud as they are, suffer from a bad case of the Rambos. That was a problem I could generally overlook in The Two Towers, even when Legolas was single-handedly taking down herds of war elephants. Now, by comparison, that seems almost quaint. It doesn't matter how outnumbered our heroes may be, if they're involved in a fight you'd better believe a couple hundred baddies are about to lose their heads. Shreds of reality are already a tall ask here, and those fight scenes scrap any shred of disbelief that may have somehow remained suspended. It's a pantomime, a hopeless exaggeration that rambles on without point or purpose like a drunken Granddad after Thanksgiving dinner. There really, really didn’t need to be three of these.

Sometimes I’ll sit down to watch the Hobbit trilogy just to remember that this third entry exists and I decide to go do something worthwhile with my time…Like watching the Lord of the Rings.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

The Battle of the Five Armies—a completely superfluous, but joyously entertaining feature-length action sequence— is pretty much all you’re going to get in this third Hobbit film.

⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀

Yes indeed, ladies and gentlemen, hobbits and orcs, the conclusion to our life in Middle Earth and the supposedly grand farewell to 3 years of meandering Hobbit entries is a massive misfire and solid evidence that something from the get-go was a tad NQR about Peter Jackson's follow up to the spectacular and accomplising The Hobbit. There is frequent unwarranted comic relief, horrible and cringe-inducing romantic subplots, strange

⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀

I can only think of one expression for this, cheap. You can tell that the film was produced quickly and did not cost much money. No comparison, not even close to Lord of the Rings.

is this movie great or is this movie great im sorry to say it but the hobbit is better than the lord of the rings.

A really fun and immersive film that starts fast and continues at a fast and good pace. There is no boredom in the film. The only bad thing is that the film is poorly rhythmically

Me encanta, en todas sus partes, humor, epicidad, y mucho enanismo, claro que sí.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

The book it's based on was one of the only classic books I have read, and I did really like it. Seeing these movies on the screen was different on so many levels. I really liked the tension and emotional themes in the movie. This movie was really fun for me to watch and I am glad it was for so many of you.

Exactly what it says on the tin - to a fault. Don't get me wrong, I like it. However, towards the end 'The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies' definitely begins to drag quite heavily - the impact of what eventually happens did not, to be honest, hit as strongly as it could've/should've. The pure action is good, but there's not much to remember about everything else. None of the characters, with the exception of Richard Armitage (Thorin) and Luke Evans (Bard) I guess, stand out amidst the wall-to-wall battle. Martin Freeman (Bilb), Ian McKellen (Gandalf) & Co. are are of little importance really, which is a shame. 'The Hobbit' series, unfortunately, gets inferior as it goes by. Loved the first film, enjoyed the second but this third installment - while passable - leaves me with a feeling of wanting something else from it. Happy to have watched them though, I'd still recommend them for sure.

Oh no! I knew it, I'm sorry. Why Peter Jackson ?? Let's start from the beginning. If the first film had a still discreet photography, this film has an obscene and highly opaque photography. Bad CGI! Soundtrack too honeyed and far from Howard Shore's style, what are you up to master! Little to save, if not a sufficiently interesting plot ... but Legolas, you still ruin the movie! This time my assessment is seriously inadequate. 4.

Nobody cares about the dwarves. I understand the premise of choosing a gruff species as the main characters is inherently going to be difficult, but there is so little balance with how they are portrayed, extremely little saving grace. The only character that was done well at all and to my surprise done extraordinarily well was Bilbo Baggins. The main story however, childish, patronizing, and with very little integrity and genuiness. This is in stark contrast to its' predecessors who took an opposite approach. At the end of the day you can tell the motive from Lord of the rings was to create a story in which people can deeply relate and the Hobbit was clearly to make money alone. For this I am deeply insulted, remove from the fact that Martin Freeman put in some incredible work into these films.

The Hobbit The Battle of the five armies is a average movie. I feel like The Hobbit could just been one movie but they expand to 3 movies to make more money.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

Love u peter love you so much thanks god for you live in the same time with u

The worst of the 3, and shows why the Hobbit would've been better as two films. Battle of the Five Armies, while it brings the magic, the wonder and the melancholy we love from Peter Jackson's middle Earth films, it just feels like an over-run afterthought. Battle sequences carried out for no reason, and a story that didn't really have sense in being over 2 and a half hours long. It still delivers, and it's love tale between Tauriel and Kili that kept me awake. But all in all, over-extends a story made to be a 3 hour epic. And man it should've been.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

One of the best trilogy I have ever seen, in sum it's a masterpiece, composed of a blending action and humor - and even a bit of romance - to create a well-paced tale that ends up being almost as satisfying. "The Hobbit" is visually stunning in all its three-parts, beside the Oscar-worthy performance by Freeman as a Bilbo (Freeman was born to be a hobbit), also I couldn't ignore the great performance of all cast, the amazing music by Howard Shore that reprised from the previous trilogy and the genius director Peter Jackson who gave us this masterpiece trilogy. The disadvantage of "The Hobbit" is the ending of part 1&2, where the film ends with ellipses rather than a period, we know the story will be continued, but with a little effort and some clever writing, Jackson could make each chapter feel like its own complete story. The result is probably the most dissatisfying element of the film. "The hobbit" is surely worth to watch, just let your senses enjoy, even If "The Hobbit" doesn't equal the achievement of Jackson's earlier Middle-earth movies.

Hollow Finale Battle Of The Five Armies might have impressive visuals and impressive performances, But this movie focuses WAY TOO MUCH on CGI instead of the story and an overly bloated script.

This is not a good film, Jackson has massacred this classic novel and undone his good work with LOTR.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

This is based on the trilogy as a whole. The Hobbit is a wonderful book but it simply doesn't have enough content to be spread between three movies. Each movie doesn't really tell a cohesive story on its own and while I judged the Lord of the Rings as a whole because it improves an already amazing experience, The Hobbit has to be judged as a whole because the movies make no sense in any other method of viewing. Even still they hit middling at best and never truly great.

Read the Hobbit it is unlike the more sophisticated Lord of the Rings trilogy. Well the hobbit is one simplistically written children's book. They did a good job of fleshing out these films and characters from one children's book. Not as epic as LOTR movies, but a darn good try considering the limited and simplistic source material they had to work with.

The timekeeping of the movie is pumped, though quite skillfully. This is the reason I give it 8 instead of 10. Simultaneously I am quite surprized how childish and even humble "The Hobbit" was changed to nearly a saga. I really appreciated the Torin's part of the story, and a wonderful play of all actors.

The Battle of the Five Armies is definitely the best of the Hobbit trilogy. Amazing special effects, great actors and epic battles. One of Peter Jackson's best movie

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

I am not sure what had transpired in Peter Jackson's head between making the excellent LOTR films, and the Hobbit trilogy, but with each new film, we're getting a bigger visual spectacle, which is more devoid of any real depth behind the flashy visuals. The last one, The Battle of the Five Armies, is about war. Now, I know a thing or two about war, and this was NOT war. It is perhaps what a 4 year old might think war looks like: devoid of all reasonable positioning, tactics, use of terrain, and even consistency in troop performance, but filled with "cool" moments. From Elves jumping over a phalanx of Dwarves straight into a charging enemy, ruining the whole point of the bracing formation AND making sure they will themselves be skewered on their allies spears; to a group of lightly armed peasants somehow holding a city against an army of heavily armored, battle hardened orcs; and finally heroes that slaughter hundreds of enemies with the same ease a grown man can crush ants with his boot - thus nullifying any sense of threat, or dread. More can be said about the fact that seeing someone dancing on screen with a couple of swords and perfect choreography is not a replacement for watching a protagonist overcome real adversity. In short, if you liked seeing Legolas and Gimli fighting in the first films, get ready to have then multiplied by 12 or something, and buffed by 100. What was the purpose of it all? It's the movie equivalent of blowing up a yearly city budget on a fireworks display. Was it all meant to be an empty, ludicrous spectacle? Was it meant to impress simpletons? Was it easier to pay the CGI department than hire a consultant who has actual knowledge in warfare, and a writer who knows storytelling? I am sorry that this is the state of the film. I am sorry that this was, for the most part, the state of the entire trilogy. I am sorry that it did not move, inspire, or captivate me - because we'll never get another Hobbit film. This is it.

You will be fully entertained by the first-rate visuals and rousing battle scenes, but you might be wanting more substance and more emotion between characters.

- boring - the elves feel like superheroes - mediocre score - the plot is stretched just to fill the running time - feels rushed

This film ends "The Hobbit" trilogy, which is a prequel to "Lord of the Rings". Its not a trilogy that has reached to the third film in the best shape, since all the magic that LOTR had to spare is totally absent from the first two films. In this film, Thorin Oakenshield's company conquers the lonely mountain and the dragon is defeated, but the fate of the dwarven treasure is uncertain as it is disputed by many interested parties. I cannot comment on how Peter Jackson and his team adapt the original material of J.R.R. Tolkien because I never read it. As far as the actors' work is concerned, I think the film has sinned by scattering too much attention in a wide range of eminently secondary characters, stealing the scene from the main actors in the trilogy such as Richard Armitage (Thorin) or Martin Freeman (Bilbo). The latter was particularly affected: Bilbo was almost relegated to the supporting cast. Legolas (Orlando Bloom) and Tauriel (Evangeline Lilly), who are largely secondary characters, have more time on the screen than the little hobbit who tells us everything. This was very bad for the film and the trilogy, and unfair to the good work developed by Freeman. Despite this, most actors have risen to the challenge with solid, credible and consistent interpretations. The rhythm of the film seems strange: the first half-hour is an endless CGI action show, followed by an hour of slow battle preparations, where the audience almost falls asleep. Then, suddenly, we are again thrown into the middle of the action and the incessant CGI, which bombards us with sound and images to the point that everything seems pointless and meaningless. The incompetent and unfortunate cinematography we criticized in the early films continues to victimize key action sequences, just as brutal CGI abuse, who makes them increasingly unrealistic and boring. The soundtrack, by Howard Shore, is at the level of expectations, as in the whole trilogy. With "The Battle of the Five Armies" comes to an end one of the biggest disappointments I've had, as far as cinema is concerned. I confess that I expected much more from this trilogy. There was enough quality material for an trilogy equal (if not better) as "Lord of the Rings". The actors did their best, and I have no doubt they would have done better if they could. The script failed because it was too deconcentrated (mostly in this movie). The director, Peter Jackson, has failed and will surely join George Lucas in the list of absurdly addicted to redundant and meaningless special effects. It's a good thing that there will not be a fourth movie.Certain things have a time to end, and LOTR has has exceeded this time thanks to this unfortunate trilogy. So, let "Lord of The Rings" rest in peace.

Best movie in the Trilogy in my opinion. I am sorta a Action Addict, so if you are looking for a movie with a great story, this movie is not for you. Dain Ironfoot is one of the biggest Bad A**es in movie history and I now have an Iron Hills banner in my room. Underneath it is an Ironfoot Helmet. I recommend this to anyone looking for a great action fantasy movie!

(76/100) The worst one in the Hobbit trilogy but a good movie nonetheless. Action was a bit mind numbing sometimes and the green screen was painfully obvious sometimes.

The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies is a wonderful concluding chapter in this amazing film trilogy. Whereas the first film took a little while to start up, this film is almost non stop action. I really loved, of course, the cinematography, the characters, and the amazing action scenes. In the end, I absolutely love this film and it's really great.

The movie was great! I watched it in theatres with my sister and it was awesome. But there were maybe too many visuals and at some point I thought I was watching a cartoon. Although critics didn't like the movie, for me it is a fine defining chapter of the Middle-Earth saga. I don't want to see another Peter Jackson's establishment because it might be too much!

Peter Jackson’s Hobbit trilogy comes to a bombastic conclusion in a film thats all crash with very little wallop. We all know at this point that the Hobbit trilogy is a bit of an overblown mess, that really should have been a straightforward two parter at the very most. Living in the long shadow of The Lord of the Rings series this prequel trilogy (even typing that makes me feel dirty) has struggled to find its own identity. However outside of the heavy weight of five films and fourteen years of cinematic backstory The Battle of the Five Armies (or TBOTFA as I’ll refer to it) remains an enjoyable, if OTT entry into the saga. The two crowning jewels of the series have been Martin Freeman’s Bilbo and Ian McKellen’s Gandalf. Freeman is fantastic as eponymous Hobbit bringing warmth, humour and at times great pathos to a part that has often become lost in his own story. As for the Gandalf the Grey, McKellen is effortless in his career defining role. The rest of the cast also step up for their final bows. I have never been impressed with Richard Armitage as Thorin Oakenshield, the leader of the dwarf party tasked with reclaiming his ancestral home from Smaug (the Dragon voiced, briefly, by Benedict Cumberbatch). However in this concluding part of the story the actor is given some interesting, if sometimes overdone, material to work with as the King under the mountain descends into a paranoid madness while he protects his newly claimed horde. Luke Evans’ rather thankless role in part two is also given much more screen time. Unfortunately many of the Hobbit characters can’t help but come across as pale imitations of their Lord of the Rings counterparts. Evan’s Bard is the honourable, reluctant leader, a lot like Aragon, while Ryan Gage plays a far less creepy and more comical version of Grima Wormtogue. Thorin’s journey from honourable to corrupt and back again also offers a mirror image to Boromir’s arc in The Fellowship of the Ring. The ‘battle’ of the title is unfortunately the weakest part of the film. With far too much CGI and not enough character the Siege of Erebor doesn’t hold a candle to the battle for Helm’s Deep. This isn’t surprising when you consider the different techniques used to make the films. The Lord of the Rings trilogy often relied on practical effects, make up and real locations to achieve its spectacle. People got dirty making those films, people got hurt. The Hobbit looks as though it was filmed on a soundstage or a green screen studio with the cast never too far from their armchairs and books. All the perilous action was left to the computers. While there are some awe inspiring and at times emotive scenes in the film, there are an equal number of laughable moments of sheer ridiculous, overblown action in the style of the Star Wars prequels (shudder). At times it feels like you're watching someone else play World of Warcraft. The final confrontations, although far better than the large scale battles, are spoiled slightly by a few really silly moments. There’s one involving ice that actually got a big laugh from the audience and less said about Legolas’s work on the falling staircase the better. The CG throughout the film is a mixed bag, when it works we get Smaug’s attack on Laketown, when it doesn’t we get Billy Connolly’s character who I swear just stepped right out of Who Framed Rodger Rabbit. Unfortunately the effects side of the film pulls focus from the characters and story, resulting in meaningful moments and deaths often falling flat. The sequence involving Christopher Lee, Hugo Weaving and Cate Blanchett is an insane fever dream that leaves plenty of questions unanswered and doesn’t really add much to the overall story. The effects can’t be blamed for all the films’ failures, however. Sometimes the script can produce just as many cringe worthy moments. The ‘love’ story between Aidan Turner’s Kili and Evangeline Lilly’s Tauriel is ridiculous and condescending to the Nth degree. The film makers are essentially saying ‘lets throw something in for the wives and girlfriends’ and think that a poorly executed and unwritten romance is the answer. Then there’s the comedy relief of Ryan Cage’s character which strays into pure Jar-Jar Binks territory. After the chaos of the Battle the film and (hopefully) The Middle Earth Saga draws to close in a suitably small way as McKellen and Freeman share a couple of reflective, underplayed moments that then link directly to their scenes in The Fellowship of the Ring. The Battle of the Five Armies cannot live up to its Lord of the Rings predecessors. With too much over the top action and serious character development problems outside of the main protagonists, I can see general audiences struggling to engage with this final entry. Ultimately many will just be glad that it’s all over, which is a shame given the heights the series has reached in the past.

Amazing, amazing trilogy. Wow, what an add on to Lord of the rings, this entire new trilogy is just adding to the masterpiece that is Middle Earth, a must watch.

It was an okay watch. Gandolf could whack people with a stick, as in all the other parts (yes I know he does a _few_ other tricks but showing him so underpowered is one aspect of the whole series that I honestly hate). He's supposed to be a much stronger character than what they show him to be in the movie. The main plotline was _okay_. The battle was chaotic and unmemorable. The hobbit + the dwarf king really shine in the movie. I felt like they've brought up the rating majorly by their excellent acting. Overall it was a forgettable experience. I watched the movie completely and then forgot about it. After 2 months I noticed it lying on my hard disk and thought that I haven't seen it. So I watched it once again. About an hour into the movie I started realizing that I _have_ seen it. I had to skip forward slowly till the end to confirm that I have indeed watched it. The whole point that I'm trying to make here is that there was nothing memorable about this movie apart from the beginning 20 minutes and the hobbit in a couple of scenes.

Very good film. According to my opinion, the film allows to explore well the different characters, sometimes with inventions from Peter Jackson (like for the saga's movies) but this additions are generally very good. Simply I love this story.