Skip to content

The Desolation of Smaug Soars to New Highs and Plummets to New Lows

14
Share

The Desolation of Smaug Soars to New Highs and Plummets to New Lows

Home / The Desolation of Smaug Soars to New Highs and Plummets to New Lows
Blog Movies of Middle-Earth

The Desolation of Smaug Soars to New Highs and Plummets to New Lows

By

Published on October 20, 2021

14
Share

A long, long time ago, in a quiet little room somewhere in the medieval quadrangle of an Oxford college, a professor named J.R.R. Tolkien found a blank page in a pile of examination papers and idly scribbled the words, “In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit.” Tolkien likely did not know that the sentence he wrote would become one of the most famous opening lines in English literature, and one of the most influential. This story began very modestly and quietly, after all, but it has continued with us ever since, for nearly a century now, reshaping children’s and fantasy literature, then role-playing games, movies, and global pop culture. The Hobbit wasn’t the first Middle-earth story Tolkien wrote, but it was the first one published, and the one that made everything else possible.

Rereading The Hobbit, it’s easy to see why it was such a success. It’s told with a wry voice, great charm and wit, and is wonderfully imaginative. Bilbo Baggins is one of children’s literature’s great heroes, despite being a fussy, wealthy, middle-aged man. What he lacks in childlike years he makes up for in childlike size, and the book aptly portrays the childlike wonder and fear of finding oneself thrust out into a bigger world, whether one likes it or not.

At the heart of the book is Bilbo’s encounter with Smaug the dragon. It’s a scene that consciously echoes Beowulf’s fight with the wyrm, and Sigurd’s deadly duel with the dragon Fafnir (not to mention Tolkien’s own story of Túrin and Glaurung). But unlike those other protagonists, Bilbo is no warrior. He’s barely even the burglar he was hired to be. As Tolkien writes, going down alone into the darkness to face Smaug is the bravest thing Bilbo ever does. Smaug, after all, isn’t just a fire-breathing monster, he’s also highly intelligent and can mesmerize with his eyes, and manipulate people with his words. Smaug’s deadliest weapon is his tongue, and Bilbo has to use all his wits not to get tripped up by his own, and thus found out.

Bilbo’s conversation with Smaug perfectly captures the great vulnerability of a child in an adult’s world. Children know how to use speech to trick people, hurt feelings, and get what they want, but adults are far more skilled at weaponizing it, turning it into a sleight-of-hand to extract information, manipulate, threaten violence, and dominate. All this Smaug has honed to an art. Bilbo escapes, but only just, and reveals to Smaug more than he intended, with disastrous consequences.

The Desolation of Smaug, the second of Jackson’s three Hobbit movies, captures this scene perfectly. It’s incredibly tense, as Martin Freeman’s Bilbo tries to sneak around—physically and verbally—Benedict Cumberbatch’s great red-gold dragon in his Scrooge McDuck-style hoard of treasure. Freeman and Cumberbatch have great chemistry from their days as Watson and Sherlock, and it pays off beautifully here, even with Cumberbatch on screen as a giant CGI lizard. That CGI is amazing, by the way. The Weta Workshop never misses, and their Smaug is gloriously realized. His red skin with cooled-lava-like streaks of black, his reptilian but cunning face, his vast and terrifying size: it’s fantastic. I’m a fan of Rankin-Bass’s feline Smaug, but Jackson’s dragon matches the monster I always had in my head when reading the book. One of the pleasures of a cinematic adaptation is seeing a book “come to life,” and while the Hobbit trilogy often falls short on that count, here it soars.

The Desolation of Smaug is the most mixed bag of the entire trilogy, containing some of its best scenes, performances, and design work, but also some of its worst adaptation choices. It suffers the middle-movie syndrome of not having any distinct identity or narrative throughline of its own. Jackson solved that issue in The Two Towers by threading it with the themes of war and trauma, but while Smaug has better individual scenes and performances than An Unexpected Journey, it lacks the narrative cohesion and character arcs of its predecessor.

The flaws are apparent from the get-go. After a flashback showing Gandalf’s fateful meeting with Thorin in Bree, we get the Dwarf company on the run from Azog again, and seeking refuge in Beorn’s house. The Beorn scene in the book is delightful, as Gandalf cunningly gets around the were-bear’s gruff suspicions by telling a rambling story and slowly revealing the Dwarves two-by-two. It’s a wonderful fairytale moment that introduces both Beorn’s nature (essentially good, but easily angered and dangerous) and highlights Gandalf’s considerable wit. Gandalf, like Smaug (and Saruman for that matter), is a master of the magic of language. He can light fires and fireworks with spells, but his true purpose in Middle-earth is stoking hope and courage in the hearts of its peoples, and he does this mostly with words of wisdom, comfort, and counsel. The movie, however, drops all of this and instead has Beorn in bear-form chase the company into his house, which the Dwarves barricade against him. When he shows up later, back in man-form, he’s apparently fine with all this. Again and again, the movie makes the mistake of thinking the only way to create conflict and tension is through a fight scene or a chase.

After their pointless sojourn in Beorn’s house, Gandalf goes to investigate the tombs of the Ringwraiths, and Bilbo and the Dwarves head into Mirkwood. Despite his horror background, Jackson drops all pretense of horror here. The endless, pitch-black, poisonous, eye-filled forest of Tolkien’s book is replaced by a small set that Bilbo and company wander around drunkenly for a few minutes before being attacked by spiders.

The spiders, at least, are wonderfully creepy, and the deep command of Tolkien’s mythology that Jackson showed in the Rings movies shines through here, as it’s the One Ring that allows Bilbo to understand the spiders’ terrible speech, a neat way of keeping a kidlit aspect of the book (giant talking spiders) while linking it to the larger narrative and history (the long, complicated relationship between Dark Lords and giant spiders). If only the rest of the story had been this clever.

The Dwarves are rescued and taken captive by the Wood-elves, led by Orlando Bloom’s Legolas, who isn’t in the book, but whose presence makes sense (this is his home, after all). This leads us to the film’s other high point besides Smaug, which is Lee Pace’s grandiose Thranduil. Pace’s towering stature and deep voice are perfect for the Elvenking, and he gives Thranduil an outsized nobility and haughtiness that befits an immortal woodland elf-lord. He feels like a Faerie-King of old, both ethereal and razor-sharp, which is exactly as he should be. It’s also a very fun performance; Pace is clearly having the time of his life, and it shows. When he’s on screen, the film is as mesmerizing as Smaug’s eyes.

Also introduced here is Evangeline Lilly’s Silvan elf Tauriel. Alas, poor Tauriel. The Hobbit is, it bears saying, bereft of women. Tauriel is Jackson’s attempt to amend that lack, and her original character arc, whose ghost still shines through at times, would have done it well. Tolkien’s books are stuffed with Elves, but even in The Silmarillion, most of the Quendi we meet are aristocrats. Having a new key character be a commoner-elf, and a woman, is a smart move. Tauriel seems to have been written to play a role similar to Quickbeam among the Ents, the relative youngster who chides their elders to take a more active role in the world, and Lilly is great when that’s the character she’s allowed to play.

But somewhere along the line, the character was changed and her story becomes almost entirely about her love triangle with Legolas and Aidan Turner’s Kili, who is costumed to look remarkably similar to Aragorn, to remind us all of how much we liked the Aragorn-Arwen romance. But Lilly and Turner have little chemistry, and it doesn’t help that their first interactions happen when she is literally his jailer. The entire venture is a profound miscalculation, and it’s especially disappointing because Tauriel could have been such a wonderful addition to Middle-earth. Instead, she’s reduced to being the Mr. Pibb to Arwen’s Dr. Pepper.

Bilbo rescues the Dwarves from Thranduil’s dungeons by stuffing them into barrels and then sending them floating down a river. Of course, this is also mutated into a chase/fight scene as the Elves and Orcs both descend on the bobbing Dwarves. Many people have said this scene plays like something out of a video game, but it looks more like a theme park ride to me, and it’s just as thrilling as watching a video of other people riding a theme park ride (i.e., not at all).

The Dwarves and Bilbo are rescued by Luke Evans’s Bard, who takes them by boat to Lake-town. Here again Weta shines, turning Lake-town into a crowded, labyrinthine Norse Venice (the architecture is a nice nod to Tolkien’s conceit of the Lakemen’s dialect of the Common Tongue being analogous to Scandinavian languages, in the same way the Rohirrim’s language is to Old English).

Bard shelters the Dwarves in his home, but becomes alarmed when he discovers who Thorin is and what his intentions are. Bard believes that Thorin’s quest will result in Smaug destroying Lake-town and argues vehemently against it. He cites an old prophecy that the return of the King of the Mountain will cause “the lake to shine and burn.” It’s worth taking a moment here to refer to the book, where that prophecy is repeated word for word, but means the lake will shine and burn with gold—not dragon fire. It’s a happy prophecy, and one all the Lakemen (not just Stephen Fry’s greedy Master) embrace because they believe the King Under the Mountain will bring renewed prosperity.

Jackson positions Bard as a brave truth-teller and Thorin as motivated by reckless arrogance and greed, and the film largely frames Bard as right. After all, Smaug does fly down and burn Lake-town to the ground (er, water) and the third movie shows the aftermath with a desperate, crying woman running into the Lake screaming, “My baby! Where is my baby?!” But the movie seems to have forgotten its own opening scene and the fact that this quest is, you know, explicitly planned and blessed by Gandalf, aka Olórin, aka the Wisest of the Maiar. The appendices of The Lord of the Rings go even further, in fact, with Gandalf heavily implying that his meeting with Thorin, and thus the Quest of Erebor, was divinely inspired, likely by the chief Vala Manwë, and possibly even by Eru (God) Himself. Bard is thus railing against heaven’s own will.

It’s not that good characters can’t be at cross-purposes, or fail to grasp the potential catastrophic results of their plans. But the movie’s framing means Gandalf is heavily responsible for the destruction of Lake-town and the deaths of hundreds or even thousands of people, and that unlike Bard, he either was too foolish to see it, or was willing to gamble it—neither of which matches the character of Gandalf that we know. Jackson’s desire to ramp up conflict leads to a strange and frankly careless bit of character assassination.

Of course, Smaug burns Lake-town in the book, as well, but this is an event nobody anticipates. No one in Esgaroth objects to Thorin’s venture, and most assume that if Smaug is still around, he’ll kill the Dwarves and that will be that. The possibility of Smaug attacking Lake-town isn’t mentioned. The X-factor is that dangerous conversation between the wyrm and Bilbo, where the hobbit accidentally reveals that he’s come by way of Lake-town. That’s what sets Smaug off to Esgaroth. But Bilbo is also the one to spot Smaug’s weak point, a fact he conveys to a thrush, who then whispers it to Bard, who then takes down the dragon. Book-Bilbo may inadvertently send Smaug to Lake-town, but he’s also the one who provides the “inside information” necessary to take down the dragon. Movie-Bilbo provides no such intel and ends the movie gravely wondering, “What have we (‘we’ here including Gandalf and maybe God Himself) done?”

Gandalf isn’t around to defend his schemes since he’s taken captive by the Necromancer, who turns out, to the surprise of no one, to be Sauron. I haven’t even mentioned the side plots with Azog and his son Bolg, and Bolg’s night raid on Lake-town, or Kili’s poisoning, or Lake-town’s off-brand Wormtongue, because this movie is stuffed with incident and yet devoid of significance. Did I mention that Thranduil magically reveals to Thorin that half his face is burned off? No? Well, I forgot, just as the filmmakers did, because it never comes up again.

Smaug, more than any other of his six Middle-earth movies, puts all of Peter Jackson’s strengths and weaknesses as a filmmaker on full display. The creature, set, and costume designs are top notch, the cast is stellar, and certain adaptation choices reveal a deep understanding of Tolkien’s world and themes. But the inflated run time, the endless need to turn every interaction into character conflict, a chase, or both, combined with tired attempts to recreate the successful bits of the Rings movies, ultimately sends the movie down dimmer paths than even Bilbo would dare to tread. You can’t blame Jackson and the studio for wanting to rake in more money, but they of all people should have known that sometimes there’s a dragon under all that gold, and it’s just waiting to wake up and lead you astray.

Austin Gilkeson has written for Tin HouseMcSweeney’sVultureForeign PolicyThe Toast, and other publications. He lives just outside Chicago with his wife and son.

About the Author

Austin Gilkeson

Author

Austin Gilkeson has written for Tin House, McSweeney’s, Vulture, Foreign Policy, The Toast, and other publications. He lives just outside Chicago with his wife and son.
Learn More About Austin
Subscribe
Notify of
Avatar


14 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Avatar
3 years ago

All of the problems with the hobbit films, can be traced to Warner execs wanting a romantic plot tumor in the movie to get women to see it. Peter Jackson had none of the time that he had to work on the films like he did with LOTR 

Avatar
ED
3 years ago

 I definitely agree that Mr Pace’s Elven-king is a major high point of these films – you either love him for his rockstar panache or love to hate him for being an Elf Jerk (Not the WORST Elf Jerk, but he still radiates that ‘Better than you’ energy) and who could possibly argue that Smaug is one of the few that loom even higher up?

 As it happens I also have a soft spot for Mr Luke Evans as Bard the Bowman, who definitely comes across as one of the more level-headed residents of Middle Earth and (perhaps more surprisingly) for this trilogy’s vision of Beorn (If only he had more to do he’d be excellent).

Avatar
3 years ago

Peter Jackson does better when he’s adapting Tolkien than when he’s adding elements of his own invention.  The problem with the Hobbit movies is that Tolkien’s story is too slight to support an epic movie trilogy, so Jackson had to add a great many of these side-stories.  Worse, because we need the movie to track the plot outline of the book, all of these sideshows end up being essentially irrelevant – we would get to the same outcome without them, so why are they there?

This is why the Hobbit movie trilogy should never have been made in that form.

Avatar
3 years ago

Hmm…I do kind of like the idea that the prophecy could have been misread/misinterpreted and Bard is pessimistic enough to think about that possibility, so I don’t know that I fully agree with that particular critique.  Perhaps it was overdone, but I could see it (isn’t Bard in the books mentioned to be a bit grim/dour/pessimistic?)

BUT I think the rest is spot on, including the rest of the overstuffed, forced conflict, love triangles and everything else.  I really WANT to love Tauriel and I really love Evangeline Lilly but she’s so wasted as a love triangle arm.  It definitely would have been cool to see her just as another perspective on the Elves.

I do love Thranduil – I also kind of get the impression from him that maybe he’s just a teeeeny bit insecure that he’s not one of the ‘big time’ Elves (which I believe the book also points out – the Wood elves are proud but not quite on the level of Elrond and the rest of the high elves).  That said, I just looked it up, and apparently Thranduil is himself a Sindar in at least some versions of the legendarium, and lived in Doriath in his youth.

Avatar
3 years ago

: if memory serves, he is not referred to as thranduil until LoTR.  in the hobbit, he’s simply the “elven king”.  always took it as tolkien trying to get a version of doriath, thingol, and menegroth into something.  

Avatar
3 years ago

 While I do agree that the “Hobbit” trilogy has its problems and is considerably inferior to the LOTR one, I still love it, faults notwithstanding. And, as mentioned, the second movie (like the other two, as well, IMHO) has several wonderful scenes and moments (agree totally regarding Smaug, Thranduil, and the cleverness of making the Ring the means for Bilbo to understand the spiders). But I also think that some of the things that do not seem to add up come from the lack of screentime in the theatrical cut to be fully played out but the sequence itself not being removed totally. Case in point: in the extended cut, between Beorn chasing the dwarves and serving them breakfast, there is another scene. And in this scene, Beorn is chopping firewood unaware of his unexpected guests until Gandalf goes and introduces the company, with the dwarves arriving from their hideout in ones and twos.

I read somewhere (at least I think I did) that Lilly said in an interview that when she signed, her only condition was not to be part of a love triangle. It is sad she ended up becoming a part of one anyway, and I can totally believe templarsteel’s suggestion @1 that the studio bosses forced PJ’s hand.

All in all, as said, there are definitely weaknesses in this trilogy not present in the original one, and quite many of them can be traced to the difference in the source material’s volume, as has been mentioned countless of times over the years. Still, I am glad PJ made it and enjoy it every time I watch it. 

Avatar
3 years ago

For me, one of the biggest missteps in this movie (in a crowded field) was the weakening of the spider scene. It went from a suspenseful piece of character development to a rather pointless fight. 

The worst was the barrel nonsense, of course. 

And I kept waiting for Legolas to say, “My father shall hear about this!” (so great was the resemblance of Thranduil to Lucius Malfoy). 

I thought the first film wasn’t good, but this was so much worse that it convinced me not to waste my money seeing the third one, and from all I hear I made the right decision there. 

Avatar
3 years ago

I was especially displeased with the barrel scene. The book excellently conveyed the predicament’s in a quiet but visceral way — thirteen dwarves sealed in barrels, and one water-hating invisible hobbit clinging desperately to a barrel, on a wild river that could drown them, sink them, bash them to bits, or carry them who-knows-where. And the impressiveness of this daring, clever escape, and the luck that they didn’t get caught by anyone. The film probably couldn’t convey that in the book’s understated fashion, but I don’t like what they replaced it with.

I was disappointed by the extreme abbreviation of Mirkwood, a setting I particularly love in the book. And a little surprised, after the LotR film trilogy’s investment in famously spectacular scenery. 

Avatar
Nancy McC
3 years ago

@6 You definitely did read that EL said “no love triangle,” or else your imagination and mine are in sync. I too cannot remember where I read it.

Of course, I don’t belong in this conversation, because after the first two Hobbit movies, I realized all that was left was war, and that’s not my cup of tea. IOW I never saw the third movie and barely remember the first two.

I’ll also agree with the observation made in earlier posts about Freeman. I cannot remotely imagine anyone better suited to play Bilbo. There was lots of good casting in the movies (although I though all the elven women looked too much like each other and their looks seemed creepy to me), but Bilbo was the chef’s kiss.

Avatar
3 years ago

@9: I also didn’t watch the third Hobbit film. I categorically dislike battle scenes in books and films. That’s one reason I love the book version of The Hobbit. The first two films had battles annoyingly stapled in, but I couldn’t think of anything else that might be in the third. 

I think film/TV adaptations of books are generally shorter than the books. But I had to look up running times to be sure that the Hobbit film trilogy managed to be shorter than the full-length audiobooks of the novel. All of the added subplots and battles apparently don’t fully replace the parts that were severely abbreviated, but it sure didn’t feel that way when watching the films. 

Avatar
Canavan
3 years ago

As a fan of Peter Jackson’s oft-maligned Hobbit trilogy, I wanted to briefly push back on Mr. Gilkeson’s critique. Smaug is not without its flaws (e.g., the barrel chase), but by and large I find myself relatively satisfied with Jackson’s artistic choices. For example, Mr. Gilkeson seems quite concerned that Bard’s presentiments somehow diminishes Gandalf, making him appear more human and fallible. I acknowledge that, but find myself wondering why that’s a bad thing, even if it’s not (*gasp*) completely faithful to Tolkien’s vision.

Avatar
Jeff V
3 years ago

I’m can’t figure out what Gandalf expected to happen when the dwarves arrived at the mountain.

He clearly thought an adventure would be the making of Bilbo – and he was right – but did he actually intend for Bilbo to be sent alone into the dark to scout out a dragon’s lair?

Did the think the dragon would be dead, or absent, or safely asleep? Did Gandalf assume he’d be there to help out? Could Gandalf overcome a dragon without revealing his own status as a maiar? Could Gandalf deal with a dragon without great risk to himself?

Avatar
Luisa Maurício Veiga
3 years ago

I liked the the two interpretations on the prophecy. 

Even though the Quest was blessed by Gandalf and therefore had a Divine mean to It, gods plans are much bigger than what humans can see. And they often involve the destruction of lives, even If the final consequence is for eventual peace. 

If they hadnt driven off Smaug from the mountain when they did, the dark forces wouldve taken control of him and destroyed many, many more cities and lives then Lake Town. The battles in LoTR would’ve been much harder and they may not even Win If they had tô fight, besides everything they had, a Full dragon. So, looking at the bigger picture, Smaug had tô come out and bê killed. And killing him was on Bards destiny, even If he didn’t want to accept, somehow he knew (because he kept the Black Arrow). A bit like Aragorns fear of his own destiny since he’s ancestral had failed his Race (and Girion was considered someone who failed, since he did not kill the dragon).

But, even so, with everything pointing this to be the right direction, Bard is only a human, he can’t quite understand the implications of this bigger plan nor can he accept the cruelty implicated on this plan and that IS: his city, where he lived ALL his life, where he’s friends live and his Family (on the movie version) hás to be attacked and destroyed in order for this plan tô work. He, himself, would never had killed the dragon If It didn’t attack Lake Town. 

I think this tragic situation was really exciting in the movie. That the Quest carried a heavy burden to be fullfield. 

By the way, Gandalf knows the missions that needs to be fullfield but many times on the book and the movies, we see that he does not know exactly what are the Full consequences of the Quest set in motion, only what needs to be done. 

Avatar
Rowan Tommins
3 years ago

I’m surprised that so much time has been spent talking about the barrel scene, which at least was both in the book, and necessary to progress the film’s narrative, but nobody has even mentioned The Forge. The film invents at least half an hour of fighting, running around, trickery, peril, and generally incomprehensible mayhem, in order to… briefly fling some molten gold at Smaug, in between him deciding to burn Laketown and going off to do it. Unless it was skipped in the TV cut I watched, this plan was never actually explained, so even without any knowledge of what happens next, there was no suspense in whether it would work. They might as well have shown us some elves having an argument over dinner.

reCaptcha Error: grecaptcha is not defined