"BLACK PANTHER" (2018) Review

"BLACK PANTHER" (2018) Review

I am going to be brutally honest. For the past three years, I have harbored mixed feelings about the output from the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU). The year 2015 produced one movie that I found entertaining, yet disappointing; and another film that I found entertaining and original, but not exactly mind blowing. But the years 2016 and 2017 proved to be very disappointing, as far as MCU movies were concerned. By the end of 2017, I thought the MCU had finally lost its mojo . . . until I saw "BLACK PANTHER", early in the following year. 

I realize many might find my comments something of a head scratcher. What exactly was wrong with the MCU films between 2015-2017? Well . . . I thought "THE AVENGERS: AGE OF ULTRON" was entertaining, yet problematic. I enjoyed "ANT-MAN" very much, but I would never regard it as one of the franchise's best. The movies, starting with 2016's "CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR" and ending with 2017's "THOR: RAGNAROK", struck me as very disappointing and somewhat inferior. Despite the fact that the franchise was raking in millions - or billions - with these films, I personally believed it had reached an artistic abyss . . . until I saw "BLACK PANTHER". Not only did I find the latter film entertaining, I also regard it as one of the better MCU films I have seen in the franchise's ten-year history. With "BLACK PANTHER", it seemed the MCU had not only climbed out of the abyss, but had reached (or nearly reached) a pinnacle. 

"BLACK PANTHER" basically told the story about King T'Challa aka Black Panther adjusting to his role as the new sovereign of Wakanda, an isolated and fictional African nation that is the most technically advanced in the world, thanks to the vibranium metal within its borders. Wakanda has spent most of its existence pretending to be a poor, third-world nation in order to protect itself from the world - especially Western nations - and prevent them from learning about its rich source of vibranium. The narrative for "BLACK PANTHER" picked up at least a week after the events of "CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR". T'Challa and his premier bodyguard and leader of the Dora Milaje regiment, Okoye; extract Nakia, T'Challa's ex-lover and a Wakandan spy, from an undercover assignment in Nigeria. All three returned to Wakanda's capital to participate in T'Challa coronation as the new king. During the ceremony, the leaders of Wakanda's five tribes are each given the opportunity to challenge the temporarily de-powered (via a potion that expunges his super strength and speed) T'Challa's role as the new king by ritual combat. One of the leaders, M'Baku of the mountainous Jabari Tribe, challenges T'Challa. After a fierce fight, M'Baku concedes defeat and T'Challa is officially acknowledged as King of Wakanda. 

Unfortunately, T'Challa's triumph is short-lived when Wakanda intelligence becomes aware of a robbery committed by a group of thieves led by an old foe of the country's, Ulysses Klaue. The latter had stolen an old Wakanda artifact from a London museum that contains vibranium, a metal substance that has allowed Wakanda to become the most technically advanced nation in the world . . . unbeknownst to other nations. When Wakanda intelligence learns that Klaue plans to sell the vibranium to the C.I.A. at a location in Busan, South Korea; T'Challa, Nakia and Okoye travel there to interrupt the planned sale and arrest the arms dealer. Instead of arresting Klaue, T'Challa stumbles across a family secret involving one of Klaue's fellow thieves, an African-American named Eric Stevens aka Killmonger, which will threaten his position on the Wakanda throne and endanger the country itself. 

After being disappointed by five MCU movies in a row, I found myself wondering if I would ever enjoy a movie from the franchise again. Thankfully, "BLACK PANTHER" proved to be a more than pleasant surprise. Thanks to Ryan Coogler's direction and the excellent screenplay that he co-wrote with Joe Robert Cole, "BLACK PANTHER" proved to be a unique film that combined the usual elements of a comic book movie, a family drama and a rare exploration into the political and social aspects of the African diaspora.

Family drama is nothing new to the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU). Audiences have seen this played out in movies like the Thor trilogy, 2015's "ANT-MAN", and to a certain extent, 2008's "THE INCREDIBLE HULK". "BLACK PANTHER" is another addition in which a deadly encounter between T'Challa's father and uncle - King T'Chaka and Prince N'Jobu in 1992, led to the new king learning about his cousin and N'Jobu's half-American cousin, Erik "Killmonger" Stevens aka Prince N'Jadaka. That 1992 encounter led to Erik becoming an orphan and abandoned by his isolationist uncle T'Chaka. This, in turn, led Erik to see revenge against the nation of Wakanda. Ironically, Erik never got the chance to exact his revenge on the very person responsible for his loss, namely his uncle, who was killed by Helmut Zemo's bomb in "CIVIL WAR". But for him, T'Challa and Wakanda served as a convenient scapegoat for his vengeance.

What made all of this even more fascinating and a lot more original than the MCU's other family dramas was how Coogler and Cole managed to mix a good deal of political controversy into this family saga. One of the reasons Prince N'Jobu had fallen out of favor with his older brother was his growing disenchantment with Wakanda's isolationist policy with the world - including those of the African diaspora around the world. After his experiences in late 20th century Oakland, N'Jobu decided to reveal Wakanda's existence to Ulysses Klaue and help the latter infiltrate Wakanda to smuggle out more vibranium. N'Jobu had planned to use the vibranium to create weapons and lead a revolution of the African diaspora against the dominating Western nations. With his father dead, Erik planned to not only get his revenge against the Royal House of Wakanda, but also carry out N'Jobu's plans. Watching this, I am reminded of Loki's plans in 2011's "THOR" - namely to keep a powerless Thor stranded on Earth, while he sets up the Frost Giants' destruction and win Odin's favor. As much I had enjoyed that movie, Loki's plans seemed rather lame to me in compare to Erik's. But what made this story arc even more interesting is that in the end . . . Erik's plans to use Wakanda weapons to conquer the world eventually led to T'Challa's decision to finally end Wakanda's isolationist policy.

"BLACK PANTHER" featured some pretty solid action sequences. I enjoyed the sequence featuring T'Challa and M'Baku's fight for the throne; Erik and Klaue's confrontation at an abandoned South Korean airfield; T'Challa and Erik's battle for the throne; and the Battle of Mount Bashenga, in which T'Challa and his forces attempted to prevent Erik and the Border Tribe from sending Wakanda weapons to the outside world. All are pretty good action sequences. But if I had to select my favorite, it would be the confrontation at the Busan casino between T'Challa, Nakia and Okoye against Klaue and his minions. With C.I.A. Agent Everett Ross thrown into the mix, this particular sequence was simply boss, especially since it lead to a wild car chase on the streets of Busan. That once scene featuring Okoye slamming her wig into the face of a Klaue minion will probably remain imprinted in my mind for years to come.

Another aspect of "BLACK PANTHER" that I admired was the film's production designs. Mind you, the film maintained that same flat photography that the MCU has become infamous for. However, I think Rachel Morrison's photography was enhanced by some sharp colors, the movie's visual effects, Hannah Beachler's gorgeous production designs that convey the world of Wakanda, along with the art direction team led by Alan Hook. Aside from Beachler's production designs, I was especially impressed by Oscar and Emmy nominee Ruth E. Carter's costume designs. Someone had compared them to those costumes featured in the 1988 comedy, "COMING TO AMERICA". But honestly . . . I think I prefer Carter's more natural designs, as featured in the images below:

  




But all of the above would have meant nothing without the talented cast for the film. "BLACK PANTHER" featured some first-rate performances from the likes of Daniel Kaluuya, who portrayed Border Tribe leader W'Kabi, who desires his own personal vengeance against Ulysses Klaue; Sterling K. Brown as the revolutionary Prince N'Jobu; both John Kani and son Atandwa Kani as the older and younger versions of King T'Chaka; Angela Bassett as T'Challa's strong-willed, yet loving mother and advisor, Queen Ramonda; Denzel Whitaker, who gave a solid performance as the younger Zuri; and Martin Freeman as C.I.A. Agent Everett Ross, who proved to me more entertaining and relevant in this film than he was in "CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR".

However, there were those performances that really impressed me. One came from Andy Serkis, who was a hoot as the murderous, yet over-the-top South African arms dealer, Ulysses Klaue. Letitia Wright was equally entertaining as T'Challa's witty and charming sister, the tech-savy Princess Shuri. Another came from Lupita Nyong'o, who gave a passionate and heartfelt portrayal of Wakandan intelligence agent and T'Challa's former girlfriend, Nakia. Forest Whitaker gave a first-rate performance as Wakanda's top courtier and former spy, Zuri. Whitaker was especially impressive in one scene in which his character was forced to confess King T'Chaka's past actions regarding N'Jobu and Erik Killmonger. Winston Duke was very impressive, imposing and at times, rather amusing as M'Baku, leader of the mountainous Jabari Tribe. Also, his first appearance in the film - during T'Challa's coronation ceremony - is one of the most memorable moments I have seen in a movie for quite some time. Danai Gurira was equally impressive and imposing as Okoyo, the traditionalist leader of the king's bodyguards - the Dora Milaje. Although I found her character's conservatism a bit annoying at times, I must admit that Gurira gave one hell of a performance.

However, this movie is really about two characters - King T'Challa of Wakanda aka the Black Panther and his paternal cousin Erik "Killmonger" Stevens aka Prince N'Jadaka. Yes, I know that the movie is called "BLACK PANTHER". But to be honest, this movie is about both cousins and how their conflicting views on Wakanda's role in the world and especially upon the African diaspora. 

Chadwick Boseman's second turn as T'Challa proved to be a different kettle of fish from the driven newly ascended king determined to seek revenge for the death of his father, T'Chaka in "CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR". In this film, Boseman gave a more relaxed performance as the happy and more satisfied young king, eagerly anticipating, yet slightly fearing his new role as king. However, Boseman's relaxed performance skillfully transformed into one of disbelief, anger and outrage when T'Challa learned about his father's actions back in Oakland 1992. This was especially apparent in two scenes in which Boseman gave outstanding performances. The first scene featured his confrontation with Zuri, who confessed the true circumstances about Oakland. Boseman gave a very intimidating, yet regal performance in that scene. The other featured T'Challa's second dream in which he expressed anger and disappointment at his father's spirit for what happened to Erik. 

Speaking of the latter, Michael B. Jordan has been receiving rave reviews for his performance as Erik "Killmonger". Some have been declaring his character as the best MCU villain ever. I do not know if I agree with that assessment. But I must admit that Jordan gave one of the most skillfully ambiguous performances I have encountered in the franchise. Audiences could easily sympathize with his backstory - the young boy who had lost his parents and abandoned. Also, one cannot help but admired Erik's desire to help those African nations and members of the African diaspora - something that his cousin seemed unwilling to do. And yet, the level of violence Erik seemed willing to utilize in order to achieve his goal or his unwillingness to face that the one person who had truly wronged him was dead justified why the talented Jordan had portrayed him such ambiguity. 

As much as I enjoyed "BLACK PANTHER", I did have some problems with the film. One, there is a chance that I may have stumbled across a major writing blooper. In "CIVIL WAR", Avenger Wanda Maximoff aka the Scarlet Witch had accidentally killed a group of Wakanda subjects during a mission in Lagos, Nigeria. The Wakandans had been there on a goodwill mission. This lead King T'Chaka to publicly support the Sokovia Accords - an act that led to his death. And yet, Ryan Coogler and Joe Robert Cole made it clear in the 2018 movie's screenplay that Wakanda has practiced a policy of isolationism for centuries. Although Coogler and Cole remembered T'Chaka's death in the 2016 movie and Bucky Barnes' presence on Wakanda soil, they apparently forgot about this goodwill mission in Nigeria. Also, why did Erik Stevens wait so long to travel to Wakanda and make a bid for the throne? He could have challenged his uncle T'Chaka for the throne and get his revenge against the very man who had wronged him. Instead, he waited until after T'Chaka's death. Why? 

Exactly when did Steve Rogers and Bucky Barnes arrive in Wakanda, as shown in one of the post-title scenes in "CIVIL WAR'? The movie opened with T'Challa and Okoye returning to Wakanda for the first time since T'Chaka's death. Were both Steve and Bucky aboard T'Challa's plane? Were they aboard the Avenger jet that Steve had used to fly to Russia in the 2016 movie? Where were they? In fact, there was no scene featuring the pair's arrival in Wakanda for the first time, which I found rather odd. Speaking of arrivals, why was Okoye with T'Challa when he first returned to Wakanda? I realize that she was the leader of the Dora Milaje and that King T'Chaka was in Austria at the time of his death. But Okoye was missing in a scene from "CIVIL WAR" in which Avenger Natasha Romanoff aka Black Widow had sought T'Challa's help to track down Steve, Bucky and Sam Wilson aka the Falcon. As the king's leading bodyguard, she should have been there - whether with T'Chaka or T'Challa. Instead, another Dora Milaje bodyguard named Ayo (portrayed by actress/model Florence Kasumba) was there. Yet, the latter was missing aboard T'Challa's plane upon his return to Wakanda. One last question . . . why did T'Challa's closest friend, W'Kabi of the Border Tribe, seemed so willing to help Erik carry out his anti-isolationist policies? Why? I understand that he might be grateful to Erik for finally killing Klaue, the man who had killed his father years ago. But am I really to believe that his gratitude extended to supporting Erik's decision to end Wakanda's isolationist policy . . . especially since he had made it clear earlier in the film that he fully supported the old policy? Was he really that grateful to fight on Erik's behalf when T'Challa had returned alive to resume the challenge against Erik? I truly found this hard to believe.

And why was the only truly negative black character in this film was the only one of some American ancestry? There was something about the film's portrayal of African-Americans that struck me as rather negative and a bit one-dimensional. In this film, African-Americans seemed to consist solely of poor and slightly thuggish people barely capable of surviving on their own, except through criminal activities. The idea of Wakanda coming to their "rescue" with advanced technology made the latter country seem very similar to the White Savior trope. And if Wakanda was going to share their technology, why did T'Challa do so with the entire international community, instead of simply other African nations and the African diaspora . . . as Nakia had originally suggested? Considering that Erik had pointed out that many countries - especially in the West - were catching up technically with Wakanda, along with the international community's generally negative attitude toward African nations and those of the African diaspora; I cannot help but wonder if T'Challa had ever considered that many of the more wealthier nations would take advantage of his generosity at the first opportunity? Or was this plot twist something that Kevin Feige and the other Marvel/Disney suits had insisted that Coogler and Cole include? 

However . . . despite these misgivings I have about "BLACK PANTHER", I cannot deny that I truly enjoyed the movie. I did. I thought Ryan Coogler, along with screenwriter Joe Robert Cole and a talented cast led by Chadwick Boseman, did an exceptional job in bringing comic book hero the Black Panther and the world of Wakanda to life. At this moment, "BLACK PANTHER" has become one of my five favorite movies in the MCU franchise.

"BLACK PANTHER" (2018) Photo Gallery

Below are images from "BLACK PANTHER", the latest entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU). Directed and co-written by Ryan Coogler, the movie starred Chadwick Boseman as King T'Challa of Wakanda aka the Black Panther: 



"BLACK PANTHER" (2018) Photo Gallery

"THE HOBBIT: BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES" (2014) Review

"THE HOBBIT: BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES" (2014) Review

When New Line Cinema and Warner Brothers first released the news that Peter Jackson would adapt J.R.R. Tolkien's 1937 novel,"The Hobbit" into three films, I had not been pleased. I thought the novel could have easily been adapted into two films or even a single film. Now that Jackson's third film, "THE HOBBIT: BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES", I realized that my feelings had not changed. 

I still believe what I had originally stated . . . an adaptation of Tolkien's novel could have easily been limited to a single film. I believe I would have enjoyed it, considering my feelings for Tolkien's tale. But you know what? I do not regret that Jackson had spread the story into the three films. A single movie or a trilogy, I enjoyed Jackson's take on the story about Bilbo Baggins and his involvement with a group of dwarves under the leadership of one Thorin Oakenshield. But when I learned that this third film would feature a long, detailed conflict known as "the Battle of the Five Armies", I found myself not looking forward to the story's conclusion for the first time, since the release of the first movie. The problem is that I still had memories of the battles featured in the last two movies of Jackson's adaptation of "THE LORD OF THE RINGS" trilogy - "THE TWO TOWERS" and "RETURN OF THE KING". I did not enjoy watching them over a decade ago. And I felt certain that I would not enjoy watching the "Battle of the Five Armies".

There were aspects of this third HOBBIT that made it less enjoyable for me than the first two films. First of all, Bilbo and his traveling companions reached their destination in the last act of the previous film, "THE HOBBIT: THE DESOLATION OF SMAUG". Which meant that the story ceased to be a road trip. With the exception of a few scenes that featured Gandalf the Gray at Dol Guldur and Smaug's destruction of Laketown, the majority of the film was set at the dwarves' kingdom of Erebor and the nearby town of Dale. A bit disappointing. I also found the movie's limited focus on Thorin's company of dwarves rather disappointing as well. With the exception of Thorin and one of his nephews, Kili, the screenplay focused less on the dwarves and more on the other characters - especially Bard the Bowman and King Thranduil. Another aspect of the plot that disturbed me, was that it made a big deal of Thorin's greed in the form of "dragon sickness". Yet, it barely focused on King Thranduil's willingness to go to war against the dwarves for an elven necklace of white gems inside Erebor. Worse, the movie's plot brushed aside Laketown resident Bard's own greed. Yeah . . . I said it. I believe Bard had developed his own greed for some of the treasure inside Erebor. During the movie's first half hour, he made it clear to Alfrid Lickspittle that he had no interested in the Erebor treasure (which he had regarded as cursed) and only wanted aid in the form of food, shelter and medicine from Thorin. Yet, within another half hour, he was demanding some of the treasure for himself and other Laketown survivors. What led to this turnabout in Bard's demands? Why did the screenplay fail to explain it? 

Remember when I had predicted that I would not like the battle sequence featured in this movie? Well . . . I was right. I did not like it. Let me correct myself. I did not like most of it. I found the majority of the so-called "Battle of the Five Armies" ridiculously long and overblown . . . just like the other battle sequences in "THE TWO TOWERS" and "RETURN OF THE KING". Now that I think of it, the movie's battle sequence also reminded me of "the Battle at Hogwarts" featured in the 2011 movie, "HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS - PART II", with the constant number of interruptions that allowed the battle to last longer than necessary. It is only by the grace of God that I was able to tolerate the "Battle of the Five Armies" a bit more than the Helm's Deep, Pelennor Fields, Black Gate and Hogwarts battles. And I will tell you why.

What made the Battle of the Five Armies a little more tolerable for me? One, it had began under unusual circumstances. Instead of a battle in which the Erebor Dwarves fought side-by-side with Men of Dale and the Woodland Realm Elves against the Moria Orcs, Goblins and Wargs; the battle nearly became a conflict between the dwarves and an alliance between the Dale men and the elves over the treasure inside the Erebor mines. But the appearance of an army of orcs, goblins and wargs led by Orc chieftain Azog quickly led to a shifting of alliances. I found that rather interesting. The Battle of the Five Armies may have began with rather odd circumstances, it ended with a good deal of poignancy and tragedy that left me in tears. And I cannot say the same for the battles featured in "THE TWO TOWERS", "RETURN OF THE KING" and "DEATHLY HALLOWS - PART II".

I have never read "The Hobbit", so I have no idea if J.R.R. Tolkien had any plans to write "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy around the time when he wrote the 1937 novel. But I have to admire the way Peter Jackson and the movie's other screenwriters - Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens and Guillermo del Toro - set up the events featured in "THE LORD OF THE RINGS" movies, both in this movie and the previous two films. This was especially apparent in moments that featured Bilbo's use of Sauron's One Ring; his eventual reluctance to inform Gandalf about it; Galadriel, Elrond and Saruman's encounter with Sauron, during their attempt to rescue Gandalf from Dol Guldur; Saruman's doom-filled decision to deal with the fleeing and formless Sauron; and Thranduil's post-battle suggestion that Legolas meet with a young Dunedain ranger named "Strider". The movie even ended where "AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY" began - on Bilbo's 111st birthday, setting in motion, the events of 2001-2003 movie trilogy. I have to say . . . good job.

However, what really impressed me about "THE HOBBIT: BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES" was how the screenwriters handled the political chaos that seemed to mark the story. I am not criticizing the story in any way. I just found it rather amazing at how Gandalf's concerns over Smaug, Thorin Oakenshield's past history with Azog and his bout of "dragon sickness" brought about so much political chaos in this story. And I must say that Jackson and the other three screenwriters handled it so well. The continuing romance between Thorin's younger nephew Kili and the Silvan elf guard Tauriel is also handled well in the movie. Their time together seemed less than it was in "THE DESOLATION OF SMAUG". But thanks to Aidan Turner and Evangeline Lilly's performances, there were two scenes featuring the pair that really impressed me - Kili's plea to Tauriel that she follow him to Erebor and their efforts to save each other from the Orc called Bolg. Aside from Kili and Tauriel, one of the most interesting relationships in the movie was that between Bilbo and Thorin. In fact, their relationship has been interesting since the moment Bilbo first rejected Gandalf's suggestion that he join Thorin's companay as a burglar in "AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY". Thorin's bout with "dragon sickness" came close to seriously undermining the pair's friendship that had thrived since the company's escape from Moria in the first film. Which is why I found their reconciliation and final scene together so poignant, thanks to Martin Freeman and Richard Armitage's performances. But the one scene that really left me in tears featured Bilbo's final good-bye to the dwarves that were part of Thorin's quest. I felt surprised by how much I truly grew to like these guys. Even more so than the members of the Ring Fellowship from "THE LORD OF THE RINGS" trilogy.

"THE HOBBIT: BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES" only earned one Academy Award - namely a Best Sound Editing for Brent Burge and Jason Canovas. One technical nomination? One? That was it? No nominations for special effects, costume designs, or editing. There was not even a nomination for Andrew Lesnie's outstanding cinematography, as shown in the following image:



I discovered that "THE LORD OF THE RINGS: RETURN OF THE KING" received eleven Academy Award nominations . . . and won all of its categories. And I am appalled. Why? Despite its flaws, I still hold "BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES" in a higher regard. Now I realize that I am not the last word on the quality of any movie. But I am entitled to my own opinions. I am sorry, but I simply have a higher opinion of "BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES" than either the second and third films in "THE LORD OF THE RINGS" trilogy. And I cannot take the Oscars seriously if the only nomination they could give this film was for Best Sound Editing.

I certainly had no problems with the performances featured in the movie. Although I was slightly disappointed by the decreased presence of most of the dwarves in Thorin's company, they still managed to give first-rate performances . . . especially Graham McTavish as Dwalin, Dean O'Gorman as Fíli, and Ken Stott as Balin. Cate Blanchett, Hugo Weaving and Christopher Lee reprised their roles as Galadriel, Elrond and Saruman the White and gave solid, but not particularly earth-shattering performances. I could also say the same about Ian Holm, who returned as Old Bilbo in the movie's final scene and Sylvester McCoy, who briefly appeared as Gandalf's fellow wizard, Radagast the Brown. Two performances in the movie struck me as particularly funny - Ryan Gage as the greedy and imaginative Laketown official Alfrid, and Billy Connolly as Thorin's loud and sardonic cousin Dáin. Lee Pace gave a colorful and fascinating performance as the complicated and not always likable Elvenking of Mirkwood, Thranduil. And Benedict Cumberbatch continued to send chills down my spine, thanks to his exceptional performance as the voice for the malignant dragon, Smaug.

Aidan Turner and Evangeline Lilly continued to generate sparks as the two star-crossed lovers, Kili and Tauriel. I found them especially effective in two scenes I had earlier mentioned. Both Orlando Bloom and Luke Evans gave excellent performances as Elven prince Legolas and Laketown archer Bard the Bowman. For the first time, I also noticed that the pair could have easily portrayed cousins. Honestly. Ian McKellen was excellent as usual portraying Gandalf the Grey - especially in his scenes with Richard Armitage and Martin Freeman. I like to think that the latter made his mark as the reluctant adventurer, Bilbo Baggins. Freeman did an excellent job of developing his character from the prissy homebody to the clever and brave Hobbit. But my vote for the best performance in the movie would go to Richard Armitage for his complicated and fascinating portrayal of the Erebor Dwarf king, Thorin Oakenshield. Actually, I feel that Armitage had been knocking it out of the ballpark since the first film. But in my opinion, two scenes in "BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES" featured his best performances as the ambiguous Thorin - namely the latter's final struggle with "dragon fever" that I found absolutely brilliant and the poignant farewell between his character and Bilbo. 

I cannot deny that "THE HOBBIT: BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES" is my least favorite of the three films based upon J.R.R. Tolkien's 1937 novel. But despite its flaws, I still managed to enjoy it very much, thanks to Peter Jackson's energetic direction, excellent production values and some superb performances from a cast led by Martin Freeman, Ian McKellen and Richard Armitage.

"THE HOBBIT: THE BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES" (2014) Photo Gallery

Below are images from "THE HOBBIT: THE BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES", the third and last in a trilogy of movies based upon J.R.R. Tolkien's 1937 novel, "The Hobbit". Directed by Peter Jackson, the movie stars Ian McKellen, Martin Freeman and Richard Armitage: 


"THE HOBBIT: THE BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES" (2014) Photo Gallery