^I agree. In a way, that scene epitomised what was wrong with the movie.
I saw it today, and in a conversation afterward I summed up my feelings as follows:
"It was good." *Shrug*
There was a lot to like. Freeman was very appealing as Bilbo, and the movie did a good job of turning the dwarves into something more than just comic relief. (I particularly liked the strong sense that they were a diaspora community) A number of scenes were well-executed, particularly the Riddle Game and the battle with the Orcs.
But it was long, and felt
long: worse, it felt padded. The new material was not well-integrated with the rest of the film, and in some cases led to bad choices like the final battle described above. Somehow, Middle Earth seemed a lot less real and substantial this time around.
Finally, for some reason, I really noticed what a sausage-fest these stories are, this time. Who knew that Arwen was such an important addition to LOTR?
Overall, The Hobbit
reminded me af a joke someone made about Pearl Harbor
: it was "a two-hour movie squeezed into three hours." And now I have to wait two years, and sit through another movie, before I get to see Smaug? What a drag.
So, I would give it a positive but unenthusiastic rating: B+. I'll go see the next one--but I'll be hoping it will be better than this one.