It’s been 9 years since we last took a trip to Middle-Earth with the Oscar-sweeping finale to ‘The Lord of the Rings’ trilogy, ‘The Return of the King’. Since then, the trilogy has gone down as one of the greatest to have ever been produced with a wide fan-base which continues to bring in mass amounts of money. Now, Peter Jackson takes us back to Middle-Earth with his adaptation of ‘The Hobbit’, set 60 years before Frodo Baggins sets off to destroy the Ring of Power in Mount Doom. Currently certified ‘Fresh’ with a 65% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, the film’s received a fair amount of criticism, but is it justified?
Before I go into the film, it’s worth mentioning that one simply shouldn’t compare ‘The Hobbit’ films to ‘Lord of the Rings’. Yes, there are obviously similarities such as characters and settings, and a few references to the films, but the source material of the two differ greatly and in particular, the way in which author J.R.R Tolkien tells these tales. The former is actually a short 300-page children’s novel told in a much lighter, humourous tone and in less detail (so why is it a trilogy? I’ll get to that later). As you’re aware of, the Lord of the Rings is thrice as long and much more substantial. Therefore, you can’t really compare the two trilogies so don’t expect ‘The Fellowship of the Ring’ (TFOTR) for this first installment.
In addition, this is in no way the new ‘Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace’, that was a car-crash of a film and an insult to Episodes IV-VI. There is a big difference with ‘The Hobbit’, Jackson and co. are not creating a new trilogy from nothing, they have an existing screenplay which they are working from.
The film begins in The Shire at Bag End on Bilbo Baggins’s (Ian Holm) 111th birthday, Elijah Wood makes a short appearance as Frodo before departing to surprise Gandalf in the woods (which is of course the first we see of Frodo and Gandalf in TFOTR). There is a reference to Gandalf and how he hates to be late which was a nice touch.
A prologue of Smaug the dragon’s attack on the Dwarves’ homeland of Erebor is shown before the tale begins 60 years before with Bilbo (Martin Freeman) being approached by Gandalf the Grey (Ian McKellen) who invites him on an adventure. Bilbo is stubborn and used to his home comforts and is quick to reject the invitation, however soon after, 13 Dwarves and Gandalf show up (to Bilbo’s displeasure) at Bag End and help themselves to a feast and gathering.
Some have criticised the pace of the film and how too long is spent in The Shire however, these scenes are terrific and provide a great insight into the personalities of the dwarves and the adventure that lies ahead of them. Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage) leads the company and explains of their quest to travel to The Lonely Mountain and reclaim their homeland from Smaug.
Soon after, they set out and Bilbo joins them. The films evolves into a great fantasy-adventure as we are introduced to new characters and some more familiar. One character that has hotly been discussed is the nature-loving and rather eccentric wizard Radagast the Brown (Sylvester McCoy). In his scenes, we hear of a poison in the woods and the introduction to something familiar which will play a greater part in the following sequels. Radagast, even criticised and insulted by Saruman the White (Christopher Lee), is a lot to take but does not go into Jar Jar Binks territory as some have suggested. The screen time he receives is probably enough and the scenes with him are entertaining, although, his sled that is made up of rabbits was a bit much…
Over the course of the film, you learn more about the Dwarves and it becomes obvious which ones are going to receive the most screen-time. Unfortunately for Jackson, he has a headache with there being 13 dwarves but he’s dealt with it brilliantly. Unsurprisingly, Thorin is the most featured dwarf, with Balin (Ken Stott), Dwalin (Graham McTavish), Kili (Aidan Turner), Fili (Dean O’Gorman) and Bofur (James Nesbitt) being the most memorable. Jackson’s done a fantastic job is bringing them from the book to the big-screen and dealt with the limitations of each character’s development well.
The dwarves are known for being courageous and proud, but also very mischievous and prone to being clumsy. How Jackson was going to deal with the humour from the book in the films was heavily discussed with a lot of it being a bit childish with an element of slapstick. The tone is fairly light, with some of the humour being quite childish, but it worked. About 90% of the jokes worked, were funny and true to the book which is a big plus.
Despite this, there are a few negatives. One of the biggest issues was with it being quite childish and light in tone is that the film is not really allowed to be too dramatic or realistic otherwise this would have conflicted a lot of things. However, the issue with this is that any real sense of danger is lost. In the Goblin Town, the company fall on a bridge from an incredible height and get up unscathed. On top of this, there are other action scenes where you never feel like they are in grave peril. Due to this, it’s slightly harder to totally immerse yourself in some of the action.
Despite this, the set-pieces are still of high-quality, they’re fun and enjoyable rather than being too gritty and dramatic. The CGI is terrific in most cases but that does not come with its criticisms. Peter Jackson seems to be very pro-CG where as some directors much prefer miniatures and more use of make-up. This is a hinderance to the film as the CGI often becomes a bit too much.
There is no problem with CGI on certain characters such as Smaug or the wargs, but some would be much better without it. Here comparisons with ‘Lord of the Rings’ can be drawn. LOTR featured a lot of miniatures and make-up which had a huge positive impact on the film as it really helps you get engaged. Unfortunately, some important villains are entirely CGI including Azog – The Pale Orc and The Goblin King and at times, it really shows. The Goblin King was poorly portrayed, looked very cartoonish and just a weak character.
Azog could be a terrific villain, but sometimes the fact he’s CGI is so obvious it’s cringeworthy. He should definitely have been make-up. When you think about how terrifying, ugly and brilliant characters like Gothmog and Lurkz were in the LOTR trilogy, it highlights how good make-up can be. One scene featuring Azog and Thorin could be in a Zack Snyder movie which is never a good sign.
Despite this, Gollum (Andy Serkis) looks absolutely stunning and lifelike and the scene ‘Riddles in the Dark’ is arguably the strongest of the film. It’s an important scene in the book as the events of what happens here play a big part throughout the rest of the story and it was more than satisfying at how this scene was done. It’s about time Serkis gets the recognition he deserves for his motion-capture performances as he is flawless and a truly skilled actor.
The film ends at a point which suitably sets up the sequel and will no doubt be the most anticipated film of 2013. It’s worth mentioning that Martin Freeman plays the part of Bilbo absolutely brilliantly. Some had concerns about his ability to fulfil the demands of such a central and important role but he smashed them to pieces. He captures every side of Bilbo terrifically with there being a couple of stand-out emotional scenes towards the end of the film.
So ‘The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey’, worth the 9-year wait? Yes. It’s not perfect, but it’s a very good film considering in the first third of the novel, the pace is quite slow and action sparse. However, the following two-thirds will feature vast amounts of action with there definitely being enough to fill into a trilogy. In the novel, there is a lack of detail and action sequences last no longer than a couple of pages. For example, ‘The Battle of Five Armies’ is an epic battle that takes place later on in the novel, but it’s worthy of being the focus-point of a film as it’s that important. The main issue is with the source material and that is that the Dwarves’ quest does not seem substantial enough to be worthy of a trilogy. However, for fans, it means more of Middle-Earth and a terrific cast so we shouldn’t complain.
So despite there being concerns with the amount of CGI and there being no real sense of danger, ‘The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey’ is a terrific first instalment to one of, if not the, most highly anticipated films in the past 10 years. It’s 169 minutes in run-time, but it honestly felt half of that. Bring on ‘The Desolation of Smaug.’
Rating: * * * *
Dan Reynolds's Blog 