The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)
I watch the extended versions of The Lord of the Rings every year, and no matter how many times I watch them, I’m equally engaged. So when I heard that Peter Jackson was turning his attention to The Hobbit I was both thrilled and terrified. How could a movie version of The Hobbit possibly match my personal enjoyment of the original trilogy? And why split it up into multiple films when it’s really not that big of a story? Below is my review of the film’s strengths and weaknesses, and commentary on the controversial decision to film it in 48fps. This review is going to be a tad longer than my normal movie reviews are as I have a lot of opinions.
Thank God for Martin Freeman- As expected, Martin Freeman is perfect for the role of Bilbo Baggins and this is something that you can see from his first moments on screen (and especially when he meets the dwarves!). Freeman is able to make a character, that would have been pretty unlikable with a lesser actor, so easy to relate to. Bilbo is truly an everyman sort of character. Like most of us, he’d prefer to stay home and read about his adventures in books. He gets frustrated and annoyed, but is ultimately a good guy. Martin Freeman manages to capture his quirks perfectly, delivering (in my opinion) a far more nuanced performance then Elijah Wood did as Frodo. In fact, I was pretty happy with the casting decisions in this film all around. Everyone did a great job, from the new actors to the returning cast.
The Importance of Knowing Your Audience- Although I enjoyed the movie overall, The Hobbit just didn't measure up to The Lord of the Rings. Peter Jackson tries to deliver us the first in a series of films that would seamlessly tie in to the Lord of the Rings, while still capturing the spirit of The Hobbit, a children’s book. As a result, we have these strange tonal shifts. We’ll have juvenile bodily humor one scene and gorey beheadings twenty minutes later. Also, much of the material that Peter Jackson has added to The Hobbit to tie into The Lord of the Rings has no place in the theatrical version of this movie. It’s as if Jackson tried to make a version of the film that would appeal to every mega-fan who loved the extended versions, forgetting that we only make up a small portion of the audience. The mainstream is likely to find this film overlong and frustrating (even I wasn’t in love with the scenes involving Radagast the Brown). A key example of this is the initial scene involving Frodo and older Bilbo in the Shire. While this would have been perfect for the extended edition, it just seems to delay the start of the movie. This is painfully obvious when you see the IMAX version, which contains the first nine minutes of Star Trek Into Darkness before the film. These nine minutes manages to introduce all of the major players (including the villain) and deliver humor, pathos, action and suspense. The story gets going right away in Star Trek, which only draws attention to how long it takes to get off the ground in The Hobbit.
The Dwarves: Or what the Movie Did Better than the Book(!!)- One thing I did really like that Peter Jackson did is better flesh out the dwarves. No offense to Tolkien but with the exception of Thorin, all of them ran together for me while reading the book. But with the film version, the costume and hair/makeup departments have given them all distinct looks, and effort has been made to flesh out a handful of them, given these shallow characters more personality and depth. Also, I was far more emotionally invested in their quest this time around, as it sseemed to be less about the treasure and more about the dwarves’ quest to reclaim their home, which is much more relatable.
My Unpopular Opinion on 48fps- Okay, it seems to me that the 48fps version is pretty universally hated by critics. I really couldn’t disagree more. The film is absolutely gorgeous, rich in color and in detail, something that is really apparent in the prologue which tells Thorin’s backstory. Yes, it’s also apparent that the high frame rate experience has some drawbacks. There are moments when you can see certain details that you’re clearly not supposed to (such as Ian McKellan’s contact lenses), and the high frame rate does make certain scenes (especially those taken under the harsh light of day) look kind of washed out. Now I’ve heard a lot of people say that they hated the HFR so much that they could not get into the entire movie. I agree that it’s an adjustment, but I think it’s worth it.
My Brief Thoughts on the First Nine Minutes of Star Trek Into Darkness- WOW! WHEN IS THIS MOVIE COMING OUT AGAIN? SPOCK!?
Final Thoughts- Despite it’s flaws (weird tonal shifts, slow moments, and occasional drawbacks of high frame rate) The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is certainly still worth your time and money. Peter Jackson does a great job of bringing us back into the world of Middle Earth, the casting is spot on, and the film is just beautiful to look at. Four Stars