The Hobbit
-
Consider my bias, as I'm a hardcore Tolkien fanatic, and I rarely head for the big screen.
I'll use LOTR as my baseline. Probably the biggest problem is- how do you top some of the greatest 9 hours of film making? In that respect, at least on the first viewing, The Hobbit comes up short.
I had fears hearing the rumors Jackson was going to seriously deviate from the book. Not the case- with a few exceptions, that I'll get to. Complaints- I have some. I'll get the big negative out of the way first. The pace of the movie- despite some pretty epic battle scenes- seemed agonizingly slow, and made the movie feel far longer than it's actual run time. Bilbo signing on with the Dwarves seemed like forever. With 10 years gone by, I was hoping for a little better on the special effects too. I thought the battle scenes were a tad overblown, but if World of Warcraft is your thing- you'll love them. Jackson turns the Wizard Radagast into a bumbling goober- which he really wasn't in the book. Add in, us Loremasters know Thorin killed Azog way back at the Battle of Moria- and Azog is still very much alive and (sort of) well in the Hobbit. I have a damn good idea what's going to happen to him in Chapter II. I don't get Jackson's fascination of turning the Head orcs into caricatures either. Gothmog in LOTR could pass for a mutilated Porky Pig- there's several similar new vermin awaiting you in The Hobbit.
Now to the pluses- the cinematography is great. For those who aren't Tolkien fanatics, Jackson did a terrific job filling in the back story. Did a good job of "adultifying" the Hobbit, which was written more on the level of a kid's Fairy Tale. For those who are Loremasters, there's plenty of stuff in the movie verbatim right out of the book. (Gollum & Bilbo) Did a pretty good job differentiating the 13 dwarves- and even Moi couldn't rattle off all their names without a lot of thinking- and as in LOTR Jackson dead on pegged how each of them were described in the book. Kudos for that.
I'll have to see it a couple more times at least- but first blush it's a B, B- flick.
-
Consider my bias, as I'm a hardcore Tolkien fanatic, and I rarely head for the big screen.
I'll use LOTR as my baseline. Probably the biggest problem is- how do you top some of the greatest 9 hours of film making? In that respect, at least on the first viewing, The Hobbit comes up short.
I had fears hearing the rumors Jackson was going to seriously deviate from the book. Not the case- with a few exceptions, that I'll get to. Complaints- I have some. I'll get the big negative out of the way first. The pace of the movie- despite some pretty epic battle scenes- seemed agonizingly slow, and made the movie feel far longer than it's actual run time. Bilbo signing on with the Dwarves seemed like forever. With 10 years gone by, I was hoping for a little better on the special effects too. I thought the battle scenes were a tad overblown, but if World of Warcraft is your thing- you'll love them. Jackson turns the Wizard Radagast into a bumbling goober- which he really wasn't in the book. Add in, us Loremasters know Thorin killed Azog way back at the Battle of Moria- and Azog is still very much alive and (sort of) well in the Hobbit. I have a damn good idea what's going to happen to him in Chapter II. I don't get Jackson's fascination of turning the Head orcs into caricatures either. Gothmog in LOTR could pass for a mutilated Porky Pig- there's several similar new vermin awaiting you in The Hobbit.
Now to the pluses- the cinematography is great. For those who aren't Tolkien fanatics, Jackson did a terrific job filling in the back story. Did a good job of "adultifying" the Hobbit, which was written more on the level of a kid's Fairy Tale. For those who are Loremasters, there's plenty of stuff in the movie verbatim right out of the book. (Gollum & Bilbo) Did a pretty good job differentiating the 13 dwarves- and even Moi couldn't rattle off all their names without a lot of thinking- and as in LOTR Jackson dead on pegged how each of them were described in the book. Kudos for that.
I'll have to see it a couple more times at least- but first blush it's a B, B- flick.
Consider my bias, as I'm a hardcore Tolkien fanatic, and I rarely head for the big screen.
I'll use LOTR as my baseline. Probably the biggest problem is- how do you top some of the greatest 9 hours of film making? In that respect, at least on the first viewing, The Hobbit comes up short.
I had fears hearing the rumors Jackson was going to seriously deviate from the book. Not the case- with a few exceptions, that I'll get to. Complaints- I have some. I'll get the big negative out of the way first. The pace of the movie- despite some pretty epic battle scenes- seemed agonizingly slow, and made the movie feel far longer than it's actual run time. Bilbo signing on with the Dwarves seemed like forever. With 10 years gone by, I was hoping for a little better on the special effects too. I thought the battle scenes were a tad overblown, but if World of Warcraft is your thing- you'll love them. Jackson turns the Wizard Radagast into a bumbling goober- which he really wasn't in the book. Add in, us Loremasters know Thorin killed Azog way back at the Battle of Moria- and Azog is still very much alive and (sort of) well in the Hobbit. I have a damn good idea what's going to happen to him. in Chapter II. I don't get Jackson's fascination of turning the Head orcs into caricatures either. Gothmog in LOTR could pass for a mutilated Porky Pig- there's several similar new vermin awaiting you in The Hobbit.
Now to the pluses- the cinematography is great. For those who aren't Tolkien fanatics, Jackson did a terrific job filling in the back story. Did a good job of "adultifying" the Hobbit, which was written more on the level of a kid's Fairy Tale. For those who are Loremasters, there's plenty of stuff in the movie verbatim right out of the book. (Gollum & Bilbo) Did a pretty good job differentiating the 13 dwarves- and even Moi couldn't rattle off all their names without a lot of thinking- and as in LOTR Jackson dead on pegged how each of them were described in the book. Kudos for that.
I'll have to see it a couple more times at least- but first blush it's a B, B- flick.
Maybe I'm in the minority but LOTR bored the crap out of me. I read all the books (forced myself. Tolkien's old timey writing and prediliction to use a lot of songs is rough) and though the movies were true enough, I just couldn't force myself to care about frodo, samwise, gandalf and crew. I don't have extremely high hopes for the hobbit either, I just expect smaug to look cool and the goblins better sing "down down to goblin town Ho-ho" or the movie fails.
-
2.75 hr movie? I cant find a recliner theater so I will wait for the DVD.....
-
Thanks Hoorta! I didn't read your take until I'd written my review but it seems we're on the same page!
I liked it a little better than you did but gave it a pass for a lot of inconsistencies!
WSS
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login