The Hobbit, a Highly Expected Pleasure

Before I begin my review of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, let me preface my opinions with a little biography.  When I was ten years old, my father began reading The Hobbit aloud to me and my sisters.  I got so into the story that during the day while he was at work I would sneak the book off the shelf, take it up to my room and read ahead so I could find out what happened next.  I fell in love with Tolkien's books that year, and I have loved them ever since.  I have read The Hobbit, all the Lord of the Rings, the appendixes, the Silmarillion, and the Book of Unfinished Tales.  My current project is to read the Book of Lost Tales.  In short, I am a Tolkein NERD! As soon as the movies came out, my family watched them, even though my sisters and I were so young my parents fast forwarded through some of the battle sections because they were too violent, and they remain to this day, my favorite movies of all time.  Therefore, when I heard that the Hobbit was being made into a trilogy of movies, I was both ecstatic and a little hesitant.  I have such a love for the stories that a movie rendition always makes me a bit nervous, because movies are never as good as the book.  I tell you this because I want you to know where I am coming from in this review; a decent all though by no means complete knowledge of the book and a love of the original story.

That out of the way... on to the review.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (hereafter referred to simply as "the Hobbit") was FANTASTIC! I walked out of the theatre stunned, totally convinced that it was the best movie I had ever seen.  A little less than a week, and a 3D showing later, I am still willing to hold by that statement.  The visuals, story, and acting all came together to form a movie that will not disappoint die hard fans.  That being said, my statement at the beginning should begin to make more sense.  I am very familiar with the story, and have a certain understanding of the workings of the world in which the story takes place.  Thus, for me, the film was incredible because it was able to tap into that rich trove of lore and history.  I cannot, however, speak to the novitiate, the uninitiated into the realm of Middle Earth.  There might be aspects of the story that move too fast or too slow for those who are unfamiliar with Middle Earth.  Thus, I recommend the movie with this caveat: if you do not know the story, do not blame me if you do not find it enjoyable.  For all the other Tolkein nerds out there, who have learned to speak elvish and have the appendices memorized and can name all thirteen dwarves in the company without batting an eyelash, read on! This review is for everyone, but most especially for you.

First, let me say that The Hobbit was a visually beautiful movie.  Much lighter than Lord of the Rings (LOTR) both in narrative and visually, the filmmakers make excellent use of the beautiful New Zealand scenery.  Wide scale panoramic shots give the movie the sense of grandeur that one experiences in LOTR, but unlike its predecessors, The Hobbit is shot with a saturated lens that makes the colors more vibrant, a trait that is used exceptionally in shots of Rivendell, and in sunrises and sunsets that figure prominently into the film.  Not only does the movie present an overall beauty and grandeur, but it also creates some beautifully iconic images in its presentation of action.  Silhouettes of the characters are often used for great dramatic effect, and some of the images look as if they could have sprung from the drawings in the book itself at the beginnings of the chapters.  One of the most powerful uses of this technique occurs in the goblin court where Gandalf uses a bright flash to blind the goblins and help the dwarves escape.  In the film, directly after the flash, only Gandalf's silhouette can be seen, sword in one hand, staff in the other, hat on top of everything, looming in the smoke and darkness.  It is a stunning moment, a beautiful visual representation of how the scene always appeared in my mind, and I believe in the minds of every reader of the book.  The same technique is used to great effect in shots of the whole company, where each of the dwarves is distinctively unique, Bilbo Baggins a head shorter than everyone else, and Gandalf looming over everyone either at the front or the back of the line.  There is so much to appreciate visually in the movie that I could discuss it for hours, but half of you have probably already stopped reading, and the other half is getting bored, so I will get a move on to other aspects of the movie.

Acting wise, the movie was stelar.  Martin Freeman presents a very convincing Bilbo Baggins.  When I first heard that he was going to be playing Bilbo Baggins I was so thrilled because I had seen his work in Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, and his performance as John Watson in the BBC TV show Sherlock, and if you combine Arthur Dent with Watson, you pretty much have Bilbo Baggins.  He does an excellent job of portraying the hobbit in all his fear and lovableness, while adding a depth of development and personality to the character beyond what was even conveyed in the book.  The result is a Bilbo Baggins who grows throughout his adventures from a Baggins to a burglar, a hobbit who is able to transcend his fear because of his care for his friends.  Richard Armitage also turns in a fantastic performance as Thorin Oakenshield, the dwarf prince attempting to regain his kingdom.  In the book, I never understood the devotion the dwarves, and eventually Bilbo had for Thorin; he always struck me as a bit of a stuck up prig.  In the film, however, his pride conveys a sense of majesty rather than self absorption, and the dwarf prince is a grand figure rather than a pompous one.  An excellent performance from returning actors Ian McKellen and Andy Serkis completes the film, as both actors works on what must have been primarily green screen, one to properly complete the proportions of wizard compared to the dwarves and the hobbit, the other reprising his role as Gollum in all his CGI wonder.  Serkis in particular turns in a stunning performance, advancements in the CGI technology making the actor's expressions more clearly visible on the computer generated character.  All in all, the entire cast did a fantastic job of bringing Thorin and Company to life on the screen.

Story wise, I will begin by saying the film was one of the best book to screen adaptations I have ever seen.  By this I mean that Peter Jackson and the screenwriters did a brilliant job maintaining as much of the original story as possible while still creating a film that was fast paced and watchable.  They managed to include many of the original lines from the story in a way that was humorous and memorable.  Hobbit readers will rejoice to know that the story of Bullroarer Took, a hobbit who was so large he could ride a real horse, was included in the story, as is Bilbo Baggins' exchange of "good mornings" with Gandalf.  The major changes to the original story came in the form of the addition of a new major antagonist; the goblin Azog the Defiler, and in the inclusion of the actions of the White Council.  It is in the role of Azog that I have found Tolkein purists most upset; they do not like the inclusion of a new character who does nothing more than move the story at a more rapid pace, however, as a critic, I can understand the choice.  It is very difficult to transition a story from page to screen, even more so something as complex and well loved as The Hobbit.  Movies require a faster, more driven pace, so I am willing to overlook a couple of small changes for the sake of the film.  All in all, however, this movie was one of the most faithful book to screen adaptations I have ever seen (which is probably why it ends up being three movies long).

There were a couple of small disappointments with the movie.  One of the most common complaints I have heard has to do with the CGI in the film.  There are two moments that particularly stand out.  First, is the goblins under the Misty Mountains.  These are all done with CGI, and the result is very different from anything produced in the original trilogy.  My response to this criticism is that if one reads the Hobbit, and then LOTR, one sees a stark difference between the goblins in one and the orcs in the other anyway.  The species under the Misty Mountains is entirely different from those that play such a heavy role in LOTR.  However, the obsessive use of CGI does tend to make the Misty Mountain goblins less scary than the original LOTR orcs, as they seem less human and less real.  There is really no way to substitute for human movement, a fact that Hollywood producers would do well to realize.  The other flaw with the CGI was in the eagles.  I was always disappointed at the stilted portrayal of the eagles in the original LOTR, so I was not expecting much from the CGI, and I was pleasantly surprised at how well they turned out.  There was, however, a difficulty with the eagles talons.  Not to seem nit-picky, but when everything else in the movie was so well done, it was strange that the talons on the eagles would end up looking so fake compared to everything else.  A bit of a disappointment, but again minor in comparison with the quality of the rest of the film.  The one other factor that annoyed me personally was Kate Blanchet's return as Galadriel.  I always liked the character in LOTR, and was excited when I heard that The Hobbit would be incorporating extra characters into the White Council sequences.  I was underwhelmed, however, with her performance: she seemed a bit stiff and awkward, and her face looked like it was made of plastic.  I realize it is ten years later, but I would rather see age lines on the actress' face than think I was looking at some sort of elf Barbie.

No film is perfect, however, and the flaws that I noticed within the film were more than made up for by the overall quality of the product.  The attention to detail is stunning, the visuals are amazing and the acting superb.  I could go on for pages about the symbolism of the story (Bilbo's sword looks markedly different from the Sting in LOTR because it is missing the elvish runes that spell out the name: at the beginning of the story the sword is unblooded and unnamed, rather like Bilbo who is untried and has not yet found himself. I look forward to seeing what Peter Jackson intends to do with that down the road), but I really don't have the time right now.  Perhaps I will come back later and write a second review going into just the symbolism, or perhaps I will come back later and edit this review to include that aspect.  For now, let me conclude by saying this.  Perhaps in critical circles the movie will not do well.  People will rant about it being too long or too short, or criticize the CGI or negatively compare the story to the original LOTR trilogy.  I do not mind.  For me, however, I think the Hobbit was a fine movie, perhaps the best I have ever seen.  I think this is because, even though I am an English major and love looking for the darkness and the reality behind the stories, at the end of the day, what I really want is a fairy tale.  I want a story that picks me up out of reality and throws me into a world of sparkling magic and gleaming unreality.  In the end, what I really love in a story is "once upon a time"... "in a hole in the ground there lived... a hobbit."

Well, back to reality.

Give me time... TIME!

Alright all, so I know that all six or seven of my faithful readers out there are wondering when the review of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey will be ready... I am working on it.  I will likely begin writing the review over the weekend, and finish it after a second viewing of the show, hopefully next Tuesday.  So expect a review some time around then. A bit of a first taste, here is what I said on the Fandango review.

To all the people out there looking at what is coming out around Christmas and contemplating which movie to go see, the answer is simple: GO TO THE HOBBIT!  This movie is a beautiful compilation of incredible story, fantastic acting, beautiful cinematography, and tasteful CGI.  What makes this film so amazing is the fact that story comes first.  It remains remarkably true to the book, with much of the script coming straight from the pages of Tolkein's classic.  What liberties that were taken were mainly functional, designed to give the film a sense of urgency and movement more suited to a film than to the rambling beauty of the book.

Well, back to reality... for a while.