Friday 14 December 2012

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)


Let me start by apologizing for the month long delay. Busy lives and a lack of good movies have kept us from posting reviews. But we're back. And now to business.

Whenever I watch a good movie on screen I tend to come out with a small smile plastered to my face. If it's a long awaited release or a sequel this smile lasts longer. If some of my favorite actors delivered fine performances in it the smile lasts even longer. The smile lasts the longest when I am too caught up in the experience to sit back and think about the movie. We've all been guilty of post-movie exuberance disorder. This year particularly has made me suffer the most, I think it is because of the number of big movie franchises that had their latest sequel/prequel/reboot this year. And I do suffer, the suffering starts the moment I begin to think about the movie and start deconstructing it.

I call it the Dark Knight Rises Effect. Not to be confused with the Matrix Revolutions effect where a sequel purely sucks.

Before I start on the review let me get something out of the way. This adaptation of Tolkien's novel The Hobbit differed from the novel in many ways. The characters were slightly different. Some of the plot points have been changed and some of them expanded. I will not complain about these as they would take up far too much time and they would require me to re-read The Hobbit. The movie differs from the novel. Some of you might be angry about the changes. I'm angry too, sometimes. But this review will not focus on those differences.

When I first read about the development of The Hobbit a few years ago I had no fears that it would not be made. I expected it to be made. LOTR had made three billion dollars. The studios had just found a prize winning formula, damned if they didn't exploit it. In fact The Hobbit would be easier to make than the LOTR as the story was adventurous yet lighter than the LOTR. There were pockets of darkness but it was nothing compared to the war and death that predominated Gandalf's later quests. I then learnt that The Hobbit had become two movies which did not feel natural as Peter Jackson had already adapted the longer novels into single movies instead of splitting them up. This year I learnt that the movies had been split into three parts to 'fully' tell the story. I was afraid that this three movie split was an effort to garner more profits. But I gave the director the benefit of doubt, he might genuinely be interested to narrate a riveting tale of adventure, loyalty, honor and bravery in great cinematic detail and quality. Looking at An Unexpected Journey I'm leaning on the theory that Tolkien has become Jackson's cash cow.

One is a gold hoarder the other is a dragon.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected journey covered the first leg of Bilbo's journey with the dwarves to reclaim their former home and hoard of precious metals, Erebor also known as the Lonely Mountain. Meanwhile dark forces are stirring, the elves keep twitching, Saruman is still a good guy and Gandalf is mysterious and old. As you can see plot-wise quite a lot of stuff happens. The all familiar aerial landscape shots that double as tourism adverts for New Zealand make the viewer feel right at home. The cinematography is spectacular as usual but the third dimension did not enhance my movie viewing experience nor was it used effectively as a medium by the filmmakers.

What is important is the way the story is told. I am reminded of a line that Gandalf delivered in this movie, "Power lies in the small things, small acts of kindness and love" or something. It is the small things that can irritate you, can mark the difference between a film and a movie, can show the commercial vision behind the movie. For example movies rely on character arcs that rarely surprise people anymore. You know that the scruffy orphan is going to win the baking championship because she was beaten at the musical choir showdown midway through the movie. In this movie too you could clearly see the character development taking place and unlike LOTR it was not well handled. More Avengers than The Godfather, do you see what I'm getting at. Action movies are littered with tiny little cliffhangers that you know the characters will clear but they include anyways because they keep you on the edge of your seat. At least they did, ten years ago. You know the ones I'm talking about? The character jumps across a chasm and instead of landing cleanly the character has to hold on to a ledge or an opportune plant growth with his/her fingertips till he/she is rescued. The little things make a difference, quite literally in Tolkien's universe but somehow the makers of The Hobbit failed to notice that.

Now the star of three successful adaptations.

Martin Freeman was a great Bilbo, unsure at first but slowly becoming adjusted to his new destiny as a hero of sorts. Sir Ian McKellen was his usual self. Fantastic. Can the man be anything else? Andy Serkis was back as Gollum, the show stealer. Elijah Wood made a very small appearance as Frodo and he looks younger than Daniel Radcliffe. Of the dwarves I have few words. None of them made lasting impression. None of them were as endearing as Gimli. They did a fine job sure, but nothing outstanding. The music just like the rest of the movie is good but it could have been better.

Soft young skin with Fair and Elrond Cream. Enriched with jujubes from Mirkwood.


Overall I'd say it was a good movie. Certainly a good experience. Disappointing though. Especially to those who've been waiting almost ten years to see it. Some of you might think I was being too harsh on the movie considering it was based on a children's book. My reply is this, the movie aimed to be more than a children's story. I recommend you watch this in a movie theatre.


IMDB Rating: 8.8/10 (This rating will probably decrease in the following weeks)

My Rating: 7/10

No comments:

Post a Comment